Canon EOS 5D Mark IV To Feature 4K Video?

[LetTheRightLensIn]

This might be disappointing news, as Canon might use 4K to differentiate the 7D replacement from the 5D replacement, meaning the 7D replacement wouldn't get 4K. That would be the disappointing part.

I can't speak to the features of the 5D III replacement, but the 7D II absolutely 100% will not have 4k video.

A bit surprising. Soon all the cams will have 4k and the 7D2 will need to last for years.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If Canon puts 4k into the 5Dmk4, it'll probably be a 8bit 4:2:0 internal recording just like the GH4. Possibly 4:2:2 8bit to an external recorder, but I don't see them doing much more than that. Anything else would essentially eliminate the 1Dc in the eyes of any indie film maker, as well as anyone that doesn't need to do any kind of heavy grading.

My fear is that the 4k it delivers will be marginally better than 5D3 ML RAW and that ML RAW for 1080p won't be possible on the new 5D4.

I hope they notice that as soon as ML RAW came out the 5D3 prices, which had been sinking a lot, shoot right back up to MSRP at most stores for some time. And stop crippling everything to pieces. It's a joke how much better ML gets out of the 5D3 than the Canon firmware alone.

I partitulary hate how Canon has pushed DIGIC processing more and more to the DNR everything to mush that a few studios sadly use on blu-rays at times. As soon as an area doesn't have brightness and extreme contrast DIGIC just turns things to 100% mush. But even in the crisp areas I don't know what they are doing. Sometimes I swear Canon marketing literally had them add a minor Gaussian blur filter in the video output stage. But it might just well be that DIGIC video processing is THAT bad. Maybe it is, there must be some reason they suck with old Canon video processing chips for the C100 and all instead of using any of the much newer DIGICs to read the sensor and do basic processing.

Anyway one would hope they are smart and give the 5D4 1080p RAW out natively and 4k compressed, but a good quality 4k and not low color and not mush and hopefully 10bits. Giving it all the hardware can do is the way to take the world by storm again. Video world moves fast and the film guys don't get into fanboy nonsense and unless Canon pushes max fast they won't ever make a big splash in low to mid-end again.

 

[ITshooter]

This might be disappointing news, as Canon might use 4K to differentiate the 7D replacement from the 5D replacement, meaning the 7D replacement wouldn't get 4K. That would be the disappointing part.

I can't speak to the features of the 5D III replacement, but the 7D II absolutely 100% will not have 4k video.

Is that an opinion, or do you have information?

If Canon leaves 4K video out of the 7D II (or 5D mk IV), I think it would be a mistake. I know a lot of people in this forum default to the "most consumers don't have 4K TVs" argument, or the "Canon must protect the Cinema-series" argument, but both viewpoints are frankly myopic.

1) The 7D II won't be aimed at "most consumers"; it will be aimed at the sort of people with the disposable income for a $2000 product that entails lots of equally expensive accessories. Perhaps 4K TVs occupy relatively little market share overall, but what is their share among affluent buyers who might make up a greater proportion of the potential 7D II user base? What share will 4K sets have among these buyers next year, when the 7D II will presumably be at full availability?

2) Even if 4K isn't your delivery output, the extra resolution has lots of benefits, from the ability to crop into footage, to the ability to create sharper/ better stabilized 1080p footage, to the ability (with shutter speed and codec limitations) to pull a perfectly usable, print-worthy photo from moving footage. Speaking as a professional journalist (surely a core part of the 7D II's would-be user base), these functions are valuable. They'll be valuable for other professional users, too, to say nothing of enthusiasts. Yes, Canon might prefer that pros and enthusiasts purchase the next-gen C100 or something, but there's a clear demand for convergent photo-video tools, and the competition is already starting to accommodate it. Canon's staved off user loss so far thanks to lock-in from its lens ecosystem, but there's a turning point for everything. How long will Canon customers buy what Canon wants to sell instead of what consumers want? Sometimes Canon reminds me of Microsoft is this regard. Protectionist tactics have historically hit walls. Some argue that Canon sells DSLRs primarily for still features, and that video ones won't make-or-break sales on a large scale. Maybe we'll see.

3) Building on the above point... 4K isn't a necessity today, per se, but the 7D II will probably be replaced on a three-to-four-year cycle. By 2017, will 4K really be so optional? Even if Canon achieves strong early 7D II sales without 4K, what will the long-tail sales look like, as competitors bring worthier models to market? I suppose Canon could always accelerate its release cycle, but not many companies have success with that model when it comes to high-end hardware.

4) TVs and professional use cases are only part of the 4K equation. New computers already offer greater-than-1080p resolution, and over the next few years, monitors of greater and greater pixel density will become more common. Again, if we're looking forward to 2017 or so, and we're thinking of the sort of user who would own a $2000+ camera, what kind of computer gear do you think this user is going to have? There's a recurring rumor that Apple will launch 4K iMacs in the near future. If that happens, it will surely drive demand (again, among influential, affluent buyers) for 4K-capable DSLRs.

5) The "Canon needs to protect the 1DC" argument also shouldn't prevent a 4K-capable 7D II. The 1DC isn't a new camera. It's one thing to protect a product from cannibalization when it's been on the market for less than a year. But today, the 1DC isn't necessarily a better option than the GH4, at least not if you're oriented more toward video than stills but need both, and is surely due for an upgrade of its own. It makes no sense to think about the 7D II cannibalizing the current Cinema-series cameras; it makes sense to think about how 7D II video features might cannibalize the next generation's. This line of thinking offers much more latitude for product segmentation. The 1DC mK II, for example, might record internal 10-bit 4K to CFast, or using some new, efficient H265 codec, etc-- whereas the 7D II could record only internal 8-bit 4:2:0 4K. The 1DC Mk II could offer more frame rate options, or more professional profiles, zebras and focus peaking, and so on. If we're thinking of the 1-DC as a tool for professionals, it's insane to think that bare-bones 4K features in a 7D (or 5D, for that matter) would take away sales.

6) By 2016, I suspect it's going to be hard for Canon to keep 4K out of its Rebel line-- because everyone else will have implemented it by then. Panasonic is putting 4K in everything right now, and more are coming. If Canon doesn't plan to release a 4K-capable 7D II until, say, early 2014, what kind of upgrade path is it offering? Again, I suppose Canon might have a speedier refresh cycle in mind than anyone suspects.

Does this mean Canon will include 4K in any of the upcoming DSLRs besides the 1DC successor? Who knows. But as my above points explained, I see more risk than reward in being conservative, and I see no reason 4K-capable DSLRs have to cannibalize C-series sales, at least not among the core pro users who justify those cameras' high-margin prices to begin with.

EDIT: After thinking for a minute, it occurs to me that if Canon actually has some amazing new sensor that creates meaningfully better stills (per the rumor about the private demos involving a special monitor), then maybe the company has more leverage than I expect. If the images are amazing, or there's some other new tech involved (new AF, etc), maybe the stills guys will flock to the model, regardless of whatever Canon does with video. But still, I think the point remains-- it seems more stubborn than sensible for Canon to leave 4K out of its next-gen pro cameras. And since it doesn't offer the video people anything comparable at the price (or anything close to it), it seems like a needless risk.

 

[Don Haines]

This "protect the higher cameras conspiracy theory" is bunk.

New features are typically introduced in lower end models.... not high end models.

"You can't put 4K video in the 5D4 because you have to protect the 1DC" By the same logic, you can't put 2K video into the T3i because you have to protect the 1DX... yet there it is.

Look at it another way.... "you can't put feature X in a camera that sells by the millions to protect camera Y that sells by the thousands" Where is the money? The money is in the low end cameras. Canon has probably made more money with the t3i than the 1DC, the 1DX, the 5D3, and the 7D put together... it has certainly sold at least 20 times as much t3i's than all of those high end cameras.... Which one do you think they would want to protect?

 

[Northstar]

This might be disappointing news, as Canon might use 4K to differentiate the 7D replacement from the 5D replacement, meaning the 7D replacement wouldn't get 4K. That would be the disappointing part.

I can't speak to the features of the 5D III replacement, but the 7D II absolutely 100% will not have 4k video.

Is that an opinion, or do you have information?

If Canon leaves 4K video out of the 7D II (or 5D mk IV), I think it would be a mistake. I know a lot of people in this forum default to the "most consumers don't have 4K TVs" argument, or the "Canon must protect the Cinema-series" argument, but both viewpoints are frankly myopic.

1) The 7D II won't be aimed at "most consumers"; it will be aimed at the sort of people with the disposable income for a $2000 product that entails lots of equally expensive accessories. Perhaps 4K TVs occupy relatively little market share overall, but what is their share among affluent buyers who might make up a greater proportion of the potential 7D II user base? What share will 4K sets have among these buyers next year, when the 7D II will presumably be at full availability?

2) Even if 4K isn't your delivery output, the extra resolution has lots of benefits, from the ability to crop into footage, to the ability to create sharper/ better stabilized 1080p footage, to the ability (with shutter speed and codec limitations) to pull a perfectly usable, print-worthy photo from moving footage. Speaking as a professional journalist (surely a core part of the 7D II's would-be user base), these functions are valuable. They'll be valuable for other professional users, too, to say nothing of enthusiasts. Yes, Canon might prefer that pros and enthusiasts purchase the next-gen C100 or something, but there's a clear demand for convergent photo-video tools, and the competition is already starting to accommodate it. Canon's staved off user loss so far thanks to lock-in from its lens ecosystem, but there's a turning point for everything. How long will Canon customers buy what Canon wants to sell instead of what consumers want? Sometimes Canon reminds me of Microsoft is this regard. Protectionist tactics have historically hit walls. Some argue that Canon sells DSLRs primarily for still features, and that video ones won't make-or-break sales on a large scale. Maybe we'll see.

3) Building on the above point... 4K isn't a necessity today, per se, but the 7D II will probably be replaced on a three-to-four-year cycle. By 2017, will 4K really be so optional? Even if Canon achieves strong early 7D II sales without 4K, what will the long-tail sales look like, as competitors bring worthier models to market? I suppose Canon could always accelerate its release cycle, but not many companies have success with that model when it comes to high-end hardware.

4) TVs and professional use cases are only part of the 4K equation. New computers already offer greater-than-1080p resolution, and over the next few years, monitors of greater and greater pixel density will become more common. Again, if we're looking forward to 2017 or so, and we're thinking of the sort of user who would own a $2000+ camera, what kind of computer gear do you think this user is going to have? There's a recurring rumor that Apple will launch 4K iMacs in the near future. If that happens, it will surely drive demand (again, among influential, affluent buyers) for 4K-capable DSLRs.

5) The "Canon needs to protect the 1DC" argument also shouldn't prevent a 4K-capable 7D II. The 1DC isn't a new camera. It's one thing to protect a product from cannibalization when it's been on the market for less than a year. But today, the 1DC isn't necessarily a better option than the GH4, at least not if you're oriented more toward video than stills but need both, and is surely due for an upgrade of its own. It makes no sense to think about the 7D II cannibalizing the current Cinema-series cameras; it makes sense to think about how 7D II video features might cannibalize the next generation's. This line of thinking offers much more latitude for product segmentation. The 1DC mK II, for example, might record internal 10-bit 4K to CFast, or using some new, efficient H265 codec, etc-- whereas the 7D II could record only internal 8-bit 4:2:0 4K. The 1DC Mk II could offer more frame rate options, or more professional profiles, zebras and focus peaking, and so on. If we're thinking of the 1-DC as a tool for professionals, it's insane to think that bare-bones 4K features in a 7D (or 5D, for that matter) would take away sales.

6) By 2016, I suspect it's going to be hard for Canon to keep 4K out of its Rebel line-- because everyone else will have implemented it by then. Panasonic is putting 4K in everything right now, and more are coming. If Canon doesn't plan to release a 4K-capable 7D II until, say, early 2014, what kind of upgrade path is it offering? Again, I suppose Canon might have a speedier refresh cycle in mind than anyone suspects.

Does this mean Canon will include 4K in any of the upcoming DSLRs besides the 1DC successor? Who knows. But as my above points explained, I see more risk than reward in being conservative, and I see no reason 4K-capable DSLRs have to cannibalize C-series sales, at least not among the core pro users who justify those cameras' high-margin prices to begin with.

EDIT: After thinking for a minute, it occurs to me that if Canon actually has some amazing new sensor that creates meaningfully better stills (per the rumor about the private demos involving a special monitor), then maybe the company has more leverage than I expect. If the images are amazing, or there's some other new tech involved (new AF, etc), maybe the stills guys will flock to the model, regardless of whatever Canon does with video. But still, I think the point remains-- it seems more stubborn than sensible for Canon to leave 4K out of its next-gen pro cameras. And since it doesn't offer the video people anything comparable at the price (or anything close to it), it seems like a needless risk.

ITshooter...i'm sure you made some good points but man, how much time did you spend writing all that? lol ;D

just having fun w ya!

north

 

[Northstar]

as a sport shooter, i would love video that has quick and accurate AF of any HD resolution...sigh...

 

[Ruined]

Canon
5d4 - user interchangeable focus screens plz

 

[Lee Jay]

My primary application for 4k is aggressively stabilized video that can still be downres'd to FHD. Try shooting video from a waterskiing boat or a full scale helicopter handheld (i.e. without a stabilized gimbal system) and you'll see how that can be useful.

 

[Harry Muff]

For those talking about the 5D4 with 4K taking away from the 1DC, try to keep in mind that 8K is already on the horizon, and I'd be surprised if Canon aren't already working on a 1DC replacement with just that.

 

[Besisika]

My primary application for 4k is aggressively stabilized video that can still be downres'd to FHD. Try shooting video from a waterskiing boat or a full scale helicopter handheld (i.e. without a stabilized gimbal system) and you'll see how that can be useful.

+1

 

[Tugela]

I didn't know there is video feature on 5D

started on the 5D2...1920x1080

Tongue in cheek: My 5D definitely doesn't have a video feature.

I suspect what Dylan777 is playfully saying is that many participants on this forum never or seldom use the video features of their cameras (if present) and would not buy a 5DIV if 4K (whatever that is) were the only upgrade.

I realize that this may be a big deal for the video folk who participate on this forum.

And, I have no idea whether adding and upping the video features on a DSLR increases the cost or helps pay for the R&D for features that still photographers are coming to love (e.g., live view).

The effect on price is minimal, since many of the tools used in video can be used to assist in stills as well. Plus, of course, most of the cost of the camera comes from things like manufacturing, overhead and marketing, not the development of the camera itself. The cost of the video component of the camera is probably something like $10-$20 per unit. Is that such a massive premium that it would make sense to leave it out?

 

[Tugela]

I would think it is almost a given or necessary that Canon takes the 4K step with the 5D. There are some cameras in the market right now that shoot 4K and in the $2500-3000 price range. My guess is that they would support external recording with the Atomos. 4K gobbles up storage like nobody's business.

For those of you not into video, shooting video with a 5DIII gives you many alternatives using all the Canon lens, and it is much better in low light situations. We also use camcorders, which are easier and quicker to use. It depends on what your needs and goals are that determine which to use for a given situation.

Not necessary unless you are recording RAW. The Sony camera can't record 4K to internal media because of the thermal envelope associated with the small body used. A DSLR like the 5D is big enough that thermal issues will be less of a problem, so it will almost certainly record to internal media as well as the HDMI port.

 

[dolina]

With the Sony A7r able to do 4K it is a given that 4K will be present on the 5D4.

 

[pdirestajr]

Oh everyone knows the 7DII will have 4k first! :

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Why do they bother making video cameras if video is such a big deal on SLRs? I hate the fact I had to spend so much extra for a feature I've used once on my 5D3.


Why can't they just split the lines properly and sell each one at a reasonable price?

Video in a DSLR is a high demand item, and has likely reduced the price of a 5D2 and 5D3 because of the bigger sales volume. The feature sells cameras. and high volume reduces prices.
You could have bought a 5D Classic when they came out for $3600 with no video. With inflation, that would have been a lot more in today's dollars.

There is also the Nikon Df with no video which sells for $3,000 when you can buy a D800 right now for $2100. That's $900 more for no video!

 

[mkabi]

I'm sorry, you have to be a true idiot, if you can't figure out that having video in your stills camera is not, and I repeat "is not" applying a premium on your stills camera. Let me say it another way, you are not paying extra for a feature you are not using.

Let me lay it out for you.... a P&S has both video and picture mode.
All rebels, all the way to the pro-bodies have video and picture mode.
Even their camcorders are able to take pictures, duh!!! I don't see people using camcorders complaining that they never use it for pictures.

As for the pricing... thats Canon... its all internal, overall management/executive decisions.

If your brain isn't clicking yet. I'm going to take another approach.

Take for example the Sony A7S - What is the price? Right now?
Brand New at Amazon - $2299 http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Full-Frame-Interchangeable-Digital-Camera/dp/B00FRDUZUK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1404491620&sr=8-1&keywords=Sony+A7R

A GoPro? $399 - Brand New.
http://www.amazon.com/GoPro-CHDHX-302-HERO3-Black-Edition/dp/B00F3F0GLU/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1404491671&sr=8-2&keywords=Go+Pro

So are you telling me that to push GoPro features along side A7S feature will cost $10,000 as seen in a 1D-C?
Or any Canon camera, 1DX, 5D Mark 3, you're saying that to push video into those cameras, you're paying extra?

I'm calling Bull$%it... and if you can't figure this out... I'm going to call you a moron.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

This might be disappointing news, as Canon might use 4K to differentiate the 7D replacement from the 5D replacement, meaning the 7D replacement wouldn't get 4K. That would be the disappointing part.

I can't speak to the features of the 5D III replacement, but the 7D II absolutely 100% will not have 4k video.

Is that an opinion, or do you have information?

If Canon leaves 4K video out of the 7D II (or 5D mk IV), I think it would be a mistake. I know a lot of people in this forum default to the "most consumers don't have 4K TVs" argument, or the "Canon must protect the Cinema-series" argument, but both viewpoints are frankly myopic.

1) The 7D II won't be aimed at "most consumers"; it will be aimed at the sort of people with the disposable income for a $2000 product that entails lots of equally expensive accessories. Perhaps 4K TVs occupy relatively little market share overall, but what is their share among affluent buyers who might make up a greater proportion of the potential 7D II user base? What share will 4K sets have among these buyers next year, when the 7D II will presumably be at full availability?

2) Even if 4K isn't your delivery output, the extra resolution has lots of benefits, from the ability to crop into footage, to the ability to create sharper/ better stabilized 1080p footage, to the ability (with shutter speed and codec limitations) to pull a perfectly usable, print-worthy photo from moving footage. Speaking as a professional journalist (surely a core part of the 7D II's would-be user base), these functions are valuable. They'll be valuable for other professional users, too, to say nothing of enthusiasts. Yes, Canon might prefer that pros and enthusiasts purchase the next-gen C100 or something, but there's a clear demand for convergent photo-video tools, and the competition is already starting to accommodate it. Canon's staved off user loss so far thanks to lock-in from its lens ecosystem, but there's a turning point for everything. How long will Canon customers buy what Canon wants to sell instead of what consumers want? Sometimes Canon reminds me of Microsoft is this regard. Protectionist tactics have historically hit walls. Some argue that Canon sells DSLRs primarily for still features, and that video ones won't make-or-break sales on a large scale. Maybe we'll see.

3) Building on the above point... 4K isn't a necessity today, per se, but the 7D II will probably be replaced on a three-to-four-year cycle. By 2017, will 4K really be so optional? Even if Canon achieves strong early 7D II sales without 4K, what will the long-tail sales look like, as competitors bring worthier models to market? I suppose Canon could always accelerate its release cycle, but not many companies have success with that model when it comes to high-end hardware.

4) TVs and professional use cases are only part of the 4K equation. New computers already offer greater-than-1080p resolution, and over the next few years, monitors of greater and greater pixel density will become more common. Again, if we're looking forward to 2017 or so, and we're thinking of the sort of user who would own a $2000+ camera, what kind of computer gear do you think this user is going to have? There's a recurring rumor that Apple will launch 4K iMacs in the near future. If that happens, it will surely drive demand (again, among influential, affluent buyers) for 4K-capable DSLRs.

5) The "Canon needs to protect the 1DC" argument also shouldn't prevent a 4K-capable 7D II. The 1DC isn't a new camera. It's one thing to protect a product from cannibalization when it's been on the market for less than a year. But today, the 1DC isn't necessarily a better option than the GH4, at least not if you're oriented more toward video than stills but need both, and is surely due for an upgrade of its own. It makes no sense to think about the 7D II cannibalizing the current Cinema-series cameras; it makes sense to think about how 7D II video features might cannibalize the next generation's. This line of thinking offers much more latitude for product segmentation. The 1DC mK II, for example, might record internal 10-bit 4K to CFast, or using some new, efficient H265 codec, etc-- whereas the 7D II could record only internal 8-bit 4:2:0 4K. The 1DC Mk II could offer more frame rate options, or more professional profiles, zebras and focus peaking, and so on. If we're thinking of the 1-DC as a tool for professionals, it's insane to think that bare-bones 4K features in a 7D (or 5D, for that matter) would take away sales.

6) By 2016, I suspect it's going to be hard for Canon to keep 4K out of its Rebel line-- because everyone else will have implemented it by then. Panasonic is putting 4K in everything right now, and more are coming. If Canon doesn't plan to release a 4K-capable 7D II until, say, early 2014, what kind of upgrade path is it offering? Again, I suppose Canon might have a speedier refresh cycle in mind than anyone suspects.

Does this mean Canon will include 4K in any of the upcoming DSLRs besides the 1DC successor? Who knows. But as my above points explained, I see more risk than reward in being conservative, and I see no reason 4K-capable DSLRs have to cannibalize C-series sales, at least not among the core pro users who justify those cameras' high-margin prices to begin with.

+1
cannibalize yourself before someone else does too

5D3 would've been a complete relative failure for video compared to 5D2 had ML not rescued it, but I fear, if anything they will still do the old provide as little as they can only try to lock out the rest even more strongly, we'll see

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

This "protect the higher cameras conspiracy theory" is bunk.

New features are typically introduced in lower end models.... not high end models.

"You can't put 4K video in the 5D4 because you have to protect the 1DC" By the same logic, you can't put 2K video into the T3i because you have to protect the 1DX... yet there it is.

Look at it another way.... "you can't put feature X in a camera that sells by the millions to protect camera Y that sells by the thousands" Where is the money? The money is in the low end cameras. Canon has probably made more money with the t3i than the 1DC, the 1DX, the 5D3, and the 7D put together... it has certainly sold at least 20 times as much t3i's than all of those high end cameras.... Which one do you think they would want to protect?

Yes, and all the same they still clearly, over the top protect their high end video and DSLR, even when it comes to silly little things (witness AFMA left out of 40D and 60D and the silly AutoISO saga where they still only allow it to fully work on 1DX).

 

[Don Haines]

This "protect the higher cameras conspiracy theory" is bunk.

New features are typically introduced in lower end models.... not high end models.

"You can't put 4K video in the 5D4 because you have to protect the 1DC" By the same logic, you can't put 2K video into the T3i because you have to protect the 1DX... yet there it is.

Look at it another way.... "you can't put feature X in a camera that sells by the millions to protect camera Y that sells by the thousands" Where is the money? The money is in the low end cameras. Canon has probably made more money with the t3i than the 1DC, the 1DX, the 5D3, and the 7D put together... it has certainly sold at least 20 times as much t3i's than all of those high end cameras.... Which one do you think they would want to protect?

Yes, and all the same they still clearly, over the top protect their high end video and DSLR, even when it comes to silly little things (witness AFMA left out of 40D and 60D and the silly AutoISO saga where they still only allow it to fully work on 1DX).

good points! Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle....

 

[peterisviksna]

This "protect the higher cameras conspiracy theory" is bunk.

New features are typically introduced in lower end models.... not high end models.

"You can't put 4K video in the 5D4 because you have to protect the 1DC" By the same logic, you can't put 2K video into the T3i because you have to protect the 1DX... yet there it is.

Look at it another way.... "you can't put feature X in a camera that sells by the millions to protect camera Y that sells by the thousands" Where is the money? The money is in the low end cameras. Canon has probably made more money with the t3i than the 1DC, the 1DX, the 5D3, and the 7D put together... it has certainly sold at least 20 times as much t3i's than all of those high end cameras.... Which one do you think they would want to protect?

Yes, and all the same they still clearly, over the top protect their high end video and DSLR, even when it comes to silly little things (witness AFMA left out of 40D and 60D and the silly AutoISO saga where they still only allow it to fully work on 1DX).

Apologies for my lack of knowledge, but could you explain what exactly you mean by the auto iso not working on bodies other than the 1DX?

Thanks.