TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
I shared my first video on the 5D MKIV (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_sqG76FBlU) and why I'm preordering and got a surprising amount of angry responses. Lots of "2012 technology" responses, etc... That wasn't the initial reaction, but there seem to be some bloggers and reviewers that have really come out negatively. People are also upset by the price (in non US markets), obviously.
Here's the thing, though. It is the little things like this (expanded AF point coverage) that will make the camera better than the specs suggest. There's one thing that I admire Canon for, and that is that they tend to deliver mature tech that is fully executed as opposed to others (Sony is one example) who have magnificent spec lists but sometimes poor concept execution.
Perhaps the crowd has a voice too and not all is praise and glory with this camera. Looking at the some technical aspects it can't be denied that its old on arrival in certain aspects. Especially on the video front.
Old HDMI-port v 1.3, old storage standards, especially the UHS I is way too much for my taste, old and inefficient codecs for video, buffer not as big as others and the list goes on. Dustin I like your reviews, but sometimes they tend to be too positive when there are things that stick out and say "why on earth, now, really". Mature tech could easily translated to gold old trusted. This however comes short of outdated, missing some innovation, not the technical leader, playing it safe. This is a camera they are releasing today to compete with the best on the market...for another 4 years. Lets put that into perspective and compare it to existing gear.
* The old D800 surpases the MP count, the D820 will be around he corner, at least in the 4 year cycle. Put some form of D5-AF system (3D) in there, put the speed up a but and you have a very fine body, besting the Mark 4 in some key areas in stills photography
* The A7R2 has already a whopping 42MP and does 4K from the whole sensor (giving it that full frame look), putting the signal out over the HDMI. The newly released 5dIV can't do that at all, because of old tech limitations and has a chuge crop (1,74x) . How embarassing is that? Since you are stuck with the lenses you have to adjust accordingly but you will never get that full frame look you hoped to get in the first place. Speedboster won't work, so there goes nothing.
* GH4 can do a compressed codec. MK4 uses the Motion jpg codec wih huge file sizes you have to convert to work with in post.
* Log picture style is missing as well. Sony and other major companies are putting it in to give you better options in post.
So all is not limitations here, it is clearly possible to implement it in a camera body, but Canon plays safe and puts old tech in there or leaves things deliberately out the competition is alreay implementing.
How does the Wifi-connection work? Tony Northrup made some statements about this and it doesn't sound very intuitive to me. If true, Wifi looks better on the spec sheet than in real use. But that is better left oit for the final reviews.
I am not saying that the other competitors do it with waving flags. The Sony menu system is a pain, the battery life is a joke, Nikons system speed is not to my liking. Thats why I sticked with Canon and bought into the system. But thats about it. I like the convenience factor. But when I see, what other manufacturers can offer, I look twice now if the convenience is the most important thing or if there are aspects, where in my opnion, Canon is lacking features I really would have to in my arsenal. Usable 4K would have been key to me, future proof saving system and interfaces as well and no AA Filter for sharper pics (like in the Nikons)...I simply can't understand why they even bothered to put 4K in, the way they did it, why even market it?