Canon Announces the EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR

Click

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 29, 2012
13,921
2,030
Canada
mikekx102 said:
Not meaning to be a troll, but has anyone seen this yet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJYXrilGk_8

I found it funny :p

;D Very funny, thanks for the chuckle.
 

Alefoto

I'm New Here
Mar 3, 2014
18
0
The 4K video of this new 5D IV is simply ridiculous and looks also to have been voluntary crippled: no HDMI 4K output, 1,7 crop factor, massive huge files to deal with, no log or one of the nice codec Canon has, high price point of the camera, high cost and weight of wide angle lens to be used in order to have a wide field of view when recording 4k (canon 11-24 f4, canon 14mm 2.8 are massive, heavy and above 2000 euro). Basically if you want to record a wide angle 4k video with this camera you have to count on spending about 5000 euro and have a huge and heavy setup to use. Not to mention then the massive files and time (and pc) needed to process them. 3500 euro???? nooo way! :mad: :mad:

For way less money and bulk you can buy a Fuji XT2 with a wide angle lens like the fuji 14mm or the even wider Voigtlander 12 or 15 or Zeiss Touit 12mm.

Not to mention the Panasonic Gh4 which can be found used for about 800 euro, wich has a way way better 4k video with almost the same crop factor. And use then the Voigtlander 10,5mm. And still, for less than the 5D IV cost, you can add into the GH4 setup the panasonic YAGH interface unit which will give you powerful audio option.

It's funny that Canon advertized the 4k option in such a camera, it is barely usable and definitely behind cheaper competition options. Even a used Canon C100 for 1500 euro gives you better video!
 

msatter

EOS 90D
Oct 23, 2012
141
1
The only way Canon is going to listen to its customers is by not buying or buying other brands that meet your needs.

So if you are happy still with you current camera postpone buying the Mark IV and the advantage you will get it cheaper than now the prices with a mark-up on it because it is new. You never know if Magic Lantern has managed, by then to overcome the firmware left outs by Canon.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,822
968
UK
www.flickr.com
Alefoto said:
Not to mention the Panasonic Gh4 which can be found used for about 800 euro, wich has a way way better 4k video with almost the same crop factor. And use then the Voigtlander 10,5mm. And still, for less than the 5D IV cost, you can add into the GH4 setup the panasonic YAGH interface unit which will give you powerful audio option.

People should not be buying this camera if their primary interest is video. It is a STILLS camera. It still produces video, which may be adequate for many users.

Alefoto said:
It's funny that Canon advertized the 4k option in such a camera, it is barely usable and definitely behind cheaper competition options. Even a used Canon C100 for 1500 euro gives you better video!

1) All the video people moaned that 4K was essential for newer Canon cameras to not be DOA. They added 4K. Now it's not the right kind ::)
2) Again, the 5D4 is a STILLS camera that happens to do video. The C100 is a VIDEO camera. How good are its stills? Probably not very good, because it's a VIDEO camera. Get it?
 
Aug 27, 2016
5
0
I've read all of the comments on this thread so thank you "mikekx102", I needed a good laugh and the above video you mentioned delivered! :D
 

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,833
1,124
promocop said:
So, does anyone want to speculate on WHY no CFfast card slot? And faster SD slot?
They didn't need more speed with the mentioned specifications plus they maintain compatibility with previous models as well as keeping the cost of buying cards lower. But they could utilize a faster (UHS-II) SD slot...
 

tpatana

EOS 5D Mark IV
Nov 1, 2012
1,545
268
tron said:
promocop said:
So, does anyone want to speculate on WHY no CFfast card slot? And faster SD slot?
They didn't need more speed with the mentioned specifications plus they maintain compatibility with previous models as well as keeping the cost of buying cards lower. But they could utilize a faster (UHS-II) SD slot...

Yup. I don't know if the UHS-II license would have cost more, that might be the reason. 90+% of people who shoot sports or such at 7fps, will be using CF anyway. So the I vs II is not huge deal. For parents taking family pictures at vacation it does nothing.
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,729
2,166
Alberta, Canada
Firstly I am no video expert, in fact expert in almost nothing. However, I do have maturity and common sense. Some CR comments are lacking even in that, full of bitterness and anger.

I, as a satisfied Canon customer do understand that there is disappointment over missing features and all the other various complaints that are valid, yes valid. As stated the 5D4 video is so so. When I shoot video it is short clips of beautiful birds, so I'll be thrilled if I get the 5D4 and its 4k.

So, what I don't understand is the excessive whining, whining when we live in a free country and can buy whatever is best for our needs. It's all available, and if you work hard and save you can have virtually anything you choose, short of the most expensive gear. If you save all your life then like me you can have some amazing lenses and a good camera when you're completely free to enjoy it.

What's more, the gear that you can presently afford exceeds what professionals had only a short time ago. Instead of being thrilled with the photographic opportunities and turning out work equal to the pros of a few years ago (you have equal equipment, after all) some of you would rather just moan and groan. If you work in the industry you may have some competitive pressure to upgrade and that's a little different.

Do you really want to live your life being negative when you have all the choices in the world and are free to exercise these choices. By all means don't buy Canon! Governments become tired and old and we boot them out. Companies that show similar signs need to be rewarded similarly by not buying their equipment. If the criticism is really accurate/deserved then those companies will reap the reward and go under or they'll respond and survive.

Contact Canon and voice your concerns and don't buy Canon. Correspond and delineate exactly how you feel Canon has fallen short of the mark. In this way the masses of discontented former Canon users will make an impact. Intelligently express similar points in CR, which is partly why it exists, in case Canon observes. I'm encouraging you guys to do this. But don't be a loser.

I can't presently complain because I'm happy with my Canon gear and I've just ordered more. :) :) That must really burn some people up - good. ;)

Jack
 
Jan 16, 2016
3
0
E said:
M_S said:
neuroanatomist said:
scyrene said:
E said:
Mikehit said:
E said:
Are you people feeling well? :-\

You're not reading what I'm posting, and you are really rude.

I am reading what you are writing.
Canon has not put high-end video functionality in the 5D4
I call it manufacturing to a price point
You see it as them deliberately crippling the product
My comment was highlighting that every manufacturer compromises to meet marketing aims. You don't like those compromises so you can either go with it or buy something else.

Simple fact is they are NOT going to make the 5D4 a high end video option. If you want high end video option buy a high end video camera.
If you were saying 'I would like to have seen...' then that is understandable. Complaining that they have deliberately crippled a product is refusing to accept reality of what they have chosen to produce.


How much would you have been willing to pay for a 5D4 with the video you would like to see?

But you are just proving to me again that you're not reading what I'm posting.

I have NOT asked for high-end video functionality in the 5D4.

And I have also written time and time again that I don't want to buy a video camera. But that I'm OK with paying for a non-crippled 1D C Mark II, if there were one.

So how come this is impossible for you to take in? I'm accused of writing the same thing over and over, but that's obviously because you're not reading and understanding it. My demands on Canon are fully reasonable.

Let's put this as clearly as possible: YOU have asked for certain features. OTHERS have asked for other features. If Canon put in all the features YOU AND OTHERS asked for, then it would be closer to a professional video camera. Unless you believe your personal desires are either more natural or somehow more important to Canon, then there's no way for the company to decide between your wishes and those of others. Does this make sense? Nobody is saying YOU want a pro video model. But one person's wishes cannot define a market. Capiche?

Let's put this as clearly as possible. If you actually read what 'E' wrote, you'd see that's exactly what he's saying. I want it so everyone wants it. It's not a high end feature. It's important to me so it's important to everyone. It's so easy to do. So logical. Canon should have done it, because I wanted them to. Or else. Or else what? Exactly.

Capiche? ;)

Useless crap. Most of the time picking on somebody. Hope you have fun that way.

Yes, this is about the most aggressive forum I have ever visited. Unbelievable.

No, not true. It just happens to harbor some hardcore Canon Fanboys. These "neuroanatomist" & "scyrene" guys are some of them. Don't you go and value their post counts or their opinions. Most of them are either about "defending mother Canon"or about "dilbert" & "dilbertland". I for one think they shouldn't pick on people who were hoping for certain features in their next camera upgrade and come here to share their opinions. If they believe that Canon cameras are the BESTEST in the world, then its their bussiness. But they need not shove negativity down the throats of anyone who feels underwhelmed by one. It is truly distasteful. They keep regurgitating along these lines: "Canon doesn't care, they won't be bothered by the losing you as a customer, they will still sell millions of units, so STFU." In truth, you can say what you want about the recent releases, just don't pay any attention to any of their posts. There are others like me who come here to read opinions as well.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I am considering the 5D Mark IV as well. I may end up getting it or on second thought, maybe not. I do have to say though, that I am indeed disappointed by the video specifications and the card formats. But it is interesting to note the path Canon has chosen to take with their recent releases. They usually have this nasty habit of protecting their product lines by crippling lower tier products, as in disabling silly features which could have easily made it into their products with negligible cost.

Firstly let me start of by saying that the 5D series of cameras have always been legendary cameras.

Let us rewind back to 2005, Canon released the 5D, which is the first small body full frame camera at an easily accessible price compared to the 1D type of bodies. There was nothing to compete against it for almost 4 years.

Then in 2008, Canon released the 5D Mark II with 1080p video capture. The immensely positive response by the film making crowd was unprecedented. They realized that they had captured a significant portion of the professional video market as well. They realized that they could get more money out of the people who were into professional video, since there was little competition in the $5000-$20000 market.

4 years later in 2012, the 5D Mark III was released and it is one of the most popular full frame cameras among pros world over. It had decent video functionality at that time, nothing ground braking. But along side it, you see that the 1DC, C100, C300 & C500 were released, which had serious video features built in them, but at much higher price points. This is when they began to ditch the type of crowd who bought the 5D Mark II, and started pushing them towards their fully video oriented products, and raised the entry point to pro video.
*[anyone remember the time they threatened to sue Magic Lantern in case they messed around with the 1DX firmware in order to protect the 1DC? Bravo Canon! You certainly prevented a lot of guys from getting more out of their 1DX]

This is when Panasonic, Samsung and Sony took note and released mirrorless products which could be used for serious video under $3500 price point which are now very popular among the video crowd. But they did nothing to dethrone the 5D Mark III which still managed to garner enormous support among the photo crowd. So in summary, they lost some of the low end market, some guys had ditched their Canon systems.

Fast forward 4 years, and you see a lot of Canon customers, and loyalists, who didn't ditch Canon when Sony and Panasonic offered them a safe heaven were eagerly awaiting the 5D Mark IV. They believed that the 5D Mark IV would be the answer to all of their worries, and that their patience with Canon would mean something.

And then when day before yesterday, then Canon dropped the bomb on the 5D Mark IV, you could see that a lot of people were hugely disappointed. Mainly the budget oriented video crowd.

The photo crowd on one hand have a lot to cheer about. DP Raw, 4fps DPAF tracking, new focus & metering sensors.

The video crowd on the other hand...

I'm one of them who shoots stills as much as I shoot videos. So it would have been really awesome if they had put a few more usable features. The crop in 4k video though enormous, was possible to swallow. But MJPEG? Seriously? Does it really take too much processing power to do x264 in 2016? This has only been done to gimp the video functionality. Well I could live with that as well, if they offered HDMI out in 4K.

Wait what?? It doesn't have 4k HDMI out? Why Canon?
They did the same thing with the 5D Mark III and disabled uncompressed 1080p out through HDMI, and they added it later via a software update only after people started considering it as a drawback against Nikon's D800 which was found to have the feature.

Do they seriously intend to ditch the video crowd? Well I'm beginning to think that that they do. While it may not be of much consequence to them whether they lose the video crowd customer base to other competing brands or not, it still does not change the fact that this mentality of theirs is starting to mess up things for everyone. I am pretty certain no one here will appreciate the use of Motion JPEG codec or the exclusion of 4K HDMI out or the huge crop factor for video.

------------------

Now as far a photography is concerned, I question the use of the older card formats for this next generation camera. Both the CF card, and the SD card are older spec. WHY? I know the cards are expensive now, but it would have gotten cheaper with time, like in a year or two. The UHS II SD cards are already cheap. Why they included older card formats in a $3500 camera in 2016 is beyond me. The Nikon D500, is able to use newer formats, while it being $1500 cheaper. Why? Couldn't they have like increased the price by a hundred bucks or so just to include the faster cards?

I get it that its not a sports camera. But now I have no other option other than spending over $6000 for the 1DX II to have decent write times. They probably want to protect the sales of the 1DX II line. But couldn't they have considered the time frame in between upgrades? Its not like they upgrade their cameras every 2 years or so like Nikon. The wait was over 4 years this time. Shouldn't it have made sense to them to at least not compromise on card formats?

I hope rival manufacturers don't have such reservations. CF is dead, CFast is the way forwards. I certainly don't intend to spend any more money on older CF cards, or slower speed SD cards which are meant to become obsolete in the near future.

------------------

Well, I for one am glad Photokina is around the corner. I am pretty sure that I'm not the only one who is going to be looking for alternatives in the list of new cameras which will be announced this year. If I find a good alternative, then I may go elsewhere, or else I will have to settle for the 5D Mark IV if I don't find anything else worthwhile. Or on second thought, I may get the 80D for the DPAF during video, and go to the dark side. Don't know for sure what's going to happen in the next few months, but I'm certainly on the fence on this one.
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,729
2,166
Alberta, Canada
jnx_r, I don't believe anyone here including neuro would say anything about your reasonably presented commentary. Your commentary and advice is pretty solid.

If you and others are in fact willing to act then it will impact Canon and Canon will be forced to respond. This will only happen if there are significant numbers and by being free to express such things in this thread you will have some impact, but as neuro might say, perhaps not as much as you think. Still, never underestimate the impact of a growing crowd of discontented customers. In this regard I fully support your efforts because it will have a positive impact (if successful) in two ways. It will help the underdog companies financially and it will force Canon to do better, which will help me, since I'm not 100% satisfied either.

Never the less, you won't presently be able to recruit me since I may have different needs and views from yours and Canon presently fills them (I moved from Nikon). I'm just dying to get the 400DO II that Canon has upgraded so amazingly well, for example.

Jack
 

arthurbikemad

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2015
505
121
UK
Great post, and I agree fully, I am still confused by the mk4. Perhaps Canon have some other model they plan to release? I say that as Canon keep saying the mk4 is mainly a stills camera, they put emphasis on that fact, makes me wonder why they have steered away from video as they have? As I say, I am somewhat confused by the mixed bag of features.... It's all very strange!
 

Alefoto

I'm New Here
Mar 3, 2014
18
0
scyrene said:
Alefoto said:
Not to mention the Panasonic Gh4 which can be found used for about 800 euro, wich has a way way better 4k video with almost the same crop factor. And use then the Voigtlander 10,5mm. And still, for less than the 5D IV cost, you can add into the GH4 setup the panasonic YAGH interface unit which will give you powerful audio option.

People should not be buying this camera if their primary interest is video. It is a STILLS camera. It still produces video, which may be adequate for many users.

I just checked the price here in Italy. It's 4150 euro... For this camera? Waaaay toooo overpriced. It would be an interesting 2016 camera for about 2000 euro, but more than twice as much? Sorry Canon but for that amount of money there are several better options in the market, for stills and definitely for video. Even older Canon cameras (C100 or a used C300 for example) give you better video options. Regarding stills, there are also some things which are implemented in cheaper cameras and lacking here: no AA filter (why did they left it??), better memory cards, better buffer, tropicalization. For stills there is always the much cheaper 5DS!


scyrene said:
Alefoto said:
It's funny that Canon advertized the 4k option in such a camera, it is barely usable and definitely behind cheaper competition options. Even a used Canon C100 for 1500 euro gives you better video!

1) All the video people moaned that 4K was essential for newer Canon cameras to not be DOA. They added 4K. Now it's not the right kind ::)
2) Again, the 5D4 is a STILLS camera that happens to do video. The C100 is a VIDEO camera. How good are its stills? Probably not very good, because it's a VIDEO camera. Get it?
I understand this new 5D IV is a still camera and that so many people want so many things. Canon launched the DSRL video stuff and many people appreciated it. Actually there are many people using a single camera for both video and still images and many people use both in their workflow. The 5DIV's supposed video capabilities are adversized on Canon's website as "cinematographic 4k video". No way with those specs and at that price: with 4000 euro, now in 2016, you can get an advanced video system of camera, basic audio gear and a few lenses or a professional video camera body only (the Ursa for example). Considering the lifespan of this new camera (up to 2020 maybe?) and its current specs compared to the 2016 competition (which is about to introduce or has introduced features like pixel shift, no aa filter now being the norm, 6k video, much faster memory cards, etc) it's already a normal camera by nowdays standards. Would it be an investment for the future?
I don't understand the purpose of this camera. For people entering the Canon system? Way too overpriced and behind competition at that price. For people upgrading their canon camera? Not for people doing video for sure. Even for still images there are cheaper and better options within Canon cameras.
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,729
2,166
Alberta, Canada
"Even for still images there are cheaper and better options within Canon cameras."

We're all different and have different needs. I have the 6D and it's not quite what I want/need now, so given that I don't care about being cheaper, and given that I have good Canon glass that I love (won't say it's the best, just that I love it) and given that I much prefer Canon ergonomics over Nikon and do nature photography with 300 2.8 II X2 III and given that I find 4.5 fps a little too slow for my liking, Alefoto, what would you suggest?

Jack
 

Alefoto

I'm New Here
Mar 3, 2014
18
0
Jack Douglas said:
"Even for still images there are cheaper and better options within Canon cameras."

We're all different and have different needs. I have the 6D and it's not quite what I want/need now, so given that I don't care about being cheaper, and given that I have good Canon glass that I love (won't say it's the best, just that I love it) and given that I much prefer Canon ergonomics over Nikon and do nature photography with 300 2.8 II X2 III and given that I find 4.5 fps a little too slow for my liking, Alefoto, what would you suggest?

Jack

Maybe I was complaining too much about the video features since I was interested mainly in those specs and the price of course (as I said before, it would be a nice 2016 camera for 2000 euro, but not for sure for more than 4000 euro). I am one of those interested in both video and stills and so I was looking at the video features as a deal breaker on this new camera. The 5D III gives you nice still images, this new 5D IV will also for sure, no question on this.
I gave a glimpse at the still specs. I am sure it will produce nice images but there are some things which leave me a little confused: the presence of the aa filter (I mean, why? everybody is moving away from this), the small buffer, the cards used, the dual pixel raw is nice but why only with canon software (it's a nice feaure for sure, but most people have already a postproduction workflow settled and very few I guess are based on the canon software).

Regarding your question, I also enjoy nature photography and also do some hard core trekking (the kind of stuff my friends will usually say "no, you can go alone, it's not for me"). Considering alternative options, well, for much less you can have:
- Canon 5DS for resolution
- a used Canon 1DX Mark I for speed, AF, buffer, ergonomics
- you can even buy a combo of 5DS plus 7D Mark II for having resolution + speed and still have some cash left
 
Jan 16, 2016
3
0
Jack Douglas said:
jnx_r, I don't believe anyone here including neuro would say anything about your reasonably presented commentary. Your commentary and advice is pretty solid.

If you and others are in fact willing to act then it will impact Canon and Canon will be forced to respond. This will only happen if there are significant numbers and by being free to express such things in this thread you will have some impact, but as neuro might say, perhaps not as much as you think. Still, never underestimate the impact of a growing crowd of discontented customers. In this regard I fully support your efforts because it will have a positive impact (if successful) in two ways. It will help the underdog companies financially and it will force Canon to do better, which will help me, since I'm not 100% satisfied either.

Never the less, you won't presently be able to recruit me since I may have different needs and views from yours and Canon presently fills them (I moved from Nikon). I'm just dying to get the 400DO II that Canon has upgraded so amazingly well, for example.

Jack

I am truly happy for you Jack, and I wish my needs were limited to photography and occasional video. Then I would be happy in the Canon camp even now. The beautiful combination of photo and video technologies in a single package was what made me consider Canon a while back. The lack of the same makes me reconsider Canon today.

I think I'll wait until Photokina is over before I make any decisions.
 

msatter

EOS 90D
Oct 23, 2012
141
1
I noticed that the battery door locking mechanism is not made of metal any-more and is now made of plastic. This will improve the performance of a Wifi SD memory card.

So not all bad that Canon did. ;-)
 

JoeDavid

Unimpressed
Feb 23, 2012
190
42
I generally sell off the old camera bodies and move to the newer bodies for the updated features and sensor improvements. From now shooting with the 7DM2, 5DM3, 5DS, and 1DXM2, this body rolls the best of the updated features of those bodies into the 5D series (minus CFast). It will be my go to camera. So much so that I'll probably end up with two of them and sell the 7DM2 and the 5DM3. I'll keep the 5DS for those limited times where 50MP actually makes a difference for what I shoot, primarily certain types of landscape and large group photography. The 1DXM2 is mainly sports for me. For the Travel and Event photography that I do, I need the "jack of all trades" 5D series body. The Mark IV certainly fill that requirement.

If I was going to complain about the Mark IV it would be in the area of the memory cards but not what you think. I'm OK with sticking with the CF and SD combo if they are sufficient for the data rates required by the still and video shooting. Unfortunately the SD media is the weak link. This is about the best SD card that you can get right now:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1082349-REG/sandisk_sdsdxp_128g_a46_128gb_extreme_pro_uhs_i.html

That SanDisk line goes all the way up to 512GB in size! It sounds great with specs like "Max. Read Speed: 95 MB/s; Max. Write Speed: 90 MB/s". The problem is this spec: "Min. Write Speed: 30 MB/s". I can live with that for stills since the camera buffer typically covers most of the burst shots I do but I've started taking video "you are there" clips when doing the travel photography. I anticipate the Mark IV being the camera that I move up to using 4K for recording them as well as some Event video.

Now to covert the complain into a feature request from Canon. They need to add another card writing option to allow you to automatically route video to one card and stills to the other card so that I don't have to remember to switch back and forth to prevent filling up the CF card with stills if the camera requires it for the 4K video option to record without dropping frames. I don't think that is an unreasonable request since it's just a firmware addition/change.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,822
968
UK
www.flickr.com
jnx_r said:
No, not true. It just happens to harbor some hardcore Canon Fanboys. These "neuroanatomist" & "scyrene" guys are some of them.

::) ::) ::)

I can only speak for myself, but I don't think fanboy means what you think. I think my posts speak for themselves, and any objective observer can make up their minds. I do not think you are one such.

...

Perhaps I can be a little more laid back because I only got the 5Ds at the beginning of summer, so the 5D4 was never likely to be my next body. Or maybe I don't bitch and whine about companies not giving me what I want, or about a device designed to do one job not doing others. I've considered many devices over the years, bought some, and it's not the brand name that matters, it's what the device can do, how much it costs, and to an extent, what the reputation it has for reliability etc. I'd recommend that attitude to everyone, but some people prefer to make a fuss...
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,729
2,166
Alberta, Canada
Guys I understand that your situation is not mine and you or I may need to reconsider. When we have good dialog we may still stick to our views but generally it broadens our horizons and we come to appreciate why our needs are not necessarily other's needs and that Canon has to look at the diverse customer base and try to please everyone. That of course is impossible.

For me in particular, a used 1DX if it was cheap enough would be an option. However, I've been waiting for about 2 years considering that it would be updated by the Mark II and I would buy that. I would/might still but 20 MP doesn't thrill me given my cropping. Stupid Canon should have given it 24 or 28 MP - forget those photo jounalists and sports fanatics that don't want that, I want it, right. I'd love all the other features.

This would be my last camera probably since I'm getting up in years. I've previously bought and sold a used 1D4 and loved it except it was short on pixels given I have the 6D - nope 16 MP is not enough since I'm always cropping; also the higher ISO performance was not great.

A 5DSr is a possibility but already I know from the 6D that I want more than 5 fps. A 7D was an option but I don't want a crop camera, so actually the 5D4 really doesn't seem too bad. In fact I think I could be pretty happy with it.

And I'm not anyone else so I don't expect anyone else to feel like me but I'm generally satisfied with Canon. Provided I don't allow myself to get too wound up about a few missing features. I think 30 MPs will just about be perfect for me.

So that's why I don't join in the chorus cursing Canon. And that's why I respect other peoples needs and opinions. And that's why I get tired of whiners! ;) Actually that's probably more because I'm old. :)

Jack
 
<-- start Taboola -->