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.