Why would they provide quality video and 4k in a $3k 5DIV or sub $2k 7DII when they can get $20k for it in a C500?
Gee I don't know. Maybe because the Sony F7 does it for $8k? The Sony A7S+Shogun does it for like $4.5k? (and that includes a fancy external monitor) The GH4 does it at least semi-passably for the 4k and pretty well for their 4k downscaled to 1080P for like $2000-something. Even the D750 is said to give a better 1080P than any Canon DSLR other than 5D3 shooting RAW with ML hack and perhaps the 1DX where it is said to be like a tie? By the time the 5D4 arrives it's not impossible that an A7S2 won't do it for $2.5k all by itself.
Frankly, I don't care all that much, since I think the quality of the imagery in video is usually mostly irrelevant. The only time I'll ever make an effort to get higher video quality than, say, my SDTV, is when I visit a real IMAX theater (you know - the 15 perf 70mm horizontal version) to see a documentary where the photography is just totally outrageous, the bulbs are 15 kilowatts, and the screen occupies around 90 degrees of my field of view.
Hmm I couldn't possibly disagree more.
Why do you even shoot more than a 1MP stills cam then?