Canon 1D Mark IV versus Sony A6000
The Canon EOS-1D Mark IV and the Sony Alpha A6000 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in October 2009 and February 2014. The 1D Mark IV is a DSLR, while the A6000 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on an APS-H (1D Mark IV) and an APS-C (A6000) sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 16 megapixel, whereas the Sony provides 24 MP. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their size, their sensors, their features, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison: Canon 1D Mark IV vs Sony A6000
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon 1D Mark IV and the Sony A6000 is provided in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. You can also use the toggle button to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the 1D Mark IV – represents the basis or 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Sony A6000 is considerably smaller (67 percent) than the Canon 1D Mark IV. Moreover, the A6000 is substantially lighter (72 percent) than the 1D Mark IV. It is worth mentioning in this context that the 1D Mark IV is splash and dust resistant, while the A6000 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist. You can find an overview of optics for the two cameras in the Canon EF Lens Catalog (1D Mark IV) and the Sony E-Mount Lens Catalog (A6000). Mirrorless cameras, such as the A6000, have moreover the advantage that they can use many lenses from other systems via adapters, as they have a relatively short flange to focal plane distance.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Canon 1D Mark IV (⇒ rgt)||6.1 in||6.2 in||3.1 in||43.4 oz||1500||YES||2009||4,999||discont.||check|
|Sony A6000 (⇒ lft)||4.7 in||2.6 in||1.8 in||12.1 oz||360||no||2014||599||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.2 in||6.6 in||3.3 in||54.0 oz||1210||YES||2016||5,999||latest||check|
|Canon 1D X (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.2 in||6.6 in||3.3 in||54.7 oz||1120||YES||2011||6,799||discont.||check|
|Canon 60D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.7 in||4.2 in||3.1 in||26.6 oz||1100||YES||2010||1,399||discont.||check|
|Canon 7D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.8 in||4.4 in||2.9 in||30.3 oz||800||YES||2009||1,699||discont.||check|
|Canon 5D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.0 in||4.5 in||3.0 in||30.0 oz||850||YES||2008||3,499||discont.||check|
|Canon 50D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.7 in||4.3 in||2.9 in||29.0 oz||800||YES||2008||1,299||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.1 in||6.2 in||3.1 in||40.7 oz||2200||YES||2007||4,499||discont.||check|
|Canon 1Ds Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.1 in||6.2 in||3.1 in||42.9 oz||1200||YES||2004||7,999||discont.||check|
|Nikon D4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.3 in||6.2 in||3.6 in||47.3 oz||2600||YES||2012||5,999||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3S (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.3 in||6.2 in||3.5 in||43.7 oz||4200||YES||2009||5,199||discont.||check|
|Sony A6300 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.7 in||2.6 in||1.9 in||14.3 oz||400||YES||2016||999||discont.||check|
|Sony A5100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.3 in||2.5 in||1.4 in||10.0 oz||400||no||2014||549||latest||check|
|Sony A5000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.3 in||2.5 in||1.4 in||9.5 oz||420||no||2014||449||discont.||check|
|Sony A3000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.0 in||3.6 in||3.3 in||14.5 oz||470||no||2013||329||discont.||check|
|Sony NEX-6 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.7 in||2.6 in||1.7 in||12.2 oz||360||no||2012||999||discont.||check|
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The A6000 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 88 percent) than the 1D Mark IV, which puts it into a different market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison: Canon 1D Mark IV vs Sony A6000
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon 1D Mark IV features an APS-H sensor and the Sony A6000 an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the A6000 is 29 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.3 and 1.5. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
Despite having a smaller sensor, the A6000 offers a higher resolution of 24 megapixel, compared with 16 MP of the 1D Mark IV. This megapixel advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 3.91μm versus 5.70μm for the 1D Mark IV). However, it should be noted that the A6000 is much more recent (by 4 years and 3 months) than the 1D Mark IV, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently.
For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. Of the two cameras under consideration, the A6000 has a markedly higher DXO score than the 1D Mark IV (overall score 8 points higher), which will translate into better image quality. The advantage is based on 1.3 bits higher color depth, 1.1 EV in additional dynamic range, and -0 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Canon 1D Mark IV (⇒ rgt)||APS-H||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||22.8||12.0||1320||74|
|Sony A6000 (⇒ lft)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.1||13.1||1347||82|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||20.0||5472||3648||4K/60p||24.1||13.5||3207||88|
|Canon 1D X (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||23.8||11.8||2786||82|
|Canon 60D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||22.2||11.5||813||66|
|Canon 7D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||22.0||11.7||854||66|
|Canon 5D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||21.0||5616||3744||1080/30p||23.7||11.9||1815||79|
|Canon 50D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||15.1||4752||3168||no||21.8||11.4||696||63|
|Canon 1D Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-H||10.1||3888||2592||no||22.7||11.7||1078||71|
|Canon 1Ds Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||16.6||4992||3328||no||23.3||11.3||1480||74|
|Nikon D4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||16.2||4928||3280||1080/30p||24.7||13.1||2965||89|
|Nikon D3S (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||12.1||4256||2832||720/24p||23.5||12.0||3253||82|
|Sony A6300 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||24.4||13.7||1437||85|
|Sony A5100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.8||12.7||1347||80|
|Sony A5000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||19.8||5456||3632||1080/60i||23.8||13.0||1089||79|
|Sony A3000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||19.8||5456||3632||1080/60i||23.7||12.8||1068||78|
|Sony NEX-6 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4912||3264||1080/60i||23.7||13.1||1018||78|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the A6000 provides a faster frame rate than the 1D Mark IV. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Canon is limited to 1080/30p.
Feature comparison: Canon 1D Mark IV vs Sony A6000
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the A6000 has an electronic viewfinder (1440k dots), while the 1D Mark IV has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Canon 1D Mark IV, the Sony A6000, and comparable cameras. If you need more detail on the specs, you can find comprehensive listings, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.
|Canon 1D Mark IV (⇒ rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||8000||10.0||no||no|
|Sony A6000 (⇒ lft)||1440||no||3.0||922||tilting||no||4000||11.0||6||no|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1620||fixed||YES||8000||16.0||no||no|
|Canon 1D X (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1040||fixed||no||8000||14.0||no||no|
|Canon 60D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||1040||swivel||no||8000||5.3||13||no|
|Canon 7D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||8000||8.0||12||no|
|Canon 5D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||8000||3.9||no||no|
|Canon 50D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||8000||6.3||13||no|
|Canon 1D Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||230||fixed||no||8000||10.0||no||no|
|Canon 1Ds Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||2.0||230||fixed||no||8000||4.0||no||no|
|Nikon D4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||921||fixed||no||8000||11.0||no||no|
|Nikon D3S (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||921||fixed||no||8000||11.0||no||no|
|Sony A6300 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2300||no||3.0||922||tilting||no||4000||11.0||6||no|
|Sony A5100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||922||tilting||YES||4000||6.0||4||no|
|Sony A5000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||461||tilting||no||4000||3.5||4||no|
|Sony A3000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||202||no||3.0||230||fixed||no||4000||2.5||6||no|
|Sony NEX-6 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2359||no||3.0||921||tilting||no||4000||10.0||6||no|
Both the 1D Mark IV and the A6000 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on eBay. The A6000 was replaced by the Sony A6300, while the 1D Mark IV does not have a direct successor.
Review summary: Canon 1D Mark IV vs Sony A6000
So how do things add up? Is the Canon 1D Mark IV better than the Sony A6000 or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Reasons to prefer the Canon EOS-1D Mark IV:
- Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
- Easier setting verification: Has an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (8000/sec vs 4000/sec) to freeze action.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (1500 versus 360) on a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in October 2009).
Arguments in favor of the Sony Alpha A6000:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 16MP), which boosts linear resolution by 23%.
- Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (8 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
- Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (1.3 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (1.1 EV of extra DR).
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/30p).
- More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
- More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
- More compact: Is smaller (120x67mm vs 156x157mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 886g or 72 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- More legacy lens friendly: Can use many non-native lenses via adapters.
- Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (88 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Reflects 4 years and 3 months of technical progress since the 1D Mark IV launch.
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the A6000 is the clear winner of the contest (13 : 6 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision on a new camera.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras is instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the 1D Mark IV or the A6000 handle or perform in practice. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable. This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, photographyblog). The detailed reviews can be accessed by clicking on the site logo in the table header.
|Canon 1D Mark IV (⇒ rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||-||5/5||-||2009||4,999||discont.||check|
|Sony A6000 (⇒ lft)||Rec||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2014||599||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2016||5,999||latest||check|
|Canon 1D X (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2011||6,799||discont.||check|
|Canon 60D (⇒ lft | rgt)||87/100 Rec||79/100 Silver||4/5||5/5||4.5/5||2010||1,399||discont.||check|
|Canon 7D (⇒ lft | rgt)||93/100 HiRec||84/100||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2009||1,699||discont.||check|
|Canon 5D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||91/100||79/100 HiRec||4/5||5/5||-||2008||3,499||discont.||check|
|Canon 50D (⇒ lft | rgt)||90/100 HiRec||HiRec||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2008||1,299||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||-||reviewed||-||2007||4,499||discont.||check|
|Canon 1Ds Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||HiRec||-||-||-||2004||7,999||discont.||check|
|Nikon D4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2012||5,999||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3S (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2009||5,199||discont.||check|
|Sony A6300 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||85/100 Gold||5/5||5/5||5/5||2016||999||discont.||check|
|Sony A5100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||-||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2014||549||latest||check|
|Sony A5000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||-||4.5/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2014||449||discont.||check|
|Sony A3000 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||-||4/5||4.5/5||4/5||2013||329||discont.||check|
|Sony NEX-6 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||78/100 Silver||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2012||999||discont.||check|
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting. If the camera you are interested in is not available, please contact me, and I will try to locate and add the respective data to the application.
- Canon 50D vs Fujifilm X-E3
- Canon 5D Mark II vs Nikon D3400
- Canon 77D vs Canon G7 X
- Canon 80D vs Canon 6D
- Canon G1 X Mark III vs Canon 5D Mark III
- Canon T5i vs Olympus E-M5 II
- Nikon D3400 vs Sony A5000
- Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 80D
- Panasonic GH5 vs Pentax 645Z
- Ricoh GR II vs Panasonic FZ2000
- Sony RX100 III vs Fujifilm X-T1
- YI M1 vs Fujifilm X-T2