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.
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!
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...promocop said:So, does anyone want to speculate on WHY no CFfast card slot? And faster SD slot?
tron said: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...promocop said:So, does anyone want to speculate on WHY no CFfast card slot? And faster SD slot?
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.
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.
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 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?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?
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 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.
jnx_r said:No, not true. It just happens to harbor some hardcore Canon Fanboys. These "neuroanatomist" & "scyrene" guys are some of them.