# Back & Forth, No 4K for EOS 5D Mark IV?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 15, 2015)

```
After yesterday’s rehashing of past rumors in a package mimicking new information, EOSHD is reporting the 4K video reports in the EOS “5D” line are untrue.</p>
<blockquote><p>…..the company believes a 4K 5D Mark IV would completely overshadow the recently released C100 Mark II and so wouldn’t happen, but that Canon LOG would likely go into the camera to allow shot-matching with the XC10.</p></blockquote>
<p>This sounds completely plausible. I get the feeling that Canon doesn’t see a big future in DSLRs for serious video productions and will try to further grow their Super 35 Cinema EOS cameras instead. The XC10 is the odd camera in the strategy, but we’ll reserve judgement until we hear from people that have used it in the field.</p>
<p>We can’t confirm a “5Dc”, but we can confirm that we were told there would be 3 “5D” cameras in 2015 and that we’ve already seen 2 of them.</p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.eoshd.com/2015/04/canon-5d-mark-iv-will-be-1080p-with-canon-log/" target="_blank">EOSHD</a>]</p>
```


----------



## leGreve (Apr 15, 2015)

Makes the decision easier.... Wont be getting a 5D3 without 4K.

You gotta love how Canon in trying to cover all bases fucks it up for themselves.

Like Ive said before, strip the lineup down to 2 cinema models, a dslr model and a semi-pro / consumer model and the sales would explode.

Same goes for stills.... Just offer three models in total.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 15, 2015)

No 4K? They better make it the best stills camera on the planet if they will dump the main event video feature.


----------



## jaayres20 (Apr 15, 2015)

I would imagine that the thousands of photographers who do not need video features would care less about having 4K in the new 5D. Why does the DSLR have to be the all in one camera to fulfill still photography and video needs. I don't see very many still photographers complaining about the lack of still photography features on their cinema line.


----------



## jdramirez (Apr 15, 2015)

I don't care about 4I, but if my phone can do it, my $4000 camera Damn well better be able to.


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 15, 2015)

I can state unequivocally, if the 5D Mark IV does not have 4K - I will be selling off my Canon gear and switching platforms. 

A manufacturer should NEVER be afraid of cannibalizing sales of their own products. They fail to realize that this is NOT A ZERO SUM GAME! 

One would have thought that the 5D Mark II would have proven that. They put out a superior product with features above its class and what do you know... people came out of the woodwork to buy it; many who would never have before. 

With this news, I'm not holding off on new Canon lens purchases until I see proof that Canon isn't going down the protectionist road...


----------



## jebrady03 (Apr 15, 2015)

I just hope a 5D Cinema camera makes it to market REALLY soon. Why? Because I'm tired of all the idiots who wish they worked for Canon marketing calling the 5D the 5Dc. Morons.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 15, 2015)

jaayres20 said:


> I would imagine that the thousands of photographers who do not need video features would care less about having 4K in the new 5D. Why does the DSLR have to be the all in one camera to fulfill still photography and video needs. I don't see very many still photographers complaining about the lack of still photography features on their cinema line.



The argument is that every professional photographer -- like it or not -- will need to be able to capture video before too long. For instance, photojournalists need to be their own everything these days, and wedding folks are being asked to capture video as well.

Then there's the argument that in 10 years, we'll all _*only*_ shoot video and pull stills from it. I'm not touching that argument with a 10 foot pole, but if Canon thinks that's our inevitable future, they need a rig that juggles video and stills flawlessly. One would think that the 5D3 (and 5D4) is that rig, and 4K is part of that juggling act, _undermined Cinema EOS sales be damned._

- A


----------



## pedro (Apr 15, 2015)

Would a rumored 18 MP 5Dx offer me about the same possibility for stills like the 5D3 now, or will this be a plan B option? I could use such a high ISO beast pretty well for the nightphotography I mostly do with my 5D3 at the moment.


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Apr 15, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> I can state unequivocally, if the 5D Mark IV does not have 4K - I will be selling off my Canon gear and switching platforms.



This. 
It's sad to say but If none of the new 5D series cameras feature 4k, I won't be buying any.. Not when Sony, Panasonic, Black Magic, and GoPro have already had it implemented into their cameras for some time now.


----------



## tomri (Apr 15, 2015)

If all you do is try to protect your market, it will disappear!


----------



## SPG (Apr 15, 2015)

Bah! I won't put too much weight on this rumor since it's coming from GH4K.com, er I mean EOSHD.com
Andrew is a little prone to hyperbole and has so much hate for the cameras that his site is named for that I can't take anything that he says with much confidence.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 15, 2015)

Just curious: As a non video guy, how important is 4K versus the less punchy sales points like clean HDMI out, Log/profiles, and video specific ergonomics/controls/external hookups, etc.?

In other words, is Canon not offering 4K in the 5D4 simply a blatant Cinema EOS sales protection move, or is it more a case of Canon not selling the other video features well?

- A


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 15, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Just curious: As a non video guy, how important is 4K versus the less punchy sales points like clean HDMI out, Log/profiles, and video specific ergonomics/controls/external hookups, etc.?
> 
> In other words, is Canon not offering 4K in the 5D4 simply a blatant Cinema EOS sales protection move, or is it more a case of Canon not selling the other video features well?
> 
> - A



Speaking as someone who works in the television industry, 4K is INCREDIBLY important. 20% of TV sales last year were 4K, that will increase dramatically this year. Most content is being captured at 4K whenever possible now with the knowledge that rebroadcasts and reuse of the content in the future there is a very real possibility that it will be displayed in 4K to the home. 

Long story short - quality capture is key. Capturing 4K at at least 8 bit 4:2:2 at as high a bit rate as possible with a mic input is really all that is necessary (some will argue you need 10 bit, some will argue 4:2:0 is enough). Either way - the ability to capture the content in as high a quality as possible is critical. Everything after that is secondary. Clean HDMI out are nice (but rarely used by most...even professionals). Logs are nice, especially if you're doing complex edits... but they aren't absolutely necessary.

Those small features can be supplemented by aftermarket companies in many cases - the one thing they can't change is the quality of original capture.


----------



## gsealy (Apr 15, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Just curious: As a non video guy, how important is 4K versus the less punchy sales points like clean HDMI out, Log/profiles, and video specific ergonomics/controls/external hookups, etc.?
> ...



For some industries and situations 4K capture for future use is important. But for me, it isn't. Things change rapidly in my world, so old stock is pretty much, well, old.


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 15, 2015)

gsealy said:


> For some industries and situations 4K capture for future use is important. But for me, it isn't. Things change rapidly in my world, so old stock is pretty much, well, old.



The difference is - the theoretical 5D Mark IV is ok for you now... but in 1 year... 2 years... 3 years? I would venture an educated guess that still producing for 720/1080 at that point will be quite antiquated. Why would anyone buy a camera that faces obsolescence so soon?

I hope I'm wrong in that I hope the new camera has 4K and all the features that make it appealing to both professionals and enthusiasts alike... I worry that I'm not though...


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 15, 2015)

The Alexa is still being used in top of the line productions and its not even capable of 4K. Maybe in a few years this will be a real issue, but not today.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 15, 2015)

jaayres20 said:


> I would imagine that the thousands of photographers who do not need video features would care less about having 4K in the new 5D. Why does the DSLR have to be the all in one camera to fulfill still photography and video needs.



It's a big market. GH4 sold way above predictions just due to 4k alone. 5D2 sold above predictions due to video.

And don't forget it's not like you are going to get a modern Exmor-level sensor for your stills either or something like a useful RAW crop mode on the 5Ds. So the stills stuff will be punted too.


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 15, 2015)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> The Alexa is still being used in top of the line productions and its not even capable of 4K. Maybe in a few years this will be a real issue, but not today.



The Alexa was introduced in 2010. People are still using 5D Mark II and III too of course - why, because at the time, that hardware represented the best, most forward looking equipment. To say it's still being used is obvious - it'll continue being used even beyond when 4K becomes much more prevalent. That said, no one is pounding down the door going, "I want the best equipment that will serve me the longest as possible! Give me a 5 year old Alexa!". 

But you prove the point - why would anyone buy new equipment that doesn't substantially improve over what they are already using? The reason the Alexa is still being used widely is because it was (and still is) an amazing forward looking piece of equipment when introduced, so it's had great longevity. New equipment should have that potential longevity if one is to seriously consider it.


----------



## gsealy (Apr 15, 2015)

jaayres20 said:


> I would imagine that the thousands of photographers who do not need video features would care less about having 4K in the new 5D. Why does the DSLR have to be the all in one camera to fulfill still photography and video needs. I don't see very many still photographers complaining about the lack of still photography features on their cinema line.



When I started to do video I went straight to camcorders. It made sense to me. But then I learned that a lot of people were using the 5DIII for video. It seemed as though they had to go through a lot of hoops to do what I could easily do with the camcorders. Researching it, I came to understand that the 5DIII offered some nice capabilities at a reasonable cost, such as using a variety of lens or the lightweight form factor. So we still have the camcorders, but we also use 5DIII's to augment the production and give it some variety. It works out well for us.

So from that perspective, it would be really nice that the 5DIV shot 4K. If the 5DIV doesn't support 4K, then I have no real need to buy it. My 5DIII shoots stills very well and I can basically upgrade it by buying high quality lenses. At some point for stills I might consider a 5DsR, which is distinctly different from the 5DIII. I just wouldn't be interested in a 5DIV that is a modest evolutionary improvement.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 15, 2015)

Thanks with all the answers, folks. 

I don't shoot video, but as I want a great sensor for all-purpose stills (incl. at high ISO), it would appear that I should skip the 5Ds and await the 5D4. So I'm curious what you video guys are going to demand my future camera to offer. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 15, 2015)

gsealy said:


> If the 5DIV doesn't support 4K, then I have no real need to buy it. My 5DIII shoots stills very well and I can basically upgrade it by buying high quality lenses. At some point for stills I might consider a 5DsR, which is distinctly different from the 5DIII. I just wouldn't be interested in a 5DIV that is a modest evolutionary improvement.



It all depends on what they improve. As a stills shooter:

If the 5D4 is a 24-28 MP rig with similar high ISO performance over the 5D3, I would pass altogether.

If the 5D4 a 30-36 MP rig with a full stop better high ISO performance over the 5D3, I would be intrigued.

If the 5D4 was simply a lights out performer in low light, had better DR, etc., they could take my money.

But, yeah -- I love my 5D3, so replacing it will require a strong step forward.

- A


----------



## gsealy (Apr 15, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> gsealy said:
> 
> 
> > For some industries and situations 4K capture for future use is important. But for me, it isn't. Things change rapidly in my world, so old stock is pretty much, well, old.
> ...



I wouldn't buy a 5DIV unless it shot 4K. That said, 'future proofing' is not important to me. So I am not going to jump in and spend a lot of money to shoot 4K now because of that concept. I will wait until the right solution comes along.


----------



## Light_Pilgrim (Apr 15, 2015)

I used to have 5D MKII, now I have 5D MKIII and I never ever recorder a single minute of video. I only want MKIV to be the best still camera in the world and I am willing to pay 4K for it


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 15, 2015)

Personally i'd rather have a higher bit-depth codec or raw of 1080, than a compressed to hell 4K codec.


----------



## joejohnbear (Apr 15, 2015)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> Personally i'd rather have a higher bit-depth codec or raw of 1080, than a compressed to hell 4K codec.



Yup, this. Put C100 quality or better video in the 5DIV, and I'm good.

And those who threaten to jump brands. Go! Jump! Good riddance. Calm your t1ts every time there's a new rumor. There are tons of options for professionals now. If you can't afford a C100, maybe you shouldn't be thinking about professional video. If you aren't shooting professionally and are just f-ing around, then maybe you're not a target customer for the video industry!


----------



## topdog (Apr 15, 2015)

4k is not that important for still shooters, but it's a nice feature to be included as 4k will become more popular in the next few years. this canon is a new sensor in a dinosaur camera body. yes canon is most used camera by pros, but there was also a time when blackberry was at the top of the mobile phone market. was considering this camera, but most likely will wait for sony's yet to be announced 50 mgp camera.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 15, 2015)

topdog said:


> 4k is not that important for still shooters, but it's a nice feature to be included as 4k will become more popular in the next few years. this canon is a new sensor in a dinosaur camera body. yes canon is most used camera by pros, but there was also a time when blackberry was at the top of the mobile phone market. was considering this camera, but most likely will wait for sony's yet to be announced 50 mgp camera.



I'm not waiting for Sony's 50 MP sensor. I'm waiting for its lenses. 

And then I'll be waiting for thoughtful ergonomic design with its bodies. 

And then I'll be waiting for better battery life. 

And then I'll be waiting for a world class AF system*. 

I agree their sensors are terrific, but migrating to that system on that back of _solely that upside*_ would have me crying a river for leaving behind so much rock-solid goodness I have with Canon today.

- A

*I know this is a video thread, but I am a stills shooter and AF >> 4k for me.


----------



## topdog (Apr 16, 2015)

actually a sony shooter considering migrating to canon for the lenses. but also know many who are stuck with canon for the lenses. for those who haven't invested heavily on lenses, canon is not looking so desirable


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Apr 16, 2015)

EosHD is hardly a credible source. I'd be hesitant to quote them.


----------



## gregory4000 (Apr 16, 2015)

I can't understand these rumors. All manufactures soon will be implementing 4k only because consumers are or will soon be aware of the incredible improvement over 1080p. For the person using medium format, I get it. That format is for professional photos. However a very large portion of consumers who shoot stills also enjoy the moment to capture a video clip. We don't want two cameras to carry around for these moments. Honestly, do you think any manufactures in three to four years will not have 4K. REMEMBER, how quickly cameras switched over from 480 to 1080, from everything as in - point and shoot to DSLR's. Can you imagine a 5DlV being released in the winter or next spring, and than for the next five years you have a feature that embarrassing in 2017, 2018 and 2019....


----------



## gsealy (Apr 16, 2015)

gregory4000 said:


> I can't understand these rumors. All manufactures soon will be implementing 4k only because consumers are or will soon be aware of the incredible improvement over 1080p. For the person using medium format, I get it. That format is for professional photos. However a very large portion of consumers who shoot stills also enjoy the moment to capture a video clip. We don't want two cameras to carry around for these moments. Honestly, do you think any manufactures in three to four years will not have 4K. REMEMBER, how quickly cameras switched over from 480 to 1080, from everything as in - point and shoot to DSLR's. Can you imagine a 5DlV being released in the winter or next spring, and than for the next five years you have a feature that embarrassing in 2017, 2018 and 2019....



Last sentence -- I agree in terms of our logic. But who knows what some marketing whiz bang at Canon is thinking?


----------



## unfocused (Apr 16, 2015)

I admit I am a near-novice in video (just beginning to learn as I have some clients with an interest in it), but I am rather confused that 4K video seems to suddenly be a "must have."

Most of the video work I am doing is likely to live on the internet and be viewed on either tablets or phones. In fact, I just had a conversation the other night with my film instructor, where he was remarking that most of his students watch their movies and tv shows on cell phones or, at best, iPads.

Given that those are the most likely delivery device for videos and there is no reason to believe that will change (in fact, it's likely that fewer and fewer people will watch shows even on a television), I have to ask how all the people who say they absolutely must have 4K video are delivering that product? 

Are your clients really that demanding that they want 4K video? Do they even know what 4K video is? If the videos are living on YouTube and similar sites, what is the need for 4K video?


----------



## sanj (Apr 16, 2015)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> Personally i'd rather have a higher bit-depth codec or raw of 1080, than a compressed to hell 4K codec.



Good point.


----------



## Dog of the Moon (Apr 16, 2015)

Not putting 4K on a 5D upgrade would be idiotic. Canon has to realize 4K is the new standard. For now on, anything that doesn't have 4K is dead.


----------



## atcd (Apr 16, 2015)

why is dslr image so much more beautiful than cinema eos? colors are much deeper shodows more cinematic. it's a shame not to have a cinema camera with the unique picture of dslr.


----------



## IglooEater (Apr 16, 2015)

sanj said:


> HurtinMinorKey said:
> 
> 
> > Personally i'd rather have a higher bit-depth codec or raw of 1080, than a compressed to hell 4K codec.
> ...



Interesting someone else is thinking the same thing. I know very little about video, but I remember reading an opinion piece on RedShark saying basically the same thing- that a higher bitrate hd would have a better payoff quality-to-megabyte ratio than compressing 4K into a palatable size given today's bandwidth and storage limitations.. 
*edit: of course, that is mainly a client-side issue I suppose
Not trying to say 4k is unnecessary by any means, I'd hate to see a new 5d without it.


----------



## J_Lewis (Apr 16, 2015)

OK Canon hear me well!! I am a professional photographer. I just started mixing shooting video and stills and don't want the C100 nor C300 soooo no 4K you sayyyyy??!! Me upset me no buy your new camera. As simple as that!! Bugger!!!


----------



## WillT (Apr 16, 2015)

If they don't add 4K to the Mark IV I am guessing there will be a lot more people jumping ship and moving to Nikon or Sony. Our customers expect the best IQ and shooting still and video is a must!


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 16, 2015)

Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it _will_ record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?

If they did, Canon could play wait and see on 4K and see if videographers really will jump ship without it. If enough folks say that they'll leave Canon over this, Canon can just release a firmware update to unlock 4K on the 5D4. Canon would give up on their upcharge strategy, but that's a lot easier than racing a new model to market.

- A


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 16, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it _will_ record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?
> - A



Interesting thought and there's two parts to the answer. 

They _could_ take that route, but it also requires a significant amount of engineering on their part to really accommodate video recording. First, the camera CPU has to be fast enough to process that amount of pixels. Second, keeping in mind that 4K is four times the amount of raw thoroughput of 1080p (or 2 if you cut the framerate), that processor is going to be running significantly harder than it would normally. You need to make sure you have the necessary cooling/heat dissipation mechanisms in place to handle that so you don't damage electronics. Third, the sensor has to be able to output that imagery to the CPU in a time short enough that it doesn't take too long (lest you get bad rolling shutter effects). Fourth, pulling extra pixels means the sensor will require more power and run hotter as well - there has to be sufficient cooling in place to handle that as well otherwise you'll either end up with lots of extra noise or damage the electronics/sensor.

So - the short answer is... the raw functionality may be there and something like a Magic Lantern could "enable" it. But the actual result would be less than optimal or potentially cause damage.

There's a good bit of engineering that goes into enabling that sort of functionality and unless they were planning on including it as a feature in the camera, that's a lot of wasted engineering dollars to engineer it all in and not use it.

So, I'd bet they wouldn't engineer the functionality in unless they planned on using it.


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 16, 2015)

The problem is Canon has ZERO anything in ILC 4K for less than $8000, and they seem to have no intention of making any serious strides here for the forseeable future unless a 5DC materializes at $3500. (No, I will not count the new little drone cam.)

It's frankly a damn shame. It really quite self-evidently a hot market based on GH4 and A7S buzz. And while the 5D2 may have started it all a few years ago, it feels like Canon just quit. Just take the C100 MkII for example. You can either spend $8000 on a still overpriced 1DC or $16000 for the C300 II. 

I don't expect a 5D4 to toss out 120FPS in 4k, but we should expect up to 30. But 60-100 in 1080p? Yes. If the A7S can do it in that little body, surely a 5 series can be made to. (Yes I know the A7S doesn't record it internally, but it can produce it for $2000)

I honestly hope they don't sell a single C100 II, so as to hasten a more reasonable priced 4k machine in their line up sooner. For $500 cheaper I'll be able to buy the URSA Mini with the brand new 4.6k sensor and it will do a whole hellova lot more than the C100 II. The only thing I can guess is that Canon has made the choice to just cede the lower range cinema markets to competitors and focus on high end. If that's the business decision, so be it. It's just frustrating.


----------



## kalieaire (Apr 16, 2015)

My friends and I all switched to Sony and Panasonic waiting for Canon to come out with a 4K option for the 5D.

Sony A7S + Panasonic GH4 for 4K video. A7-II for pictures. Single lens system, much more affordable than Canon.

We still use mostly EF Mount lenses since we have speedboosters for all the cameras and run the A7S in Crop when shooting video.

Canon is still stuck in the past and don't know how to innovate anymore.


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Apr 16, 2015)

As i respect all the commentators here on this subject and not targeting anyone im just speaking my mind, I could care less about all this 4k mumbo jumbo, canon has 4k in there line either way and it is nice to have the latest in anything that comes out today but IMO i could care less about all this crap. 

years ago nobody know crap about 4k and could of cared less about it however its out now ok so what. 4k aint new and it should be out on dslr cameras that are new, why? when 1080p is still good, TV broadcasters are full of it, besides if you got a business and making a ton of money I think you should be able to get the camera for the job. 

The dslr cameras still have video in them, yes its not what you expect but you cant please everyone in a one do it all machine for 3000 dollars. looks like the market is going back to the old days. if you want 4k buy the machine that will do the job for you. 

Not long from now there will be something better than 4k then what? they should make that one to just for people to use, I don't think so they are doing what they do for the money makers. all the other brands out there that bin have 4k for a long time, just buy that instead of bashing canon for not pleasing the wants notice I didn't say needs of everyone. Once I got some video options in my cameras that I can get the message across im happy with that. If i got the money I would go all out and get the machine to get the best I can afford.

This aint over yet, rumors are only rumors until the final product comes out, nobody knows for sure what is going to happen. This could all change but either way I learned my lesson from running out there to buy the latest and grates, i will keep what I got and upgrade accordingly to my needs instead of hype what's hot.


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Apr 16, 2015)

joejohnbear said:


> HurtinMinorKey said:
> 
> 
> > Personally i'd rather have a higher bit-depth codec or raw of 1080, than a compressed to hell 4K codec.
> ...



Word!


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Apr 16, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it _will_ record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?
> 
> If they did, Canon could play wait and see on 4K and see if videographers really will jump ship without it. If enough folks say that they'll leave Canon over this, Canon can just release a firmware update to unlock 4K on the 5D4. Canon would give up on their upcharge strategy, but that's a lot easier than racing a new model to market.
> 
> - A



Smart Person, I was thinking the same thing, and this has more grounds than the rumor itself.


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Apr 16, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it _will_ record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?
> ...



I understand what your saying and respect it but na, if they do it, they will know better than that. like the 7d mk2 and it cpu's it will be able to handle the 4k with there new 50mp camera its already there so aint nothing causing any damage. if you can enable it then it can handle it. I seen this argument before and it will work.


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 16, 2015)

Any current camera in Canon's DSLR lineup has a sensor capable of 4k resolution. 4k is only 8-9MP. The issue is the processing power needed to snatch it, but the newer Digic 5 and Digic 6 (particularly the DUAL chip cameras) should be able to handle 24-30FPS 4k. 

And it's not always about making the final product 4k. It's about being able to shoot in a higher resolution and down converting to 1080p which will yield a much nicer 1080p image than shooting native. Also, just like one of the main advantages of a 5DS 50MP rig is being able to frame wide and crop in if need be, still having a very high resolution still afterward, shooting in 4k and being able to tighten up a shot in post without losing anything on a 1080p timeline is major.

And we are still a bit hand tied at 1080p in current DSLR offerings from Canon thanks to the internal post RAW processing that not even "Clean" HDMI out has solved. Short of using Magic Lantern and getting straight RAW, you cant even compare the 5D3 1080p image to that of the same quality of the A7S or GH4.

I don't expect all or even most C100 II or C300 II features and quality from a $3000 DSLR, but I would at this point expect to see similar BASE capabilities, like 4k, even if it needed to be slung out to an Odyssey or Shogun to snag it. I would NOT expect the great monitor or viewfinder, the zebras, the focus peaking, false color, 72+ FPS, and great audio preamps with XLR ins and SDI outs.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Apr 16, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it _will_ record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?
> ...



I don't think they would spend NRE on a function they don't plan to use, however leveraging a design which accommodates that feature from a different product is a common approach even if they don't write firmware for it.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 16, 2015)

My fault. I framed the hypothetical the wrong way. I'm not arguing that Canon -- _after release_ -- figures out some hack method to unlock 4K in a manner that the rig can't handle. You can do that with an f/8 center AF point firmware update or extra bracketing intervals, but not something like 4K.

Let me reframe the question: 

*Would Canon design a purpose-built 4K rig that was top-to-bottom able to record 4K, handle all that data, dissipate the heat, manage the rolling shutter, etc.

...and then they block that resolution option from the menu deliberately to protect Cinema EOS sales?*

If there were large defections to other brands or (more likely) violently negative chatter in the dead time between announcement and release, Canon could then just flip a switch, deploy a firmware update, and whammo. It would be a political/messaging fiasco that screams 'marketing blunder', but it would surely stop the bleeding if people were really leaving Canon over this.

Optimally building in 4K would be a major hardware/design undertaking that one would think the 5D design camp would want to take credit for and put front and center in their launch marketing, but perhaps tenting up the Cinema EOS price is important enough to the higher-ups at Canon that such subterfuge might be worth pursuing.

- A


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 16, 2015)

And to the notion one would hinder sales of the other:

Serious filmmakers are STILL going to buy the big dogs. The C300 II type bodies. Many of them would ALSO purchase the smaller DSLR for different types of shooting. But the advantage of having both be Canon sensors in post production is huge. Makes grading much easier.

Look at Philip Bloom. He has a Sony F55, FS7, and A7S. Uses all three regularly and intermixes them in productions. And guys like that still say "They'd rather the Canon look" but Canon isn't making a system to suit their needs. The C300 II will start to open the doors, but it shouldn't stand alone.


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 16, 2015)

If the 3 year old 1DC can do it (and it does) they can do it in a 5 body. The GH4 can do it just fine for $1500. A 5D4 that can shoot 8FPS at 28MP in RAW could sleep through 24FPS in 8.8MP 4k, especially if it's not even doing the recording itself....which it could.

My point is that its seems logical all the hardware capability and build is already there. I don't know if they can implement it to 4K in existing models, but surely it can easily be done with the same parts in a new one with perhaps some minor tweaks.




ahsanford said:


> My fault. I framed the hypothetical the wrong way. I'm not arguing that Canon -- _after release_ -- figures out some hack method to unlock 4K in a manner that the rig can't handle. You can do that with an f/8 center AF point firmware update or extra bracketing intervals, but not something like 4K.
> 
> Let me reframe the question:
> 
> ...


----------



## gregory4000 (Apr 16, 2015)

The way I see it. The 5dlV needs to at least meet competing units like the GH4. Imagine, no, don't imagine. In the next three years ( 2018) there will be many new cameras (including 'most' cell phone ) will have 4K. ( 4K is four times the resolution of High Def) and now you'll have this great new camera that won't be upgraded for an additional two more years ( 2020 ), still using video an the level of the 5dll (2008).
I'm not expecting the 5dlV to be par with the C300ll, however 10 bit 4K with 12 stops of dynamic range it should have.
And if it's true that the 5dlV will accept Cfast card ( used on cameras that shoot 4K, in fact I haven't seen any still camera or 2K video camera that uses Cfast) , than Canon must be planning something special!
If you shoot video professionally and need 15 stops with XLR's , SDI's and all the other features, the C300ll will get you there. But anyone considering the 5dlV WHO ALSO may want to shoot the random run and gun video clip may not be aware yet, BUT in a year or two will really wish his DSLR had 4K.


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 16, 2015)

Only reason you need those hyper expensive CFast 2.0 Cards is if you're shooting 4k in RAW or real quality Codecs like ProRes. Otherwise it's overkill. Canon won't be putting either of those recording options in ANY camera. Even the C300II has to send signal off-board to record externally for that. And at $16,000, people are really gonna be looking for something HUGE over the brand new $4995 BlackMagic URSA Mini that has notably better specs with the same EF mount.



gregory4000 said:


> The way I see it. The 5dlV needs to at least meet competing units like the GH4. Imagine, no, don't imagine. In the next three years ( 2018) there will be many new cameras (including 'most' cell phone ) will have 4K. ( 4K is four times the resolution of High Def) and now you'll have this great new camera that won't be upgraded for an additional two more years ( 2020 ), still using video an the level of the 5dll (2008).
> I'm not expecting the 5dlV to be par with the C300ll, however 10 bit 4K with 12 stops of dynamic range it should have.
> And if it's true that the 5dlV will accept Cfast card ( used on cameras that shoot 4K, in fact I haven't seen any still camera or 2K video camera that uses Cfast) , than Canon must be planning something special!
> If you shoot video professionally and need 15 stops with XLR's , SDI's and all the other features, the C300ll will get you there. But anyone considering the 5dlV WHO ALSO may want to shoot the random run and gun video clip may not be aware yet, BUT in a year or two will really wish his DSLR had 4K.


----------



## gregory4000 (Apr 16, 2015)

The URSA mini is very interesting, the main advantage of the C300ll is its low light capabilities.
And it's true the Cfast are useful for the Raw 4k. That being said. Why if Canon is considering putting Cfast in the 5dll???


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 16, 2015)

gregory4000 said:


> The URSA mini is very interesting, the main advantage of the C300ll is its low light capabilities.
> And it's true the Cfast are useful for the Raw 4k. That being said. Why if Canon is considering putting Cfast in the 5dll???



There's a huge price variance from CFast to CFast 2.0. 128GB CFast on Amazon. $70 128GB CFast 2.0 on Amazon. $640

CFast 2.0 can write 510MB/Sec. If you think of full blown RAW 4K, it's over 400MB/SEC


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 16, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> I would NOT expect the great monitor or viewfinder, the zebras, the focus peaking, false color, 72+ FPS, and great audio preamps with XLR ins and SDI outs.



I would expect the zebra and focus peaking and live zoomed focus box. Those are NOT advanced features. They are basic, necessary, little things. Canon has tricked you if you think those two little things are advanced pro features.

(I'd say it should also have 4:2:2, 10bit, slog2, 4k at this point.)

Now the 150fps, super video viewfinder, XLR and SDI (for a DSLR form factor, adds lots of bulk and would annoy stills photographers and even some video people) and so on fair enough though.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 16, 2015)

Dog of the Moon said:


> Not putting 4K on a 5D upgrade would be idiotic. Canon has to realize 4K is the new standard. For now on, anything that doesn't have 4K is dead.



Especially since this camera still needs to look solid 2-3 years after it's release and it's release can't be any earlier than a half year away still.


----------



## gsealy (Apr 16, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> gregory4000 said:
> 
> 
> > The URSA mini is very interesting, the main advantage of the C300ll is its low light capabilities.
> ...



It's my understanding that RAW 4K would allow about 6-7 minutes of video to be stored on a 128GB CFast 2. That gets expensive in a hurry.


----------



## Creative69 (Apr 16, 2015)

gregory4000 said:


> The way I see it. The 5dlV needs to at least meet competing units like the GH4. Imagine, no, don't imagine. In the next three years ( 2018) there will be many new cameras (including 'most' cell phone ) will have 4K. ( 4K is four times the resolution of High Def) and now you'll have this great new camera that won't be upgraded for an additional two more years ( 2020 ), still using video an the level of the 5dll (2008).
> I'm not expecting the 5dlV to be par with the C300ll, however 10 bit 4K with 12 stops of dynamic range it should have.
> And if it's true that the 5dlV will accept Cfast card ( used on cameras that shoot 4K, in fact I haven't seen any still camera or 2K video camera that uses Cfast) , than Canon must be planning something special!
> If you shoot video professionally and need 15 stops with XLR's , SDI's and all the other features, the C300ll will get you there. But anyone considering the 5dlV WHO ALSO may want to shoot the random run and gun video clip may not be aware yet, BUT in a year or two will really wish his DSLR had 4K.



Competing camera GH4????? are you serious? I have never seen a GH4 in any studio shoot I have been involved in or in any wedding come to think of it. I don't think Canon have much to fear there. I would say why don't you just use a GH4 but we already know why not, therefore there is no competition from that particular camera at least.
I agree that companies like Canon need to keep pushing the boundaries, but to make out that the 5D with 4K would somehow be the saviour of Canon is silly. I guarantee Canon know their market better than most people here give them credit for. The new Canon EC10 has 4K just go and buy that, is it a personal vendetta that some people have waged against Canon to push them to include 4K? I applaud Canon for sticking to their principles I personally would never use my dslr for video, horses for courses but thats me. Don't worry Canon won't get off that easy though they better bring a real improvement to the quality of stills which I'm sure they will and even then its not because I particularly need it but just to show that advances are being made.


----------



## coldsweat (Apr 16, 2015)

Creative69 said:


> I applaud Canon for sticking to their principles I personally would never use my dslr for video, horses for courses but thats me.


Me too!


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 16, 2015)

The market is showing there is a real appetite for 4k in ILC bodies. That's Canon leaving money on the table right there. Compound that with a lot of third party users adapting L glass, and that tells you even more.

Somewhere in Canon I suspect is the notion that by adopting 4k into "lower end" bodies (NOT video cameras, DSLRs) like the 5 bodies and 7 bodies, means they may cannibalize some of their C body sales. To add heft to this theory, they just release a new C body for $5500 that does 1080p, and not even in very high frame rates. While I believe most of the people using a C100 II are a different crowd than a 5 body, there are lot of people buying these ILCs now just for video. I suspect hardly anyone is buying a GH4 mainly for stills. Same for the A7s.

But even with the A7S, Sony still sells a lot of FS7 bodies. I honestly don;'t understand where Canon was thinking with the C100 II with so much other competition in that space running 4K. They are applying the same tactic to DSLRs.



Creative69 said:


> gregory4000 said:
> 
> 
> > The way I see it. The 5dlV needs to at least meet competing units like the GH4. Imagine, no, don't imagine. In the next three years ( 2018) there will be many new cameras (including 'most' cell phone ) will have 4K. ( 4K is four times the resolution of High Def) and now you'll have this great new camera that won't be upgraded for an additional two more years ( 2020 ), still using video an the level of the 5dll (2008).
> ...


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 16, 2015)

coldsweat said:


> Creative69 said:
> 
> 
> > I applaud Canon for sticking to their principles I personally would never use my dslr for video, horses for courses but thats me.
> ...



I happen to be a stills only shooter who agrees with you, but "sticking to their principles"? 

Would the Cinema EOS line even _exist_ if the 5D2 wasn't such a massive hit as a video rig? What principles are they sticking to by not trying to limiting the video appeal of the 5D4?

Oh... Their principle of _making as much money as possible_. *That* one. I always forget that one.

I retract my question. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 16, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> The market is showing there is a real appetite for 4k in ILC bodies. That's Canon leaving money on the table right there. Compound that with a lot of third party users adapting L glass, and that tells you even more.



Agree with most of what you said, but the quote above re: adapting glass may be less about others offering 4K and more about the rise of mirrorless in general. Consider that many mirrorless systems:

1) Have limited/very poor glass of their own
2) Many don't use AF for video, so adapting lenses for video is a better 'fit' for the application than it is for stills
3) One of the sells of mirrorless is that you can adapt FF glass from any manufacturer due to the smaller flange distance

So I'm not convinced 4K is the driver of this so much as the growth of mirrorless is.

- A


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 16, 2015)

To provide a bit of clarification to those who can't understand why people are up in arms over the potential of Canon leaving out forward looking features...

Many people, myself included, purchase into a full camera ecosystem because it makes it much easier to simply stick with one rather than carry a myriad of lenses for a myriad of cameras. When we purchase into a system, its because we've been led to believe that the company will continue to innovate and respond to their customers demands and needs. When a company eschews that previously defined path to the detriment of their customers - simply switching to a different platform becomes a giant pain in the @$$. Not only is it an expensive proposition, but it's also time/labor intensive not to mention you have to refamiliarize yourself with often very different control schemas and quirks of the equipment. Add to that the betrayal of trust of why you bought in and the first place and you have the makings of a perfect storm.

Don't get me wrong, if Canon fails to deliver, I won't hesitate to switch platforms. But it wouldn't be because I want to, it will be because I have to.


----------



## ReggieABrown (Apr 16, 2015)

If Canon don't put 4k in the 5d Mark iv I'm switching brands for sure. I'll sell my 7d mark ii, keep my 60d and use the money from the 7d2 for a blackmagic ursa mini. Don't get me wrong, I like Canon, but I don't want to invest in a camera that I'll be using for the next 5 years that only does 1080p video. And with the 5d I'm sure the stills will be awesome, I just want some awesome video along with awesome stills in one body.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 17, 2015)

Creative69 said:


> Competing camera GH4????? are you serious?



Yeah, why not? I bet he was. Why would he not be? The GH4 flew off the shelves in far greater numbers than expected because of the 4k video. Or that the 5D2 also beat expectations with help from the video crowd.



> I guarantee Canon know their market better than most people here give them credit for.



The same Canon that laughed at the RX100 at few years back and said that they were certain there was zero market for such a camera.... and now a couple years later after RX100 flew off the shelves they scramble out with their clone.



> The new Canon EC10 has 4K just go and buy that,



Why? When for just 20% more money we could get a BM Ursa Mini that has a much larger sensor, does 4k at 60p, takes Canon EF lenses instead of being restricted to a built-in lens, I believe has RAW HD option, I think hits something like 150fps in HD, etc. etc. etc.

Also, you do realize that a 5D4 with nice 4k video means lugging around ONE item, especially nice on hikes and it means spending a large chunk of money once instead of twice?



> is it a personal vendetta that some people have waged against Canon to push them to include 4K? I applaud Canon for sticking to their principles



Leaving out 4k is sticking to their principals??? What principal is that????



> I personally would never use my dslr for video, horses for courses but thats me.



Fine enough, but also you do realize the 5D4 will still have some video, even if likely forgetable by today's standards so it won't be your 'pure' stills only body anyway. It will have just enough video to annoy the so-called 'purists' and not enough video to satisfy the stills/video crowd. Sounds like the best of both worlds  .



> Don't worry Canon won't get off that easy though they better bring a real improvement to the quality of stills which I'm sure they will and even then its not because I particularly need it but just to show that advances are being made.



I would have that they will too, but looking at the 5Ds.... it's the same old, same old, and that was supposed to be a dedicated landscape image quality camera.... unless the dual-gain read rumor is true, then it may be game on again, at least up to 18MP level.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 17, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> To provide a bit of clarification to those who can't understand why people are up in arms over the potential of Canon leaving out forward looking features...
> 
> Many people, myself included, purchase into a full camera ecosystem because it makes it much easier to simply stick with one rather than carry a myriad of lenses for a myriad of cameras. When we purchase into a system, its because we've been led to believe that the company will continue to innovate and respond to their customers demands and needs. When a company eschews that previously defined path to the detriment of their customers - simply switching to a different platform becomes a giant pain in the @$$. Not only is it an expensive proposition, but it's also time/labor intensive not to mention you have to refamiliarize yourself with often very different control schemas and quirks of the equipment. Add to that the betrayal of trust of why you bought in and the first place and you have the makings of a perfect storm.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, if Canon fails to deliver, I won't hesitate to switch platforms. But it wouldn't be because I want to, it will be because I have to.



+1


----------



## gregory4000 (Apr 17, 2015)

Those of you who use the 5D for still only do not represent the entire group who purchases this camera. No more than the sports enthusiast represents all who watches cable. I'm sure many who purchase the 5D series for a great still camera as it is, likes to tinker with video a little. Don't misconstrue this statement. I'm in no way counting the professional video photographer in this group. They would not use the 5D or GH4 even if it was the bomb. Mainly as many have told me...because you are charging a lot of money for a service and don't want to be seen using uncle Eddie camera. People expect to see professional equipment on a project site. The C300 ll may shoot better or very close video to Red Epic. But many high end professional know that their client want to see a Red, Arri, Sony F65 with $60,000 - $200,000 lens group.
The 5D is that perfect balance of serious still enthusiast with the addition of those who enjoy stills and a little video. And doesn't want to carry two cameras. 
Many DSLR manufactures have lost a tremendous market share to the cell phone. I wonder if Canon saw that coming?
If Canon drops the ball on this upgrade, Believe me, Nikon, Sony, Blackmagic Design, Fujifilm.....will love to swoop up the disgruntle consumer who has felt let down.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 17, 2015)

If you want 4k, don't buy the XC10, buy the Panasonic fz1000. It makes the Canon look like a shameful attempt at 4k.


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 17, 2015)

Yup. Thank you.



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Creative69 said:
> 
> 
> > Competing camera GH4????? are you serious?
> ...


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 17, 2015)

This notion that Canon DSLRs "Don't need" X is folly. Canon should want to remain the market product innovator. I stress PRODUCT. Why? Because Canon has proven itself as a technological innovator, even to this day. Moreso than anyone else. Don't argue. The proof is in the patents. Bring the tech to market is a different story. There are three camps in this forum. The first is those who love Canon blindly regardless of what they produce or not produce, as it were. The second is those who are here to belittle Canon no matter what they do or don't. The third are those like myself and others saged enough to love and appreciate Canon for what is has done and is doing, but stoic enough to measure our praise and criticism in the proper proportions when Canon does something right, and when Canon fails to excel.

They need a 5 body with A7S/GH4 caliber 4k. Period. It's a market that is REAL and thriving.


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 17, 2015)

If Canon decides to produce a 5D4 without 4k, but instead produces a SERIOUS 5DC that will, I think Canon fans will be happy campers. But to release a 5D4 without that ability and no other 5 body that will will be viewed as a tragic failure by a not insignificant portion of the market willing to spend the money on such a Canon product.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 17, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> If you want 4k, don't buy the XC10, buy the Panasonic fz1000. It makes the Canon look like a shameful attempt at 4k.



$729 and includes "You've got focus peaking for manual focus, zebra for detecting overexposure,"

two BASIC, BASIC things that Canon has decided are 'ultra high-end' features fit only for Cxx models


----------



## PureClassA (Apr 17, 2015)

I feel to a certain degree that Canon has slowly slid into the realm of Caesar "resting on his laurels". A name doesn't carry like it used to. 



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > If you want 4k, don't buy the XC10, buy the Panasonic fz1000. It makes the Canon look like a shameful attempt at 4k.
> ...


----------



## tesign (Apr 17, 2015)

All this while all the Canon cameras I have, I had never once use Video except for "Oh, this is how you take videos" with that button. Not sure why all the asking for video features and wanting "4K" for if I'm using a DSLR camera as what it should be..a DSLR for photography. 

User who are interested in Video should get one that does just seriously video and Canon has plenty to give on that with their range of video cams. I hope Canon makes a 5D FF or a 7D MK III just like Nikon did with their Nikon "DF" model..yah, no video. Maybe with video features..a few other things may be incorporated into such a "no video Canon" DSLR camera.


----------



## meson1 (Apr 17, 2015)

In this day and age, I don't think it's realistic not to include 4K on any but the most basic cameras. If Canon don't want their Pro and Prosumer still cameras to do video, they shouldn't have put it on the current and previous gen products in the first place. But now they've set a precedent, there is a consumer expectation and they have to compete with products from their main rivals Nikon and Sony.

I think the path Canon ought to take should be similar to their current offerings. Offer a basic 4K video with DPAF functionality and the mandated 30 minute recording limit, but not advanced features such as rolling shutter compensation or 60fps etc.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Apr 17, 2015)

tesign said:


> I hope Canon makes a 5D FF or a 7D MK III just like Nikon did with their Nikon "DF" model



I don't have a stake in Canon's profits, but wanting them to copy an abject failure? Kinda silly.



tesign said:


> *Maybe with video features*..a few other things may be incorporated into such a "no video Canon" DSLR camera.



I don't understand. Do you mean instead of video features?

At this point, video support is largely software (notwithstanding much higher datarate video). Having it available doesn't hinder the stills performance of a camera nor prevent other things from being added (well, within the limits of the firm- and software capacities). 

I don't use video on any of my SLRs. Video capability accounts for precisely 0% of my camera selection criteria. But I'll take it.

Also, perhaps if a product manager feels a given camera will be heavily used for video, improvements in the display and manual focus aids will be considered. So it's possible that inclusion of video could manifest in improvements for stills. On the flip side, they could decide that the optical view finder or shutter or mirror box or off-sensor PDAF are secondary concerns, at which point stills performance would be negatively impacted. There is no indication of that happening.


----------



## mkabi (Apr 17, 2015)

tesign said:


> Not sure why all the asking for video features and wanting "4K" for if I'm using a DSLR camera as what it should be..a DSLR for photography.



I always found that comment as dumb as "I'm going to use my smartphone only for phone calls."
Or "I'm going to use my computer only for research and/or accounting/budgeting."

If you don't know how to do DSLR video, just say so...
It involves a lot more than just flicking the switch and holding the camera while it films video.
Just like how photography is a lot more than taking the lens cap off and pushing the shutter button.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 17, 2015)

mkabi said:


> tesign said:
> 
> 
> > Not sure why all the asking for video features and wanting "4K" for if I'm using a DSLR camera as what it should be..a DSLR for photography.
> ...



MKabi -- We try to keep this a respectful place. This isn't a forum at DPReview or Petapixel. Please tone it down to keep the discussion focused on content instead of winding people up. Thank you in advance.

Tesign -- that's the polarizing issue here. Stills-only folks (like myself) have to accept that the days of a stills-only rig are over. So many stills-only photogs are being asked to moonlight with video either because it's harder and harder to send two people to a job if one can do both, or they voluntarily opt to learn video just as an added service to beef up their value to clients. Customers want more, so photographers have more to do... and the photo gear industry has to step up and offer those products. The 5D2 and 5D3 are stellar examples of that.

But if stills are all you want to shoot (like in my case), I have to hold out that the 5D4 will:

* Deliver on stills IQ in a considerably better way than my 5D3 (another stop or two of high ISO with similar noise, more DR, better AF, improved metering, MF lens assistance, etc.)

* Not burn my wallet for video features I do not need

...or I'm not going to buy it. We'll see how that pans out. It might turn out that a future _6D2 _is the FF stills rig we need, because we *know* that rig will be nerfed for video. Hopefully it won't be nerfed for burst rate or AF too badly as well.

- A


----------



## pedro (Apr 18, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> But if stills are all you want to shoot (like in my case), I have to hold out that the 5D4 will:
> 
> ** Deliver on stills IQ in a considerably better way than my 5D3 (another stop or two of high ISO with similar noise, more DR, better AF, improved metering, MF lens assistance, etc.)
> *
> ...



*Dead on*, *ahsanford*. Although, I cannot imagine the feasability of two additional ISO stops with similar noise. But: will a bumped up sensor to 24-28 MP technically be able to do that? I could see that in an 18 MP sensor with new tech (if I read our expert's comments here on the forum). But I am not sure, if Canon really canniballize their flag ship by an allrounder cam high ISO wise. Therefore, give me very clean ISO 25600 on the next 5D and I'll call it a day ;-)


----------



## dolina (Apr 18, 2015)

It is nice to have as 4K displays are already widely available.


----------



## Creative69 (Apr 18, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Creative69 said:
> 
> 
> > Competing camera GH4????? are you serious?
> ...



GH4 flying off the shelves....So what!! thats my point those who bought them obviously wasn't concerned or did not want / need the stills capability that the 5D offered. Point proven, we are all different with different needs. It seems that Canon has aligned itself with users who have needs such as mine and I'm good with that. To those who are going to throw tantrums and sell all their Canon kit if the new camera does not have 4K again I say you obviously have no requirement or appreciation for the principles of which the 5D was born, which was to be a fine stills camera.


----------



## Creative69 (Apr 18, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> coldsweat said:
> 
> 
> > Creative69 said:
> ...



Yep its all about the money... would you be happier if Canon were to go out of business?
As you well know world the of video has changed since the 5D ii came along, we have serious and affordable options now like https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/cinemacameras. I understand many people want gadgets that can do it all and then complain when it doesn't do any one thing particulally well. This exactly why the 5Ds is a seperate product, its a tool for a specific purpose, but again average Jo fails to get it. Well I'm just saying that I get it and yes I see it as Canon sticking to their principles.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 18, 2015)

Creative69 said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > Creative69 said:
> ...



1. How does making a camera worse at something than the competition make it better?
2. What makes you think it will be so awesome for stills? EVen the 5Ds, a dedicated landscape camera, got a 2007-type sensor. The 5D4c rumor gave hope to new sensors, but if that is false and the no-4k no dual-gain rumor is true then....


----------



## Hellish (Apr 18, 2015)

If the 5D4 doesnt have 4k I am jumping ship. The 7D2 should of had it, and the future 80D should also have it, stop crippling your cameras.


----------



## Creative69 (Apr 19, 2015)

Hellish said:


> If the 5D4 doesnt have 4k I am jumping ship. The 7D2 should of had it, and the future 80D should also have it, stop crippling your cameras.


Yeah you should! But I'm wondering what you jump to?


----------



## Creative69 (Apr 19, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Creative69 said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



1. Worse or better is completely subjective.

2. I have seen pretty awesome images created on a 5D but I guess those were taken by real photographers who knew how to get the best out of the tools.

3. To sympathise I can see how if you're not happy with your images you would want the added features to maybe compensate for that.

When the 5D was created it was never promised it would be up there with the latest and greatest in the world of video. If I purchase a family car I wouldn't expect the manufacturer to turn the latest model into a 4x4 just because it's in fashion. Yes it's a stills camera with some video capability and that's it. 
So for those threatening to leave Canon, if your requirements have moved to video just do it! And celebrate the fact we have such choice today!


----------



## K-amps (Apr 19, 2015)

I suspect, we will get only one 5d4, it will be a 4k model, with 18mp, 8-10 fps AND with enhanced DR, all these three attributes seem to go together.

Want more MP?

Canon would like to sell you a 50mp still camera.... 

5d5 might get 24-28 mp with high DR and great High iso performance but not in 2015 when Canon is still releasing 2007 tech sensors. 

This is not what I want them to do... but seems the way things are going. If they still release a 5d3 type sensor, I will be very disappointed... but not surprised.


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 19, 2015)

K-amps said:


> I suspect, we will get only one 5d4, it will be a 4k model, with 18mp, 8-10 fps AND with enhanced DR, all these three attributes seem to go together.
> 
> Want more MP?
> 
> ...



In general, I hope the spec sheet you predict is correct. I'm willing to sacrifice a little (not a lot, but a little) MP for greater DR and better low light performance. Making sure there is also 4K, 8-10fps and an enhanced focus system and you'd have a winner on your hands.

If I were designing the product line, I'd do much of the above, and then put out the next 1D series with a new tech sensor that was around 32-36mp, similar DR to the 5D4, 12-15fps and some either enhanced framerate capability at 4K and 1080 as well as possibly some RAW output. 

That's doable TODAY with current tech. Not only would they make the 5D market (generally) happy but they'd preserve the tiered system to maximize profits.


----------



## sanj (Apr 19, 2015)

tesign said:


> All this while all the Canon cameras I have, I had never once use Video except for "Oh, this is how you take videos" with that button. Not sure why all the asking for video features and wanting "4K" for if I'm using a DSLR camera as what it should be..a DSLR for photography.
> 
> User who are interested in Video should get one that does just seriously video and Canon has plenty to give on that with their range of video cams. I hope Canon makes a 5D FF or a 7D MK III just like Nikon did with their Nikon "DF" model..yah, no video. Maybe with video features..a few other things may be incorporated into such a "no video Canon" DSLR camera.



?? There are others in this world too who use their equipment differently.


----------



## gregory4000 (Apr 19, 2015)

Maybe Canon is making the third version of the 5dlV for Video. 
We'll have a high res version, a dedicated still model and now a cinema model.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 19, 2015)

Creative69 said:


> 1. Worse or better is completely subjective.



That depends. If you are looking for a fast entry for the 100m dash and you have someone who has never done better than 14s and someone who routinely hits sub 10.0s then I think it's safe to say that the second sprinter is better.

If one camera has high-quality HD and 4k and basic usability features and one camera has poor quality 1080p HD (and only the same or less frame rates) and poor usability features is it really still subjective at that point?

worse or better can be completely subjective at times, but it can be (all but) completely objective at other times



> 2. I have seen pretty awesome images created on a 5D but I guess those were taken by real photographers who knew how to get the best out of the tools.



Who has EVER said otherwise? Total made-up straw man argument.
And it's actually counter to your point of view.
You can take nice photos with the current 5D3, so why the heck should you spend another $3500 for some new one unless it really brings a lot of majorly new and improved stuff (also of the sort that you might personally make use of)?



> 3. To sympathise I can see how if you're not happy with your images you would want the added features to maybe compensate for that.



LOL and out comes the typical throwing of shade.

Why don't you just go back to the 10D if it takes every single type of photo in every single scenario as best as you wish? Ask Peter Reed Miller to dump all his gear and shoot the next superbowl with a 10D and the original 75-300 IS or maybe a 24mm T&S?



> When the 5D was created it was never promised it would be up there with the latest and greatest in the world of video. If I purchase a family car I wouldn't expect the manufacturer to turn the latest model into a 4x4 just because it's in fashion. Yes it's a stills camera with some video capability and that's it.
> So for those threatening to leave Canon, if your requirements have moved to video just do it! And celebrate the fact we have such choice today!



I was just saying don't be so happy about the possibility that the 5D4c might be false since the 5D4c rumor also brought with it talk of much improved sensors and radically higher fps....

And why so defensive over celebrating Canon offering less for more?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 19, 2015)

K-amps said:


> I suspect, we will get only one 5d4, it will be a 4k model, with 18mp, 8-10 fps AND with enhanced DR, all these three attributes seem to go together.
> 
> Want more MP?
> 
> Canon would like to sell you a 50mp still camera....



If it was for legit reasons of making video top notch (and they couldn't say do an on-chip bin from a 40MP sensor and be 95% of the same quality) then I'd be happy with that 5D4 (so long as it truly did deliver video and had basic like zebras, focusing aids, 10bit slog 15 stops packed, 4:2:2, not mushy or waxy or weird), that would be pretty awesome even if I definitely would miss the MP. I mean that would allow for some amazing video!!!!! And the stills would be awesome (other than for cropping and reach), but it might be a legit compromise to get the top of the top video. It would be a beast. A pure stills shooter might well prefer a D810 or D820 though and pure landscape shooter a D810 or D820 or A7R or A7R II though since you'd get 36-50MP and high DR. As a dual still and video shooter though (who sometimes stills shoots a little action too), I'd actually be more for the 5D4 though (it would easily the lightest, most compact, all-in-one, most cost effective).

IMO the 5Ds would look really bad though, they cripple the crop mode to make sure it doesn't become more all-around and cripple the sensor by using the old tech (unless it's that they are still using 500nm and can't do dual-gain on a high MP sensor on 500nm, but that would actually be worse in many ways and still crippled, just for less direct reasons and with a lot worse forward view).




> If they still release a 5d3 type sensor, I will be very disappointed... but not surprised.



yeah now if they do that, blah and probably jumping ship (As I had already started to look into before all these dual-gain rumors came out)

and that plus no 4k, yeah I'm back to having given up and getting my alternate plans in full motion again


----------



## Creative69 (Apr 19, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Creative69 said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Worse or better is completely subjective.
> ...



Ok it's always hard when speaking via text, I'm really not intending to be aggressive or defensive. I would like to see improvements as much as you obviously do. My point is, to suggest that the 5D needs 4K or Canon is ******* is laughable. Canon created a rod for its own back when the 5DII and 7D came out, users found how to record and grade half decent video with these cameras. Generally speaking it was those who couldn't afford the real vid cams of the time who pushed the boundaries. The whole DSLR movie scene was born out of creative people pushing limits with what was affordable and available at the time. Obviously Canon took advantage and made a big deal out of the 5D video capability. But as usual it wasn't the manufacturer that created the legend it was the unknown users as well as people like Philip Bloom. 

Then came 4K and every smart phone offered it but what the majority of people do not understand is that 4K on a smart phone is not the same as it is on a Black Magic camera for instance. Canon make professional 4K capable cameras and if they're not willing to make the necessary compromises to shoe horn 4K into a camera that has a very solid and reliable reputation then I completely understand. The Panasonic GH4 has little to lose; it had to make a name for itself for something, so yes it has become in my opinion a great ametuer 4K camera. I think the 5Ds is a step in the right direction and if Canon continue to provide tools that are specialised in a particular area then that may be because they feel the product will be much more capable that way. Of course making a little extra cash along the way but hey thats business right?


----------



## Hellish (Apr 20, 2015)

Creative69 said:


> Hellish said:
> 
> 
> > If the 5D4 doesnt have 4k I am jumping ship. The 7D2 should of had it, and the future 80D should also have it, stop crippling your cameras.
> ...



Any future Full-Frame Sony E Mount that will have 4k (Internal or not) + a GH5.

You pair up the FF Sony E with the Sony Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1.4 ZA, and the GH5 with the Panasonic Leica Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2 OIS (85mm Equiv) and you are not only covered for stills but shooting amazing video as well.

_2 camera wedding use set-up_


----------



## pedro (Apr 20, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> K-amps said:
> 
> 
> > I suspect, we will get only one 5d4, it will be a 4k model, with 18mp, 8-10 fps AND with enhanced DR, all these three attributes seem to go together.
> ...



*Plus one. Hope they do such an 18 MP version, if they split these 5Ds anyway.*


----------



## Tugela (Apr 20, 2015)

SPG said:


> Bah! I won't put too much weight on this rumor since it's coming from GH4K.com, er I mean EOSHD.com
> Andrew is a little prone to hyperbole and has so much hate for the cameras that his site is named for that I can't take anything that he says with much confidence.



That site is focused on video. The fact that they don't talk much about Canon products in spite of the site's name is due to Canon basically having not done any development on the video functions of their cameras since the original implementation, whereas the competition has picked up the ball and ran. That is why so much of the discussion there is about non-EOS cameras - Canon are basically not even in the game.

You can only live on past glory for so long before you get written off as out of touch.


----------



## Tugela (Apr 20, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Left field idea: any possibility that the 5D4 is designed that it _will_ record 4K but Canon simply blocks that feature with firmware to prevent undercutting Cinema EOS sales?
> 
> If they did, Canon could play wait and see on 4K and see if videographers really will jump ship without it. If enough folks say that they'll leave Canon over this, Canon can just release a firmware update to unlock 4K on the 5D4. Canon would give up on their upcharge strategy, but that's a lot easier than racing a new model to market.
> 
> - A



No. They make money selling hardware, not handing out firmware updates. They will want you to buy a new camera, and that won't happen if they give you the new functions for free through firmware.


----------



## K-amps (Apr 20, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> If I were designing the product line, I'd do much of the above, and then put out the next 1D series with a new tech sensor that was around 32-36mp, similar DR to the 5D4, 12-15fps and some either enhanced framerate capability at 4K and 1080 as well .........



I don't make money off Photography, but if that 1dxii came with those specs, I would buy it... along with the 11-24, and 100-400ii Canon please, take my money.


----------



## K (Apr 20, 2015)

Practically speaking, 4K isn't really needed nor "here" yet. It will be some time yet before enough people can utilize the increased resolution on their TV's and monitors, as well as the bandwidth ISP's need to increase for streaming 4K.

However, in marketing terms - not having 4K will be disastrous. It's a spec, just like big megapixel numbers. Lacking it is a black mark against the product. And while not important today - Canon's product cycle is 3-4 years. 2018 at best for the next camera? By that time others will have 4K and be throwing it in Canon's face.

I think the same way Canon trumped Nikon with 50 megapixels, they're going to have to add 4K in some iteration to the 5D4. It doesn't have to be great 4K, all they need is to be able to put 4K on the specs.


----------



## K-amps (Apr 20, 2015)

K said:


> Practically speaking, 4K isn't really needed nor "here" yet.



Agree on this for the most part... but did you miss the new Sony 4K bravia line up starting at $1299 for the 42" announcement a couple days back... its here.


----------



## K (Apr 20, 2015)

K-amps said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Practically speaking, 4K isn't really needed nor "here" yet.
> ...




I'm aware of the availability now, but market saturation will take time. That is why it is not "here" in the sense I used that term. 4K is not the norm by far.

It won't take til 2018 though, which is my point that Canon would be foolish to not include it in the 5D4. I don't know what the latest market figures are for the average consumer lifecycle of TV upgrading - but based on the past, with 4K already on the shelves, Canon will be too late to the game if they don't release this year or early next year.


----------



## Tugela (Apr 20, 2015)

K said:


> K-amps said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



Professional shooters may still need to deliver in HD, but most users of cameras such as the 5D are not professionals, they are amateurs with money to burn. Those folk by and large will also be the ones buying 4K TV sets, and they will want video they shoot to look good on those sets. Right now anyone wanting to shoot quality video as an amateur pretty much has to get a Sony, Panasonic or Samsung camera. Canon are not in the game.


----------



## sanj (Apr 22, 2015)

Tugela said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > K-amps said:
> ...



Laugh of the decade. Thank you!


----------



## Dphotos (Apr 22, 2015)

This is beyond troubling. 4K is now standard for Sony A series cameras and the same for the Panasonic GH4. Canon just does not get it. They have to come up with a mirror less camera similar to the Sony. They are losing a great deal of their market share to Sony. I can't tell you how many people that have sold of their Canon gear in favor of the Sony and Panasonic cameras. Consumers want 4K along with a great stills camera. Looks like Canon will be shooting themselves in their foot. At the recent NAB convention no one was shooting with a Canon 5D Mark lll when covering the event like last year or the year before they have all switched to the lighter weight Sony cameras. I own two Canon 5D Mark lll cameras. I am fine with the Megapixels I get out of my camera and have no need for 36 megapixels along with the same HD video settings. I will not be buying a new Canon camera this year. Canon needs to slim down their camera line and give the 5D Mark lll professionals what they need and desire.


----------



## jdramirez (Apr 22, 2015)

Maybe this is just an old wives tale, but I was of the understanding that the heavier the body, the more stable the camera is when pressing the shutter.

On a personal level, I do not mind having a heavy body or lens because I know that you cannot cheat physics and go with light gear in order to achieve the same effect.


----------



## scandale (Apr 23, 2015)

Like most people here, i'll switch from canon to another platform if they decide to don't add 4K to their cameras. I hadn't bought their 5D3 for the same reason.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 24, 2015)

K said:


> K-amps said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



Plus a 5D4 buyer is not the average buyer. The 5D4 buyer may already be running a UHD monitor and/or HDTV. At the very least all they film now, suddenly looks way better in a year or two. Waht if someone takes a trip to some amazing place this year or the next? I bet they'd rather have it captured in 4k. Plus you can use it to get much better HD (more DR, better detail, closer to 4:4:4, etc.), for panning, extra stabilization, etc. etc. even if you only have an HD screen.

UHD monitors make a wonder for stills photography too and there is infinite material out there already for peopl eto make use of in the stills department that is way beyond UHD.

Who knows when decent 4k streaming arrives, but who cares? Streaming stinks for picture and audio quality. It's not the way to go. It just wasted internet bandwidth and drives up high speed connection costs for no great reason.


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 26, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Plus a 5D4 buyer is not the average buyer. The 5D4 buyer may already be running a UHD monitor and/or HDTV. At the very least all they film now, suddenly looks way better in a year or two. Waht if someone takes a trip to some amazing place this year or the next? I bet they'd rather have it captured in 4k. Plus you can use it to get much better HD (more DR, better detail, closer to 4:4:4, etc.), for panning, extra stabilization, etc. etc. even if you only have an HD screen.
> 
> UHD monitors make a wonder for stills photography too and there is infinite material out there already for people to make use of in the stills department that is way beyond UHD.



+1


----------



## dak723 (Apr 26, 2015)

scandale said:


> Like most people here, i'll switch from canon to another platform if they decide to don't add 4K to their cameras. I hadn't bought their 5D3 for the same reason.



I see you are new to posting, so you might have missed the poll that says that the majority of folks here are NOT interested in 4K and only 33% say they are. So most people here are not switching to another platform. If it is so important for you, by all means, switch!

Considering less than 1% of households have a 4K TV and various industry experts predict 4K will become affordable for the masses in 10 to 12 years, the users on this forum are probably not representative of the average DSLR buyer.


----------



## dolina (Apr 26, 2015)

dak723 said:


> Considering less than 1% of households have a 4K TV and various industry experts predict 4K will become affordable for the masses in 10 to 12 years, the users on this forum are probably not representative of the average DSLR buyer.


Same reason why people on photo forums like this will not give up their dedicated still camera for a smartphone despite the smartphone selling 1.3 billion units vs less than 44 million dedicated still cameras in 2014.

But for events like weddings I would insist the outfit covering would record the ceremonies in 4K.

4K by your golden anniversary would be like color SDTV when it transitioned from black and white.


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 26, 2015)

dak723 said:


> scandale said:
> 
> 
> > Like most people here, i'll switch from canon to another platform if they decide to don't add 4K to their cameras. I hadn't bought their 5D3 for the same reason.
> ...



Speaking as someone who works in broadcasting and who has to consider the implications of changing formats and 4K TV adoption, here's my take.

For 2014, 20% of all global TV sales were 4K. Projections from major manufacturers are expecting sales to double year over year from 2014 to 2015 and the same again into 2016. (Specific projections not available at the moment beyond 2016). 

In terms of market penetration, 4K TV is expected to have similar (and possibly accelerated growth) as compared to the adoption of HDTV. Initial sales curves are already bearing this out. In the 5 years from the introduction of HDTV, household HDTV penetration topped 43% (106.5M total TV households / 46M HDTV households). 

In terms of the affordability statistic you mention, I would LOVE to see specific sources because nowhere have I seen anything even REMOTELY that pessimistic. Most analysts expect prices to be within a 20% premium of HDTV sets within 2-3 years with parity expected around 4-5 years. Heck, you can buy 4K TVs in the range of 50 inches now for under $500. (http://www.walmart.com/ip/39664946?u1=VlQwcC1Bb0tNckFBQURkbDlxWUFBQUF4&oid=368707.1&wmlspartner=NKa3hZyYoHA&sourceid=33265407533303424077&affillinktype=10&veh=aff)

The main debate here is the intelligence of the BUSINESS decision by Canon to either include or exclude 4K functionality from the next 5D series camera. You'd have a pretty hard time convincing me its not a net negative for Canon to exclude the functionality.


----------



## mkabi (Apr 26, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > scandale said:
> ...



Deja vu... I swear I have read this somewhere else... perhaps in the same thread???
Just so you know... 20% global sales is probably about the same as or less than 1% of households.

Unless you are thinking that every 100 households that you visit, 20 of them will have 4K TVs...
If thats what you truly think, I suggest that you visit a 100 of your friends and family, and check their TV sets. If you don't have 100 friends/family, at least go around the neighborhood. 20% is a lot... thats 1 in every 5.


----------



## dolina (Apr 26, 2015)

I know the TV upgrade cycle is a a lot longer than say a typical smartphone or PC upgrade cycle. If I recall correctly it's in the range of 7-8 years?

Another thing to consider is that 1 out of every 4 millennials do not own a TV. They watch their "TV" on other devices like their computer, tablet or smartphone.

Finally you have to think of content that take away from TV time like say the Internet and computer games.

Steam sale anyone?


----------



## Tugela (Apr 26, 2015)

dak723 said:


> scandale said:
> 
> 
> > Like most people here, i'll switch from canon to another platform if they decide to don't add 4K to their cameras. I hadn't bought their 5D3 for the same reason.
> ...



Considering that the poll was responded to mostly by people who shoot stills and see video as a threat, or know very little about shooting it, most of them voted "no" basically out of ignorance or spite.

As for 4K not "becoming affordable for the masses", I have news for you - it is already "affordable for the masses". It isn't going to take 10-12 years as you claim, it is happening right now. There are lots of models under $1K already. for example: 

http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/lg-electronics-lg-40-4k-ultra-hd-120hz-led-smart-tv-40ub8000-black-40ub8000/10322874.aspx?path=f7cb459a8a68dad5f851d09374eda314en02

A 40 inch 120Hz 4K TV for CDN$650, likely a lot less for US$.


----------



## Tugela (Apr 26, 2015)

mkabi said:


> clarksbrother said:
> 
> 
> > dak723 said:
> ...



If TV replacement rates are averageing 7-8 years, and the majority of HD sets out there are approaching that age, it follows that a majority will be replaced in the next 4 years or so. If 20% of sets being sold today are 4K, and that number is expected to rapidly increase in the next two years, it will end up that 4K will have very significant market penetration in the next few years. 50% in the next 4 years is entirely a reasonable number.

When you are doing projections you need to consider where the market is going, not where it has been or currently is.


----------



## mkabi (Apr 26, 2015)

Tugela said:


> When you are doing projections you need to consider where the market is going, not where it has been or currently is.



Exactly and if that is the case, 4K Cameras has been on the market since 2003 as per wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution. 
NAB 2015, it was all about 6K+
People buying now, have no choice but to get 4K TVs.
But, in 4 years... there better be 8K TVs.


----------



## clarksbrother (Apr 27, 2015)

mkabi said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > When you are doing projections you need to consider where the market is going, not where it has been or currently is.
> ...



You joke, but that is the general thought on where the format roadmap will end up. In broadcast circles many are deciding when/how to upgrade production formats. Whether to upgrade to a 4K infrastructure or hold out for something more.


----------



## jdramirez (Apr 27, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> mkabi said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



Then I'm definitely waiting to buy a 4k projector. Stupid broadcasters delaying their decision.


----------



## gsealy (Apr 27, 2015)

Tugela said:


> mkabi said:
> 
> 
> > clarksbrother said:
> ...



Even though there are many 4K TVs out there, so what? You still need a way to get the content there. I have DirectTV and they still have some SD channels. So we won't see generally provided broadcast 4K for a while. Internet? Most people do not have the bandwidth to stream it. That leaves 4K players, and how exactly do you create the disks? Or distribute them? As it is right now true 4K can only be delivered from the big movie people on disks. Because they have the money to do it. Maybe there are people that want to take 4K videos of their baby or pets, or a family function. That's cool. But as far as the necessity of buying 4K cameras and all that goes with it for the purpose of making money, it just isn't there generally speaking.


----------



## gjones5252 (Apr 29, 2015)

This is turning into a silly discussion. I agree with previous posters saying that the negative viewpoint about 4k is mostly coming from photographers. 
I do both photography and videography and often at the same time. I would greatly benefit from having 4k.
There are two ways my media is delivered. Either on massive screens that are using either led or multiple projectors or by internet. 
These screen have higher resolution the 1920x1080 and it would be awesome to see it in a high resolution. When my pictures come up on the screen they look amazing because the resolution is higher than the screen. If i only delivered then pictures that were around 1920 x1080 they would not look nearly as good. 

As far a internet delivery 4k still has advantages. Post stabilization. I mostly work in run and gun environments and I would have no worries about having extra stabilization opportunities. 
ALso 4k looks great when it is then output at 1080p.

Crazy viewpoint but I am thinking about even getting a XC10!! I often have to cover conferences and I would be able to use this as a main event recording cam on a tripod. And it gives me multiple angles. I want wide angle? boom 100% view. I want to zoom in and scan around so it looks like i had a camera operator back there the whole time. Best part is its all still in 1080.

There are far to many people complaining about what in the long run is essentially an amazing thing. 
If your a photographer stop complaining. This whole video thing hasnt in fact added cost to your camera, but more than likely has increased the sales of canon products dramatically. More sale+more r+d=more developments=better end product for all involved. 

If your a videographer stop complaining. If you dont need and arent getting certain features then dont use the ones you dont need and find the accessories to solve the ones you dont have. You chose Canon for reliability, lenses, and quality. Be happy your getting those every day. Not everyone else is as lucky. 

This forum used to be a lot more positive with just one or two people getting in fights with Neuro. Now its like the most negative place to hear about canon stuff.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 1, 2015)

gjones5252 said:


> This is turning into a silly discussion. I agree with previous posters saying that the negative viewpoint about 4k is mostly coming from photographers.
> I do both photography and videography and often at the same time. I would greatly benefit from having 4k.
> There are two ways my media is delivered. Either on massive screens that are using either led or multiple projectors or by internet.
> These screen have higher resolution the 1920x1080 and it would be awesome to see it in a high resolution. When my pictures come up on the screen they look amazing because the resolution is higher than the screen. If i only delivered then pictures that were around 1920 x1080 they would not look nearly as good.
> ...


Skip the XC10, Get a panasonic FZ1000 for 800$.


----------



## Ebrahim Saadawi (May 10, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> gjones5252 said:
> 
> 
> > This is turning into a silly discussion. I agree with previous posters saying that the negative viewpoint about 4k is mostly coming from photographers.
> ...



*-Broadcast approved codec

-4:2:2 305mbps vs 24mbps 4:2:0

-Rotating grip

-Stronger built (chuck states it's 1dx/c100/300 build materiel)

-Canon Log vs horribly baked-in profiles

-12 stops of DR vs 10

-Dual media Slots

-A video optimized sensor from the ground up with native 4K readout (no downscaling/lineskipping/binning), larger photosites meaning better lowlight performane too, it just has a different image league ad different sensor from the fz1000, just because they share the approximate size!

-Much less rolling shutter

-The lens optical quality is said to be high-end L league performance but video optimized and shows no breathing, it's not just the numbers on the barrel that determines glass.

-AF is perfect vs unusable

-10bit 4:2:2 HDMI output*

It baffles me how all over the web people are implying it's a comparable camera to the fz1000 and rx10 just because they have a similarly sized sensor! Look at the above specs, a completely different league of camera from the still great rx1000&rx10


----------

