Back & Forth, No 4K for EOS 5D Mark IV?

[clarksbrother]

Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it will record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?
- A

Interesting thought and there's two parts to the answer.

They could take that route, but it also requires a significant amount of engineering on their part to really accommodate video recording. First, the camera CPU has to be fast enough to process that amount of pixels. Second, keeping in mind that 4K is four times the amount of raw thoroughput of 1080p (or 2 if you cut the framerate), that processor is going to be running significantly harder than it would normally. You need to make sure you have the necessary cooling/heat dissipation mechanisms in place to handle that so you don't damage electronics. Third, the sensor has to be able to output that imagery to the CPU in a time short enough that it doesn't take too long (lest you get bad rolling shutter effects). Fourth, pulling extra pixels means the sensor will require more power and run hotter as well - there has to be sufficient cooling in place to handle that as well otherwise you'll either end up with lots of extra noise or damage the electronics/sensor.

So - the short answer is... the raw functionality may be there and something like a Magic Lantern could "enable" it. But the actual result would be less than optimal or potentially cause damage.

There's a good bit of engineering that goes into enabling that sort of functionality and unless they were planning on including it as a feature in the camera, that's a lot of wasted engineering dollars to engineer it all in and not use it.

So, I'd bet they wouldn't engineer the functionality in unless they planned on using it.

 

[PureClassA]

The problem is Canon has ZERO anything in ILC 4K for less than $8000, and they seem to have no intention of making any serious strides here for the forseeable future unless a 5DC materializes at $3500. (No, I will not count the new little drone cam.)

It's frankly a damn shame. It really quite self-evidently a hot market based on GH4 and A7S buzz. And while the 5D2 may have started it all a few years ago, it feels like Canon just quit. Just take the C100 MkII for example. You can either spend $8000 on a still overpriced 1DC or $16000 for the C300 II.

I don't expect a 5D4 to toss out 120FPS in 4k, but we should expect up to 30. But 60-100 in 1080p? Yes. If the A7S can do it in that little body, surely a 5 series can be made to. (Yes I know the A7S doesn't record it internally, but it can produce it for $2000)

I honestly hope they don't sell a single C100 II, so as to hasten a more reasonable priced 4k machine in their line up sooner. For $500 cheaper I'll be able to buy the URSA Mini with the brand new 4.6k sensor and it will do a whole hellova lot more than the C100 II. The only thing I can guess is that Canon has made the choice to just cede the lower range cinema markets to competitors and focus on high end. If that's the business decision, so be it. It's just frustrating.

 

[kalieaire]

My friends and I all switched to Sony and Panasonic waiting for Canon to come out with a 4K option for the 5D.

Sony A7S + Panasonic GH4 for 4K video. A7-II for pictures. Single lens system, much more affordable than Canon.

We still use mostly EF Mount lenses since we have speedboosters for all the cameras and run the A7S in Crop when shooting video.

Canon is still stuck in the past and don't know how to innovate anymore.

 

[AshtonNekolah]

As i respect all the commentators here on this subject and not targeting anyone im just speaking my mind, I could care less about all this 4k mumbo jumbo, canon has 4k in there line either way and it is nice to have the latest in anything that comes out today but IMO i could care less about all this crap.

years ago nobody know crap about 4k and could of cared less about it however its out now ok so what. 4k aint new and it should be out on dslr cameras that are new, why? when 1080p is still good, TV broadcasters are full of it, besides if you got a business and making a ton of money I think you should be able to get the camera for the job.

The dslr cameras still have video in them, yes its not what you expect but you cant please everyone in a one do it all machine for 3000 dollars. looks like the market is going back to the old days. if you want 4k buy the machine that will do the job for you.

Not long from now there will be something better than 4k then what? they should make that one to just for people to use, I don't think so they are doing what they do for the money makers. all the other brands out there that bin have 4k for a long time, just buy that instead of bashing canon for not pleasing the wants notice I didn't say needs of everyone. Once I got some video options in my cameras that I can get the message across im happy with that. If i got the money I would go all out and get the machine to get the best I can afford.

This aint over yet, rumors are only rumors until the final product comes out, nobody knows for sure what is going to happen. This could all change but either way I learned my lesson from running out there to buy the latest and grates, i will keep what I got and upgrade accordingly to my needs instead of hype what's hot.

 

[AshtonNekolah]

Personally i'd rather have a higher bit-depth codec or raw of 1080, than a compressed to hell 4K codec.

Yup, this. Put C100 quality or better video in the 5DIV, and I'm good.

And those who threaten to jump brands. Go! Jump! Good riddance. Calm your t1ts every time there's a new rumor. There are tons of options for professionals now. If you can't afford a C100, maybe you shouldn't be thinking about professional video. If you aren't shooting professionally and are just f-ing around, then maybe you're not a target customer for the video industry!

Word!

 

[AshtonNekolah]

Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it will record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?

If they did, Canon could play wait and see on 4K and see if videographers really will jump ship without it. If enough folks say that they'll leave Canon over this, Canon can just release a firmware update to unlock 4K on the 5D4. Canon would give up on their upcharge strategy, but that's a lot easier than racing a new model to market.

- A

Smart Person, I was thinking the same thing, and this has more grounds than the rumor itself.

 

[AshtonNekolah]

Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it will record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?
- A

Interesting thought and there's two parts to the answer.

They could take that route, but it also requires a significant amount of engineering on their part to really accommodate video recording. First, the camera CPU has to be fast enough to process that amount of pixels. Second, keeping in mind that 4K is four times the amount of raw thoroughput of 1080p (or 2 if you cut the framerate), that processor is going to be running significantly harder than it would normally. You need to make sure you have the necessary cooling/heat dissipation mechanisms in place to handle that so you don't damage electronics. Third, the sensor has to be able to output that imagery to the CPU in a time short enough that it doesn't take too long (lest you get bad rolling shutter effects). Fourth, pulling extra pixels means the sensor will require more power and run hotter as well - there has to be sufficient cooling in place to handle that as well otherwise you'll either end up with lots of extra noise or damage the electronics/sensor.

So - the short answer is... the raw functionality may be there and something like a Magic Lantern could "enable" it. But the actual result would be less than optimal or potentially cause damage.

There's a good bit of engineering that goes into enabling that sort of functionality and unless they were planning on including it as a feature in the camera, that's a lot of wasted engineering dollars to engineer it all in and not use it.

So, I'd bet they wouldn't engineer the functionality in unless they planned on using it.

I understand what your saying and respect it but na, if they do it, they will know better than that. like the 7d mk2 and it cpu's it will be able to handle the 4k with there new 50mp camera its already there so aint nothing causing any damage. if you can enable it then it can handle it. I seen this argument before and it will work.

 

[PureClassA]

Any current camera in Canon's DSLR lineup has a sensor capable of 4k resolution. 4k is only 8-9MP. The issue is the processing power needed to snatch it, but the newer Digic 5 and Digic 6 (particularly the DUAL chip cameras) should be able to handle 24-30FPS 4k.

And it's not always about making the final product 4k. It's about being able to shoot in a higher resolution and down converting to 1080p which will yield a much nicer 1080p image than shooting native. Also, just like one of the main advantages of a 5DS 50MP rig is being able to frame wide and crop in if need be, still having a very high resolution still afterward, shooting in 4k and being able to tighten up a shot in post without losing anything on a 1080p timeline is major.

And we are still a bit hand tied at 1080p in current DSLR offerings from Canon thanks to the internal post RAW processing that not even "Clean" HDMI out has solved. Short of using Magic Lantern and getting straight RAW, you cant even compare the 5D3 1080p image to that of the same quality of the A7S or GH4.

I don't expect all or even most C100 II or C300 II features and quality from a $3000 DSLR, but I would at this point expect to see similar BASE capabilities, like 4k, even if it needed to be slung out to an Odyssey or Shogun to snag it. I would NOT expect the great monitor or viewfinder, the zebras, the focus peaking, false color, 72+ FPS, and great audio preamps with XLR ins and SDI outs.

 

[3kramd5]

Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it will record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?
- A

Interesting thought and there's two parts to the answer.

They could take that route, but it also requires a significant amount of engineering on their part to really accommodate video recording. First, the camera CPU has to be fast enough to process that amount of pixels. Second, keeping in mind that 4K is four times the amount of raw thoroughput of 1080p (or 2 if you cut the framerate), that processor is going to be running significantly harder than it would normally. You need to make sure you have the necessary cooling/heat dissipation mechanisms in place to handle that so you don't damage electronics. Third, the sensor has to be able to output that imagery to the CPU in a time short enough that it doesn't take too long (lest you get bad rolling shutter effects). Fourth, pulling extra pixels means the sensor will require more power and run hotter as well - there has to be sufficient cooling in place to handle that as well otherwise you'll either end up with lots of extra noise or damage the electronics/sensor.

So - the short answer is... the raw functionality may be there and something like a Magic Lantern could "enable" it. But the actual result would be less than optimal or potentially cause damage.

There's a good bit of engineering that goes into enabling that sort of functionality and unless they were planning on including it as a feature in the camera, that's a lot of wasted engineering dollars to engineer it all in and not use it.

So, I'd bet they wouldn't engineer the functionality in unless they planned on using it.

I don't think they would spend NRE on a function they don't plan to use, however leveraging a design which accommodates that feature from a different product is a common approach even if they don't write firmware for it.

 

[ahsanford]

My fault. I framed the hypothetical the wrong way. I'm not arguing that Canon -- after release -- figures out some hack method to unlock 4K in a manner that the rig can't handle. You can do that with an f/8 center AF point firmware update or extra bracketing intervals, but not something like 4K.

Let me reframe the question:

Would Canon design a purpose-built 4K rig that was top-to-bottom able to record 4K, handle all that data, dissipate the heat, manage the rolling shutter, etc.

...and then they block that resolution option from the menu deliberately to protect Cinema EOS sales?

If there were large defections to other brands or (more likely) violently negative chatter in the dead time between announcement and release, Canon could then just flip a switch, deploy a firmware update, and whammo. It would be a political/messaging fiasco that screams 'marketing blunder', but it would surely stop the bleeding if people were really leaving Canon over this.

Optimally building in 4K would be a major hardware/design undertaking that one would think the 5D design camp would want to take credit for and put front and center in their launch marketing, but perhaps tenting up the Cinema EOS price is important enough to the higher-ups at Canon that such subterfuge might be worth pursuing.

- A

 

[PureClassA]

And to the notion one would hinder sales of the other:

Serious filmmakers are STILL going to buy the big dogs. The C300 II type bodies. Many of them would ALSO purchase the smaller DSLR for different types of shooting. But the advantage of having both be Canon sensors in post production is huge. Makes grading much easier.

Look at Philip Bloom. He has a Sony F55, FS7, and A7S. Uses all three regularly and intermixes them in productions. And guys like that still say "They'd rather the Canon look" but Canon isn't making a system to suit their needs. The C300 II will start to open the doors, but it shouldn't stand alone.

 

[PureClassA]

If the 3 year old 1DC can do it (and it does) they can do it in a 5 body. The GH4 can do it just fine for $1500. A 5D4 that can shoot 8FPS at 28MP in RAW could sleep through 24FPS in 8.8MP 4k, especially if it's not even doing the recording itself....which it could.

My point is that its seems logical all the hardware capability and build is already there. I don't know if they can implement it to 4K in existing models, but surely it can easily be done with the same parts in a new one with perhaps some minor tweaks.

My fault. I framed the hypothetical the wrong way. I'm not arguing that Canon -- after release -- figures out some hack method to unlock 4K in a manner that the rig can't handle. You can do that with an f/8 center AF point firmware update or extra bracketing intervals, but not something like 4K.

Let me reframe the question:

Would Canon design a purpose-built 4K rig that was top-to-bottom able to record 4K, handle all that data, dissipate the heat, manage the rolling shutter, etc.

...and then they block that resolution option from the menu deliberately to protect Cinema EOS sales?

If there were large defections to other brands or (more likely) violently negative chatter in the dead time between announcement and release, Canon could then just flip a switch, deploy a firmware update, and whammo. It would be a political/messaging fiasco that screams 'marketing blunder', but it would surely stop the bleeding if people were really leaving Canon over this.

Optimally building in 4K would be a major hardware/design undertaking that one would think the 5D design camp would want to take credit for and put front and center in their launch marketing, but perhaps tenting up the Cinema EOS price is important enough to the higher-ups at Canon that such subterfuge might be worth pursuing.

- A

 

[gregory4000]

The way I see it. The 5dlV needs to at least meet competing units like the GH4. Imagine, no, don't imagine. In the next three years ( 2018) there will be many new cameras (including 'most' cell phone ) will have 4K. ( 4K is four times the resolution of High Def) and now you'll have this great new camera that won't be upgraded for an additional two more years ( 2020 ), still using video an the level of the 5dll (2008).
I'm not expecting the 5dlV to be par with the C300ll, however 10 bit 4K with 12 stops of dynamic range it should have.
And if it's true that the 5dlV will accept Cfast card ( used on cameras that shoot 4K, in fact I haven't seen any still camera or 2K video camera that uses Cfast) , than Canon must be planning something special!
If you shoot video professionally and need 15 stops with XLR's , SDI's and all the other features, the C300ll will get you there. But anyone considering the 5dlV WHO ALSO may want to shoot the random run and gun video clip may not be aware yet, BUT in a year or two will really wish his DSLR had 4K.

 

[PureClassA]

Only reason you need those hyper expensive CFast 2.0 Cards is if you're shooting 4k in RAW or real quality Codecs like ProRes. Otherwise it's overkill. Canon won't be putting either of those recording options in ANY camera. Even the C300II has to send signal off-board to record externally for that. And at $16,000, people are really gonna be looking for something HUGE over the brand new $4995 BlackMagic URSA Mini that has notably better specs with the same EF mount.

The way I see it. The 5dlV needs to at least meet competing units like the GH4. Imagine, no, don't imagine. In the next three years ( 2018) there will be many new cameras (including 'most' cell phone ) will have 4K. ( 4K is four times the resolution of High Def) and now you'll have this great new camera that won't be upgraded for an additional two more years ( 2020 ), still using video an the level of the 5dll (2008).
I'm not expecting the 5dlV to be par with the C300ll, however 10 bit 4K with 12 stops of dynamic range it should have.
And if it's true that the 5dlV will accept Cfast card ( used on cameras that shoot 4K, in fact I haven't seen any still camera or 2K video camera that uses Cfast) , than Canon must be planning something special!
If you shoot video professionally and need 15 stops with XLR's , SDI's and all the other features, the C300ll will get you there. But anyone considering the 5dlV WHO ALSO may want to shoot the random run and gun video clip may not be aware yet, BUT in a year or two will really wish his DSLR had 4K.

 

[gregory4000]

The URSA mini is very interesting, the main advantage of the C300ll is its low light capabilities.
And it's true the Cfast are useful for the Raw 4k. That being said. Why if Canon is considering putting Cfast in the 5dll???

 

[PureClassA]

The URSA mini is very interesting, the main advantage of the C300ll is its low light capabilities.
And it's true the Cfast are useful for the Raw 4k. That being said. Why if Canon is considering putting Cfast in the 5dll???

There's a huge price variance from CFast to CFast 2.0. 128GB CFast on Amazon. $70 128GB CFast 2.0 on Amazon. $640

CFast 2.0 can write 510MB/Sec. If you think of full blown RAW 4K, it's over 400MB/SEC

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I would NOT expect the great monitor or viewfinder, the zebras, the focus peaking, false color, 72+ FPS, and great audio preamps with XLR ins and SDI outs.

I would expect the zebra and focus peaking and live zoomed focus box. Those are NOT advanced features. They are basic, necessary, little things. Canon has tricked you if you think those two little things are advanced pro features.

(I'd say it should also have 4:2:2, 10bit, slog2, 4k at this point.)

Now the 150fps, super video viewfinder, XLR and SDI (for a DSLR form factor, adds lots of bulk and would annoy stills photographers and even some video people) and so on fair enough though.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Not putting 4K on a 5D upgrade would be idiotic. Canon has to realize 4K is the new standard. For now on, anything that doesn't have 4K is dead.

Especially since this camera still needs to look solid 2-3 years after it's release and it's release can't be any earlier than a half year away still.

 

[gsealy]

The URSA mini is very interesting, the main advantage of the C300ll is its low light capabilities.
And it's true the Cfast are useful for the Raw 4k. That being said. Why if Canon is considering putting Cfast in the 5dll???

There's a huge price variance from CFast to CFast 2.0. 128GB CFast on Amazon. $70 128GB CFast 2.0 on Amazon. $640

CFast 2.0 can write 510MB/Sec. If you think of full blown RAW 4K, it's over 400MB/SEC

It's my understanding that RAW 4K would allow about 6-7 minutes of video to be stored on a 128GB CFast 2. That gets expensive in a hurry.

 

[Creative69]

The way I see it. The 5dlV needs to at least meet competing units like the GH4. Imagine, no, don't imagine. In the next three years ( 2018) there will be many new cameras (including 'most' cell phone ) will have 4K. ( 4K is four times the resolution of High Def) and now you'll have this great new camera that won't be upgraded for an additional two more years ( 2020 ), still using video an the level of the 5dll (2008).
I'm not expecting the 5dlV to be par with the C300ll, however 10 bit 4K with 12 stops of dynamic range it should have.
And if it's true that the 5dlV will accept Cfast card ( used on cameras that shoot 4K, in fact I haven't seen any still camera or 2K video camera that uses Cfast) , than Canon must be planning something special!
If you shoot video professionally and need 15 stops with XLR's , SDI's and all the other features, the C300ll will get you there. But anyone considering the 5dlV WHO ALSO may want to shoot the random run and gun video clip may not be aware yet, BUT in a year or two will really wish his DSLR had 4K.

Competing camera GH4????? are you serious? I have never seen a GH4 in any studio shoot I have been involved in or in any wedding come to think of it. I don't think Canon have much to fear there. I would say why don't you just use a GH4 but we already know why not, therefore there is no competition from that particular camera at least.
I agree that companies like Canon need to keep pushing the boundaries, but to make out that the 5D with 4K would somehow be the saviour of Canon is silly. I guarantee Canon know their market better than most people here give them credit for. The new Canon EC10 has 4K just go and buy that, is it a personal vendetta that some people have waged against Canon to push them to include 4K? I applaud Canon for sticking to their principles I personally would never use my dslr for video, horses for courses but thats me. Don't worry Canon won't get off that easy though they better bring a real improvement to the quality of stills which I'm sure they will and even then its not because I particularly need it but just to show that advances are being made.