EOS 5D Mark IV Update [CR2]

[Nininini]

It's also a far more widely known fact that the 1D line is the better journo tool.

Not true at all, the majority of the Photographers are shooting with 5D.

The 5Ds/R lines are too expensive for the average bear.

Ok, then buy a 6D or an APS-C.

/first.world.problems

 

[JJJandak]

So many people whining about video feetures.. If you don't shoot video, just ignore it! This camera is gonna take exactly same pictures even if it was only still camera.

 

[rrcphoto]

I don't think there is anyone who actually thinks video capabilities will be removed from the 5D line. It's also a far more widely known fact that the 1D line is the better journo tool. Folks using their bodies for stills just need to ignore the video menus and shoot. End of story. The 5Ds/R lines are too expensive for the average bear.

what makes you think a new 5D mark IV will be any cheaper?

 

[slclick]

I don't think there is anyone who actually thinks video capabilities will be removed from the 5D line. It's also a far more widely known fact that the 1D line is the better journo tool. Folks using their bodies for stills just need to ignore the video menus and shoot. End of story. The 5Ds/R lines are too expensive for the average bear.

what makes you think a new 5D mark IV will be any cheaper?

I didn't. In fact I gave no allusion to that model. Really? I love my 5D3 and it's more than enough camera for me.

I truly hope the Mk4/X makes most of you happy, yet I know it won't because complaining is an Olympic sport around here.

It all boils down to me wondering how many of you use your tools to their fullest potential and how many just have GAS and love to read spec sheets and argue.

 

[tron]

If the 5DIV is going to be more film oriented, maybe the 6DII will move upmarket in stills capacity but lack video features, making it cheaper and different than the 5D series but be closer in stills capacity to the 5D line than before.

Still (pun intended), a camera devoted to stills photography should have higher fps than a video oriented camera and better Phase Detetion AF as well. So far this is the 5D series...

 

[scyrene]

I remember when Canon cares about photographers... It was a long time ago. Now all the lineup seems to be fit for videographers. Too bad. I don't care about 4k. Just need a f*cking good camera for still.

And the current lineup offers you nothing for stills? Out of the 5D3, 5Ds(r), 1Dx(2), and the various lower models... If you can't take a good photo with any of those, it's not the camera, it's you.

 

[slclick]

I remember when Canon cares about photographers... It was a long time ago. Now all the lineup seems to be fit for videographers. Too bad. I don't care about 4k. Just need a f*cking good camera for still.

And the current lineup offers you nothing for stills? Out of the 5D3, 5Ds(r), 1Dx(2), and the various lower models... If you can't take a good photo with any of those, it's not the camera, it's you.

Doubleplus One

 

[Photox]

As of all the 5D's, it will most likely be introduced in September on Photokina 2016. Canon would not like to make the same mistake again,
by putting two cameras in the market at the same time (1Dx and 5D3), cuz most of the users wouldnt go for the pricier camera. Period.

 

[Besisika]

It all boils down to me wondering how many of you use your tools to their fullest potential and how many just have GAS and love to read spec sheets and argue.

I don't want myself to get too deep into this conversation. Your question got me thinking about what is actually the issue, if there is one or two. Good question.
I think, there is nobody who uses the tool to its fullest potential; simply impossible.
But it is not necessarily a GAS either to call for a better one - not always.
The key is that everybody has specific needs. If the current gear doesn't allow him to do what he wants or the task would be easier or faster with a better result if the gear is improved then he would scream for an improvement. He would not be satisfied if the new gear doesn't help his cause and would call it a crap. In the process, he totally ignores the other improvements.
We look at the overall improvement and find it impressive, but not him.
I don't think that is a GAS.
If a trailer can protect your family from the weather, why buy a house? Would that be a GAS?

 

[slclick]

It all boils down to me wondering how many of you use your tools to their fullest potential and how many just have GAS and love to read spec sheets and argue.

I don't want myself to get too deep into this conversation. Your question got me thinking about what is actually the issue, if there is one or two. Good question.
I think, there is nobody who uses the tool to its fullest potential; simply impossible.
But it is not necessarily a GAS either to call for a better one - not always.
The key is that everybody has specific needs. If the current gear doesn't allow him to do what he wants or the task would be easier or faster with a better result if the gear is improved then he would scream for an improvement. He would not be satisfied if the new gear doesn't help his cause and would call it a crap. In the process, he totally ignores the other improvements.
We look at the overall improvement and find it impressive, but not him.
I don't think that is a GAS.
If a trailer can protect your family from the weather, why buy a house? Would that be a GAS?

Apple to oranges.

Look we all know that tech and gadgetry gets people going around here. GAS is real and the drool really starts flowing around announcement time. All logic is pissed to the wind when GAS sets in. Marketing has brainwashed even the most sensible of us that newer is better and we NEED it. YMMV because you're level headed, right?

 

[unfocused]

It's also a far more widely known fact that the 1D line is the better journo journalism tool.

Not true at all, the majority of the Photographers are shooting with 5D.

Both simultaneously right and wrong.

While the 1D may be the better photojournalism tool, most photojournalists are underpaid and cannot afford to buy a 1D for themselves. (Most photojournalists do not have their equipment provided by their employers.) Only large and some mid-size newspapers provide a camera and lens pool. Those in smaller markets are usually expected to buy their own equipment.

Almost all freelance and contract photographers must provide their own equipment, although at a certain level (such as National Geographic) they may have access to a pool of equipment, but that's only for a tiny percentage of photographers.

One reason you see so many Reuters (or AP) photographers using 5Ds is that many of them are contract or freelance photographers who have to buy their own equipment. (ever hear of outsourcing?) I'm sure many would love to have a 1D body, but they probably would rather eat.

 

[slclick]

It's also a far more widely known fact that the 1D line is the better journo journalism tool.

Not true at all, the majority of the Photographers are shooting with 5D.

Both simultaneously right and wrong.

While the 1D may be the better photojournalism tool, most photojournalists are underpaid and cannot afford to buy a 1D for themselves. (Most photojournalists do not have their equipment provided by their employers.) Only large and some mid-size newspapers provide a camera and lens pool. Those in smaller markets are usually expected to buy their own equipment.

Almost all freelance and contract photographers must provide their own equipment, although at a certain level (such as National Geographic) they may have access to a pool of equipment, but that's only for a tiny percentage of photographers.

One reason you see so many Reuters (or AP) photographers using 5Ds is that many of them are contract or freelance photographers who have to buy their own equipment. (ever hear of outsourcing?) I'm sure many would love to have a 1D body, but they probably would rather eat.

I didn't feel the need to type in 'photo' since on this forum that should be a given, however as things get picked apart here to the Nth degree, I guess you taught me something.

 

[dak723]

I truly hope the Mk4/X makes most of you happy, yet I know it won't because complaining is an Olympic sport around here.

It all boils down to me wondering how many of you use your tools to their fullest potential and how many just have GAS and love to read spec sheets and argue.

When I first came to this forum, I thought, "Oh good, here's a place where I can share my enthusiasm for photography. And maybe learn a few new things along the way."

Alas, it is not what I had hoped for. It has become a place for constant complaints. It has become a place for trolls to make outrageous statements meant only to rile up the people who like their Canon cameras. It has become a place for people suggesting how Canon should run their business (despite the fact that they have NO knowledge whatsoever about running a business). It is all about trashing Canon and promoting Sony and other brands - even though the vast majority of the "trashers" have never tried these other brands and only know what the internet sites say about them and their spec sheets. The negativity sure helps kill any enthusiasm anyone might have for taking photos with their Canon cameras. And worst of all, newbies come to this site hoping to get some actual opinions on cameras and other products. What they get is the endless Sony propaganda and the opinion that Canon is "years behind."

Pretty sad, because the reality (as I see it) is that today's cameras are all excellent and take pics that are virtually indistinguishable from one another. People find Canon "boring" because they don't throw in every bell and whistle and instead care about making durable, reliable, easy to use cameras that take excellent pictures. Techies
aren't interested in that. They care about specs and being able to tell their friends that their camera has the best "ratings". Photographers care about the photos and Canon has always delivered what they need.

 

[slclick]

I truly hope the Mk4/X makes most of you happy, yet I know it won't because complaining is an Olympic sport around here.

It all boils down to me wondering how many of you use your tools to their fullest potential and how many just have GAS and love to read spec sheets and argue.

When I first came to this forum, I thought, "Oh good, here's a place where I can share my enthusiasm for photography. And maybe learn a few new things along the way."

Alas, it is not what I had hoped for. It has become a place for constant complaints. It has become a place for trolls to make outrageous statements meant only to rile up the people who like their Canon cameras. It has become a place for people suggesting how Canon should run their business (despite the fact that they have NO knowledge whatsoever about running a business). It is all about trashing Canon and promoting Sony and other brands - even though the vast majority of the "trashers" have never tried these other brands and only know what the internet sites say about them and their spec sheets. The negativity sure helps kill any enthusiasm anyone might have for taking photos with their Canon cameras. And worst of all, newbies come to this site hoping to get some actual opinions on cameras and other products. What they get is the endless Sony propaganda and the opinion that Canon is "years behind."

Pretty sad, because the reality (as I see it) is that today's cameras are all excellent and take pics that are virtually indistinguishable from one another. People find Canon "boring" because they don't throw in every bell and whistle and instead care about making durable, reliable, easy to use cameras that take excellent pictures. Techies
aren't interested in that. They care about specs and being able to tell their friends that their camera has the best "ratings". Photographers care about the photos and Canon has always delivered what they need.

Let's not bring rational thought and common sense into this now, ok?

 

[transpo1]

... Apparently the plans for the video features of the camera changed about a year ago and became an important part of the development of the camera. ...

I only hope that Canon will not overdo that video part. :
But I am sure they know that it is still a stills camera with video features and not the other way around.

Come on, it's not a zero-sum game. Just because it has great video features doesn't mean the photos will suck.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I've never filmed in 4K.
Is it a great leap forward?
My experience with video in Canon DSLRs is that the quality is good in the image but that it suffers badly from rolling shutter / jello and moving objects can be hard on the eyes to look at.
Does 4K solve any of those issues?

It sells cameras. Its like the high MP chase, its a feature that sells more cameras, so the customer gets what he wants, or at least what he thiink he wants. As far as a rolling shutter, there have been improvements to sensor readout speeds in the several years since the 5D III was developed, so it should be less, but still a issue for some uses. The key is sensor readout speed, they cannot read the entire CMOS sensor at once (Yet), so faster readouts are being developed.

A very good dual pixel auto focus while in live view will give users both a mirrorless option (NO EVF), or a conventional DSLR. I would probably use both, but would need a external battery pack or a lot of extra batteries for sustained live view use. I would like enough power for 3 hours of continuous live view if the DPAF works out.

 

[trulandphoto]

It may just be that the 5Ds/r will be the studio/portrait/landscape option, the 1DXII and 7DII the action/sports/wildlife option and the 5DIV a video oriented option. And maybe a 6D update that is somewhat like a 5DII with updated sensor, processor, etc.

 

[dak723]

It sells cameras. Its like the high MP chase, its a feature that sells more cameras, so the customer gets what he wants, or at least what he thinks he wants.

Ah, the high MP chase. How many times do we hear people on this forum ask for more MP and lower noise knowing full well (or they should) that higher MP is the enemy of low noise. I used a 6 MP Rebel (the original 300d) for nine years before upgrading. I did not want the tiny pixels of all the available crop cameras at that time (all 18 MP) so I spent far more than I wanted to get the larger pixels of the 6D. In those 9 plus years, sensor efficiency increased a lot, so a 6 MP crop camera would have been great, with higher IQ than any other crop camera on the market. And able to print 12" x 8" which is as large as I need. Alas, with the higher and higher MP that camera companies feel the need to produce, we'll never get the best IQ possible. Thanks techie-nerds for screwing up the possibility of a really high quality crop camera with your constant demand for more MPs..

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

People thinking they'll get something like a mini 1DC with 4K, a bigger sensor (without the 14 fps) are simply deluding themselves.

If something very important isn't in the 1DX2 it is unlikely to find itself in the 5 series.

Most of the upgrades in the 1DX 2 are on the video side ... I don't think canon will rain on its own parade here.

that may be so, but people will continue getting Sony or other stuff then

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Can we please have PRO-RES in camera. non of this compressed B.S. ;D

Prores is a lossy compressed codec.

And it's owned by Apple and plays much nicer on Macs than any other OS. So DNxHR please

cineform is better, plus a more or less open standard after the sale