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

[Canon Rumors]

After yesterday’s rehashing of past rumors in a package mimicking new information, EOSHD is reporting the 4K video reports in the EOS “5D” line are untrue.</p>
<blockquote><p>…..the company believes a 4K 5D Mark IV would completely overshadow the recently released C100 Mark II and so wouldn’t happen, but that Canon LOG would likely go into the camera to allow shot-matching with the XC10.</p></blockquote>
<p>This sounds completely plausible. I get the feeling that Canon doesn’t see a big future in DSLRs for serious video productions and will try to further grow their Super 35 Cinema EOS cameras instead. The XC10 is the odd camera in the strategy, but we’ll reserve judgement until we hear from people that have used it in the field.</p>
<p>We can’t confirm a “5Dc”, but we can confirm that we were told there would be 3 “5D” cameras in 2015 and that we’ve already seen 2 of them.</p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.eoshd.com/2015/04/canon-5d-mark-iv-will-be-1080p-with-canon-log/" target="_blank">EOSHD</a>]</p>

 

[leGreve]

Makes the decision easier.... Wont be getting a 5D3 without 4K.

You gotta love how Canon in trying to cover all bases fucks it up for themselves.

Like Ive said before, strip the lineup down to 2 cinema models, a dslr model and a semi-pro / consumer model and the sales would explode.

Same goes for stills.... Just offer three models in total.

 

[RLPhoto]

No 4K? They better make it the best stills camera on the planet if they will dump the main event video feature.

 

[jaayres20]

I would imagine that the thousands of photographers who do not need video features would care less about having 4K in the new 5D. Why does the DSLR have to be the all in one camera to fulfill still photography and video needs. I don't see very many still photographers complaining about the lack of still photography features on their cinema line.

 

[jdramirez]

I don't care about 4I, but if my phone can do it, my $4000 camera Damn well better be able to.

 

[clarksbrother]

I can state unequivocally, if the 5D Mark IV does not have 4K - I will be selling off my Canon gear and switching platforms.

A manufacturer should NEVER be afraid of cannibalizing sales of their own products. They fail to realize that this is NOT A ZERO SUM GAME!

One would have thought that the 5D Mark II would have proven that. They put out a superior product with features above its class and what do you know... people came out of the woodwork to buy it; many who would never have before.

With this news, I'm not holding off on new Canon lens purchases until I see proof that Canon isn't going down the protectionist road...

 

[jebrady03]

I just hope a 5D Cinema camera makes it to market REALLY soon. Why? Because I'm tired of all the idiots who wish they worked for Canon marketing calling the 5D the 5Dc. Morons.

 

[ahsanford]

I would imagine that the thousands of photographers who do not need video features would care less about having 4K in the new 5D. Why does the DSLR have to be the all in one camera to fulfill still photography and video needs. I don't see very many still photographers complaining about the lack of still photography features on their cinema line.

The argument is that every professional photographer -- like it or not -- will need to be able to capture video before too long. For instance, photojournalists need to be their own everything these days, and wedding folks are being asked to capture video as well.

Then there's the argument that in 10 years, we'll all only shoot video and pull stills from it. I'm not touching that argument with a 10 foot pole, but if Canon thinks that's our inevitable future, they need a rig that juggles video and stills flawlessly. One would think that the 5D3 (and 5D4) is that rig, and 4K is part of that juggling act, undermined Cinema EOS sales be damned.

- A

 

[pedro]

Would a rumored 18 MP 5Dx offer me about the same possibility for stills like the 5D3 now, or will this be a plan B option? I could use such a high ISO beast pretty well for the nightphotography I mostly do with my 5D3 at the moment.

 

[WeekendWarrior]

I can state unequivocally, if the 5D Mark IV does not have 4K - I will be selling off my Canon gear and switching platforms.

This.
It's sad to say but If none of the new 5D series cameras feature 4k, I won't be buying any.. Not when Sony, Panasonic, Black Magic, and GoPro have already had it implemented into their cameras for some time now.

 

[tomri]

If all you do is try to protect your market, it will disappear!

 

[SPG]

Bah! I won't put too much weight on this rumor since it's coming from GH4K.com, er I mean EOSHD.com
Andrew is a little prone to hyperbole and has so much hate for the cameras that his site is named for that I can't take anything that he says with much confidence.

 

[ahsanford]

Just curious: As a non video guy, how important is 4K versus the less punchy sales points like clean HDMI out, Log/profiles, and video specific ergonomics/controls/external hookups, etc.?

In other words, is Canon not offering 4K in the 5D4 simply a blatant Cinema EOS sales protection move, or is it more a case of Canon not selling the other video features well?

- A

 

[clarksbrother]

Just curious: As a non video guy, how important is 4K versus the less punchy sales points like clean HDMI out, Log/profiles, and video specific ergonomics/controls/external hookups, etc.?

In other words, is Canon not offering 4K in the 5D4 simply a blatant Cinema EOS sales protection move, or is it more a case of Canon not selling the other video features well?

- A

Speaking as someone who works in the television industry, 4K is INCREDIBLY important. 20% of TV sales last year were 4K, that will increase dramatically this year. Most content is being captured at 4K whenever possible now with the knowledge that rebroadcasts and reuse of the content in the future there is a very real possibility that it will be displayed in 4K to the home.

Long story short - quality capture is key. Capturing 4K at at least 8 bit 4:2:2 at as high a bit rate as possible with a mic input is really all that is necessary (some will argue you need 10 bit, some will argue 4:2:0 is enough). Either way - the ability to capture the content in as high a quality as possible is critical. Everything after that is secondary. Clean HDMI out are nice (but rarely used by most...even professionals). Logs are nice, especially if you're doing complex edits... but they aren't absolutely necessary.

Those small features can be supplemented by aftermarket companies in many cases - the one thing they can't change is the quality of original capture.

 

[gsealy]

Just curious: As a non video guy, how important is 4K versus the less punchy sales points like clean HDMI out, Log/profiles, and video specific ergonomics/controls/external hookups, etc.?

In other words, is Canon not offering 4K in the 5D4 simply a blatant Cinema EOS sales protection move, or is it more a case of Canon not selling the other video features well?

- A

Speaking as someone who works in the television industry, 4K is INCREDIBLY important. 20% of TV sales last year were 4K, that will increase dramatically this year. Most content is being captured at 4K whenever possible now with the knowledge that rebroadcasts and reuse of the content in the future there is a very real possibility that it will be displayed in 4K to the home.

Long story short - quality capture is key. Capturing 4K at at least 8 bit 4:2:2 at as high a bit rate as possible with a mic input is really all that is necessary (some will argue you need 10 bit, some will argue 4:2:0 is enough). Either way - the ability to capture the content in as high a quality as possible is critical. Everything after that is secondary. Clean HDMI out are nice (but rarely used by most...even professionals). Logs are nice, especially if you're doing complex edits... but they aren't absolutely necessary.

Those small features can be supplemented by aftermarket companies in many cases - the one thing they can't change is the quality of original capture.

For some industries and situations 4K capture for future use is important. But for me, it isn't. Things change rapidly in my world, so old stock is pretty much, well, old.

 

[clarksbrother]

For some industries and situations 4K capture for future use is important. But for me, it isn't. Things change rapidly in my world, so old stock is pretty much, well, old.

The difference is - the theoretical 5D Mark IV is ok for you now... but in 1 year... 2 years... 3 years? I would venture an educated guess that still producing for 720/1080 at that point will be quite antiquated. Why would anyone buy a camera that faces obsolescence so soon?

I hope I'm wrong in that I hope the new camera has 4K and all the features that make it appealing to both professionals and enthusiasts alike... I worry that I'm not though...

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

The Alexa is still being used in top of the line productions and its not even capable of 4K. Maybe in a few years this will be a real issue, but not today.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I would imagine that the thousands of photographers who do not need video features would care less about having 4K in the new 5D. Why does the DSLR have to be the all in one camera to fulfill still photography and video needs.

It's a big market. GH4 sold way above predictions just due to 4k alone. 5D2 sold above predictions due to video.

And don't forget it's not like you are going to get a modern Exmor-level sensor for your stills either or something like a useful RAW crop mode on the 5Ds. So the stills stuff will be punted too.

 

[clarksbrother]

The Alexa is still being used in top of the line productions and its not even capable of 4K. Maybe in a few years this will be a real issue, but not today.

The Alexa was introduced in 2010. People are still using 5D Mark II and III too of course - why, because at the time, that hardware represented the best, most forward looking equipment. To say it's still being used is obvious - it'll continue being used even beyond when 4K becomes much more prevalent. That said, no one is pounding down the door going, "I want the best equipment that will serve me the longest as possible! Give me a 5 year old Alexa!".

But you prove the point - why would anyone buy new equipment that doesn't substantially improve over what they are already using? The reason the Alexa is still being used widely is because it was (and still is) an amazing forward looking piece of equipment when introduced, so it's had great longevity. New equipment should have that potential longevity if one is to seriously consider it.

 

[gsealy]

I would imagine that the thousands of photographers who do not need video features would care less about having 4K in the new 5D. Why does the DSLR have to be the all in one camera to fulfill still photography and video needs. I don't see very many still photographers complaining about the lack of still photography features on their cinema line.

When I started to do video I went straight to camcorders. It made sense to me. But then I learned that a lot of people were using the 5DIII for video. It seemed as though they had to go through a lot of hoops to do what I could easily do with the camcorders. Researching it, I came to understand that the 5DIII offered some nice capabilities at a reasonable cost, such as using a variety of lens or the lightweight form factor. So we still have the camcorders, but we also use 5DIII's to augment the production and give it some variety. It works out well for us.

So from that perspective, it would be really nice that the 5DIV shot 4K. If the 5DIV doesn't support 4K, then I have no real need to buy it. My 5DIII shoots stills very well and I can basically upgrade it by buying high quality lenses. At some point for stills I might consider a 5DsR, which is distinctly different from the 5DIII. I just wouldn't be interested in a 5DIV that is a modest evolutionary improvement.