Canon Announces the EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,729
2,166
Alberta, Canada
Incidentally, if you shoot waxwings you'll notice they are prime candidates for moire, with a filter, so I expect they could be bad without but I don't honestly know.

Jack
 

Attachments

  • BWaxwing_1D4_2274.JPG
    BWaxwing_1D4_2274.JPG
    1.1 MB · Views: 137

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,822
968
UK
www.flickr.com
Alefoto said:
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!

Fwiw I agree the price is high, and more than I'd be prepared to pay. I don't know to what extent that is Canon's fault, and how much the relative currency values, and local issues (like warranties, taxes, distribution) matter. I've never bought anything on release, it's a good idea to wait and see how much the price drops. Judging by other recent examples, it'll be a few hundred cheaper within a year (especially if you consider grey market imports).

I say again, the C100 is not a fair comparison because it's a video camera (incidentally, it doesn't shoot 4K). The other questions, I can only guess at. People disagree on whether an AA filter is a net benefit or drawback - I can't comment, but I don't think it's a big deal either way (is the 5DsR appreciably sharper? Is it not just a few % different at most?). And memory cards... well again, we've seen both sides argue their case in these forums. Some prefer backwards compatibility and cheapness, others want the best at any price. That's up to you to decide.

Alefoto said:
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.

The Canon website will of course portray this as the best thing at everything ever - such is the nature of marketing materials. Take it with a large pinch of salt. I don't see rival manufacturers producing products *in this category* that do the things you ask, however. The D5 and D500 have just come out, and they have only just introduced 4K.

A lot of what you say has some merit, but I just think it boils down to, who is this camera for? It is an all-rounder. It does a lot of things quite well, but a multipurpose tool is unlikely to better a specialist product in any given area. Higher res? 5Ds/R. Higher speed? 1Dx(II)/7DII. Best low light? 1Dx(II)/D5. Better video? Cinema cameras/other brands.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,822
968
UK
www.flickr.com
Jack Douglas said:
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

Haha, it's true that if only there was one machine that could do everything really well, it would save a lot of head scratching. Actually, if the 5Ds had a higher fps option with smaller output size/sensor crop, it would be pretty close.
 
Jan 28, 2014
4
0
Australia
I read most of the posts but still came to th3 conclusion that an upgrade from the 7d to the 5d4 is my next step I have the latest glass, 100-400, 70-200 etc so any change other than body would be expensive. Canon are making products for the consumer but at the same time are protecting their investment in R&D. I have no problems with that I get a great piece of gear and they make money. QED....
 

arthurbikemad

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2015
505
121
UK
If the Mk4 has the same hit rate as the 1DX2 people will be happy, plus at 30mp the images should be good, cropping with the 1DX2 has been a big surprise for me, extreem crops still give good res, given the hut rate is up, FPS is up, DR and IQ is up the keeper rate rises big time in my case, I will upgrade my mk3 and use the mk4 as backup or all rounder, I'd like to get 50mp body but feel it will narrow my options with a second body, once the price drops on the mk4 it would be hard for me not to chop in the mk3, it's also nice to have an option of a grip less body that works with medium sized whites for walking etc. Video wise...we'll it's not my bag but I understand why people are upset, I do and use to shot a lot of video and edit etc way back just not so much now, not sure what the reasons are for canon to chop so much out, I do feel they have done so for market reasons, a brave move that could cost them, unless they bring out a surprise body soon. In the mean time video shooters have many options, however I will say a lot of people I know that make mini films don't really know what they shoot with, as film makers they only care for the content.
 

GuyF

EOS RP
May 26, 2012
689
0
arthurbikemad said:
If the Mk4 has the same hit rate as the 1DX2 people will be happy...

It'll all depend on the scenario. Taking action shots as an example, the larger battery in the 1DX2 will drive big lenses a bit better and the huge fps will allow you to choose the best shot from a far greater selection. The 50% more pixels on the 5D4 (over the 1DX2) may well mean you have to increase the shutter speed compared to the 1DX2 to ensure you minimise motion blur due to the subject crossing more pixels in the same amount of time (unless you have great panning skills). Certainly a number of users have intimated that faster shutter speeds are required but looking at Keith Breazeal's shots over on the military aircraft thread suggest you can get brilliant shots of fast action with 50mp.

How's your panning? :)
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,822
968
UK
www.flickr.com
GuyF said:
arthurbikemad said:
If the Mk4 has the same hit rate as the 1DX2 people will be happy...

It'll all depend on the scenario. Taking action shots as an example, the larger battery in the 1DX2 will drive big lenses a bit better and the huge fps will allow you to choose the best shot from a far greater selection. The 50% more pixels on the 5D4 (over the 1DX2) may well mean you have to increase the shutter speed compared to the 1DX2 to ensure you minimise motion blur due to the subject crossing more pixels in the same amount of time (unless you have great panning skills). Certainly a number of users have intimated that faster shutter speeds are required but looking at Keith Breazeal's shots over on the military aircraft thread suggest you can get brilliant shots of fast action with 50mp.

How's your panning? :)

I don't think higher pixel counts make much difference to action shots - I'd have thought those were mostly taken at high shutter speeds anyway? We're not talking about 1 pixel blur versus 2 pixel blur, right? Where a higher shutter speed may well be needed is to mitigate camera motion, for subjects where there wouldn't be as much movement to begin with (and always with the caveat that it's viewing at 100% where it becomes apparent).
 

arthurbikemad

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2015
505
121
UK
My panning is ok...ish...lol I am waiting to see some real comparison from current bodies to the Mk4 (1DX, 1DX2, 5D3, 5DS etc etc). Yesterday after some time with the 1DX2 I was back on my 5D3, it's shocking how such a GREAT camera can seem sooooo s l o w after the 1 series. I know there are many factors at play and the comparison is highly unfair so take my comment as "just saying", also it was with a 200/2 on the 5D3 and a 500/4 on the 1DX2 but back to back you'd never believe how much difference in focus speed, acquisition and so on would be. The 200/2 on the 5D3 use to seem quick! I have high hopes for the Mk4.
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,729
2,166
Alberta, Canada
arthurbikemad said:
My panning is ok...ish...lol I am waiting to see some real comparison from current bodies to the Mk4 (1DX, 1DX2, 5D3, 5DS etc etc). Yesterday after some time with the 1DX2 I was back on my 5D3, it's shocking how such a GREAT camera can seem sooooo s l o w after the 1 series. I know there are many factors at play and the comparison is highly unfair so take my comment as "just saying", also it was with a 200/2 on the 5D3 and a 500/4 on the 1DX2 but back to back you'd never believe how much difference in focus speed, acquisition and so on would be. The 200/2 on the 5D3 use to seem quick! I have high hopes for the Mk4.

Well isn't that the sad reality of life in general. I liked my 6D more before I had a few months with the 1D4, but at least in that case the 6D had better IQ in non-action circumstances. Better not to test drive the $500K car if you're only buying a $30K one ... unless you have a very easy to please disposition! ;)

Jack
 

vjlex

EOS R5
Oct 15, 2011
405
310
Osaka, Japan
pwp said:
It was an odd move, but in working reality, it's really of very little consequence, barely noticeable.
FWIW I have always assigned ISO to the Set button. Give it a try.

I'm gobsmacked that the headline feature, Dual Pixel RAW can only be processed in Canon's software. Do you know a single professional who works with even modest volumes who uses Canon's lame software? Canon can't do software. Who's going to give up a highly evolved Lightroom or Capture One workflow to process their Dual Pixel RAW files in DPP? Take it from me...for the most part it ain't going to happen.

There are lots of other far more inexplicable design/feature decisions or exclusions that make the 5D MkIV a huge disappointment. It could have so easily been revolutionary.

-pw

Wow, is that how people feel about DPP? For me I generally prefer it over 3rd party software, especially when it comes to curve adjustments and light retouching. I prefer sticking to the CR2 files as opposed to taking up more space converting to another format. I do on occasion use Photoshop (haven't really gotten into Lightroom), but generally only when the image needs more than just basic retouching. Can I ask what's so bad about DPP?

I do think though that eventually, if not right away, Dual Pixel RAW will be able to be edited in PS/LR, unless it's been stated otherwise. I can't really imagine Canon expecting people to exclusively use their software for this already camera-exclusive feature. After all, it's not like they're making money off DPP.
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,318
505
pwp said:
Do you know a single professional who works with even modest volumes who uses Canon's lame software?

Art Morris.
Arash Hazhegi (OK, not a pro but a damned good amateur)
 

glness

EOS M50
Feb 23, 2015
34
5
www.flickr.com
Please tell me they are going to release a version of this camera without the AA filter so I can by the "R" version. Unless, of course, this is camera intended mostly for wedding photographers. What were they thinking?
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,822
968
UK
www.flickr.com
glness said:
Please tell me they are going to release a version of this camera without the AA filter so I can by the "R" version. Unless, of course, this is camera intended mostly for wedding photographers. What were they thinking?

Maybe they were thinking that everyone has managed perfectly well with AA filters for fifteen years, and although a small number of people are now anti-AA evangelists, the vast majority of customers won't know or care, and it may on balance be a net benefit to keep it?

(I've still not decided whether or not I think AA filters are on balance good or bad; I just don't think there's enough solid evidence out there to be so certain, as I've said on another thread).
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,318
505
And moire becomes less of a problem with higher density sensors.

I think it has becomes one of those 'it can't improve resolution so I would rather not have it just in case' issues.
 

LovePhotography

Texas Not Taxes.
Aug 24, 2014
233
0
Well, from my totally unscientific observations, it appears as though used 5DSr prices on eBay have jumped about $150 in the last 5 days!
 
<-- start Taboola -->