More Specifications & Images of EOS 5D Mark IV

[privatebydesign]

What a breath of fresh air in this thread. Now, I just have to take some time to reflect on what you say. I take it that the 30 MPs of the 5D4 is a positive in your estimation? Thanks for this.

Jack

I take the 5D mkIV to be a very compelling general purpose camera, resolution included. As Canon so often do they upgrade everything a bit, which makes gear heads go crazy about specs left out that they believe will bring about the eminent demise of Canon.

Then the photographers get a hold of the actual cameras and are very impressed with the consummate capabilities the seemingly modest spec sheet belie. Canon make fantastic cameras.

At this point I think 30MP is a great 'middle ground', sounds like Goldie Locks but not too few to annoy the pixel peepers too much, not too high to annoy the 'my computer can't do that' crowd. 30MP will make fantastic high resolution decent sized prints or allow realistic cropping. It will also keep noise manageable for those that refuse to normalise in comparisons (most on line testers and reviewers).

Personally I rarely shoot at high iso and think if you are shooting 30MP you might as well shoot 50MP, I am not worried about the noise or the file sizes, so, for me, a 5DSr makes more sense (and I print big). For most people I can't imagine how a 5D MkV is going to be interesting enough to upgrade from a MkIV for.

 

[arthurbikemad]

All I am going to say is after shooting with the 1DX Mk2 those who choose to buy into the 5D4 will be pleased I am 100% sure! I have no doubt that my 5D3 will end up sold and replaced for a Mk4. If the AF and other improvements are as significant as the 1DX2 proved to be in my case those who upgrade are in for a treat. Those who buy into the 5 series camera at Mk4 for the first time will be blown away! My Mk3 has been such a great camera the extra MP, DR and ISO etc can only add to a great system that lets the photographer capture great images. Bring it on Mr Canon and lets get shooting

In the end, once you grab some great pics with the new camera the price will soon be forgotten. 8) (just avoid checking your bank statement for a while) :-X

 

[Jack Douglas]

All I am going to say is after shooting with the 1DX Mk2 those who choose to buy into the 5D4 will be pleased I am 100% sure! I have no doubt that my 5D3 will end up sold and replaced for a Mk4. If the AF and other improvements are as significant as the 1DX2 proved to be in my case those who upgrade are in for a treat. Those who buy into the 5 series camera at Mk4 for the first time will be blown away! My Mk3 has been such a great camera the extra MP, DR and ISO etc can only add to a great system that lets the photographer capture great images. Bring it on Mr Canon and lets get shooting

In the end, once you grab some great pics with the new camera the price will soon be forgotten. 8) (just avoid checking your bank statement for a while) :-X

A lot of help that is in choosing between a 1DX II and 5D4! This is better than Christmas 60 years ago. Good advice not to look into the finances too much, though.

Jack

 

[arthurbikemad]

;D Yeah I see your point re the choice haha

Sorry about that, if you can't choose between them. . . . . . .

 

[3kramd5]

unfocused, what are your portrait autofocus settings?

3kramd5: There are tools and features invented that's readily available now to aid and increase keepers but I'm seeing only excuses from others.

Why are those tools and features okay but a little leeway in post is useless?

Excuses? How about "I effed up"? Whether it's me or the camera or the model or a friggin cosmic ray, it makes no difference.

The tools and techniques suggested involve either gear which may be impractical or prohibited, or changing the look of the photo. Many clients like the very narrow DOF look in portraiture. Why else do world class portrait artists use moderately long focal lengths and wide apertures on large formats?

Shooting with wider DOF may increase the rate at which eyes are acceptably in focus, but decrease keeper rate because DOF is too wide thus the photo doesn't meet the aesthetic intent.

In any case, I'm not looking to increase keeper rate, I'm merely excited for the prospect of saving photos which are excellent in all aspects except focus is slightly off. I also shoot digital raw rather than instax. YMMV.

Because they are readily available now and not based on a guessing game hunch about a rumor.
Can you tell me exactly what dual pixels does right now?

Yes, the serve the autofocus system.

So your complaint is that I'm hoping a rumor manifests rather than potentially altering the appearance of my photos? Odd - this is a rumor site after all. Would you also suggest that the people who like the 30MP rumor should shoot with longer lenses and stich panoramas (tools and technique to increase resolution)?

"Yes, the serve the autofocus system."

???

Were you thinking dual pixel AF would let you adjust focus in post? /facepalm

No, I was answering your post the only way I can. You asked what exactly I can tell you about them, and the only thing I know for certain is that they serve autofocus. Anything regarding DPRAW would be total speculation, and thus not meet your criterion ("exactly").

Speculation warning:

The quotes and the word rumor refers to dual pixel RAW.
Can I use it on m-raw / s-raw?

Don't know.

Is it only for stationary objects?

It's hard to imagine how the camera or post-processing software would know if the objects are moving. Do you mean is it not for servo? Don't know.

What's the range I can adjust the focus / bokeh?

Don't know, but given small amount of data to work with (as opposed to say what's in the Lytro cameras), I'd guess "not very wide." Not that it is characterized as "micro adjustment."

End of Speculation

Wish warning:

I hope that "micro" is enough to safe photos where the intended focus is missed by about 3mm.

End of Wish

 

[Sporgon]

The 35 f2 IS is the greatest walk around general purpose lens I have ever used. Great for environmental portraits, killer for stitched panos when used in portrait orientation, not too big and heavy or intrusive but fast enough and the IS is a godsend. With the pixel rich 5DSr it gives a very good rendering of a 50mm perspective, which although it has gone out of favour to a large extent still makes compelling images, just stand back and crop. If I could only have one lens it would be the 35 f2 IS.

That's it. You've sold it to me, my 40 pancake is no more. Also I've found I need the IS if I'm to move on to even higher mp cameras

 

[scyrene]

The 35 f2 IS is the greatest walk around general purpose lens I have ever used. Great for environmental portraits, killer for stitched panos when used in portrait orientation, not too big and heavy or intrusive but fast enough and the IS is a godsend. With the pixel rich 5DSr it gives a very good rendering of a 50mm perspective, which although it has gone out of favour to a large extent still makes compelling images, just stand back and crop. If I could only have one lens it would be the 35 f2 IS.

That's it. You've sold it to me, my 40 pancake is no more. Also I've found I need the IS if I'm to move on to even higher mp cameras

The 35 f/2 IS is a great lens, and about as good as it gets for handheld low light work. It's a fair bit bigger than a pancake lens, mind (but not big and heavy like an L).

 

[scyrene]

The piece I have yet to hear any of the CanonRumors Forum aristocracy chime in on is ... "What do we compare the 5D Mark IV against from other manufacturers?" ... and ... "Who is the intended audience for this camera?". I'd like a solid comparable to understand if Canon is 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place with this offering or is it in a class by itself?

All things considered (Price, Specs, Glass, whatever) its difficult to say what exactly the 5D IV is answering or competing against.

"Aristocracy" :

I dunno... The 5D1-3 have been generally understood and discussed as aimed at people shooting diverse subjects who don't want the bulk or cost of a 1-series, and especially wedding photographers.

I'm not expert enough in other brands to know which models it competes with (it's not as easy as 1DxII-D5), but each brand seems to have slightly different subdivisions, so it's always going to be imprecise.

 

[gunship01]

Let's get it to 1,000 posts!

 

[jayphotoworks]

With all of the discussion around the 5D Mark IV, I keep thinking ... 'What are the comparable cameras from other manufacturers?'. Because we can't really just compare the 5D Mark III against the 5D Mark IV and declare a victory right? We know the IV will be better ... of course ... because its a IV not a III. But once you look at the offerings from the other major brands its not as easy. Pre-5DS I think this would have been an easy question to answer ... but now trying to make a baseline comparison seems a bit harder. And who really is the intended audience for this camera?

Trying to understand what is it the 5D IV is intended to do best other than natively accept Canon glass. Is it Video, Events, Weddings? And if so ... what feature or features make this a more compelling option than say a 5DS, or Sony blah, or Nikon blah. Its seems like a 5DS and that new WiFi Adapter could get you most of the way there. Which in my mind makes the 5DS/R Mark II the Canon camera to watch.

Well, you do got a point and from what i read, it´s been dismissed the camera uses....It looks like everybody want a A7 SII, a 1Dx II, a 5dS R, and a Alexa in one single body! And of course, one body that costs only 3k! And worse than that, the comparisons that are made between cameras are just unrealistic! It´s nonsense to compare a 1Dx II with Sony bodys, it´s just nonsense! Like it´s nonsense that someone that just makes video and need a really high end camera for huge video assignments, to want to buy a 1Dx II or a 5D markIV just for video purposes and want everything in those cameras. C-log´s (which i would also love, i confess, but i understand why it´s not there). 1Dx II is a workhorse! it´s a terrific camera for stills and deliver you huge possibility's for video! Not perfect for video? Well, it´s not ment to be! It´s just like the 5D markIV!
According to the rumors, we are going to have a really beautiful camera there! Improved ISO noise (witch i don´t complain in 5DIII, but if it comes better, just great!!), among other great features can make a really good camera to work!
It´s just amazing the huge talk about what camera could bring or not to bring...and it´s understandable, we all need something else more! However, most of the talk disperses a lot. First of all, we do need to understand cameras and what they can deliver. If some cameras are good in somethings, others are good in other things.

I´ll give you an example:

If you are a professional wildlife and nature photographer and videographer, which camera do you choose? A Sony A7RII and give a priviledge to video but just loose the still captures because af of Sony is pretty bad for wildlife? Or a 1Dx II that gives you the top of the market in stills, and also provides excellent video resolution? Well, the perfect thing should be to have the both! But even then....what lenses do you have for Sony to film wildlife? And if you have a 500mm from canon which is really expensive, do you want to buy another tele from sony to the other camera? One tele to film, another to still? You put adapters and loose AF? How can you film those crazy little birds that are so fast with a lens and camera that don´t get them in focus?

So, what if you are a commercial videographer? Do you really need a 1Dx II to film? Or the Sony A7 SII is the way to go?
It´s just too personal choice!!!!

So guys, How can you tell that this Canon 5DmkIV is a bad camera, or that Canon is disappointing?? What are you asking? Everything? Its not realistic!

What i would love to see in 5DmkIV in improvements and don´t have (at least not known):

- 1080HD 120fps (although of course i understand why doesn't have)
- buffer improvement (one of the bad things of my 5DIII is buffer, just hope a good improvement in this one)
- retro-illuminated buttons - It´s just terrible to shoot in the dark and try to hit the right button.
- Improvement in autofocus - The AF in 5DIII isn´t bad, but it´s not also very good.
- improvement in DR (yes its quite discussed this point, and for me this is what canon should improve more. It´s not bad, but can be better.

Finally, if canon makes a camera that can put together every stuff from 1DxII, 5DmkIV, A7 RII, A7 SII, 5DS R, i will buy it!!! For sure!!!
Errgghh.....wait, wait, but only if it costs less than 3,5k!

Just to finalize....If you have a 5DIII, a 1dx, 1dxII, 5ds r and you can´t get the best of the results....well, it´s time to consider that the fault it is not in the equipment....

The piece I have yet to hear any of the CanonRumors Forum aristocracy chime in on is ... "What do we compare the 5D Mark IV against from other manufacturers?" ... and ... "Who is the intended audience for this camera?". I'd like a solid comparable to understand if Canon is 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place with this offering or is it in a class by itself?

All things considered (Price, Specs, Glass, whatever) its difficult to say what exactly the 5D IV is answering or competing against.

I think Canon's entire DSLR portfolio is still primarily designed for stills work over video work. The 5D2 really polarized the industry and defined an entirely new growth segment where people started creating video content using traditional stills digital cameras. It was not soon afterwards that Canon created their EOS Cinema line and clearly delineated the feature sets and r&d that would be offered in each business unit.

Because of Canon's dominance in the market, compounded by the small segment of video/stills hybrid shooters, they've decided that there is no incentive to invest any further in r&d to blur the lines with their Cinema line, and they've decided to play it safe and stay the course.

I would assume that their strategy is that it probably won't be until there is a large enough exodus to other hybrid camps that they will offer a revolutionary product to reel back in the masses. Especially those with an existing assortment of EF glass. Even with a 4 year release cycle, they probably have enough goodwill and market share to wait it out.

I started with Canon years ago and built out an entire Canon DSLR outfit, but as the years went by, veered more into video production work, so it is users like myself that find Canon's newest offerings no longer fit ideally into how I use these products. If I consider stills only, the 5d4 is a large upgrade and will probably be among the best in class amongst its peers. If I consider video only, the 5d4 would probably be a non-starter and if I consider it as a hybrid, it would probably be a relatively poor choice for a new product launch at the tail-end of 2016.

 

[Jack Douglas]

jayphotoworks, can't criticize your comments. Every company is constantly making decisions on the direction they should take, as wisely as they can. Sometimes their decisions lead the product away from what we are hoping for so then we have to decide if a switch is desirable. Fortunately we are free to choose whomever we prefer.

Jack

 

[ashmadux]

...
- Improvement in autofocus - The AF in 5DIII isn´t bad, but it´s not also very good.
...

I would say the AF is very, very good... But I agree the 5D3's AF could definitely use an improvement.

That's the same 1DX AF system that's been on every sports sideline the last four years. All those white lenses you see on sidelines are not there solely because the lenses themselves are great -- they would not be there in such overwhelming numbers if the AF was not top drawer. Yes, some systems have a wider spread, but I'm not aware of any that track better.

The 5D3 AF does need improvement but only in specific areas: they need to bring back red servo AF points and expanded f/8 use for the teleconverter crowd. And move to -3 EV for dark rooms / places. Other than that, if you are hung up on the number of points or how much those points fill the frame, go get a mirrorless rig and see what chasing that will do for you.

I understand that everything on the 5D3 could improve -- I do -- but the AF is absolutely one the strongest legs it stands on.

- A

I find the so called criticisms of the 5d3 Af borderline ridiculous. Not all that way because at least there was some thought behind it, no matter how off the "mark" it is.

See what i did there

PS- technically speaking, im no fan of any af module that has points smashed into the center- but that's hardly unique to the 5d3. for what it is, it works spectacular. If you want to shoot in ultra darkness, use a lighting assist or model light, eh?

 

[transpo1]

--> 4K Video Limitations --> Re: More Specifications & Images of EOS 5D Mark IV

With all of the discussion around the 5D Mark IV, I keep thinking ... 'What are the comparable cameras from other manufacturers?'. Because we can't really just compare the 5D Mark III against the 5D Mark IV and declare a victory right? We know the IV will be better ... of course ... because its a IV not a III. But once you look at the offerings from the other major brands its not as easy. Pre-5DS I think this would have been an easy question to answer ... but now trying to make a baseline comparison seems a bit harder. And who really is the intended audience for this camera?

Trying to understand what is it the 5D IV is intended to do best other than natively accept Canon glass. Is it Video, Events, Weddings? And if so ... what feature or features make this a more compelling option than say a 5DS, or Sony blah, or Nikon blah. Its seems like a 5DS and that new WiFi Adapter could get you most of the way there. Which in my mind makes the 5DS/R Mark II the Canon camera to watch.

Well, you do got a point and from what i read, it´s been dismissed the camera uses....It looks like everybody want a A7 SII, a 1Dx II, a 5dS R, and a Alexa in one single body! And of course, one body that costs only 3k! And worse than that, the comparisons that are made between cameras are just unrealistic! It´s nonsense to compare a 1Dx II with Sony bodys, it´s just nonsense! Like it´s nonsense that someone that just makes video and need a really high end camera for huge video assignments, to want to buy a 1Dx II or a 5D markIV just for video purposes and want everything in those cameras. C-log´s (which i would also love, i confess, but i understand why it´s not there). 1Dx II is a workhorse! it´s a terrific camera for stills and deliver you huge possibility's for video! Not perfect for video? Well, it´s not ment to be! It´s just like the 5D markIV!
According to the rumors, we are going to have a really beautiful camera there! Improved ISO noise (witch i don´t complain in 5DIII, but if it comes better, just great!!), among other great features can make a really good camera to work!
It´s just amazing the huge talk about what camera could bring or not to bring...and it´s understandable, we all need something else more! However, most of the talk disperses a lot. First of all, we do need to understand cameras and what they can deliver. If some cameras are good in somethings, others are good in other things.

I´ll give you an example:

If you are a professional wildlife and nature photographer and videographer, which camera do you choose? A Sony A7RII and give a priviledge to video but just loose the still captures because af of Sony is pretty bad for wildlife? Or a 1Dx II that gives you the top of the market in stills, and also provides excellent video resolution? Well, the perfect thing should be to have the both! But even then....what lenses do you have for Sony to film wildlife? And if you have a 500mm from canon which is really expensive, do you want to buy another tele from sony to the other camera? One tele to film, another to still? You put adapters and loose AF? How can you film those crazy little birds that are so fast with a lens and camera that don´t get them in focus?

So, what if you are a commercial videographer? Do you really need a 1Dx II to film? Or the Sony A7 SII is the way to go?
It´s just too personal choice!!!!

So guys, How can you tell that this Canon 5DmkIV is a bad camera, or that Canon is disappointing?? What are you asking? Everything? Its not realistic!

What i would love to see in 5DmkIV in improvements and don´t have (at least not known):

- 1080HD 120fps (although of course i understand why doesn't have)
- buffer improvement (one of the bad things of my 5DIII is buffer, just hope a good improvement in this one)
- retro-illuminated buttons - It´s just terrible to shoot in the dark and try to hit the right button.
- Improvement in autofocus - The AF in 5DIII isn´t bad, but it´s not also very good.
- improvement in DR (yes its quite discussed this point, and for me this is what canon should improve more. It´s not bad, but can be better.

Finally, if canon makes a camera that can put together every stuff from 1DxII, 5DmkIV, A7 RII, A7 SII, 5DS R, i will buy it!!! For sure!!!
Errgghh.....wait, wait, but only if it costs less than 3,5k!

Just to finalize....If you have a 5DIII, a 1dx, 1dxII, 5ds r and you can´t get the best of the results....well, it´s time to consider that the fault it is not in the equipment....

The piece I have yet to hear any of the CanonRumors Forum aristocracy chime in on is ... "What do we compare the 5D Mark IV against from other manufacturers?" ... and ... "Who is the intended audience for this camera?". I'd like a solid comparable to understand if Canon is 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place with this offering or is it in a class by itself?

All things considered (Price, Specs, Glass, whatever) its difficult to say what exactly the 5D IV is answering or competing against.

I think Canon's entire DSLR portfolio is still primarily designed for stills work over video work. The 5D2 really polarized the industry and defined an entirely new growth segment where people started creating video content using traditional stills digital cameras. It was not soon afterwards that Canon created their EOS Cinema line and clearly delineated the feature sets and r&d that would be offered in each business unit.

Because of Canon's dominance in the market, compounded by the small segment of video/stills hybrid shooters, they've decided that there is no incentive to invest any further in r&d to blur the lines with their Cinema line, and they've decided to play it safe and stay the course.

I would assume that their strategy is that it probably won't be until there is a large enough exodus to other hybrid camps that they will offer a revolutionary product to reel back in the masses. Especially those with an existing assortment of EF glass. Even with a 4 year release cycle, they probably have enough goodwill and market share to wait it out.

I started with Canon years ago and built out an entire Canon DSLR outfit, but as the years went by, veered more into video production work, so it is users like myself that find Canon's newest offerings no longer fit ideally into how I use these products. If I consider stills only, the 5d4 is a large upgrade and will probably be among the best in class amongst its peers. If I consider video only, the 5d4 would probably be a non-starter and if I consider it as a hybrid, it would probably be a relatively poor choice for a new product launch at the tail-end of 2016.

As a 5DII and 5DIII lover with lots of EF glass, I've said it many times here and I'll say it again- Canon needs to provide more value to its video customers and not just lead them on by trickling down the latest video features- such as 4K- to prosumers years after they've reached competitors' products. Yes, Canon maintains steady profits by doing so, but there are other ways to make profit, namely, by cannibalizing yourself and your own products to find what consumers want and selling on volume. Follow the lead of companies like Apple (under Jobs), who were fearless in coming out with new and better products that cannibalized existing lines because those products were the future. Canon needs fearless leadership to do this, and it won't happen overnight, but when you're ahead, as Canon still is, you have to be a bit risky and we've just not seen that so far from their video integration with the 5D line, since the 5DII.

If the dynamic range is right, this camera will be everything I want in a stills camera, but sorely lacking if the 4K video is hobbled in some way. Canon also could have implemented 120fps in 1080p mode for us video shooters, but hobbled it to up-sell to the Cinema EOS line and higher end models. This has got to stop if they want to maintain brand loyalty and goodwill among their customers. Come on, Canon- you can do so much better. Don't think about marketing and protecting existing models, think about making the all around BEST products.

And just so everyone knows, this is constructive criticism, because I want them to provide the best possible Canon products to me for my use as a hybrid stills / video shooter. Right now, I'm really on the fence between this and a Sony, and I'd really rather go with Canon. So here's to hoping the 5DIV announcement will surprise me and prove this wrong.

Rant = over.

 

[tpatana]

...
- Improvement in autofocus - The AF in 5DIII isn´t bad, but it´s not also very good.
...

I would say the AF is very, very good... But I agree the 5D3's AF could definitely use an improvement.

That's the same 1DX AF system that's been on every sports sideline the last four years. All those white lenses you see on sidelines are not there solely because the lenses themselves are great -- they would not be there in such overwhelming numbers if the AF was not top drawer. Yes, some systems have a wider spread, but I'm not aware of any that track better.

The 5D3 AF does need improvement but only in specific areas: they need to bring back red servo AF points and expanded f/8 use for the teleconverter crowd. And move to -3 EV for dark rooms / places. Other than that, if you are hung up on the number of points or how much those points fill the frame, go get a mirrorless rig and see what chasing that will do for you.

I understand that everything on the 5D3 could improve -- I do -- but the AF is absolutely one the strongest legs it stands on.

- A

I find the so called criticisms of the 5d3 Af borderline ridiculous. Not all that way because at least there was some thought behind it, no matter how off the "mark" it is.

See what i did there

PS- technically speaking, im no fan of any af module that has points smashed into the center- but that's hardly unique to the 5d3. for what it is, it works spectacular. If you want to shoot in ultra darkness, use a lighting assist or model light, eh?

I went from 7D to 5D3, and holy smoke the AF for awesome better. Few times I tried 7D at dim lights, and 5D3 was getting much more keepers.

Then later I went 1DX, I felt 1DX was even better. Which is strange as they are supposed to have same/similar AF. Could be that my brain just tried to justify the extra price, but for sure it felt better. Placebo maybe.

 

[rrcphoto]

...
- Improvement in autofocus - The AF in 5DIII isn´t bad, but it´s not also very good.
...

I would say the AF is very, very good... But I agree the 5D3's AF could definitely use an improvement.

That's the same 1DX AF system that's been on every sports sideline the last four years. All those white lenses you see on sidelines are not there solely because the lenses themselves are great -- they would not be there in such overwhelming numbers if the AF was not top drawer. Yes, some systems have a wider spread, but I'm not aware of any that track better.

The 5D3 AF does need improvement but only in specific areas: they need to bring back red servo AF points and expanded f/8 use for the teleconverter crowd. And move to -3 EV for dark rooms / places. Other than that, if you are hung up on the number of points or how much those points fill the frame, go get a mirrorless rig and see what chasing that will do for you.

I understand that everything on the 5D3 could improve -- I do -- but the AF is absolutely one the strongest legs it stands on.

- A

I find the so called criticisms of the 5d3 Af borderline ridiculous. Not all that way because at least there was some thought behind it, no matter how off the "mark" it is.

See what i did there

PS- technically speaking, im no fan of any af module that has points smashed into the center- but that's hardly unique to the 5d3. for what it is, it works spectacular. If you want to shoot in ultra darkness, use a lighting assist or model light, eh?

I went from 7D to 5D3, and holy smoke the AF for awesome better. Few times I tried 7D at dim lights, and 5D3 was getting much more keepers.

Then later I went 1DX, I felt 1DX was even better. Which is strange as they are supposed to have same/similar AF. Could be that my brain just tried to justify the extra price, but for sure it felt better. Placebo maybe.

The 1dx has three processors, one for af, ae and camera control.

 

[Donkey_Kong]

Re: --> 4K Video Limitations --> Re: More Specifications & Images of EOS 5D Mark IV

As a 5DII and 5DIII lover with lots of EF glass, I've said it many times here and I'll say it again- Canon needs to provide more value to its video customers and not just lead them on by trickling down the latest video features- such as 4K- to prosumers years after they've reached competitors' products. Yes, Canon maintains steady profits by doing so, but there are other ways to make profit, namely, by cannibalizing yourself and your own products to find what consumers want and selling on volume. Follow the lead of companies like Apple (under Jobs), who were fearless in coming out with new and better products that cannibalized existing lines because those products were the future. Canon needs fearless leadership to do this, and it won't happen overnight, but when you're ahead, as Canon still is, you have to be a bit risky and we've just not seen that so far from their video integration with the 5D line, since the 5DII.

If the dynamic range is right, this camera will be everything I want in a stills camera, but sorely lacking if the 4K video is hobbled in some way. Canon also could have implemented 120fps in 1080p mode for us video shooters, but hobbled it to up-sell to the Cinema EOS line and higher end models. This has got to stop if they want to maintain brand loyalty and goodwill among their customers. Come on, Canon- you can do so much better. Don't think about marketing and protecting existing models, think about making the all around BEST products.

And just so everyone knows, this is constructive criticism, because I want them to provide the best possible Canon products to me for my use as a hybrid stills / video shooter. Right now, I'm really on the fence between this and a Sony, and I'd really rather go with Canon. So here's to hoping the 5DIV announcement will surprise me and prove this wrong.

Rant = over.

You video folk are so pesky! Buy a video camera. They shoot video.

 

[Mikehit]

Re: --> 4K Video Limitations --> Re: More Specifications & Images of EOS 5D Mark IV

As a 5DII and 5DIII lover with lots of EF glass, I've said it many times here and I'll say it again- Canon needs to provide more value to its video customers and not just lead them on by trickling down the latest video features- such as 4K- to prosumers years after they've reached competitors' products.

'Needs to'?
Why. They have clearly chosen the 5D to be a mainly stills camera and created the DC range for videographers.

Yes, Canon maintains steady profits by doing so, but there are other ways to make profit, namely, by cannibalizing yourself and your own products to find what consumers want and selling on volume. Follow the lead of companies like Apple (under Jobs), who were fearless in coming out with new and better products that cannibalized existing lines because those products were the future. Canon needs fearless leadership to do this, and it won't happen overnight, but when you're ahead, as Canon still is, you have to be a bit risky and we've just not seen that so far from their video integration with the 5D line, since the 5DII.

Is this this the same Apple company who for the last couple of iterations have been accused of stagnating?
Breaking new ground in a mobile phone was easy meat once you had the idea - merely putting cameras and the like in phones was itself a big step forward. Photography on the other hand is relatively mature and you only need took at the problems phone manufacturers now have in creating something new to see how difficult it has been for camera manufacturers to do the same for quite a while now.
There has been precious little developments on sensor technology for several years so are you suggesting that all camera manufacturers are running some sort of technological cartel and agreeing not to release anything truly innovative ?

If the dynamic range is right, this camera will be everything I want in a stills camera, but sorely lacking if the 4K video is hobbled in some way. Canon also could have implemented 120fps in 1080p mode for us video shooters, but hobbled it to up-sell to the Cinema EOS line and higher end models. This has got to stop if they want to maintain brand loyalty and goodwill among their customers. Come on, Canon- you can do so much better. Don't think about marketing and protecting existing models, think about making the all around BEST products.

As has been repeated several times to the video crowd, there are massive technological problems with things like heat generation and processing power when getting a camera to be both a stills and video. And if you are willing to pay the price why not buy a video camera if your required specifications are that high?
Why do you think the 1DC is great at video but falls down on stills?

And just so everyone knows, this is constructive criticism, because I want them to provide the best possible Canon products to me for my use as a hybrid stills / video shooter.

Fair enough. But when you are going to criticise a company at least make sure your criticisms are valid.

 

[arthurbikemad]

Without reading 100 pages, I wonder at 30MP and "old" card tech what will the buffer be RAW? Given an extra 1FPS you have to wonder if this "pixel beast" will grind to a halt after 6 or seven frames... :-\

 

[wockawocka]

Assuming a write speed of 30mb/s, one raw file a second then a buffer of 1gb will hold around 30 frames. Memory is cheap and Canon, if you are listening, I would happily of paid an extra 500 bucks extra per GB of buffer.

Anything less than a 20 shot buffer and I'll be most unimpressed.

 

[Mikehit]

Without reading 100 pages, I wonder at 30MP and "old" card tech what will the buffer be RAW? Given an extra 1FPS you have to wonder if this "pixel beast" will grind to a halt after 6 or seven frames... :-\

The 5D3 buffer was 30-odd frames if I recall correctly so I see no reason the 5D4 would be as low as '6 or 7'.
How big a buffer do you need?