Sure it's not an issue ... If you are that one professional on earth who gets everything perfect the first time, even in fast moving ENG or doco environments. For the rest of us not-yet-perfect videographers ... every bit of tech helpsI also see no reason to record 4K today.
So I can stabilize in post, crop, downsample, and still have 1080p left.
This is a legitimate response, but this camera is aimed at people using professional-style rigs, no? So stabilisation isn't really an issue.
Again, that's a legitimate point. But people saying it's a killer issue... I mean, at some point, you're always going to have to make up for equipment limitations with better technique. We all want ever better technology, but I don't understand the rancour towards specific targets, e.g. non-4k cameras.
Most of the DPs I know are now being asked by their clients to shoot 4K specifically for reframing ability in post. So, 4K is becoming a highly requested feature and a necessary one to compete, not to mention the other benefits it has for stabilization and future-proofing. So Canon is really hobbling their camera by not including it.
I think the rancor you mention is actually a misnomer for love- many of the people on this forum love Canon products and want to buy them, but are disillusioned by the lack of competitive specs. I love Canon stuff, but I'm not going to buy another camera body from them for video until it's competitive with the other, more highly specced bodies out there.
So, there it is: rancor = love for Canon
4k don't know …
most major motion pictures are shooting on alexas…and film cameras…either scanning to 2k…or 2.5k…so if a client wanting to make a web commercial wants 4k ….
Ahh, yes, very true. But most major motion pictures have the budget for increased time to shoot multiple angles and don't need to save time and $$ by shooting 4K for reframing. They also have greater post-production budgets for scanning, etc.
Many doc-style TV shows do need that $$ savings and speed, however.