With the release of the Nikon D850, one might be wondering how the Canon 5D Mark IV would compare to it side-by-side in terms of specifications, since both compete directly with one another. The Canon 5D Mark IV was announced almost exactly a year earlier in August of 2016, so it is a fairly recent release that will most likely not be updated for at least several more years. Now please keep in mind that such camera comparisons do not take into account lenses, accessories and other systems differences, so I ask that our readers take such comparisons with a grain of salt. It would be foolish to change systems every time a better camera comes out, because manufacturers like Nikon and Canon are known to leapfrog each other every few years!
Let’s take a look at the specifications of both cameras in more detail. Additional commentary on the data is provided below.
Nikon D850 vs Canon 5D Mark IV Specification Comparison
| Camera Feature | Nikon D850 | Canon 5D Mark IV |
|---|---|---|
| Sensor Resolution | 45.7 MP | 30.4 MP |
| Sensor Type | BSI CMOS | CMOS |
| Sensor Size | 35.9×23.9mm | 36.0×24.0mm |
| Low-Pass Filter | No | Yes |
| Sensor Pixel Size | 4.35µ | 5.36µ |
| Image Size | 8,256 x 5,504 | 6,720 x 4,480 |
| Image Processor | EXPEED 5 | DIGIC 6+ |
| Buffer: RAW 14-bit Lossless Compressed | 51 | 21 |
| Native ISO Sensitivity | ISO 64-25,600 | ISO 100-32,000 |
| Boosted ISO Sensitivity | ISO 32, ISO 51,200-102,400 | ISO 50, ISO 51,200-102,400 |
| Dust Reduction / Sensor Cleaning | Yes | Yes |
| Viewfinder Type | Pentaprism | Pentaprism |
| Viewfinder Coverage and Magnification | 100%, 0.75x | 100%, 0.71x |
| Built-in Flash | No | No |
| Storage Media | 1x QXD, 1x SD (UHS-II) | 1x CF, 1x SD (UHS-I) |
| Continuous Shooting Speed | 7.0 fps, 9.0 fps with MB-D18 | 7.0 fps |
| Max Shutter Speed | 1/8000 to 30 sec | 1/8000 to 30 sec |
| AE Bracketing Range | ±5 EV | ±3 EV |
| Flash Sync Speed | 1/250 | 1/200 |
| Shutter Durability | 200,000 cycles | 150,000 cycles |
| Exposure Metering Sensor | 181,000-pixel RGB sensor | 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor |
| Number of AF Points | 153 AF points, 99 cross-type | 61 AF points, 41 cross-type |
| AF Detection Range | -4 to +20 EV | -3 to +18 EV |
| Auto AF Fine-Tune | Yes | No |
| Focus Peaking | Yes | No |
| Focus Stacking | Yes | No |
| Video Maximum Resolution | 3,840 x 2,160 (4K) @ up to 30 fps | 4,096 x 2,160 (4K) @ up to 30 fps |
| Video Crop Factor | 1.0x | 1.74x |
| Audio Recording | Built-in stereo microphone External stereo microphone (optional) | Built-in stereo microphone External stereo microphone (optional) |
| Headphone Jack | Yes | Yes |
| LCD Size and Type | 3.2″ Tilting Touchscreen LCD | 3.2″ Touchscreen LCD |
| Dual Pixel AF | No | Yes |
| Dual Pixel RAW | No | Yes |
| LCD Resolution | 2,359,000 dots | 1,620,000 dots |
| Built-in GPS | No | Yes |
| Wi-Fi | Yes | Yes |
| Bluetooth | Yes | No |
| Battery Life | 1840 shots (CIPA) | 900 shots (CIPA) |
| Button Illumination | Yes | No |
| Weather Sealed Body | Yes | Yes |
| USB Version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Weight (Body Only) | 915g | 800g |
| Dimensions | 146.0 x 124.0 x 78.5mm | 150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm |
| MSRP Price | $3,299 (as introduced) | $3,499 (as introduced) |
Obviously the two cameras are made to serve different purposes. The Nikon D850 has a high-resolution 45.7 MP sensor that competes more with the Canon 5DS R (50.6 MP), rather than the Canon 5D Mark IV, which only has a 30.4 MP sensor. Nikon D850 has a superior back-illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor and at ISO 64, it is known to yield exceptional dynamic range – something Canon typically struggles with. Without a low-pass filter, the D850 yields very sharp and detailed images, making it an ideal choice for landscape, macro and wildlife photography. In comparison, the Canon 5D Mark IV looks more like a general-purpose camera that is primarily aimed at portrait photographers.
Aside from that, there are very few areas where the Canon 5D Mark IV can hold its ground against the Nikon D810. Nikon has done a phenomenal job with the D850 and it really shows when one looks at a chart like this, since it highlights where Nikon was aiming with the announcement. Clearly, Nikon’s goal was to make sure that the Canon 5D Mark IV stays out of the competition, and as you can see from the chart, Nikon beats Canon pretty much on every major spec. It has a larger viewfinder, much better storage media options, an option to increase continuous shooting rate by 2 fps to get to a total of 9 fps, better flash sync speed, better shutter durability, better AF system, larger AF detection range, 4K video without any cropping, a tilting LCD screen, a far superior battery life and a lower price point.
Where the Canon 5D Mark IV comes out is its Dual Pixel AF system, which takes advantage of the phase detection pixels on the sensor when shooting in live view mode, allowing the camera to focus quickly and accurately on subjects. I wish Nikon implemented something similar, because its contrast-only live view focusing is extremely slow in comparison. Another feature Nikon has been consistently missing is GPS. Canon has done a great job by integrating a GPS chip into the 5D Mark IV and I really wish Nikon did it on the D850, since it is such a needed feature for travel and landscape photography. Lastly, the Canon 5D Mark IV is noticeably lighter (with roughly about 115 gram difference) and it is physically smaller in comparison to the Nikon D850.
I think the D850 should be compared to the 2,5 year old 5DS(r).
And even then the Nikon looks very impressive if you look at the specs and MSRP :)
It seems that the D7xx serie aims more to the 5D serie at the moment.
The D750 was in terms of specs already close to the 5D III.
I have to agree. It seems like the D850 is on more of the 5DSR league than the 5D MkIV.
But that leaves a gap in Nikon’s lineup. However, in many ways the D750 can fill that gap.
I dissagre. The D850 is directly aimed at the 5D MkIV. Don’t let the MP increase fool you into thinking the 5Dsr was the target. That was a happy coincidence. Dual Pixel AF is the only feature the 5D has over the D850 now. If you are buying the camera for strictly video then maybe the 5D is a better choice. If you are shooting more than just video the D850 looks to be the best choice in DSLR right now. I’m sure Canon will counter with a more robust set of features in the next gen 5D but for now it’s Nikon’s time to shine. Really doesn’t matter for sales to new shooters. Few Canon shooters will switch to Nikon nor will Nikon shooters switch to Canon when the next gen 5D is revealed. Nikon for the most part has been the innovator in new tech. As for comments elsewhere in this post, GPS robs battery life and gives very little back. It’s a tool for maybe 10% of the photographers out there and makes for a great marketing piece. Most shooters will never use it. There are so many other ways to get that info for inclusion in PP. Hooray Nikon. Now you have a few years to get ready for Canon’s response. The D850 builds a time-bridge for Nikon to bring forward their idea of what Mirrorless ILC should be. We’ll see what happens.
I’m not saying that the 5Dsr was the intended target. My contention is that the D850 can best the 5Dsr as well as the 5D MkIV.
GPS is a must feature for wildlife & landscape photographers IMO, just like the DPAF feature for videographers.
The Canon is better for video than the D850?!?!?! What?
The Mk IV has a 1.75x Crop shotting 4K, and a horrible codec with slow storage.. There is no reason at all to get a MkIV over the D850 for Video
Nasim
I have been reading your articles for several years. Your objectivity and technical mastery, two essential traits, is second to none. I thank you very much for adding to my understanding.
Thanks
Respectfully
Jamal Mubarik
One small bone to pick.
“GPS…. I really wish Nikon did it on the D850, since it is such a needed feature for travel and landscape photograph”
A GPS chip would indeed be handy but , ” a needed feature”?
Pls what Canon product can we compare to Nikon D610?
Kindly pls reply me back.Thanks
The 6D or the 6D mark II because they are the entry level full frame
Thanks for the detailed information.
Two issues that upset me as a D810 user.
1) D850 and Nikon in general is behind on remote shooting.
I fail to understand how a camera with WiFi and BT
can’t be fully remotely controlled by a simple app.
Why force people to buy an expensive and bulky
device for something almost any other camera is offering?
2) no foucs peaking in 4K , kind of weird not offering
It where it is most needed ???
Nikon has done a huge progress where they already strong and few very small steps in others.
Still no solving the AF performaces in LV
( still and Video) is a major problem.
I don’t believe they are no aware of that and since
The problem was solved by Canon / Sony and Fuji
I don’t see what is stopping them.
If Fuji can offer resonable AF in their mirrorless why
Nikon can’t?
I feel that the press job is to ask them those
questions for us the customers and get answers
Not only praise the new king.
Thanks
Yair
To your first question: Have you tried the app qDSLR Dashboard? It works perfectly with the D750 and you can control pretty much anything from there. No need to buy anything else. I use it mostly to focus stack macro. You define start point, end point and the focus steps and let the app then do the rest.
Surprise @Mario
The new Nikon BT+WiFi cameras no longer allow access to the wifi from any 3rd party apps.
Best hold onto that D750 if you value that feature.
Just adding to Mario’s suggestion, qDSLR Dashboard works fine on the D810. It does, however, require a bulky (but not expensive) external device to handle the communication.
Sorry, I can’t comment on jpuritz’s words about BT + WiFi cameras – I don’t have one.
I’m a Nikon user. But I have to admit that Canon 5D4 is more all-rounded. As Nasim mentioned, Dual Pixel AF makes 5D4 a very powerful camera in liveview mode for both still and movie. It’s like two cameras in one. The advantages of D850 over 5D4 are relatively trivial, other than the tilt-screen, which can be important for some. And on the other hand, GPS tagging can be solved with some Apps like GeoTagPhoto. All in all, Dual Pixel sets Canon apart from conventional DSLR and mirrorless cameras.
Triviality is in the eye of the beholder. If you don’t shoot video, dual pixel’s trivial. I think the advantages of the D850 over the 5DIV make it much more appealing to me (I’m also a Nikon shooter right now) but if I was getting into DX-shooting, any of the Canon bodies with dual pixel would be more appealing to me than the D5600, D7200, or D7500 because the Canon sensors aren’t so behind.
It’s true that triviality is in the eyes of the beholder. What I meant was D850 in most of the parameters are simply of “better”, “faster”, “stronger”… I don’t shoot video, Dual Pixel is awesome in still photography, better tracking accuracy and the ability to change focus on different subjects just by tapping and follow the subject by sliding on the screen is much faster than the using the joystick in OVF mode. Especially when using the camera in low or high angels with the tilt screen, CD AF is hopeless for moving objects.
ZEISSIEZ, i agree with you . I have both 5D4 and the D500. the mirrorless/LV mode between the Canon and the Nikon is like day and night. the face detection and tracking in LV of the 5D4 is very good. i was looking forward on Nikon releasing some nice LV AF tech in D850 but no. This is important for me as I consider cameras like 5D4 and D850 as DSLR/mirrorless transition cameras. Canon is already there when it comes mirrorless FF. Nikon ??? A lot of people has missed this point.
Yes, there are too many occasions where I need to shoot at low
/high angles, which doesn’t allow looking though the OVF. So the LCD is all I have got. Contrast detection AF is frustratingly slow, and couple with the slow response every time a shot is taken makes a poor shooting experience. When my bro got the 5D4, wow! I said to myself, that could solve my problem in the next D8XX. But no luck. I don’t need the extra pixels, and other bells & whittles as much.
I am as surprised as you that so few people see the point. Maybe most people just shoot at eye-level.
I think it illustrates that once you are in a system you get comfortable with its strengths and weaknesses. Just like canon shooters a few years ago (when canon was really behind) really couldn’t see the value of more DR, Nikon shooters today don’t see much value in better AF performance in live view.
I use long focal lengths for wildlife so I don’t mind that weakness from Nikon since it impacts very little how I shoot but now and then I’d love to be able to have fast AF with the mirror up, especially when shooting landscape from a very low point of view…
Well said Frederic. What you don’t know won’t hurt u.
A few years earlier I was using Canon before switching to Nikon. Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses.
1. Lenses – Nowadays both of them produce sharp lenses. Several years ago, Nikon was better with wide lenses while Canon was better with tele lenses. Nowadays, I think Canon still has an edge in lens coating. Much less flare, more contrast and better color when shooting with the sun in the frame. And sunstar with a Canon 16-35 F2.8 II or III is not achievable with any Nikon lenses.
2. Sensor: no debate here. Canon has been lagging behind ever since D3/D700.
3. Ergonomics: with the D850’s ISO button on the right they are about equal. Before that D800 needed two hands to operate, while Canon is simple: right hand for all the controls in shooting mode, left hand for all the controls in playback mode.
4. Customers support: it depends on location. In where I live, Canon is much more efficient. 3 days VS 2 weeks kind of contrast.
5. Lens selection: Nikon has a set of great and affordable F1.8 prime lenses. But there’s a glaring absence of an important lens in 16-35F2.8 which accept normal filters. This kind of lens is so bread and butter for cultural photography.
6. Auto focus: in OVF mode, Nikon is more reliable especially in tracking moving subjects. In Liveview mode, Canon with Dual Pixel is much better.
7. Image quality: Nikon JPEG files are more detailed, less smeared and more accurate. Canon JPEG files are more saturated especially in RED, more contrasty resulting in more 3D pop. This is also the same to lesser extend in RAW.
8. Features: in camera Geotagging is good to have, but with Apps like GeoTagPhoto, we can make use of the GPS in our smartphones to geotag our pics for any cameras. Tilt LCD is missing in 5D4. How can it be missing with the Dual Pixel AF already in place?
So no system is perfect yet, a 5D4 with tilt-LCD screen or a D850 with dual pixel AF is perfect.
That sums it up,pretty well!
Nice summary Zeissiez,
One could even speculate that if two companies had targeted developing a duopoly position in the serious DSLR market since the late 1970s, one of the techniques would be to agree to split the features to be optimal on, to ensure each other’s survival, block new entrants, and appear competitive to regulators. But that would be wildly cynical fantastical thinking, based on no truth whatsoever! And certainly isn’t the reason I have both!
Like every new camera these days the hardware of both is totally adequate for 98% of users (100% of whom will never reach the skill level needed to get to that 98%, myself included). What I would like to see PL cover, which would be a nice change from the measurebating, is a review of the remaining issues that really matter like customer service and new release reliability. How about that?
The D750, D810, and now the D850 are partly to blame for luring me from Canon. Will likely put all my Canon gear up for sale after end of year (for tax purposes). My recent increase in Nikon E lenses collection has also influenced my switch. The 300mm f/4E, 70-200mm f/2.8E FL, and 500mm f/4E FL are light and sharp. While the D500 is noiser than I would prefer for wildlife photography, when coupled with the 16-80mm f/2.8-4E I have a nice light walk-around configuration that results in very sharp photos. Even though it is not an E lens, the Nikon 24-120mm f/4G is way sharper than the Canon 24-105mm f/4L. At the current pace, I personally think Nikon will surpass Canon. Once caveat: Nikon really needs to improve their quality control for newly released products. Recalls are not only expensive, they damage the brand.
Nikon D850 is indeed a right step towards regaining the technical superiority which Nikon once enjoyed. With the release of this particular camera, they ensured that it surpass the predecessor and set new market segment standards. Dual Pixel AF in LV mode is something which should have been considered but it does not hamper the prospect badly. Most of the photographers resort to LV only in controlled situation if they are not making videos. The photographers, who are looking forward to take advantage of Full frame 4K are the only ones who will be complaining about lack of it. For stills, it will not create much of an issue.
The 51 RAW image buffer, 99 cross type AF sensors, 7/9 FPS and huge battery life will attract all the Wildlife, Sports and Wedding photographers. This is something we always wanted and now it is presented with a good price factor.
But Nikon need to have better quality controls without doubts. any issue which warrants for recall will only add troubles for them and dent heavily on their already declining brand value.
At $3k plus, it’s still out of reach for most; total investment would be closer to $5k when you’re talking lenses, camera bag, and so on.
This camera is aimed mainly at Pro photographers. Those who already have required lenses and other accessories required. For those who are looking forward to turn Pro, I believe that most of them are using full frame lenses as Nikon does not have a big line of DX lenses.
What Canon has that Nikon doesn’t is high quality f/4 zooms. They also have better wide angle and mid range zooms. They also have the 50mm 1.2. A greater lens selection. Their lenses are cheaper too.
Ok, lets check this claim a little bit
Canon 16-35 f:4 L Is -> Nikon 16:35 f:4 G:ED VR … slight differences but close
Canon 24-70 f:4 L IS -> I give you that one, no equivalent, the 24-120 is not as good optically
Canon 70-200 f:4 L Is -> Nikon has the same lens, equally good, I have owned both
Canon 24-105 f:4 L Is -> the Nikon 24-120 f:4 Vr has more reach and is actually slightly better optically in the overlapping range (again, I have owned both)
Canon 11-24 f:4 -> indeed there is no equivalllent but one can argue that Nikon’s 14-24 f:2.8 is brighter although not as wide, $1000 cheaper and optically very close. Edge to canon unless you need f:2.8 but it’s not an automatic (I personally would favour f:2.8 over 3mm wider for my shooting style).
Canon 8-15 fish-eye f:4 and 16-40 f:4 L are also peerless in but there are equivalent lenses with equally good optics but not constant apertures for cheaper in nikon’s line.
So overall you are right but it is not that big of a gap, the most popular lenses have equivalent options; where canon shines though are the less common lenses. Checking on B&H though you are right on prices, when a direct match exists the canon is always at least 5% cheaper it seems. One notable exception is the 200-400 f:4 zoom where Nikon is $4000 cheaper but it is not on the level with canon optically and does not have a built in X1.4 converter.
Having shot canon for 25 years and now Nikon for 3, I will say lens lineup is not a limiting factor between brands except in a few cases, one of them being tilt & shift lenses where canon kills it. On the other hand, the Nikon 200-500 f:5.6 is without match in canon’s line.
You mention the 50 f:1.2 which is indeed unique but I could easily argue that the Nikon 58 f:1.4 is actually a better and cheaper lens for that type of portraiture.
Bottom line is that both have amazing lens lines – I never lose sleep over that.
Correct, both have some duds and both have many more legends.
For example the Canon 100-400 (even the original model) is better than both versions of the Nikon 80-400. But, Nikon’s 300/4 PF is extraordinary when you consider the weight.
Food for thought…
Seems to me that digital camera technology is following a similar curve as that followed by personal computers. The early part of the development curve for PCs resulted in products that were vastly superior to those that immediately preceded them. But the added value curve for both has flattened out over time despite continued technical advances. Faster CPUs are not of much use to most PC users these days. For all but the most demanding PC users, PCs got “good enough” to do virtually everything commonly demanded of them years ago and the need to constantly upgrade the hardware fell off dramatically once this happened. There are always special users with special needs that are the exception, but for most people the hardware is “good enough”.
So it is with SLRs. While processing speeds are increasing and sensor resolution is increasing with each generation, I would argue that for the overwhelming majority of users, professionals included, the technology has reached a point where we have also hit the plateau of “diminishing returns”. Resolution on virtually all modern SLRs is spectacular and it is hard to argue for the need (for most users) for more resolution. Dynamic range on the best modern cameras is spectacular and differences between brands and models is becoming less and less important. Frames per second have reached a point that they only matter to a very narrow segment of the professional market.
While there is no doubt that the new Nikon D850 is a technical marvel and bests virtually all other SLRs on the market in terms of specs, I think that it would be hard to argue that it is actually any more “useful” to a serious photographer than a Canon 5DMk4 or other similar serious camera. Witness the move away from high end Nikon and Canon SLRs to Fuji cameras with 24Mp APSC sensors by many professionals.
I think that the D850 (and maybe even the 5DMk4) represent the end of a line of development. Things have gotten “good enough”. The specs are so good that they don’t really matter much any more for almost everyone, even pros. It’s a good place to be. Now we can stop worrying about upgrading our camera bodies every couple of years and focus on technique (or lenses, if gear is your thing).
As a Canon user I feel sorry that the current Nikon cameras are better than the Canons but Canon has some great lenses, probably better than the Nikon ones. And a few lenses Nikon hasn’t (mp macro, the new tilt-shift lenses). But after all, it’s the photographer that takes the pics, not the camera. I’m still amazed by the sharpness my 5DIII deliveres. And it’s a great allround camera which I use for urbex, macro, concerts, weddings, portraits, landscapes. I find Canon is easier to use than Nikon (less buttons).
I’d like to point out that a bigger Pixel Pitch is not necessarily better.
It should, of course, result in better image quality — especially at higer ISOs. But this very comparison (D850 vs 5D Mk IV) is maybe the best example that this not a number to be considered alone.
Also, there are many cases in photography (wildlife, astrophotography, macro) in which you cannot get closer to your subject and, therefore, you depend on a high pixel density (and also very good lenses) to get enough details. A tiny pixel, in these cases, is highly desirable.
Ok, there is enough said about Mark IV vs D850. What’s is your opition when it comer to lets say Sony a7 series or maybe even a future release of new a7?
I am curious about the DR and high ISO. 5D IV’s DR and shadow recovery are very good, maybe only 1/2 stops behind D810 but Mark IV is much better after ISO3200 (both DR and noise).
have been ardent fan of Nikon for about 24years now. I enjoyed shooting with D70..D200 ..D700..D800 and now D810…
the skin tone of 5DIII is especially worth appreciating, especially in wedding photography. this is more so for Indian’s skin.
May be for this reason Canon’s 5DIII and 5Div were huge hit in India, than elsewhere in the world…
Nikon seems to be weak in producing good skin tones..it fails to give me color seperation (tonal gradation of color)on the face. One should
go for post prod in LR for getting better results…