# Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Talk [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 26, 2015)

```
<p>There’s not a lot of information coming in about the replacement to the EOS 5D Mark III, which we expect to be announced no earlier than the spring of 2016. All signs point to it coming after the successor to the EOS-1D X.</p>
<p>The latest thing we’ve been told is that the camera would have a higher resolution than the EOS-1D X Mark II, which at last count would be in the area of 24mp. While the camera would remain a good videography DSLR, again we’re told that 4K is not part of the plans for the EOS 5D Mark IV.</p>
<p>We do wonder if we’re going to see another split in the EOS 5D line, with a lower megapixel option for ISO performance and something in the high 20mp’s in resolution for the masses. We’re seeing nothing that suggests we’ll get a cinema version of the EOS 5D Mark IV, but there continues to be hints of multiple cameras coming.</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
```


----------



## Chaitanya (Nov 26, 2015)

So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.


----------



## expatinasia (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> There’s not a lot of information coming in about the replacement to the EOS 5D Mark III, which we expect to be announced no earlier than the spring of 2016. All signs point to it coming after the successor to the EOS-1D X.
> 
> The latest thing we’ve been told is that the camera would have a higher resolution than the EOS-1D X Mark II, which at last count would be in the area of 24mp. While the camera would remain a good videography DSLR, again we’re told that 4K is not part of the plans for the EOS 5D Mark IV



This makes a lot of sense to me, the 5D Mark III has a higher res than the 1D X so no surprise that will continue.

The no 4K may well ruffle some feathers though.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 26, 2015)

Chaitanya said:


> So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.



The vast majority of 5D buyers don't care about 4K video.


----------



## Hardwire (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> The vast majority of 5D buyers don't care about 4K video.



Ironically, as a 5D buyer (1x 5d2, 2x 5d3) I am disturbed by the lack of 4k....which is odd considering I have never shot video even once on any of these cameras.

I think it is a case of an expected level of technology, given this is a feature on consumer mobile/cell phones these days it seems counter intuitive that it is lacking from a £3000 camera....and therein is the issue.


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> The vast majority of 5D buyers don't care about 4K video.



Based on what evidence?

I think it's more accurate to say that MAYBE and I emphasize MAYBE, the majority of 5D buyers don't care about video at all (but I would bet you it's pretty close to a 50/50 split). 

Of those that do care about video, most certainly a majority will care about 4K, especially given the 4 year refresh cycle Canon is on. 4K is _almost_ a necessity now. In 4 years, you'll be hard pressed to buy displays that aren't 4K. (Whether the delivery infrastructure is in place is another story entirely.) To not include 4K would likely cause many to turn away from the Canon ecosystem altogether. I've already got one foot out the door with a Panasonic GH4 (using a metabones speedbooster) since Canon has been so slow to come out with a successor with 4K. 

_Credentials: I work for one of the largest producers of TV content in the United States and work with much of the Canon ecosystem and the entire production process to air._


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 26, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > The vast majority of 5D buyers don't care about 4K video.
> ...



It's absolutely not a 50/50 split. There's plenty of market research that says 5D buyers don't care about 4K on DSLRs and that the % of sales of "5D" cameras for the primary purpose of video is single digits.

I don't understand why people want Canon to make a stills camera for videographers, the ergonomic hassles and additional cost to make it "usable". Let someone else make the 4K camera, most people are sticking Canon lenses on them anyway.

That said, I think we'll see more 4K oriented video products from Canon at NAB this year.


----------



## expatinasia (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> There's plenty of market research that says 5D buyers don't care about 4K on DSLRs and that the % of sales of "5D" cameras for the primary purpose of video is single digits.



We have to be careful here. Market research does not mean much unless it is substantiated, and even then can easily be manipulated.

If you ask me whether I bought the 1D X "for the primary purpose of video", then I would say no. However I have shot well over 800 videos on it. And 4K in the 1D X II is an absolute must.

I did not buy the 1D X for its video strengths, I bought it as it is the best sport camera on the market, but it also helps and can do my other business interests.

I doubt 5D users are that dissimilar. It's nice to have options, and considering we are hearing more and more about 8K, then 4K is a minimum.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 26, 2015)

expatinasia said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > There's plenty of market research that says 5D buyers don't care about 4K on DSLRs and that the % of sales of "5D" cameras for the primary purpose of video is single digits.
> ...



All points here are true, and 4K will be on the 1D X II because there's space for inputs and outputs.

Of my friends that shoot video for a living, not a single one of them uses a DSLR anymore, they've all moved on to Sony video stuff or Cinema EOS. Obviously this isn't a large sample size, but even talking to friends in the rental business, the growth has been in video gear and they don't see anywhere near as many DSLRs going out for video productions.


----------



## Sabaki (Nov 26, 2015)

Can somebody throw a poll up simply asking who has shot more than 5 hours of video on any of their DSLRs?

Speaking strictly for myself: I shoot still images. What do I want from a new model? The ability to shoot better still images with a higher rate of keepers. So give me better base ISO performance, an AF system that increases my keeper rate by a few percent.

Sure, I want the menus to be intuitive, I want the ergonomics to be comfortable and practical and I really want durability of the highest order.

The guys shooting 4k more than likely already have a 4k rig. Or am I wrong?


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 26, 2015)

Don't like that rumor  esp. because it's [CR2].

Too many MP, again different sensors between 1DX2 and 5D4 ==> makes fab more expensive, could mean different DR and S/N behaviour and people whine about it (of course a flagship must stay something special...)

I can understand those yelling for 4K, although I'm not on that ship. 
Remember what was one important reason that made the 5D2 so famous? Video?
And if the market share % (_edit: between stills and video_) are at single digits for the 5D3 could there be any other reason but those people just moving the upgrade path to Cine EOS. Could it be, that the other way and there are cheaper, better solutions, e.g. Sony and Panasonic?

Not sure what to think about it but "Hope, it won't come true..." :-\


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Nov 26, 2015)

I see that many would NOT USE 4K in a future 5D Mark IV.But I would feel inferior people when someone says:

"My cell phone can record 4K, and your camera can not do ..." 8)

It is a kind of small dick complex.


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> There's plenty of market research that says 5D buyers don't care about 4K on DSLRs and that the % of sales of "5D" cameras for the primary purpose of video is single digits.



I think you misread; note that I said, video, not 4K. I also said that somewhere around 50% of users CARE about video, I said nothing of primary purpose. I would agree that the primary purpose of probably 9 out of 10 5D buyers is still. But video most certainly plays a role. For many people, 4K is a bit of a litmus test for manufacturers. It's a clear indication that they are willing to innovate and provide the end user with the best feature set it can. Think of it like purchasing an expensive car. If you're spending $60,000 on a new car, and it doesn't have heated seats, LED headlights and satellite navigation, no matter how good the engine/transmission are, you're going to ask yourself what the heck the manufacturer was thinking. That car manufacturer, just like Canon, is not a market provider of one. Yes, their product may in fact serve the needs of the consumer quite well. The problem is, someone else may do it better, for the same price. (With heated seats...)



Canon Rumors said:


> I don't understand why people want Canon to make a stills camera for videographers, the ergonomic hassles and additional cost to make it "usable". Let someone else make the 4K camera, most people are sticking Canon lenses on them anyway.
> 
> That said, I think we'll see more 4K oriented video products from Canon at NAB this year.



I don't think anyone is asking that. The advantage of the 5D series is that it takes great stills, and you can still capture some video that will stack up against the best of what's on the market - it may not be nearly as easy to do that, but the capability is there. As for the, "Let someone else make the 4K camera" part, I know many company executives across a broad spectrum of industries that would be *HORRIFIED *by taking that stance in any market (I'm not referring to 4K, I just mean the ethos of, "Let someone else eat our lunch."


----------



## mrsfotografie (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.
> ...



Speaking for myself, I don't care for video and rather have my DSLR focused on stills photography.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Nov 26, 2015)

I think serious video guys who want the 5D4 to do video would rather have pimped-out 1080 and not held-back 4K. I could see Canon going that route. Or maybe Canon has done the math and determined that the loss in 5D4 sales over video would not be as much as the lost sales in their Cinema sales if the cheaper 5D4 did amazing 4K? 

I've read many comments from people who say they must have 4K video, but give no mention at all to wanting less compression, more color depth, or higher bit rates. To them, 4K is 4K and none of those other things matter at all.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 26, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> ...the majority of 5D buyers don't care about video at all (but I would bet you it's pretty close to a 50/50 split).
> 
> _Credentials: I work for one of the largest producers of TV content in the United States and work with much of the Canon ecosystem and the entire production process to air._



I work for one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, so I think most people thinks drugs are good. I suppose my perspective might be a little bit biased, mmmmkay?


----------



## expatinasia (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



The 1D X is a different beast. I need it for sports, but I have many business interests and use it for video too.

The 5D series is more mainstream, and while many may not use the video functions, at least they are there. I would be astounded if Canon left out 4K in the 5D Mark IV. In fact, I could almost see Sony paying them to do so.

Is it Rio Olympics or the next FIFA World Cup which will be shot in 8k?


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 26, 2015)

PhotographyFirst said:


> I've read many comments from people who say they must have 4K video, but give no mention at all to wanting less compression, more color depth, or higher bit rates. To them, 4K is 4K and none of those other things matter at all.



The thing is, those things are not mutually exclusive. Much of what you mention is contingent on a faster processor. The question is, will/is Canon spending the time to develop the hardware necessary to do that. Honestly, if there is no 4K, that may be why. Panasonic offers V-Log and 200mb bit rates in a camera a third of the price - but I am guessing (I have no info on this, so please correct me if I'm wrong), that they are using an "off the shelf" processor to handle video/photo whereas Canon develops their own from scratch with the Digic. 

The thing is, with the features that the Magic Lantern firmware was able to construct with a small team of part time developers doing this in their free time, makes you question what Canon is doing when it comes to developing features/processing capabilities.


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 26, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> clarksbrother said:
> 
> 
> > ...the majority of 5D buyers don't care about video at all (but I would bet you it's pretty close to a 50/50 split).
> ...



Haha, fair enough - that said, I feel it's important people post a little background otherwise it's tough to see the perspective/angle people are coming from.


----------



## CanoKnight (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> The vast majority of 5D buyers don't care about 4K video.



The real purpose of 4k video is not for producing video in 4k but for producing video in 2k (1080p) that looks much better than video shot in 2k.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 26, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > There's plenty of market research that says 5D buyers don't care about 4K on DSLRs and that the % of sales of "5D" cameras for the primary purpose of video is single digits.
> ...



That's a poor analogy, there's a lot of $60,000+ performance cars without heated seats and Nav, because those features simply aren't important to the purpose of the vehicle, and they can even be a negative.



clarksbrother said:


> I don't think anyone is asking that. The advantage of the 5D series is that it takes great stills, and you can still capture some video that will stack up against the best of what's on the market - it may not be nearly as easy to do that, but the capability is there. As for the, "Let someone else make the 4K camera" part, I know many company executives across a broad spectrum of industries that would be *HORRIFIED *by taking that stance in any market (I'm not referring to 4K, I just mean the ethos of, "Let someone else eat our lunch."



Canon wants to make a great 4K & 8K workflow, why waste time making bad 4K cameras?

The 1D C proved people didn't want the DSLR form factor for 4K workflow, even when pricing was cut almost in half, way more people chose the 1080P C300.


----------



## aceflibble (Nov 26, 2015)

Considering how the professional market has moved well away from using DSLR for video, I don't know why they would bother throwing resources away on putting 4k in any DSLR body now. 4K in a DSLR is nothing more than a bullet point to satisfy online commenters who will rarely be buying the camera anyway. The cost of putting 4K in a machine does not outweigh the tiny, tiny bump in sales you get from fraturing it. If anything, there is more than enough evidence to suggest that the higher price demanded by puting 4K in a camera actually equates to fewer sales than if you didn't have 4k and priced the body lower.

Not to mention, Canon already makes so little money on bodies that there's no reason to go all-out. Lenses re the only thing that are really profitable now. A body that sells for £1000 street only makes about £45 profit. Bodies that cost £2500-£3500—the range any new 5D falls in—tends to go from a £30 loss to a £40 profit, depending on the SKU. If they're making a loss or barely any profit on the body, why would they make it even worse for themsleves by putting in costly 4K?

If you are serious enough about video that you're chasing 4k, you shouldn't be looking at DSLR. You should have stopped looking at DSLR several years ago. Grab a C300, grab an FS7, or hell, if you want something small, grab something like a GH4 or A7SII. There is literally no benefit whatsoever to continuing to try to use DSLR for video, and there are many drawbacks. I get that there will be a few hobbyists still trying to cling to DSLR video, but for you, just go to mirrorless if you really need 4K, though I question your 'need' for that, too. If you're a professional, shame on you for even _thinking_ about wanting a new 5D body for video.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Nov 26, 2015)

Maybe Nikon and Canon have an agreement to keep 4K away from certain levels of their DSLR lineups? 

Someone who wants the stills capabilities of the D750, D810, or 5D will not being switching to a GH4 or A7s just to gain some video ability if it is not their primary use. 

Once Nikon puts 4K into a non-D5 body, Canon will only then be forced to play along.


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 26, 2015)

aceflibble said:


> Not to mention, Canon already makes so little money on bodies that there's no reason to go all-out. Lenses re the only thing that are really profitable now. A body that sells for £1000 street only makes about £45 profit. Bodies that cost £2500-£3500—the range any new 5D falls in—tends to go from a £30 loss to a £40 profit, depending on the SKU. If they're making a loss or barely any profit on the body, why would they make it even worse for themsleves by putting in costly 4K?



1) Just curious where you got the stats on the profit per body. Don't doubt it, just curious where the numbers came from.

2) 4K isn't as costly as you may think. It's mostly a software thing especially when you consider the improvements they try to make from a sensor side continually (i.e. faster sensor read/global shutter, heat dissipation for less noise, faster sensor data bus so you can get more full res FPS). All the same tech required for better camera specs are almost the same as what's required for 4K.


----------



## padam (Nov 26, 2015)

It is very annoying considering the fact that the Digic 7 processors and the sensor will surely have enough processing power and readout capability for 4k video.

It is just the decision of the Canon marketing people, but it may just backfire in the long-term as more and more cameras enter the market with lower price points and less restrictions on features.


But I think a 5DC may very well be on the cards taking the place of the 1DC at a lower price point (which may become obsolete if the 1DX Mark II gets 4k) and then this makes sense (still annoying though)


----------



## geonix (Nov 26, 2015)

The 5D II and 5D III had been pioneers in DSLR video. A lot of people started to use DSLRs for video because of these models. 

With its other specs the 5D III had been (and still is to those who still use it) an excellent allrounder. 

If the 5d IV will not include 4K it won't be an excellent allrounder anymore. 4K is the video standard of the future (acutally it is already now to some) and if I want to buy a 3000+ bugs camera I will be quite disappointed if it doesn't offer standard specs for video. Especially if even entry-class cameras from other companies and smart-phones do offer 4k.

Canon brought the viedeo option into the DSLRs and by not including 4K into their "consumer" and "pro-sumer" line soon they will damage their DSLR lineup substantially. There is no way back. People expect a high-end DSLR to also have decent viedeo functions. 

The 5d IV will probably come 2016, maybe they even wait up until photokina as they did with the 7d II, and if Canon then still thinks 4K is unnecessary or not needed. Well...


----------



## robinlee (Nov 26, 2015)

I do not mind if they split the line like Sony A7II A7RII and A7SII, but seriously Canon, please ensure your DR is vastly improved, higher FPS (8 at least), high buffer rate and CFast card upgrade... these are the areas I am looking for improvement to justify my upgrade.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Nov 26, 2015)

robinlee said:


> I do not mind if they split the line like Sony A7II A7RII and A7SII, but seriously Canon, please ensure your DR is vastly improved, higher FPS (8 at least), high buffer rate and CFast card upgrade... these are the areas I am looking for improvement to justify my upgrade.



I am looking for increased DR mostly, that's the single most important technical feature for me to draw me into the 5DMk IV. Other than that I bet there will be the usiual improvements in ergonomics and customize-able features which are also good to have. The MkIII is a great camera and has no obvious shortcomings like the MkII had, so the MkIV will have to be extra good to get people to upgrade.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Nov 26, 2015)

Thankfully my 5D3 is in my opinion the perfect SLR and I cannot see buying a replacement camera in the foreseeable future - maybe not ever. However, to add to the video debate, I have zero (and I mean zero) interest in shooting video. I have never quite understood the reason for putting video in SLR cameras - to me shooting video is a completely different discipline/feel and requires a camcorder. When I got my 5D2 (my first digital SLR) and then 5D3 I had wished they offered a version without video. It just adds an extra button and extra menu items that I do not need and I like to have things as uncluttered as possible.


----------



## Viggo (Nov 26, 2015)

I would rather have a minijack on my 1dx than 4K. I have maybe shot 1 hour in three years, all in very short familyfun sequences. On my small Sony handycam, I've shot maybe 50 hours in the same time frame.


----------



## mml4 (Nov 26, 2015)

I hope to replace my 6D with a Mark 4 when it is released. I don't want video capability in my still camera as it is of no interest to me and the thought I am paying $ for it turns me off. At the price point this camera will sell at I shouldn't have to pay for things I don't want! I would rather have built in GPS than video capability.
Marc


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 26, 2015)

geonix said:


> The 5D II and 5D III had been pioneers in DSLR video. A lot of people started to use DSLRs for video because of these models.
> 
> With its other specs the 5D III had been (and still is to those who still use it) an excellent allrounder.
> 
> ...



The 5D Mark II was a fluke for Canon and they admit that. However, it did tell them that filmmakers were looking at different ergonomics and design ideas and Cinema EOS system was born. All the R&D dollars for video, 4K & 8K are going into that line of products. I do think we'll see a cheaper 4K solution with an EF mount from Canon in the future, but it will be a video camera first.

Canon has also said the days of making a "do everything" camera is over and that their products were going to become more focused for the job at hand.


----------



## Perio (Nov 26, 2015)

If I remember correctly, people in CR have been talking some time ago that HD video adds little to the cost of the DSLR. How much more would it cost to have 4k video capabilities in 5d mk4? 

For me personally, 5ds color rendition in 5d mk4 would be much more desirable than 4k video. But I may not be a target population for 5d mk4.


----------



## sleepnever (Nov 26, 2015)

Put me in one of those camps that doesn't care about 4K video. Sometimes, when its my son's birthday or he's doing something super cute (cooking with my wife), I'll bust out the 5D3 for some video. Otherwise, camera phone covers it. 

As for the Megapixels, I'd really like to see a bump. Nothing massive, but 28-30 would be a nice resolution bump. 50 is too much right now, especially because I still use my camera for a variety of things.


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 26, 2015)

aceflibble said:


> Considering how the professional market has moved well away from using DSLR for video, I don't know why they would bother throwing resources away on putting 4k in any DSLR body now. 4K in a DSLR is nothing more than a bullet point to satisfy online commenters who will rarely be buying the camera anyway. The cost of putting 4K in a machine does not outweigh the tiny, tiny bump in sales you get from fraturing it. If anything, there is more than enough evidence to suggest that the higher price demanded by puting 4K in a camera actually equates to fewer sales than if you didn't have 4k and priced the body lower.
> 
> Not to mention, Canon already makes so little money on bodies that there's no reason to go all-out. Lenses re the only thing that are really profitable now. A body that sells for £1000 street only makes about £45 profit. Bodies that cost £2500-£3500—the range any new 5D falls in—tends to go from a £30 loss to a £40 profit, depending on the SKU. If they're making a loss or barely any profit on the body, why would they make it even worse for themsleves by putting in costly 4K?
> 
> If you are serious enough about video that you're chasing 4k, you shouldn't be looking at DSLR. You should have stopped looking at DSLR several years ago. Grab a C300, grab an FS7, or hell, if you want something small, grab something like a GH4 or A7SII. There is literally no benefit whatsoever to continuing to try to use DSLR for video, and there are many drawbacks. I get that there will be a few hobbyists still trying to cling to DSLR video, but for you, just go to mirrorless if you really need 4K, though I question your 'need' for that, too. If you're a professional, shame on you for even _thinking_ about wanting a new 5D body for video.



+1. (Until the silly last sentence.)


----------



## JMZawodny (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> The 5D Mark II was a fluke for Canon and they admit that. However, it did tell them that filmmakers were looking at different ergonomics and design ideas and Cinema EOS system was born. All the R&D dollars for video, 4K & 8K are going into that line of products. I do think we'll see a cheaper 4K solution with an EF mount from Canon in the future, but it will be a video camera first.
> 
> Canon has also said the days of making a "do everything" camera is over and that their products were going to become more focused for the job at hand.



I am another photographer that does not care whether the 5D4 will shoot 4k. All I do care about is whether the sensor will include on chip digitization. My personal needs are split between high DR at low ISO or acceptable noise at high ISO (25,600 or higher). This alone will likely determine whether I get the 5D4 or 1Dx2. What I do not want to see is the cost of the 5D4 increased or the engineering compromised just to do 4K (this would include a more costly body and the likely adoption of CFast).


----------



## Eldar (Nov 26, 2015)

Having enjoyed the 5DSR for some months, I really wonder what they have included to tempt me into a 5DIV. To accept less resolution, they must have added a few vital capabilities. More fps, wider DR, high ISO noise improvements, improved AF (coverage and tracking) and improved power consumption/battery life would all be nice ...But I believe I will get all of those with the 1DX-II ... At least I hope they keep body size and ergonomics pretty close to the 5DSR.


----------



## vscd (Nov 26, 2015)

I also don't care about 4k. I would go further: 4k is something *I don't want *on my body. Why? Enough buttons are dedicated to videofunctionality, I don't use anyway. 

But, I would like to see some improvement on the DR (but I'm not yelling for it) and the new features of the 7DM2 (Flickering detection, better Auto ISO). What I *really* would like to see is some stuff which is really easy to make and mostly standard of Magic Lantern:

- Intervall shot
- Bulb Mode with *free *programmable time
- Live Buld Mode (like on the Olympus OM-D 5)
- stop down button on the side of the right hand

And hey Canon, please try to invent something in between OVF and EVF. EVFs suck, but mirroring more Information into the OVF (on demand) would be the perfect way. It's no problem, the Fuji X100T even show how to start...

P.S. For me 18MP would be enough if the ISO get's noisefree result @25600. 8)


----------



## George D. (Nov 26, 2015)

Just because Nikon D5 is rumored with 4K doesn't mean Canon 5D4 has to jump on the bandwagon. 5D4 is a serious hi-end Stills photographer's camera. If any couple wants to shoot it's wedding like a Hollywood production please rent EOS C.


----------



## PureClassA (Nov 26, 2015)

The percentage of 5D body buyers buying for video is very small compared
To stills. Well sure, because there are frankly far better options avilabale for video at or below the same price point. I'd be curious to know what the sames figures are for the a7s and s2 and the GH4 since I would have to assume a very high if not nearly all who are buying those cameras are using them for video. And for pros, an a72 is still a very useful tool as a second or small camera fir certain shots. 

I would just like to see Canon at least get something competitively priced with the fs7 or now the fs5.


----------



## RGF (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.
> ...



I am one who does not care about 4K.


----------



## erjlphoto (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.
> ...



Count me among those who don't care about 4k video.


----------



## Etienne (Nov 26, 2015)

My 5D3 does everything I want and need for photography. If the 5D4 doesn't offer compelling video upgrade, then it will definitely be a pass for me.

1080p is quickly becoming the new SD video. 4K TV's are dropping in price like a stone. In a couple of years nobody will buy any video product that is less than 4K. It is already amazing how far expectations have changed in one year. This is accelerating.

Canon really needs to upgrade the C100 to a mark III . It didn't last a year before becoming obsolete. This is not your parents video age. The pace of change is blazing right now. Canon's "hold back the features" approach is a mistake.


----------



## mkabi (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Canon wants to make a great 4K & 8K workflow, why waste time making bad 4K cameras?
> 
> The 1D C proved people didn't want the DSLR form factor for 4K workflow, even when pricing was cut almost in half, way more people chose the 1080P C300.



I will agree on the comment that more people chose the C300 over the 1DC.
But I don't agree on the comment that "people didn't want the DSLR form factor for 4K workflow, even when pricing was cut almost in half."

And, if thats the market research that they are going by... they need to expand their focus beyond their own brand.

Watch from 4:40 to 5:20 - NAB 2015 - These guys aren't quoting DXOMark or some other biased company.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPvaLrrpFrk

Thats whats happening... is it Mirrorless or the features that Mirrorless carries???

You know what went wrong with the 1DC???
-Motion JPEG - I don't even know what that is... forget the workflow...
&
-Pricing - yes, they cut it half... but to compete with the pricing of the GH4, NX1, A7s, a7rII, a7sII - Its too late!

In my opinion, if they had the current price on the day it was released (which is still more expensive than the price of the 1DX when it was released), and allowed Magic Lantern to tweak it. They won't have this problem... People would have bought (because that was the only one of its kind on the market), Motion JPEG would be a new standard and none of us would be complaining.

Of course, I would be expecting the 1DC would have dropped half of half of its price by now too.


----------



## RGF (Nov 26, 2015)

Like to see 28-32 MP, 12-14 stops DR in the "main" version. In a low MP, high ISO version I would like 12-16 MP that gave 3-4 stops increase in ISO range (vs the higher MP version).


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> The 5D Mark II was a fluke for Canon and they admit that. However, it did tell them that filmmakers were looking at different ergonomics and design ideas and Cinema EOS system was born. All the R&D dollars for video, 4K & 8K are going into that line of products. I do think we'll see a cheaper 4K solution with an EF mount from Canon in the future, but it will be a video camera first.
> 
> Canon has also said the days of making a "do everything" camera is over and that their products were going to become more focused for the job at hand.



IMHO, if they think the driving factor for the 5D Mark II was the fact that there was video in an ergonomic package like the 5D series, they have severely misinterpreted the whole market (other than size). Much of the fervor surrounding it was the fact that you could get cinema level video (DOF, etc) from a small, comparatively inexpensive package. (Compared to current market solutions at the time). So - from there, they took that success, and made their Cinema EOS line much bigger, and much more expensive. IMO, what Canon essentially did, was start to abandon one market with the 5D and move to a related, but completely separate market of digital Cinema cameras. Don't get me wrong - I think it was a smart move to get into that market, but to confuse or confound that with the market they were/are in with the 5D series is a mistake - it's two separate animals.


----------



## Besisika (Nov 26, 2015)

George D. said:


> If any couple wants to shoot it's wedding like a Hollywood production please rent EOS C.


Dude! you made me laugh, because it is true.

At this time I see no one reason for me to upgrade my 5D3 and 1DX. 
4K is not the aspect of video that would make my work better and surely is not even within the first 10 factors I think 5D3 weakest point from a video perspective. All these weaknesses , my opinion, are better handled by the EOS C100.
For me 4K is just a "want" not "need" feature. 4 years from now - who knows? But today, no way. I simply have no time or space to handle big files with my current computer. That is a post production nightmare. Stabilization alone would drive me crazy. 
Frankly, I have been wondering how long does it take to stabilize a 4min 4K video in Davinci or Premiere? And if you shoot a wedding every two weeks, would you shoot it with a 4K entirely? I don't know, I am just wondering.
Just allow 4K through HDMI or SDI so I can record it for future use (if needed - and that is a big IF) and I am good.

Back to the 5D4, I would upgrade only if they improve at least one stop the sync speed. I am a getting older flash photographer and dragging big flashes all over the place is painful.
Other than that, I will skip. It is not worth my 3.5K My current gear can handle whatever I need.

On the other hand, people who are currently using a crop sensor would find these "little" improvement quite attractive. I wouldn't be surprised if someone would buy a 5D4 (or other camera) vs 5D3 just for the sake of 4K, even if he doesn't really know if he needs it or not and sales pitch would convince him even more.
"Professionalism" in photography doesn't belong to the connected alone like it used to be. Youtube would make sure of that. 
The market is changing as many hobbyists buy 3.5K camera just because they can afford it, and they would show off that their camera can do 4K. 
Believe me:"they are loud".

Does canon want to lose these customers? It is up to them.


----------



## Adelino (Nov 26, 2015)

I don't care about 4k. A camcorder can do a much better job than an SLR. 

An increase in dynamic range is a must, lower high ISO noise, a nice bump in MP count is expected doesn't have to be too much. The new tech like anti flicker and as some have stated Magic Lantern type improvements, the ML improvements just shows Canon wasn't trying hard enough.

Ergonomics are spot on and need little to no changes.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 26, 2015)

It must have 4K video and 15 stops of DR or the 5DIV won't sell and Canon will fail. Or at least I won't be buying one...but then, I wasn't going to anyway.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 26, 2015)

So much hand-wringing when we haven't even seen anything really interesting about what might actually be in the camera (as opposed to what might not be). I'll reserve judgment until we start seeing some actual specs.

I do find it surprising that there would be no 4K video in the 5DIV, but I have learned over the years that Craig's sources are usually pretty good once we get to CR2-CR3, so it's possible. I am guessing that if that's the case, it has nothing to do with market differentiation, but everything to do with technical limitations.

Canon doesn't release junk and if they don't feel they can do 4K justice, they won't put it in. 

For the past several years I've been saying that after several years of convergence, we are likely to see a divergence between video and stills cameras. The demands that each places on the system may be such that it is getting harder and harder to produce a really superior DSLR that does both well.

I'm going to suggest something that I'm sure will get people riled up, but I would not be at all surprised to see the 80D have 4K video. An 80D with 4K video, flip screen, improved touch screen follow focus (smoother with more options on how fast it changes focus), headphone jack, maybe even a second slot for CFast (but I doubt it) could make the 80D the enthusiast's top choice for video.

As for the 5DIV, I'm not wild about higher megapixels, but as long as we still get improved high ISO performance, I really don't care. For me, it's not about some arbitrary number. It's about squeezing just a little more quality out in low-light situations. Given the improvements I've seen in the 7DII, I am confident Canon will deliver on ISO performance. 

I'm much more interested as well in what other features we may see. What the autofocus system might be like and what the frame rate might be. After using a 7DII for a few months, when I try to shoot sports with the 5DIII, I feel like I'm shooting in slow motion.


----------



## slclick (Nov 26, 2015)

Even if it does have 4k, the frame rate will never be enough because there will always be people you can't and shouldn't try to please.

But really, I couldn't care less, I only do stills.


----------



## Etienne (Nov 26, 2015)

OPG said:


> This is a camera. Say hello camera!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Armchair amateurs with big egos become cynics. A pro uses whatever tool is best for the job.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 26, 2015)

Etienne said:


> A pro uses whatever tool is best for the job.



So true.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Nov 26, 2015)

OPG said:


> This is a camera. Say hello camera!
> [...]
> 
> This is a camera. Say hello camera!
> ...



I couldn't agree more, except I do think that expensive toy may be indeed an expensive toy but also a real camera


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 26, 2015)

OPG said:


> I'll definitely remember that the next time I need to get out of my armchair and walk into my studio! ;D



*I'll also remember that that image is from the studio of Marcelo Isarrualde. I mean really... :*


----------



## OPG (Nov 26, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> OPG said:
> 
> 
> > I'll definitely remember that the next time I need to get out of my armchair and walk into my studio! ;D
> ...



It's the thought of a well designed studio that counts! ;D
I wasn't passing the studio as my own. Tough crowd. I'll take my ironic comedy somewhere else and make sure to mark "sarcasm" next time. 
Thanks for knowing the name though. I was looking all over for it.


----------



## M ROB (Nov 26, 2015)

My thinking is that the 5D Mark IV will not have 4K because it will have 8K with full pixel readout and no pixel binning, like the Sony A7S II has in 4K. Wouldn't this make sense considering that the 5D Mark II was the groundbreaker at the time it was introduced by including HD video? Wouldn't Canon wish to have another groundbreaking camera. Just think of the possibilities....


----------



## luminaeus (Nov 26, 2015)

I have shot maybe 45 minutes of video total across all the DSLRs I've ever owned. I want the 5D Mark IV to have 4K so the Internet can shut up about it not having 4K and get back to paying attention to features that matter.


----------



## Ivar (Nov 26, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> It must have 4K video and 15 stops of DR or the 5DIV won't sell and Canon will fail. Or at least I won't be buying one...but then, I wasn't going to anyway.



Sony has got quite better with the 2nd iteration of the 7 series. Considering the shorter lifecycle of Sonys I'd at least try to future proof even if just a little. Also, for the first timers, grabbing an expensive SLR, they might be negatively surprised that even their smartphones are somewhat more capable not talking about the ease of use. The cameras in smartphones are still getting better. I'm afraid, that ever lasting conservativeness might have serious consequences (yeah I see this far they have stayed afloat, but then again there seems to be less visibility and recognition of the brand as each year passes by).


----------



## jeffa4444 (Nov 26, 2015)

In the openning remarks it was suggested we may see two cameras, one maybe video biased the other still biased its just a thought. 
When the 5D MKII was launched at Photokina on the 17th September 2008 I was at the launch event and at no time did Canon mention videographers they mentioned wedding photographers and enforcement agencies as likely purchasers, the camera was actually handicapped frame rate wise until later firmware changes. It opened pandoras box but since its launch companies like Black Magic, Sony, Panasonic have produced better low priced video cameras and we now NEVER get asked for video DSLRs. As to the whole 8K / 4K debate its really like comparing apples & oranges for instance the Sony F65 is an 8K camera downsampled to 4K and whilst NHK etc. are carrying out 8K broadcast tests practical 8K broadcast is years & years away and thats without getting into viewing distances etc. Most 4K origination is being shown as 2K or less and then there are the multiple flavours of 4K and whether they are shown as H.264 (most likely) or H.265 (more unlikely) so much of that resolution & color space is not actually being realized. 
Personally I would not use a DSLR for 4K (or 1080P) its form factor by comparison to true video cameras is compromised their are better options. 
The 5D lineup are better served giving people Resolution & DR options and possibly colorimagery options but thats a personal view and others will differ.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Nov 26, 2015)

4k may not be a dealbreaker *today*, but we're talking about a camera that *may* be announced in 2016, and if so will be expected, based on history, to sell until *2020*.


----------



## Ozarker (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.
> ...



I know I don't. If I did I would buy a Cinema camera. If I take video I use my 70D. I use the 5D MKIII for stills only.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.
> ...



Exactly. I would love to see a stills-centric version of the 5D IV and the videots having to buy video cams or Sony or GoPro or some 4k smartphones. Sick and tired of that 4k in every DSLR whining.


----------



## glness (Nov 26, 2015)

I know this is only a CR2 level rumor, but this would make no sense to me at all. The Nikon flagship workhorse FF cameras are their 800 series: 36mp, low noise, great AF, and industry-leading DR. I assume Nikon will soon have a 900 series – or whatever they call it – employing the new 42mp Sony chip. Again, it will probably become their workhorse high-end camera with low noise, impressive DR, great AF, likely with 4K video, and probably be capable of shooting about 6 fps.

Why would Canon launch a new 5D Mark IV that doesn't even match the now almost four-year-old Nikon D800? Today I own a 1D X (mostly for wildlife) and 5D III (mostly for landscape). I'd probably upgrade to the 1D X Mark II if it is 24mp with 15 fps, but there is no way I would buy a 5D Mark IV if it was only 4mp more. Canon needs a great breakthrough workhorse camera in the high 30mp range to fit between their new 1D X Mark II and their 50mp 5DS/5DS R.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Nov 26, 2015)

glness said:


> I know this is only a CR2 level rumor, but this would make no sense to me at all. The Nikon flagship workhorse FF cameras are their 800 series: 36mp, low noise, great AF, and industry-leading DR. I assume Nikon will soon have a 900 series – or whatever they call it – employing the new 42mp Sony chip. Again, it will probably become their workhorse high-end camera with low noise, impressive DR, great AF, likely with 4K video, and probably be capable of shooting about 6 fps.
> 
> Why would Canon launch a new 5D Mark IV that doesn't even match the now almost four-year-old Nikon D800? Today I own a 1D X (mostly for wildlife) and 5D III (mostly for landscape). I'd probably upgrade to the 1D X Mark II if it is 24mp with 15 fps, but there is no way I would buy a 5D Mark IV if it was only 4mp more. Canon needs a great breakthrough workhorse camera in the high 30mp range to fit between their new 1D X Mark II and their 50mp 5DS/5DS R.


I guess for those wanting Nikon D810 features or Sony 7R series features those cameras are freely on sale. I would hope Canon provides Canon features like the improved mirror box or reinforced base plate I have in the 5DS or the 50.6 MP sensor that for landscape makes it a stand-out camera. I dont care about its video abilities Im never going to use them but the cropping facility, mRaw etc. are all useful. It seems the biggest critics of Canon are Canon users and the grass is always greener on the other side. I hope Canon does improve DR in any 5D MKIII replacement but I equally hope they keep the MP count below 30MP at between 26-28MP because the pixel pitch does have a sweet spot and thats not 50MP which is more specialist.


----------



## canonic (Nov 26, 2015)

I do care about 4K video! I do care about video! I do care about DR!
But who am i or who are you for Canon?! Just nobody! 
Canon makes what Canon wants! 
Canon is big and healthy ... Canon can care about itself. 
Canon cant listen us! (is not the nsa, isnt it?! 8) )
Canon dont need us!


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Nov 26, 2015)

glness said:


> I know this is only a CR2 level rumor, but this would make no sense to me at all. The Nikon flagship workhorse FF cameras are their 800 series: 36mp, low noise, great AF, and industry-leading DR. I assume Nikon will soon have a 900 series – or whatever they call it – employing the new 42mp Sony chip. Again, it will probably become their workhorse high-end camera with low noise, impressive DR, great AF, likely with 4K video, and probably be capable of shooting about 6 fps.
> 
> Why would Canon launch a new 5D Mark IV that doesn't even match the now almost four-year-old Nikon D800? Today I own a 1D X (mostly for wildlife) and 5D III (mostly for landscape). I'd probably upgrade to the 1D X Mark II if it is 24mp with 15 fps, but there is no way I would buy a 5D Mark IV if it was only 4mp more. Canon needs a great breakthrough workhorse camera in the high 30mp range to fit between their new 1D X Mark II and their 50mp 5DS/5DS R.


5Ds is more in line with the category of where the D810 stands. The 5D3 and future 5D4 are more directly compared to the D750. The D750 was made to be the true wedding and general do-it-all camera from Nikon. If the MP count of the 5D4 goes up to 28MP and it does 8+ FPS, I don't see the D8XX series competing for the same usage unless Nikon comes out with an 8+ FPS camera. They would also have to deal with buffer clearing and buffer depth which would be hurt by using 36+ MP.


----------



## douglaurent (Nov 26, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.
> ...



Really? I bought a total of six 5D2 and 5D3, and i wouldn't have bought more than one without the video function. Never met anyone who used it because of photo only! Canon officials themselve say in the future you can't dividide photo and video anymore, because video is just a fast series of photos - which is why they are planing the 8K video breakthrough until the end of the decade. Not having 4K video in a flagship camera like the 5D4 that should last until the year 2020 is a big shame. There will be a Sony A7R3 in 2017 and a Sony A7R4 in 2019. Only a handful of hardcore fanboys can be crazy enough to buy a 5D4 with specs that are weaker on almost any level. I say that as an owner of 100+x expensive Canon products and someone who would be willing to buy any new good Canon camera and lens.


----------



## jolyonralph (Nov 26, 2015)

It's really not that difficult.

Canon's competition has 4K support in their cameras. The benefits of adding 4K to the 5D Mark IV are obvious:

a) one less 'disadvantage' in the comparative features and especially the reviews.

b) This won't be 4k for serious videographers as has been said, there will be limitations in what you can do with it (as there are for example on the A7R II). But put 4K in a camera and people will start to play with it. I certainly will. And a portion of those will go on and realise they really want a Canon camera that does 4K better and will go out and buy a 1DX II or whatever to do just that.

The chances of this eating into the serious 4K market are pretty small.


----------



## Diltiazem (Nov 27, 2015)

It will be very difficult for Canon to come up with a successor that will entice most of the current 5DIII users to upgrade. On the other hand if they bump MP, give better DR and high ISO noise and better overall performance a lot of 5DII users (there are lots of them out there) and APSC users are likely to upgrade. I don't know how important 4K is in this equation.


----------



## MrToes (Nov 27, 2015)

We just need more DR at ISO 64 (Native) and ISO 400K!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 27, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Chaitanya said:
> ...



Presumably you believe that you and the people you know are representative of 'vast majority of 5D buyers.' Because buying 6 dSLRs in the same line is so...typical.


----------



## Zv (Nov 27, 2015)

4K advocates - are you looking to use the 5DMKIV primarily for video or do you just want to have a little 4K on the side? I don't understand the reasoning behind either argument. 

If you want primarily 4K you'd be looking elsewhere. 

And those who might just wanna dabble with 4K or might use it once in a blue moon surely you could live without as clearly it isn't that important or you'd be in the former camp. 

Tell me again, why does it need to have 4K??


----------



## langdonb (Nov 27, 2015)

FWIW, I have rarely used the video feature with my 60D, 6D and 5Dlll...therefore I don't care about 4K.


----------



## dak723 (Nov 27, 2015)

Just do a search for cameras overheating with 4K and you may actually have some idea why Canon doesn't put 4K in the 5DIV. So while some argue that it wouldn't cost more with 4K, it probably would indeed as it would take a redesign to overcome the heating issue. I think most photographers would rather have a reliable camera that is problem free even without 4K rather than a camera with potential problems and failures with 4K. Of course, if you're a techno-geek that just wants to boast to your friends that you have 4K, then you wouldn't care, would you.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 27, 2015)

OPG said:


> clarksbrother said:
> 
> 
> > OPG said:
> ...



You. Are. So. Busted!

It has got nothing to do with a well designed studio! You tried to pass that off as your own studio, and that is pathetic.........


----------



## siegsAR (Nov 27, 2015)

Why does it have to be 4K? How about 2.7K? Thats an improvement over full hd and can still be res'd down to 1080.


----------



## Txema (Nov 27, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> glness said:
> 
> 
> > I know this is only a CR2 level rumor, but this would make no sense to me at all. The Nikon flagship workhorse FF cameras are their 800 series: 36mp, low noise, great AF, and industry-leading DR. I assume Nikon will soon have a 900 series – or whatever they call it – employing the new 42mp Sony chip. Again, it will probably become their workhorse high-end camera with low noise, impressive DR, great AF, likely with 4K video, and probably be capable of shooting about 6 fps.
> ...



I use my 5D mark III for stills, Real State for work and Travel & Landascape for pleasure. If de new 5D doesn't give me better DR better high ISO and at least 36 mp I'll pass on it. I will buy a 7RII for my Travel & Landscape and use the 5D mark III as backup. I'm almost sure canon will disappoint me one more time.
I just have too much glass to change ship.
I would love a 5D with the 7RII sensor on it.


----------



## gjones5252 (Nov 27, 2015)

I had a very long post typed out. My phone kindly deleted it. 
Here is a short version. 
Don't be silly. Videography has brought tons of new users and money to canon. They are now exiting to continue there video purchases. 
This camera needs 4K. It can do 4K. The 5d3 can do raw with magic lantern. 
Canon can do some amazing things with these cameras but is not walking forward confidently in a market they created. 
4K will affect you no more than 1080 in the 5d3 and it's still an amazing camera. 
To those who say camcorders do everything these cameras do and better-wrong. There is a reason this market took off. 

Full disclosure I shoot video and photo. With photography being my primary.


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> I hope Canon does improve DR in any 5D MKIII replacement but I equally hope they keep the MP count below 30MP at between 26-28MP because *the pixel pitch does have a sweet spot* and thats not 50MP which is more specialist.



Can you explain what you mean by this? Sweet spot how?


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

Ivar said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > It must have 4K video and 15 stops of DR or the 5DIV won't sell and Canon will fail. Or at least I won't be buying one...but then, I wasn't going to anyway.
> ...



Smartphones make phone calls, but the 5D4 won't. Seriously, anyone spending this much on a camera ought to have some inkling as to why expensive professional products might not have features found in everyday consumer items, or more fool them.

(And whether phone camera 4K is 'real' 4K in terms of quality is also worth considering).


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

Is nobody else more interested in frame rates than resolution? I love the creative opportunities in high speed video. More resolution is far less exciting.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 27, 2015)

I'd use video if it would autofocus, since it would be for causual use, 4K would be useless to me, I can barely edit 2K with my computer.

If a new model had 4K, that would be fine with me, but I'd not be using it. Cameras have lots of features I don't use.


----------



## DCP (Nov 27, 2015)

5D4 should be about stills first, video second. 28-30 MP, 14-15 stops DR, 7-8 FPS, faster more accurate AF, and more AF points, overall much better image quality as it should compete with D810 and A7r2 at low ISO image quality, also have time lapse modes, and lower noise at high ISO. 5D3 does good at ISO's above 1600, now needs better. Then video, 4k if it can happen, and be 24,30,60 fps at 2.7 and 4k both, and 90 fps at 1080, tilt screen. The 5D4 should be the pro all around/landscape version of the 1DX2 and be built as such, and perform as such.


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 27, 2015)

scyrene said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > I hope Canon does improve DR in any 5D MKIII replacement but I equally hope they keep the MP count below 30MP at between 26-28MP because *the pixel pitch does have a sweet spot* and thats not 50MP which is more specialist.
> ...



Other factors notwithstanding, a smaller pixel pitch (or pixel site size), the poorer low light performance you experience (i.e. more noise at higher ISOs). By reducing the total MP, you end up with larger pixels which means much better low light sensitivity, i.e. Sony A7s II.


----------



## scottkinfw (Nov 27, 2015)

I agree. A GoPro Hero 4 Black can do the trick.

I would like to see a 5DIV be more like a current 1DX in the 5D body. My 2 cents.



Sabaki said:


> Can somebody throw a poll up simply asking who has shot more than 5 hours of video on any of their DSLRs?
> 
> Speaking strictly for myself: I shoot still images. What do I want from a new model? The ability to shoot better still images with a higher rate of keepers. So give me better base ISO performance, an AF system that increases my keeper rate by a few percent.
> 
> ...


----------



## scottkinfw (Nov 27, 2015)

I think you nailed it. So sick of being slammed by fans of Sony/Nikon. I would use the 4K occasionally, but am a stills shooter. Would like better/faster focusing, and better iq primarily. 



ajfotofilmagem said:


> I see that many would NOT USE 4K in a future 5D Mark IV.But I would feel inferior people when someone says:
> 
> "My cell phone can record 4K, and your camera can not do ..." 8)
> 
> It is a kind of small dick complex.


----------



## K-amps (Nov 27, 2015)

4k or no 4k.... why can't we get clean iso 100 RAW footage from any manufacturer... not Sony or Nikon no one has clean iso 100 RAW's... heck my almost 4 year old 5d3 has less noise than these hyped newer models.


----------



## DanThePhotoMan (Nov 27, 2015)

Just my two cents, but if the 5DmkIV had 4k video I would be shocked. Canon had the chance to show innovation and ad 4k into the C100mkii, but they didn't. Canon is trying extremely hard to make sure they are differentiating their photo and video products. Their $16k cinema camera can only do 30p in 4k, and has absolutely horrid slow motion. If that is what they're marketing as a professional video camera for specs, don't expect anything remotely close in their stills camera. My business is 50/50 for photo and video, and though it hurt the wallet at first to buy separate cameras for photo and video, it made for a much better experience and I am much happier this way as well. You can't have it all in body, and unfortunately you should expect less from Canon than any other manufacturer in terms of innovation.


----------



## scottkinfw (Nov 27, 2015)

Simple.

1. bragging rights like the other "big boys" like Sony.
2. so they don't have to listen to "big boys" dis the camera fro lack of 4K even though most will use it for stills anyway.

sek



Zv said:


> 4K advocates - are you looking to use the 5DMKIV primarily for video or do you just want to have a little 4K on the side? I don't understand the reasoning behind either argument.
> 
> If you want primarily 4K you'd be looking elsewhere.
> 
> ...


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > jeffa4444 said:
> ...



But is that actually true? A lot of folks say it's the total sensor size that matters. Per pixel noise goes up with smaller pixels (as far as I've been led to believe) but the overall image doesn't suffer when viewed at the same size (i.e. *not* 100% zoom, but e.g. printed on the same size paper). The A7s series is optimised for video; judging by DPR test scenes, its high ISO performance isn't much different from other Sony cameras when normalised to the same size (see attached).


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

scottkinfw said:


> Simple.
> 
> 1. bragging rights like the other "big boys" like Sony.
> 2. so they don't have to listen to "big boys" dis the camera fro lack of 4K even though most will use it for stills anyway.



You might want to hang around with different people... you know, like grownups.


----------



## mkabi (Nov 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> It must have 4K video and 15 stops of DR or the 5DIV won't sell and Canon will fail. Or at least I won't be buying one...but then, I wasn't going to anyway.



Yeah, cause 1080p and 12 stops of DR is da sh!t... nothing will beat it... nothing! I tell you!!!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 27, 2015)

dak723 said:


> Of course, if you're a techno-geek that just wants to boast to your friends that you have 4K, then you wouldn't care, would you.



How about going out and actually doing shooting and coming across scenarios where more DR would help or shooting 4k would make things look better?

It seems that it is you who are the one insecure and can't stand when anyone mentions that your camera isn't the best at this or that even when you don't even care or get out enough in enough scenarios to ever need to care.... so you call everyone names and make up ridiculous nonsense based on the silly ways that you think about things, caring only about bragging rights and what other's think of the specs of your belongings.


----------



## Renzokuken (Nov 27, 2015)

At this point in time, not having 4k just signals that the firm is behind competition
whether you'll use 4k video or not that's another issue altogether

IF the 5D3 camera replacement does not come with 4K,

it better perform better than what's in the market, no, no ultra low megapixel good ISO bullS___
it must minimally perform better AND have as much megapixels as something like the Sony A7R2 

if it has lesser megapixels than A7R2 and yet performs worse (ISO+Dynamic Range) and not have 4K
then i really don't know what Canon is doing

already we are starting to see some loyalist of canon jumping ships
if the 5D4 suck, I think it will mark the start of the end of the Canon era

what complicates matter is that Canon has a cine line
so intentionally leaving 4K out might just be a marketing move entirely to avoid self cannibalization


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

Renzokuken said:


> already we are starting to see some loyalist of canon jumping ships
> if the 5D4 suck, I think it will mark the start of the end of the Canon era



Lol, cos we've NEVER heard that before!

Some people jump ship. Some jump back. And some people will say it sucks whatever they come out with. Everyone has a different idea of what it should improve on. So long as it's an improvement on a few core things, and still sells well to its target market (weddings, generalist pros, high end enthusiasts), it won't be the end of any era. Companies the size of this one aren't made or broken by one camera model in a lineup of a dozen.


----------



## vscd (Nov 27, 2015)

> Lol, cos we've NEVER heard that before!
> 
> Some people jump ship. Some jump back. And some people will say it sucks whatever they come out with. Everyone has a different idea of what it should improve on. So long as it's an improvement on a few core things, and still sells well to its target market (weddings, generalist pros, high end enthusiasts), it won't be the end of any era. Companies the size of this one aren't made or broken by one camera model in a lineup of a dozen.



Yes, and don't forget, DSLRs are dead anyway. Mirrorless is the future. Since years! Muahahahaa.


----------



## DigiAngel (Nov 27, 2015)

I bought a 5D MK II over the Nikon D700 because mainly of the video capability. And i never shot a video on it.

Then, beeing in the Canon Eco System, i upgraded to a 5D MK III and i never shot video on it.

I dont know if i will buy the MK4, but what i now know is, i will not care if it offers 4K video or not  ;D


----------



## gbchriste (Nov 27, 2015)

Earlier this year I added a second 5d3 body so I could switch between using the 24-70 and 70-200 without having to swap lenses. So I'm not inclined to run out and snatch up a Mark IV anyway. But to the question of video, the only time I've ever shot video on any of the 5d bodies I've owned over the last 5 years was when I once hit the video start button while fumbling around in a dark setting where I couldn't see the controls and was still fairly new to to body layout and couldn't quite operate it all by feel. Caused me to miss a crucial still shot was going for, resulting in a torrent of bad words.

So I don't give a rats a$$ about video on the 5d body line and would be most happy if they dropped it in favor of better overall capabilities in the still imaging arena. While I love my 5d3's, the one thing that might make me seriously consider jumping up to a Mark IV would be bringing back illuminated focus points. I get so sick of losing and then having to hunt to require the AF point when shooting against a dark background.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Nov 27, 2015)

scyrene said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > I hope Canon does improve DR in any 5D MKIII replacement but I equally hope they keep the MP count below 30MP at between 26-28MP because *the pixel pitch does have a sweet spot* and thats not 50MP which is more specialist.
> ...


The higher the MP in a fixed area the higher the likelyhood of camera shake which trades-off resolution. Many Sony / Nikon users with 36MP cameras complain of higher instances of soft images through camera shake. Obviously any camera not handled correctly will give camera shake but there is some evidence to suggest a balance can be struck around 26-28MP on a 36x24mm sensor. 
Since Ive had my 5DS Ive undertaken various shots & situations where Im trying to determine what is the "safest" shutter speed to focal length compared to my 6D when hand holding. Its not an exact science but generally as you would expect the longer the focal lenght the more critical this becomes. Its not just an issue in stills either because smaller pixels have an affect on panning speeds in video.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Nov 27, 2015)

Perhaps Canon could use this method of DR improvement ......

http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/noiseless-frame-summation-in-cmos.html


----------



## Hector1970 (Nov 27, 2015)

DigiAngel said:


> I bought a 5D MK II over the Nikon D700 because mainly of the video capability. And i never shot a video on it.
> 
> Then, beeing in the Canon Eco System, i upgraded to a 5D MK III and i never shot video on it.
> 
> I dont know if i will buy the MK4, but what i now know is, i will not care if it offers 4K video or not  ;D


I think the way you bought the 5D MK II is the way a good section of buyers with approach the 5D Mark IV.
4K probably isn't the first consideration but if the Nikon or Sony Equivalent has it , it can appear a lesser camera. It's other attributes might compensate but the camera's are getting very similar with not alot to distinguish between them.
I think Canon should be careful. People might wait for another camera if the 5D IV doesn't have 4K. The 5D III is still a great camera.


----------



## cpsico (Nov 27, 2015)

I would be all on board for an 18 megapixel low light camera


----------



## Tiderace (Nov 27, 2015)

Goodbye to Canon for us despite owning 5D Mark III and many lenses. soft images, focus problems, lack of 4K and 1080P soft video images with no sound on HDMI out. They have messed with us long enough. They are too calculated, too expensive, and no longer the only big boy in town, wake up Canon, the horse is out of the barn and left you behind, genuinely sorry to say, even with dual pixel focusing etc. 

Next photography camera will be the Sony A7RII and video the PWX FS5. You just got too expensive and too little to offer guys


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 27, 2015)

Renzokuken said:


> I t better perform better than what's in the market, no, no ultra low megapixel good ISO bullS___
> it must minimally perform better AND have as much megapixels as something like the Sony A7R2
> 
> if it has lesser megapixels than A7R2 and yet performs worse (ISO+Dynamic Range) and not have 4K
> then *i really don't know what Canon is doing*



What they're doing is selling more cameras than all other brands. It's evident that those who define camera performance as low ISO DR are a very small minority of people who matter to manufacturers – namely, camera buyers.


----------



## gsealy (Nov 27, 2015)

Well, no 4K in the 5DIV is too bad. I was kind of hoping for that. At the same time perhaps Canon will improve upon the 2K that they do have with 10 bit, 4:2:2, DPAF, wider DR, and so on. We have to wait and see. 

What I like about the 5DIII is that it so versatile, and that adds greatly to its value. If we are shooting video with a camcorder/cinema camera, then the 5DIII can serve as an extra camera to get specialty shots using various lenses. That adds a lot to the production. So a 5DIV with 4K would fit a nice role there. Oh well, there are numerous alternatives and more coming each month as the price points for 4K continue to go downward. I can wait because 4K is not really, really essential yet. But we ARE getting there.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Nov 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Renzokuken said:
> 
> 
> > I t better perform better than what's in the market, no, no ultra low megapixel good ISO bullS___
> ...


They are selling more cameras and more lenses than the competition. However it is fair to say a lot of Canon users that frequent this site (and therefor show interest in the brand) are not entirely statisfied with the company development & progress in certain areas one of which is DR. I for one can live with the present DR but I wont deny that I would like at least two more stops and think it would make a big difference particularly dealing with noise in enlargements.


----------



## photo212 (Nov 27, 2015)

Let's applaud Canon for striking the 4K video nonsense from a still camera. It keeps the price down for the rest of us, and that is a great thing! For those wanting a video camera, here's my suggestion: Buy a video camera. 

As far as more megapickles, dill or kosher, I'm full of pickles. I do not need more. I do not really want more. Fills memory cards faster. Takes longer to download/upload. Means my late-2010 desktop is getting poised for a forced upgrade.

Better quality sensors, not quantity. 18MP will do fine. 22MP great, maybe even 24MP, but then the curve turns downhill for me. I'm paying for things I do not need. Just as the 50MP 5Ds revealed, many Canon lenses are not up to the task of resolving the light that tightly. More costs in getting the latest and greatest Version II or III. I will gladly pay for less noise and more dynamic range. That is the quality I seek.

I realize others have differing opinions for their personal wants and needs. The cost of one size fits all is too high.


----------



## PurMar (Nov 27, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > So even in 2016 stupid arse Canon will not add 4k support to their camera that might be priced north of 2500$.
> ...



I disagree here. When I got 5dm2 I did not expect to shoot a lot of video, but eventually I used it many times to shoot video for one or other company. It may represent only 5% of my activity, but it is still worth of $1000s each year. Should I buy a dedicated camera for that? Not worth it? 

If the trend continue, I may switch my backup to Sony as that seams to be the camera that can handle most of what you throw at it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 27, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> However it is fair to say a lot of Canon users that frequent this site (and therefor show interest in the brand) are not entirely statisfied with the company development & progress in certain areas one of which is DR.



Yes, some of the few thousand active members here are not satisfied. What fraction of Canon's user base do you suppose that represents? 

Do you suppose it's also fair to say that a lot of Nikon and Sony users are not entirely satisfied with their brand?


----------



## Antono Refa (Nov 27, 2015)

If the Canon 5DmkIV has 4K, people will boo hoo that they will defect to Nikon if the 5DmkV doesn't have auto focus in video, then they'll want all zoom lenses to be upgraded to be parfocal, and always more pixels, and within a decade they'll expect the 5D to take medium format SLR level stills and pro cinema 8K video, or they'll defect right then and there.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 27, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Renzokuken said:
> ...



Wow, you're so right. It's amazing that Canon manages to sell any dSLRs at all! How _do_ they manage to even stay in business, let alone remaining the market leader for over a decade??


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

dilbert said:


> DigiAngel said:
> 
> 
> > I bought a 5D MK II over the Nikon D700 because mainly of the video capability. And i never shot a video on it.
> ...



It's certainly the case that as light levels fall very low, video can step in where stills fail - if you have a tripod. I staked out an owl roost box once; stills I'd have to have kept the shutter speed up at 1/250+, but in video can go down to 1/30, and the reduced resolution hides a lot of noise too (the owl never emerged, but it was a salutary lesson).


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

cpsico said:


> I would be all on board for an 18 megapixel low light camera



That would be the 1Dx ;P


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > jeffa4444 said:
> ...



By all accounts camera shake is more apparent at 100% the higher the number of megapixels (or, I guess, more accurately the finer the pixels), but once again normalised it's the same regardless (i.e. printed on A4 shake would be no more visible in a 6MP vs 24MP vs 50MP camera, everything else being equal). What I'm getting at is, given all these things are gradual - a sliding scale, with per-pixel noise and visible shake increasing with more MP (rather than there being any sudden change or cutoff at any point), how can there be *a* 'sweet spot'? Surely each of us might draw a line in a different place?


----------



## scyrene (Nov 27, 2015)

photo212 said:


> Let's applaud Canon for striking the 4K video nonsense from a still camera. It keeps the price down for the rest of us, and that is a great thing! For those wanting a video camera, here's my suggestion: Buy a video camera.
> 
> As far as more megapickles, dill or kosher, I'm full of pickles. I do not need more. I do not really want more. Fills memory cards faster. Takes longer to download/upload. Means my late-2010 desktop is getting poised for a forced upgrade.
> 
> ...



I think a 2010 PC is going to start creaking in the near future anyway... 

But you could always shoot Mraw/Sraw on a higher res sensor, if you're concerned about memory and bandwidth?


----------



## George D. (Nov 27, 2015)

In any case for movie mode people the 5D4 upgrade will definitely be Full HD 1080p at 60fps (from 30fps), Sans-voir. Anything higher than 60 fps not to speak of 4K is spec for shooting the soccer World Cup. That's definitely not the 5D4 arena. Looking good for Canon.

Now CR bring in the stills specs please. ISO and the rest.


----------



## Ozarker (Nov 27, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> OPG said:
> 
> 
> > clarksbrother said:
> ...



Wow.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 27, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> So why do you want the 5D4 to be like 24MP FF at 8fps...a 5D3 with tweaked AF and 2 more fps...



Actually, that doesn't sound half bad to me. 

Give me the sensor performance that is obvious in the 7D II (higher ISO performance with better and more natural looking grain, rather than the old electronic noise) with slightly better high ISO performance. 

Add in the 7DII autofocus and the flippy lever for picking autofocus points. Maybe add a touch screen and bring it into the 21st century in terms of connectivity and I'll be very pleased. I'm not interested in some tech geek bragging rights. I want an even better all-around camera that helps me pay the bills.


----------



## Etienne (Nov 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Renzokuken said:
> 
> 
> > I t better perform better than what's in the market, no, no ultra low megapixel good ISO bullS___
> ...



We can argue about when, or IF, Canon's business will suffer, but there's no denying the fact that Sony is starting to offer compelling, innovative cameras that push the limits more than Canon's, and in some cases make Canon's look obsolete as soon as they hit the shelves ... like the Sony FS5 vs C100, and the EOS-M vs A6000, or the A7x series vs [Canon has nothing here], and the Canon Xf200 and XA30 vs Sony PXW-X70

As a Canon fan, I want this to change. But I've already bought the Sony PXW-X70 (when I was considering the XF200), and next year it will be the FS5 instead of the C100, and possibly an A7s II.

Loads of professionals are singing the praises of these Sony Cameras for good reason. And load of pros who used to love the 5DII and 5DIII for both video and photography are leaving for Sony and others. Canon appears to be unable to meet the grade in these categories. Personally I love my 5DIII for photography and would not trade it for any of the current Sony or Nikon cameras if photography was my only concern. But it's not. I travel as light as possible, and I need to get as much out of each piece of gear that I can, which means a DSLR has to be able to act as a second or third video camera as well as a stills camera. The 5D4 has to be just as good at video as it is at stills to hold any interest to me. And the C100 mk III (whenever that arrives) has to match the FS5 to even be considered.


----------



## OPG (Nov 27, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > OPG said:
> ...



Let's add to the long list of condemning. Unbelievable the way that the quote tree structure works. This post was made in reply to a previous comment as a sarcastic example. This is a public opinion forum. Nothing was solicited, passed as something else with a different name, no names were mentioned from both ends, no copyright infringement for personal gain, image wasn't downloaded from a source website, and nothing was doctored, edited, or forged. The image was posted on another forum as an example about light configuration studio set-ups with no mention of copyright to any photographer or where the original source was. The original post was made to be an example of something elaborate with ironic comedy. I mentioned this before, but with quote block witch-hunting, it will go on and on as something else. Even going back and changing the original post doesn't help. Apologizing doesn't make a difference either when people only adopt the "never forgive, and never forget" consequence. 

Moving on.


----------



## kevl (Nov 27, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Of my friends that shoot video for a living, not a single one of them uses a DSLR anymore, they've all moved on to Sony video stuff or Cinema EOS. Obviously this isn't a large sample size, but even talking to friends in the rental business, the growth has been in video gear and they don't see anywhere near as many DSLRs going out for video productions.



The reason your friends have switched to Sony for video is the same reason most people switched to the Canon 5D II for video when it came on the scene. 

It isn't because "5D buyers' suddenly wanted to shoot video, it is because it was the best product. Very few people use a 5D to shoot video now because it is at least a couple of generations behind in technology now. From DN, to noise, to resolution, to codec... it is the wrong choice for video. No 5D buyer is buying the 5D for video now, not because they don't want to do video but because it can't do video well in the current market. We still need to have a 5D (or similar body) because we do stills, only now we need a $3400CAD camera for stills and a $1,000 camera for video. 

The ONLY reason not to put 4K in the 5D IV is to increase the perceived value of the 1Dx II and other 4K capable future products in the minds of a very small minority of people who don't have 4K in every other camera in their house next year. I can't imagine very many people buying the 1Dx II for video... it will be an added capability, and that's exactly what should be on the 5D IV as well. 

I don't do video. I don't intend on doing video. However, it would be really nice if I could do it with my next camera should I need to do video. It isn't that the 5D IV needs to have 4K, it is that it is almost rude of Canon not to put it in. 

That being said, I'm glad to hear that it will have more than 24MP. I'm still hoping for 28MP.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 27, 2015)

OPG said:


> clarksbrother said:
> 
> 
> > OPG said:
> ...



In fact, the original post was a clear and manifest implication that the image was of _your_ studio. As for apologizing not making a difference, well...I notice that you didn't even make the attempt. 

Pathetic.


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Nov 27, 2015)

I'd like to see a full frame version of the 7D mark ii. 22-28mp, better iso performance, ~10fps, focus points that cover more of the frame (either by spacing them out more or adding more).

As for video, I'm on the fence. 4K would be nice, but it won't be a deal breaker for me. I'd rather buy or rent a cinema EOS for heavy video work. It was a shame the c100 mark ii didn't have 4K. 

For my next camera, I'm really considering buying a 1DX mark ii for the high speed full frame sensor, but if the 5D mark iv can do around 10fps, I'd much rather buy two of those than just one 1DX mark ii.


----------



## OPG (Nov 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> OPG said:
> 
> 
> > clarksbrother said:
> ...



Give it a rest will you. 
That's the problem with forums, even if you try to correct something,
the following banter will still arise: 

Me: I'm sorry. 
You: You only said "I'm sorry" because you got caught. Pathetic.

Entrapment after entrapment.


----------



## Etienne (Nov 27, 2015)

Here's why the 5D4 has to have 4K video, at least for me:

I have to travel as light as possible, and cover both video and photography, so a lot of gear is required. I'd really like a combo of a 5D4, C100 III, and a XF200. But they all have to match up to 4K video, and at least one of them has to offer high frame rate for slomo. It would be sooo much nicer to have all of this provided in the Canon environment to match the majority of my lenses, and also because I love Canon color and Canon's ergonomics.

But Sony is offering the FS5 now. And Sony appears to be going gang busters to give bang-for-your-buck in video.

Down deep, I am rooting for Canon to blow me away. But Sony is winning.


----------



## Solar Eagle (Nov 27, 2015)

scyrene said:


> But is that actually true? A lot of folks say it's the total sensor size that matters. Per pixel noise goes up with smaller pixels (as far as I've been led to believe) but the overall image doesn't suffer when viewed at the same size (i.e. *not* 100% zoom, but e.g. printed on the same size paper). The A7s series is optimised for video; judging by DPR test scenes, its high ISO performance isn't much different from other Sony cameras when normalised to the same size (see attached).



Go look at the shadow area's of this normalized test scene and you will see the difference. 

High ISO Compared: Sony A7S vs. A7R vs. Canon EOS 5D III

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4613822764/high-iso-compared-sony-a7s-vs-a7r-vs-canon-eos-5d-iii


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 27, 2015)

OPG said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > OPG said:
> ...



The problem with forums...people who lie, then when called on it refuse to apologize, then lie again claiming they did. 

Try this: admit your mistake, apologize, _then_ move on. Seems a few important life lessons have passed you by so far.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 28, 2015)

OPG said:


> Entrapment after entrapment.



Er, not even close. Entrapment is when somebody is induced to fulfill an action that they were otherwise unlikely to have done. 

I see nothing to suggest you were encouraged, induced, goaded, or subverted in any way. It is a straightforward case of plagiarism, and that is something any creative individual should be acutely aware of and sensitive to.

Forums are forums, some are good and some are bad. CR on the whole a pretty good one and I, as creative individual, would be immensely disappointing if this kind of thing was accepted or became a norm, which was why I added my voice to clarksbrother's comment after he first pointed your plagiarism out.


----------



## scyrene (Nov 28, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > But is that actually true? A lot of folks say it's the total sensor size that matters. Per pixel noise goes up with smaller pixels (as far as I've been led to believe) but the overall image doesn't suffer when viewed at the same size (i.e. *not* 100% zoom, but e.g. printed on the same size paper). The A7s series is optimised for video; judging by DPR test scenes, its high ISO performance isn't much different from other Sony cameras when normalised to the same size (see attached).
> ...



There's definitely less colour noise in the A7s in that comparison. But is that due to the number/size of pixels?


----------



## OPG (Nov 28, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> OPG said:
> 
> 
> > Entrapment after entrapment.
> ...


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 28, 2015)

OPG said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > OPG said:
> ...



I was just making a rational comment about the conduct of people on a place I frequent. There is a vast range of skill sets here, not just photographically speaking, and to put up with falsehoods and plagiarism is not something I want to do.

When caught you act like some persecuted innocent, when that doesn't wash you come back with _"Entrapment, entrapment"_ and then stuff like this. Pathetic.......


----------



## Solar Eagle (Nov 28, 2015)

scyrene said:


> There's definitely less colour noise in the A7s in that comparison. But is that due to the number/size of pixels?



The whole point in making a 12MP full frame sensor with such large pixels is for low light sensitivity. I know you mentioned the video performance of the A7s but here's another line from Sony's marketing material on it: _Explore new frontiers of imaging expression with the α7S, combining phenomenal sensitivity (up to ISO 409600 with ultra low noise. That means a lack of light no longer limits your artistic range._


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 28, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> OPG said:
> 
> 
> > Entrapment after entrapment.
> ...


Entrapment is when you exit your canoe in a rapid and get entangled in something under the water


----------



## Solar Eagle (Nov 28, 2015)

OPG said:


>



Continuing to respond/defend yourself is just drawing more attention to the situation. You better just quietly delete your account and make a new one. ;D


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Nov 28, 2015)

Solar Eagle said:


> OPG said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



He could do that, or we could forgive him for making a mistake before the thread gets shut down.

Come on guys. It's the holiday season.


----------



## OPG (Nov 28, 2015)

Mitch.Conner said:


> Solar Eagle said:
> 
> 
> > Continuing to respond/defend yourself is just drawing more attention to the situation. You better just quietly delete your account and make a new one. ;D
> ...



Thank you! I apologize. I took down the photo, I deleted the post. It won't happen again.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 28, 2015)

OPG said:


> Mitch.Conner said:
> 
> 
> > Solar Eagle said:
> ...



Welcome to CR OPG


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 28, 2015)

OPG said:


> Thank you! I apologize. I took down the photo, I deleted the post. It won't happen again.



Appreciated, forgiven, forgotten. 

Welcome!


----------



## photo212 (Nov 28, 2015)

scyrene said:


> photo212 said:
> 
> 
> > Let's applaud Canon for striking the 4K video nonsense from a still camera. It keeps the price down for the rest of us, and that is a great thing! For those wanting a video camera, here's my suggestion: Buy a video camera.
> ...


Never said a 2010 PC.
Six-core Mac Pro Tower

mRAW would be significantly less than existing sensors - generally about half the native megapixels. Again, paying for more than necessary. I'm sure someone out there thinks the 5Ds is not enough at 50MP and wants 80MP or 100MP. Great for them, but I really do feel going beyond 24MP is overkill for what many people need.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Nov 28, 2015)

photo212 said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > photo212 said:
> ...


According to Canon mRaw is 28MP so its more than half the native 50.6MP. As an owner of the 5DS the main reason I bought it was for landscape and the ability to crop shots in Lightroom and preserve detail & sharpness beyond what I could get from my 6D and in this respect the camera acheives that. Ive been very impressed with just how well the detail in written words, numbers, edges of leaves, fine branches etc. can be enlarged. I print a lot of photos to A3 and comparing these to former shots from the 6D which in themselves are still very good the finer detail is certainly better.


----------



## pedro (Nov 28, 2015)

photo212 said:


> mRAW would be significantly less than existing sensors - generally about half the native megapixels. Again, paying for more than necessary. I'm sure someone out there thinks the 5Ds is not enough at 50MP and wants 80MP or 100MP. Great for them, but I really do feel going beyond 24MP is overkill for what many people need.



*24 MP would be way enough for me as well!* Could someone here on this forum please explain to me, why Canon do not pass down their new 24 MP sensor to the rumored 5DIV as well? Aren't there enough other features who differentiate the 1Dx from a 5D anyway? Speed, built quality, etc?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Nov 28, 2015)

For me, 28MP is fine, but yes I'd love to have some of the color from the 5ds sensor move to the mk4. I have zero need for video, so 4k really means nothing for me. I'm fine with the current frame rate as I almost never move it to high speed burst anyways, I'm generally on silent shutter. 

I'd like more DR, more high ISO quality, more cross type AF points, built in intervalometer/bulb timer, and that would pretty much cover it for me!


----------



## pedro (Nov 28, 2015)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> For me, 28MP is fine, but yes I'd love to have some of the color from the 5ds sensor move to the mk4. I have zero need for video, so 4k really means nothing for me. I'm fine with the current frame rate as I almost never move it to high speed burst anyways, I'm generally on silent shutter.
> 
> I'd like more DR, more high ISO quality, more cross type AF points, built in intervalometer/bulb timer, and that would pretty much cover it for me!



Someone earlier in the thread said, that at 28 MP high ISO IQ would start getting worse... Then IMHO Canon should at least equip the 5DIV with a sensor based on the new tech mentioned in reference to the 1DX2...


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Nov 28, 2015)

pedro said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > For me, 28MP is fine, but yes I'd love to have some of the color from the 5ds sensor move to the mk4. I have zero need for video, so 4k really means nothing for me. I'm fine with the current frame rate as I almost never move it to high speed burst anyways, I'm generally on silent shutter.
> ...



note, I'm not talking huge ISO gains, just a little bit better which they should be able to do with new sensor tech (I've been renting the 5ds and 5dsr and if at 50 MP's I can get as clean shots at higher iso's I'm pretty sure at 28 MP's you should be able to get a bit more than what you get with the 5d3).


----------



## pedro (Nov 28, 2015)

Thank you, Chuck. Still a bit wondering, why the 5DIV doesn't get the 24 MP sensor as well... For my super lowlight escapades I guess I'll go the Sony a7sII route anytime prices get lower. After reading Steve Huff's report about testing the Sony A7SII in extreme light, this seems to be a viable alternate route. http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/10/26/shooting-at-iso-409600-with-the-sony-a7sii/

A 6D/6DII surely could do a great allrounder job then, although we are talking different systems here...


----------



## sanj (Nov 28, 2015)

OPG said:


> Mitch.Conner said:
> 
> 
> > Solar Eagle said:
> ...



Bravo. Looking forward to further discussions with you.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 28, 2015)

photo212 said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > photo212 said:
> ...



A 2010 Mac Pro is easily capable of working with massive amounts of 5DS files, it is a complete non issue.

If you are getting any delay in working then I'd look towards a preferences issue in your editing program and HD allocation. It takes a lot of tinkering to optimise LR and PS to work at their best for any individual work style, but it is time very well spent.


----------



## drjlo (Nov 28, 2015)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> I'm pretty sure at 28 MP's you should be able to get a bit more than what you get with the 5d3).



As I hold my almost 4-year-old 5D3, I sure hope we can expect more from Canon than "a bit more" from 5D4!!


----------



## Takingshots (Nov 29, 2015)

Small window of opportunity for CAnon to catch up. If they launch something that is mediocre, fail to grab the accolade from peers and professionals, they could have people thinking too long to wait for another development. 
Form factor is critical to consider with ageing population who has the money to travel and spend of a camera that is small all purpose camera. What is out there(SonyA7rii/A7sii) they will want to compare this new Canon to see if it up to specs or better ! Again if you snooze you will lose it. I am holding off to buy the Sony A7rii to see if better price in 2016 and at the same time I will wait for Canon to announce their new development. I can wait until the end of next year... Might jump in if the price of Sony is right and any hiccup in the field(early consumers who bgt it) will finalize my decision....


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 29, 2015)

Takingshots said:


> Small window of opportunity for CAnon to catch up.



Get real, the 5D mkIII is probably one of the, if not the, best selling FF DSLR ever. How is that playing catch up?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Takingshots said:
> 
> 
> > Small window of opportunity for CAnon to catch up.
> ...



Because Sony has more low ISO DR. DRrrrrrrrrr.


----------



## scyrene (Nov 29, 2015)

Takingshots said:


> Form factor is critical to consider with ageing population who has the money to travel and spend of a camera that is small all purpose camera.



While this may be true in general, the 5D series is not a small all-purpose camera for newbies. It's a general-purpose full frame DSLR for professionals and monied enthusiasts. Seniors wanting a small, light camera for travel have no shortage of options; the 5D is not one, and never will be.


----------



## clarksbrother (Nov 29, 2015)

Etienne said:


> Here's why the 5D4 has to have 4K video, at least for me:
> 
> I have to travel as light as possible, and cover both video and photography, so a lot of gear is required. I'd really like a combo of a 5D4, C100 III, and a XF200. But they all have to match up to 4K video, and at least one of them has to offer high frame rate for slomo. It would be sooo much nicer to have all of this provided in the Canon environment to match the majority of my lenses, and also because I love Canon color and Canon's ergonomics.
> 
> ...



+1 on pretty much everything you said (speaking for myself anyways). It felt like blasphemy when I started using it, but I'd highly recommend checking out the Panasonic GH4. You can get up to 96fps 1080p with high bitrate encoding, and 4K in 24 or 30p. ALL of which available with V-Log color encoding so you can do some nice color grading later. It is M4/3 so if you're expecting the same level of sensitivity light wise, don't. It's a compromise. BUT, with a metabones speedbooster, it is a workable if not perfect all-in-one solution.


----------



## nehemiah (Nov 29, 2015)

I estimate that I've shot about 12 minutes of video on my 5D3, and I bought it right at release paying $3499.

Of the 12 minutes, all of it were accidental video because accidentally the toggle switch went left to the video option while I was unaware. To me, having video is not jut neutral -- it is a negative because of things like this wasting battery, wondering why the still camera function is behaving in a weird manner, etc. That would be just multiplied by also having a 4K option.

I would have paid $3599 for a 5D3 version that had no option for video.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Takingshots said:
> 
> 
> > Small window of opportunity for CAnon to catch up.
> ...



5D III was the only "universally useful and still affordable" Canon DSLR. (6D too crippled, 1D-X too big and expensive), Nikon DSLRs clearly better (D800, D810 and D750), but system switch is a huge move for anybody with (lots of) EF glass (and Nikon is clearly inferior in lenses) and/or more than 1 camera body. Sony A7 first gen was an "untested system with few lenses and obvious teething problems". That has changed with Mk. II generation of Sony A7 series. Also, more 4k alternatives for video-leaning users became available. And Fuji made good progress with their much smaller&lighter X-MILC system.

Ever since, Canon has been and is loosing customers, including many valuable enthusiasts and semi-pro 5D1, 2 and 3 users who also bought a good deal of all EF L glass ever sold and speedlites (first 580's then a new full set of 600's).

A lot of these have either added a Sony or are in the process of switching - still holding on to their EF lenses, as adapting got better and better. Others who wanted smaller/lighter gear (including aging, health issues, but affluent segment) have "downsized" and gone to Fuji, others did not yet, because they still prefer FF over APS-C.

A lot of people on the fence right now. Willing to give Canon one more chance to finally catch up to best in class in 5D category: universal, highly capable, reliable FF camera system, not too big, not excessively expensive). Another minor ho-hum facelift like the one from 5D2 to 5D 3 will not be enough for Canon now to keep these clients. There are more alternatives this time round. Sony is for real.


----------



## tcmatthews (Nov 29, 2015)

How many people who originally bought a 5D II for video have already gone to Sony or Panasonic GH4? I don't know but I would assume all those that could not afford to buy Canon's cinema line. I think that not including 4K video on the 5D Mark IV would be a mistake from a marketing point of view. Over the approximate 3-4 year period it will be sold 4k will most likely be added to all cameras. Not that many in the market to buy a 5DIV will ever use it for video. 

The only exception is if they go to higher MP high speed with the 5D IV and at the same time release a low light lower MP video oriented 6D II that would shut up the haters. 

But what do I know. My Sony 7II is now my primary camera. The firmware update if fantastic, and there is no real reason not use my Canon lenses on it. But I am not a pro.


----------



## pedro (Nov 29, 2015)

nehemiah said:


> I estimate that I've shot about 12 minutes of video on my 5D3, and I bought it right at release paying $3499.
> 
> Of the 12 minutes, all of it *were accidental video because accidentally the toggle switch went left to the video option while I was unaware. * To me, having video is not jut neutral -- it is a negative because of things like this wasting battery, wondering why the still camera function is behaving in a weird manner, etc. That would be just multiplied by also having a 4K option.
> 
> I would have paid $3599 for a 5D3 version that had no option for video.



*same here, although I had less then two minutes on my 5D3 who got stolen in an assault this summer...insurance covered it completely. ;-) good one! *


----------



## NorBro (Nov 29, 2015)

If it wasn't for the video capability, these cameras would not be as popular as they are today. Independent filmmakers and videographers accidentally discovering the power of the 5D Mark II gave it new life.

Yes, you do need video. And yes, it needs to be 4K.

I would pay for a model that strictly has video features and no stills. Of course I would like to have stills, but Canon truly needs a great successor to the 1DC.

There are people who are just as passionate about video as many of you are about your stills.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 29, 2015)

NorBro said:


> If it wasn't for the video capability, these cameras would not be as popular as they are today. Independent filmmakers and videographers accidentally discovering the power of the 5D Mark II gave it new life.
> 
> Yes, you do need video. And yes, it needs to be 4K.
> 
> ...



That's why I and many other Canon (stills) users around th world would like to see 2 models (like 1D-X vs. 1Dc) for the 5D line: 
* 5D IV ... focused on stills, no video capture, no video out, no microphones, no earphone jack, no video menus, no "Record Video" switch or button - but with LiveView. 
* 5Dv ... video-focused model (similar to 1Dc or like Sony A7S I) with all 4k bells and whistles on it 

That way, it would also become very evident, how little interest there really is for video-DLSRs ... when you have to pay for it, rather than getting (4k) video as a freebie on the back of stils users.


----------



## pedro (Nov 29, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> NorBro said:
> 
> 
> > If it wasn't for the video capability, these cameras would not be as popular as they are today. Independent filmmakers and videographers accidentally discovering the power of the 5D Mark II gave it new life.
> ...



Would like to see an a7s -ish Canon as well...


----------



## Takingshots (Nov 29, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Takingshots said:
> ...



Well said.


----------



## Alastair Norcross (Nov 29, 2015)

Anyone who thinks the upgrade from 5DII to 5DIII was "minor" or "ho hum" clearly either never used both cameras, or wasn't paying attention. The only thing that was a minor change was the MP count.


----------



## crashpc (Nov 29, 2015)

Alastair Norcross said:


> Anyone who thinks the upgrade from 5DII to 5DIII was "minor" or "ho hum" clearly either never used both cameras, or wasn't paying attention. The only thing that was a minor change was the MP count.


Not really. In grand scheme, for certain users, it´s not enaugh of an upgrade.
It seems that I´m going for 5D II instead of new crop camera, and not 5D III. If it was so much better for my use, I would buy 5D III. Doesn´t happen. Not great enaugh upgrade...


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 29, 2015)

crashpc said:


> Alastair Norcross said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone who thinks the upgrade from 5DII to 5DIII was "minor" or "ho hum" clearly either never used both cameras, or wasn't paying attention. The only thing that was a minor change was the MP count.
> ...



If you're going for a 5DII instead of a 5DIII there is only one reason in the real world - cost.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 29, 2015)

Alastair Norcross said:


> Anyone who thinks the upgrade from 5DII to 5DIII was "minor" or "ho hum" clearly either never used both cameras, or wasn't paying attention. The only thing that was a minor change was the MP count.



5D3 is essentially the 5D2 with an AF system that should already have been in the Mk. II. IQ and sensor hardly any difference. 

Btw: yes, I currently own and use a 5D III. Did not own a 5D2 but shot with it occassionally.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 29, 2015)

Alastair Norcross said:


> Anyone who thinks the upgrade from 5DII to 5DIII was "minor" or "ho hum" clearly either never used both cameras, or wasn't paying attention. The only thing that was a minor change was the MP count.



Exactly! 

Before the 5DIII came out, there were many self-appointed "experts" on this forum who confidently predicted that Canon would "cripple" the autofocus of the 5DIII. When that didn't happen they had to find something else to whine about. In the meantime, actual photographers started buying and using the camera and loved it. Many of us still do. I don't want revolutionary change. I want incremental improvement to a great all around tool that helps me pay the bills.



AvTvM said:


> ...Canon has been and is loosing customers, including many valuable enthusiasts and semi-pro 5D1, 2 and 3 users who also bought a good deal of all EF L glass ever sold and speedlites (first 580's then a new full set of 600's).



I'd love to know where you get your statistics. 

If you are looking at the CIPA numbers and extrapolating from those that somehow Canon is losing customers, that's not what the statistics show. It's one thing to be critical of Canon. Everyone has the right to criticize. But when people just make up their own facts they lose all credibility. 

You have specific desires that you want Canon to meet. If they don't meet them, they may lose you as a customer. Fair statement of fact.

But, I don't share your desires. I want a reasonable upgrade that reflects the not-insignificant improvements made in the 7DII and 5Ds, plus a few other things that I'm hoping for (usable wifi and touchscreen would be a bonus). 

In the end, Canon has to look at their market research and decide how to meet the desires of the majority of their customers and potential customers. 

To infer some sort of "failure" or "loss" from those very rational business decisions is just delusional and belongs in the realm of conspiracy theorists.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 29, 2015)

crashpc said:


> Alastair Norcross said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone who thinks the upgrade from 5DII to 5DIII was "minor" or "ho hum" clearly either never used both cameras, or wasn't paying attention. The only thing that was a minor change was the MP count.
> ...



Bullshit. The AF on the MkIII is worth the upgrade between the MkII ad MkIII, if you come back with _'I don't need AF'_ then the 6D is much better than the 5D MkII.

There are no quantum jumps in IQ, AF, DR etc etc coming, there is slow and steady improvement in all aspects of camera functionality, I am not saying that every iteration of every model suits every buyer, especially when you factor in cost. But to say the 5D MkII is more suitable than a 5D MkIII or 6D for anybody that isn't solely basing their purchase decision on cost is farcical, or you simply haven't used them all and compared the RAW files.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Nov 29, 2015)

I'm another who hardly ever uses video, used it once this year for some interview stuff, I don't care for groundbreaking advances, just a little better will do, as long as the camera feels the same and I don't have to relearn menus or buttons then that's great, by all means add features, built in RT for speedlights would be nice, better AF and low light and if you wish more MP, be nice too if it uses same batteries as old Mk3, otherwise, bring it on, I will buy if looks good, or I may jump in on a 1DX to go with my Mk3 then wait a while for price drop, bugs, and firmware to settle on the Mk4.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 29, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> 5D3 is essentially the 5D2 with an AF system that should already have been in the Mk. II. IQ and sensor hardly any difference.



The 5DII had a good sensor and IQ. The 5DIII improved EVERYTHING ELSE, expect that which didn't need fixing.


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > Alastair Norcross said:
> ...


+1
The 5D2 to 5D3 was a whole lot of little improvements. Looked at individually, nothing changed dramatically, but the sum package was a much nicer camera. I would expect this to happen again with the 5D4....


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 29, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > 5D3 is essentially the 5D2 with an AF system that should already have been in the Mk. II. IQ and sensor hardly any difference.
> ...



Yeah right. 5D2 had a slightly subpar sensor when it came out and a really poor AF system but it offered FF sensor and shallow DoF Full HD (1080p) on the cheap. Video folks loved it, stills folks had to put up with it.
5D3 had a reasonable but not great AF system, really poor sensor compared to best in class when it came out. And subpar video capabilities. Incremental iteration it was ... 
Video folks have largely moved on already, stills shooters have mostly been holding still (hehe) ... but many have left Canon and many more will if there's yet another incremental upgrade with the Mk. IV (which i fully expect, knowing Canon quite well after many years of follwing the industry closely). Cipa statistics are not detailed in any way, nor does Canon publish unit sales (other than umpteen million EOS sold) - but the picture is fairly clear and the writing is on the wall. Mene mene tekel peres. 

To me 5D IV does not matter. Mk. III will be my last mirrorslapper ever. Next up will be FF sans mirror for me.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 30, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



In other words, you are completely clueless. Completely. The 5D3 has the SAME AF system as the 1Dx. But you're right, it's ok, but not great. I don't even know what to say to you.


----------



## scyrene (Nov 30, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> To me 5D IV does not matter. Mk. III will be my last mirrorslapper ever. Next up will be FF sans mirror for me.



WE KNOW. You've made your position on cameras with mirrors repeatedly. Ad nauseam in fact. You announce this as if it's a surprise.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 30, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



+1

I think it's one too many mirror-slaps to the head.


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 30, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> crashpc said:
> 
> 
> > Alastair Norcross said:
> ...



I had to make the decision between getting a 5D, or paying twice as much for a 5D2. I went with the 5D2 and regretted it.

I had to suffer with 21 megapixels, instead of 12.....
I had to suffer with ISO 25,600, instead of 3200....
the rear monitor was only 4 times the resolution.....

oh the humanity!!!!!

and then the 5D3 came out... (did not get it as I was happy with 5D2)
obviously a step backwards.....
megapixels downgraded from 21.1 to 22.1
ISO downgraded from 25,600 to 102,400
AF points downgraded from 9 to 61
FPS downgraded from 3.9 to 6
storage downgraded from single slot to dual slots
rear screen downgraded from 900Kpixels to 1040Kpixels

I wonder how much they will downgrade the 5D4....


----------



## Go Wild (Nov 30, 2015)

Hello to everyone. I´m not trying to make a point in this reply, but just give you my humild opinion. I own a 5D markIII and i use it a lot, and i mean...a lot! I´m a professional photographer, mostly wildlife photographer, but i also have to do some marriage services, product photography and comercial (mostly for websites, not big prints). Well, like we use to say...Europe is in crysis and we just need to make what money want´s you to make. This is just important to tell you that I trully need a super versatile camera, although, i have a Canon 7D markII for 70% of the wildlife work, but when light come down, 5D is the answer. 

And what a superb peace of machine the MkIII is...!! Very often i push her to the limits and never, ever makes me feel bad , or failed. Ever. So when i read someone say that is going to leave DSLR and 5D markIII for a mirrorless....I just think it is foolish...you´re about to switch from a camera that is remarcable confort in hands, to a camera that feels weird in the hands (Sony mirorless). You switch from a camera that gives you about 800 shots/900 in batery life, for a camera that gives you about 200 shots! Really?? Do you imagine taking pictures in a wedding with this? I sooht easily about 1500 shots in a wedding. Thats what? 7 batterys? Reaally? No..not for me! You switch from a camera tha have a remarcable AF sistem for one camera that have a poor af sistem? Then if you gor for the new A7R II We´re talking of 4000€, and the 5D markIII is selling at 2500€. (Prices in euros sorry.)
And for what? Because someone say to you that Sony is better in DR? Because it records in 4K? 
Just in minor situations DR of Canon get´s me concerned....but believe me, you get the shot well done, you get that shot, and no one really be concerned in DR! 
Despite what i said, i really like that the new MkIV would give some good improvement in DR. If it makes me loose my mind? Hell no! 

About the video....well....everybody has a point here...It would do no harm if 4K is there...but i think stills photographers do not care if it isn´t, because the full HD wiil do good for their purposes of some pontual films. If they can make a cheaper machine without the 4k, please Canon, leave 4K behind!! If Canon can make more imporvements on Stills, please, leave 4K behind. If i want a camera to film 4K i definitly have a lot of options in the market. People always seek for something that gives you all for the small price. 
Well, but for me no issue in this. Photography cameras ARE for Photography. Video cameras, ARE for video. Period. Buy a 5d markIII and a Sony A7S, or a Canon C300. Too expensive? Well...you have to decide whats important to you. 

What i would live to see in new camera: 

- Built in timelapse/intervalometer (like 7D markII ou 5D S) 
- Dinamic range improvement (Nikon and Sony are better - 5DS is reaally better and aproaches Nikon and Sony)
- Buffer capability improved. (better Raw recording preformance)
- More MP´s - About 30 MPs (this one is related to the nex one)
- Improvement in High ISO capability - Ok, i ask for more MP´s so in theory, more MP´s less high iso performance. (Well, if Nikon has it in the Nikon D810 with 36 mp´s why can´t we have it in Canon!  And the Nikon D810 is about the same price of the MKIII
- Better info sistem in viewfinder. 
- Focus peaking - Come on Canon, you can do this in your machines with no problem!! 
- Slightly better AF performance in cross type af points 
- Improvement in digic processor. - Just for give even more fast AF 
- Well...surprise me and I´ll buy the machine!!  

Sorry for some errors in writting!!


----------



## unfocused (Nov 30, 2015)

dilbert said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Good job Dilbert. You managed to be both wrong and irrelevant. Try reading posts once in a while before making drive-by comments.

Your comment underscores exactly what I said. You cannot infer anything about Canon's relative position in the marketplace by reading CIPA numbers. They do not break sales down by brand. 

Oh, and you might want to actually look at the data. The difference in the year-over-year trend for both mirrorless and DSLRs is not statistically significant and DSLR sales are actually up 3% in the Americas year-over-year – the dollar value is up 20% in the Americas. Dollar value outside of the Americas, Asia and Europe is up 25% for DSLRs. 

Using statistically insignificant variations in the market over the short term to make long-term claims just looks ignorant.


----------



## Antono Refa (Nov 30, 2015)

Go Wild said:


> About the video....well....everybody has a point here...It would do no harm if 4K is there...but i think stills photographers do not care if it isn´t, because the full HD wiil do good for their purposes of some pontual films. If they can make a cheaper machine without the 4k, please Canon, leave 4K behind!!



4K would require CFast card slots. A pair of 32GB CFast cards costs at least U.S.$250 w/ S&H. SD & CF cards cost nothing, because I already paid for those.

So, unless 4K actually reduces camera price by U.S.$250, keep it out.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 30, 2015)

Antono Refa said:


> Go Wild said:
> 
> 
> > About the video....well....everybody has a point here...It would do no harm if 4K is there...but i think stills photographers do not care if it isn´t, because the full HD wiil do good for their purposes of some pontual films. If they can make a cheaper machine without the 4k, please Canon, leave 4K behind!!
> ...



Not true, the 1DC uses regular CF cards, the Panasonic GH4 uses SD cards, clearly CFast is not "required" for 4k.


----------



## sanj (Nov 30, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Alastair Norcross said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone who thinks the upgrade from 5DII to 5DIII was "minor" or "ho hum" clearly either never used both cameras, or wasn't paying attention. The only thing that was a minor change was the MP count.
> ...



Yes agree. The only change of any substantial significance of the focus. Which was enough for me. I think IQ improvement is going to be very very gradual.


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 30, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > crashpc said:
> ...


+1, thank you Don for working that out.

When the 5D3 came out I was planning to stay with my 5D2 because it was such a bad camera. 
When I held the 5D3 in my hands I realized how much worse this one was so I instantly had to downgrade. 
And the image quality really su**s so much it squeezes out the best photographer in me to make the pictures look decent at least. 
For all pros the IQ is the absolute turn down so no one did or would ever use the 5D3.

Hopefully the 5D4 will become better so I don't need to downgrade furthermore...
[/sarc mode]


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 30, 2015)

5D3 is not a bad camera by all means and overall I do like shooting with it - as long as I don't take into consideration (inherent) disadvantages of mirrorslappers vs. mirrorless for my usage scenarios. 

But I will repeat, even if it causes considerable pain to many a fellow Canonite here ... that 5D 3 is clearly sub-par both in performance and in value compared to direct competitor products (Nikon D810, D750). Not just for "paper specs", but were it counts in real life: sensor performance/IQ, AF-performance, firmware (just to mention Auto-ISO implementation). 

I am convinced that a minor upgrade will not suffice this time. 5D IV with a few more MPs, a tiny little bit better sensor IQ (low-ISO DR, Hi-ISO noise), a tiny bit better AF performance and MAYBE  visible/lit active AF points also in Servo-AF ... makes little sense. Yes, it will still be bought - but only by the ever shrinking segment of Canon customers who are or feel "locked-in" - due to EF glass, speedlites etc. It will not win what Canon really needs: additional, new customers. Those moving up from smartphones, conmpacts, or ageing APS-C cameras.


----------



## sanj (Nov 30, 2015)

Go Wild said:


> Hello to everyone. I´m not trying to make a point in this reply, but just give you my humild opinion. I own a 5D markIII and i use it a lot, and i mean...a lot! I´m a professional photographer, mostly wildlife photographer, but i also have to do some marriage services, product photography and comercial (mostly for websites, not big prints). Well, like we use to say...Europe is in crysis and we just need to make what money want´s you to make. This is just important to tell you that I trully need a super versatile camera, although, i have a Canon 7D markII for 70% of the wildlife work, but when light come down, 5D is the answer.
> 
> And what a superb peace of machine the MkIII is...!! Very often i push her to the limits and never, ever makes me feel bad , or failed. Ever. So when i read someone say that is going to leave DSLR and 5D markIII for a mirrorless....I just think it is foolish...you´re about to switch from a camera that is remarcable confort in hands, to a camera that feels weird in the hands (Sony mirorless). You switch from a camera that gives you about 800 shots/900 in batery life, for a camera that gives you about 200 shots! Really?? Do you imagine taking pictures in a wedding with this? I sooht easily about 1500 shots in a wedding. Thats what? 7 batterys? Reaally? No..not for me! You switch from a camera tha have a remarcable AF sistem for one camera that have a poor af sistem? Then if you gor for the new A7R II We´re talking of 4000€, and the 5D markIII is selling at 2500€. (Prices in euros sorry.)
> And for what? Because someone say to you that Sony is better in DR? Because it records in 4K?
> ...



Get ready to buy. Most of your wishes will come true.


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 30, 2015)

Hi AvTvM! 

I dont consider myself a "_Canonite_", as you can read I've also been using other equipment, including "the dark side"  
And I am still comparing products from other companies with the ones from Canon.



AvTvM said:


> ...
> even if it causes considerable pain to many a fellow Canonite here ... that 5D 3 is clearly sub-par both in performance and in value compared to direct competitor products (Nikon D810, D750). Not just for "paper specs", but were it counts in real life: sensor performance/IQ, AF-performance, firmware (just to mention Auto-ISO implementation).
> ...


It seems the only ones feeling pain are the ones that are not able to persuade me and others from their opinion (either right or wrong). You have yours I have mine. 

In my - different - opinion I don't see the D810 in the same market segment as the 5D3 and it never came cross my mind to replace a 5D3 by a D800 or D810. And it took Nikon about three - almost four - years to deliver the D750 that really struggled to get past the 5D3, except for the sensor IQ where I agree that at low ISO they're ahead.

So I feel no pain and please don't argue that Canon marketing or this forum had deadened my senses. 

Of course I agree that a big improvement would be best for the 5D4. Otherwise I'd be waiting for a 5D5 because I am soooo fine with the 5D3 that I don't even think about a change.


----------



## djkmann (Nov 30, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> There’s not a lot of information coming in about the replacement to the EOS 5D Mark III, which we expect to be announced no earlier than the spring of 2016.



Here is the current progression of when the 5DIV is expected, as collected over the past several months on Canon Rumors:

Oct - Dec 2015
Aug / Sept 2015
Fall 2015
Late summer 2015
Before April 2016
Spring 2016

We'll nail it one of these times!


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 30, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> 5D3 is not a bad camera by all means and overall I do like shooting with it - as long as I don't take into consideration (inherent) disadvantages of mirrorslappers vs. mirrorless for my usage scenarios.
> 
> But I will repeat, even if it causes considerable pain to many a fellow Canonite here ... that 5D 3 is clearly sub-par both in performance and in value compared to direct competitor products (Nikon D810, D750). Not just for "paper specs", but were it counts in real life: sensor performance/IQ, AF-performance, firmware (just to mention Auto-ISO implementation).
> 
> I am convinced that a minor upgrade will not suffice this time. 5D IV with a few more MPs, a tiny little bit better sensor IQ (low-ISO DR, Hi-ISO noise), a tiny bit better AF performance and MAYBE  visible/lit active AF points also in Servo-AF ... makes little sense. Yes, it will still be bought - but only by the ever shrinking segment of Canon customers who are or feel "locked-in" - due to EF glass, speedlites etc. It will not win what Canon really needs: additional, new customers. Those moving up from smartphones, conmpacts, or ageing APS-C cameras.



Interesting that you include in your "real life" argument, AF. It's interesting because the 5D3 has better AF than the D8x0 and arguably better than the D750, at least, according to the specs. Does Nikon even have dual cross type AF sensors? And at high ISO noise (6400), the 5D3 sensor is less noisy than the D800's; all 3 of them. 

In other words we're back to that low ISO DR "spec" (singular). I'm looking at AF, lens selection, CPS service, speed lite system, high ISO noise. That's why Canon is on top. They pretty much trounce the other competitors in everything except low ISO DR which I agree to some is important. 

And last but not least, the AF improvements from the 5D2 to the 5D3 were very, very significant and I still can't figure out why you think the progression from the 5D2 to the 5D3 was minor. Still haven't addressed that point. In fact, you seemed to have blatantly ignored it in your post. Since we all know the progressions from the 5D to the 5D2 to the 5D3 were in fact each very substantial, there is no reason to think the 5D3 to the 5D4 won't be either.


----------



## ignomini (Nov 30, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > The vast majority of 5D buyers don't care about 4K video.
> ...



Enjoy your Panasonic VIDEO equipment. This STILL photographer couldn't care less about shooting video. All I want is an evolution of what is a great still camera. And like all things, it depends on who you hang around. Seen plenty of 5Ds, but never seen one being used to shoot video. 50 percent? Other than goofing around, I'll bet the serious use of video on these things is more like ten percent at best. If Canon leaves out 4k, it's for a reason - like maybe they want to sell dedicated video equipment. Simple business decision.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 30, 2015)

ignomini said:


> clarksbrother said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



+1

Or because market research actually indicates that 4k video is less of a factor. Who knows.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 30, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> ... Or because market research actually indicates that 4k video is less of a factor. Who knows.



...Or, because Canon decided too many compromises would need to be made to offer 4K video *and* a top notch affordable general purpose pro body.

...Or, maybe the source of the rumor is just wrong.

Indeed. Who does know? Certainly no one on this forum.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Nov 30, 2015)

As a landscape shooter, I found the image quality of the 5D2 to be just awful. The red channel was a disaster on that camera. The 5D3 wasn't as good as the 6D, but still much better than the 5D2, IMO. Even my Rebel T1i is better than the 5D2 regarding red channel quality. I went through 3 copies of the 5D2 and all the same. Also, the shutter noise sounded like a mouse being crushed to death with every shutter click on the 5D2. Really not cool especially when shooting quiet events. 

Isn't the 5D3 missing a proper servo tracking AF illumination and linked metering? In that regard, the NIkon AF system is better, isn't it? I've heard nothing but amazing things about the D750 and D810. It was the D800 AF that was a mess.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 30, 2015)

PhotographyFirst said:


> Isn't the 5D3 missing a proper servo tracking AF illumination and linked metering? In that regard, the NIkon AF system is better, isn't it? I've heard nothing but amazing things about the D750 and D810. It was the D800 AF that was a mess.



Except those things have absolutely nothing to do with the accuracy and precision of the AF system. So no, they do not have better AF systems.


----------



## kevl (Nov 30, 2015)

Just finished up processing some images of a politician and his family for Christmas which I shot on my 5D3 with two speed lights in their home. I controlled the lighting, kept it very safe and low contrast, and was able to get the entire shoot setup, shot, and all the gear out the door in 42 minutes and the files are freaking awesome. 

There is zero need for improvement on any level for this kind of shooting with the 5D3 it is simply perfect for the job. 

If I had been shooting with a D810 I may have let a bit more contrast in on my lighting, but probably not because keeping the shoot speedy was important. The more you use contrast in your lighting of a group the more potential there is for problems to happen on location. 

I'm sharing this because the limitations of the 5D3 are really only limitations if you don't shoot correctly. If you know the camera and use it accordingly the results will be stunning. If you're shooting in very low light you need to over expose more than you would need to with a Nikon in order to preserve DR and lower noise. Is this a problem once you know it? Only in the most extreme situations and in those situations the D810 wouldn't be any good either. 

What about resolution? Fill the frame. 

I love my 5D3. 

The only reason why I push so hard for Canon to do a major upgrade is because they can, and not to is just holding back and trying to create perceived extra value in their higher products. I'll be buying the best solution for me next year, whether that is a Nikon, a Sony, or the 5DIV... but those crapping on the 5D3 like it is a subpar product... LOL!!! 

I had my choice for the D800 or the Canon 5D3 4 years ago. I was in a situation where I was able to pick either system at about equal cost. Not only did the 5D3 feel better in my hands it performed better while I shot it. Perhaps not when shooting a test pattern, but when I was using it to photograph real people with my hands on the camera. 

Could it have been better? Yes. Most obviously yes. Does it suck because it wasn't as technically good on a spec sheet as the D800 and now D810? No. Stop being silly.


----------



## PureClassA (Nov 30, 2015)

Nailed it



Don Haines said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > crashpc said:
> ...


----------



## PureClassA (Nov 30, 2015)

kevl said:


> I had my choice for the D800 or the Canon 5D3 4 years ago. I was in a situation where I was able to pick either system at about equal cost. Not only did the 5D3 feel better in my hands it performed better while I shot it. Perhaps not when shooting a test pattern, but when I was using it to photograph real people with my hands on the camera.



You clearly don't understand reality. The spec sheets and test patterns are the most critical factor for proper photography but even moreso is the Dynamic Range from ISO 100-400. You have to evolve to be more like me. I'm a guy who owns a 5D3 and understands what a total POS it is. In fact it was such a POS that I went and pre-ordered a 5DSR, which is an even bigger POS. A high Mega-Pixel POS. The stupid thing STILL has a mirror in it for God's sake. But I figured it was high time to punish myself with more crap-tastic gear. Don't worry, you'll figure it out sooner or later. Proper photographic technique and acquired skill sets are for iPhone amateurs. Real pros need cameras they can completely clown-screw a shot on (ALL THE TIME apparently) and recover it 4 stops in post with the lenscap on.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 30, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> kevl said:
> 
> 
> > I had my choice for the D800 or the Canon 5D3 4 years ago. I was in a situation where I was able to pick either system at about equal cost. Not only did the 5D3 feel better in my hands it performed better while I shot it. Perhaps not when shooting a test pattern, but when I was using it to photograph real people with my hands on the camera.
> ...


Exactly. Photography = monkey + push button :-[


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 30, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Nailed it
> 
> 
> 
> ...


One correction though, screen LCD resolution is quoted in kilodots not kilopixel. A pixel is made up of at least three dots. R,G,B.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 30, 2015)

well, i call a spade a spade and an AF system to me is "better" if it helps photographers getting a higher percentage of perfectly focussed shots ... in all sorts of situations and conditions. Being able to see in the viewfinder, whether/which AF point/s are active and on the subject is relevant to me, even if you happen to think otherwise. 




bdunbar79 said:


> PhotographyFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't the 5D3 missing a proper servo tracking AF illumination and linked metering? In that regard, the NIkon AF system is better, isn't it? I've heard nothing but amazing things about the D750 and D810. It was the D800 AF that was a mess.
> ...


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Nov 30, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> PhotographyFirst said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't the 5D3 missing a proper servo tracking AF illumination and linked metering? In that regard, the NIkon AF system is better, isn't it? I've heard nothing but amazing things about the D750 and D810. It was the D800 AF that was a mess.
> ...


LoL, what? 

That's quite a silly stretch to discredit the advantages of the features.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 30, 2015)

PhotographyFirst said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > PhotographyFirst said:
> ...



Who cares if the points are illuminated or the spot-metering is linked if the shots are OOF, or you can't track a player on a dimly lit field jumping over another player? I'd rather get the shot, wouldn't you? So yes, speaking strictly from the AF system, it's discredited. I get paid by the photo.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Nov 30, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Sell, i call a spade a spade and an AF system to me is "better" if it helps photographers getting a higher percentage of perfectly focussed shots ... in all sorts of situations and conditions. Being able to see in the viewfinder, whether/which AF point/s are active and on the subject is relevant to me, even if you happen to think otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Interesting. I've never had a problem with it. If you can't see the AF point then you really are in trouble anyways. Since the AF systems in the D8x0 are worse, the AF won't lock on anyways. It probably won't with the 5D3 either. You're nitpicking little stupid things again ignoring the larger advantage, higher precision points of the 5D3's system over the other brands to make some point that no one is falling for. The core of an AF system is the precision and the ability to track, of which the 5D3 is superior.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 30, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> PhotographyFirst said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



That is the point so many internet pundits and experts miss, and why there is such a difference of opinions on so many aspects of the gear wars.


----------



## Sinjunb (Dec 1, 2015)

A lot of the comments here are baffling. I'm a professional videographer/cinematographer and I use a 5D3. I only just this month lost my first gig for not having a 4k camera, clients have been more than happy with my 5D3 for almost 2 years now. Why am I not using a 1DC? Because I can't afford it. It's over $5k more than a 5D3, and that's the cheapest camera in Canon's line that provides a noticeable increase in IQ over the 5D3. I'd LOVE it if the 5D4 has 4k, that would make an upgrade only cost around $1.5k after selling my 5D3. 

The only other 4k options in the price range are the GH4 and Sony A7s, the Sony being the only one I might consider but that would mean going through the hassle of adapting my Canon lenses, not to mention the Sony brand just not having the same cache as Canon for getting jobs. As soon as Canon releases an affordable 4k video camera I'd have to sell the Sony.

So right now I'm just waiting for Canon to come out and say whether or not they'll ever release anything in the sub-$3.5k range that shoots 4k. If they're standing firm on $8k and up for 4k, I'll jump ship to Sony, but I won't like it.


----------



## timmy_650 (Dec 1, 2015)

Sinjunb said:


> A lot of the comments here are baffling. I'm a professional videographer/cinematographer and I use a 5D3. I only just this month lost my first gig for not having a 4k camera, clients have been more than happy with my 5D3 for almost 2 years now. Why am I not using a 1DC? Because I can't afford it. It's over $5k more than a 5D3, and that's the cheapest camera in Canon's line that provides a noticeable increase in IQ over the 5D3. I'd LOVE it if the 5D4 has 4k, that would make an upgrade only cost around $1.5k after selling my 5D3.
> 
> The only other 4k options in the price range are the GH4 and Sony A7s, the Sony being the only one I might consider but that would mean going through the hassle of adapting my Canon lenses, not to mention the Sony brand just not having the same cache as Canon for getting jobs. As soon as Canon releases an affordable 4k video camera I'd have to sell the Sony.
> 
> So right now I'm just waiting for Canon to come out and say whether or not they'll ever release anything in the sub-$3.5k range that shoots 4k. If they're standing firm on $8k and up for 4k, I'll jump ship to Sony, but I won't like it.



Have you looked into Black Magic Camera? You can use your EF lens and they are priced well.


----------



## Sinjunb (Dec 1, 2015)

timmy_650 said:


> Sinjunb said:
> 
> 
> > A lot of the comments here are baffling. I'm a professional videographer/cinematographer and I use a 5D3. I only just this month lost my first gig for not having a 4k camera, clients have been more than happy with my 5D3 for almost 2 years now. Why am I not using a 1DC? Because I can't afford it. It's over $5k more than a 5D3, and that's the cheapest camera in Canon's line that provides a noticeable increase in IQ over the 5D3. I'd LOVE it if the 5D4 has 4k, that would make an upgrade only cost around $1.5k after selling my 5D3.
> ...



I have. I shoot a lot in natural and low light situations, and I wasn't crazy about its performance there in the tests I've seen. The a7s comes out looking much better IMO.


----------



## Etienne (Dec 1, 2015)

Sinjunb said:


> A lot of the comments here are baffling. I'm a professional videographer/cinematographer and I use a 5D3. I only just this month lost my first gig for not having a 4k camera, clients have been more than happy with my 5D3 for almost 2 years now. Why am I not using a 1DC? Because I can't afford it. It's over $5k more than a 5D3, and that's the cheapest camera in Canon's line that provides a noticeable increase in IQ over the 5D3. I'd LOVE it if the 5D4 has 4k, that would make an upgrade only cost around $1.5k after selling my 5D3.
> 
> The only other 4k options in the price range are the GH4 and Sony A7s, the Sony being the only one I might consider but that would mean going through the hassle of adapting my Canon lenses, not to mention the Sony brand just not having the same cache as Canon for getting jobs. As soon as Canon releases an affordable 4k video camera I'd have to sell the Sony.
> 
> So right now I'm just waiting for Canon to come out and say whether or not they'll ever release anything in the sub-$3.5k range that shoots 4k. If they're standing firm on $8k and up for 4k, I'll jump ship to Sony, but I won't like it.



I'm in the very same position. I use the 5D3 for both photography and video. I bought my first Sony video camera last year, the PXW-X70. I also considered the Canon XF-200 but it was more money and under-spec'd. I considered the C100 mkII, but it too is under-spec'd. Now I am seriously considering the Sony FS5 when it comes out, and if I go that route it may be the watershed move for me from Canon to Sony for good. I'll start replacing my Canon lenses with stuff that works better on the Sony systems, probably get an A7 for photography and back-up video. 
I had real high hopes for the C100mkII, but Canon really holds back the features, I was a bit shocked at their stingy approach. 
2016 will probably the deciding year for whether I flip from Canon to Sony.


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 1, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > Go Wild said:
> ...


A GoPro saves 4K to micro SD cards......


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 1, 2015)

StudentOfLight said:


> One correction though, screen LCD resolution is quoted in kilodots not kilopixel. A pixel is made up of at least three dots. R,G,B.


Good point!
I stand corrected. Thanks!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Dec 1, 2015)

kevl said:


> Just finished up processing some images of a politician and his family for Christmas which I shot on my 5D3 with two speed lights in their home. I controlled the lighting, kept it very safe and low contrast, and was able to get the entire shoot setup, shot, and all the gear out the door in 42 minutes and the files are freaking awesome.
> 
> There is zero need for improvement on any level for this kind of shooting with the 5D3 it is simply perfect for the job.
> 
> ...



All fair until you ended with the part I bolded.

So basically if people shoot simple scenes where you can control the light you are shooting correctly, if you say, get out into nature and shoot some large scale scene, you are shooting incorrectly and thus facing non-existent limitations??


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 1, 2015)

Sinjunb said:


> A lot of the comments here are baffling. I'm a professional videographer/cinematographer and I use a 5D3. I only just this month lost my first gig for not having a 4k camera, clients have been more than happy with my 5D3 for almost 2 years now. Why am I not using a 1DC? Because I can't afford it. It's over $5k more than a 5D3, and that's the cheapest camera in Canon's line that provides a noticeable increase in IQ over the 5D3. I'd LOVE it if the 5D4 has 4k, that would make an upgrade only cost around $1.5k after selling my 5D3.
> 
> The only other 4k options in the price range are the GH4 and Sony A7s, the Sony being the only one I might consider but that would mean going through the hassle of adapting my Canon lenses, not to mention the Sony brand just not having the same cache as Canon for getting jobs. As soon as Canon releases an affordable 4k video camera I'd have to sell the Sony.
> 
> So right now I'm just waiting for Canon to come out and say whether or not they'll ever release anything in the sub-$3.5k range that shoots 4k. If they're standing firm on $8k and up for 4k, I'll jump ship to Sony, but I won't like it.



+1 on pretty much everything there. I had a definite need for 4K immediately so a few months back I got a GH4. (Of course Sony came out with their A7S II right after...) Adapting the Canon lenses wasn't too bad and the metabones works reasonably well. I still like shooting with my 5D Mark II much better. The GH4 does a good job, but it just doesn't..."feel" as nice. Maybe it's the form factor or that I've taken nearly a million shots on the 5D Mark II... Either way, if there's no 4K on the Mark IV, I'll begrudgingly look elsewhere and start transitioning over my lenses to a new system.

Also - as far as the BlackMagic stuff goes - their interfaces and ergonomics are generally crap IMO unless you're spec-ing the system out on rails. Almost completely worthless for anything run-n-gun. Same goes for photos on it. 

Also - FWIW - Sigma now offers a lens mount conversion service. Sigma has been impressing quite a few people with their lenses these days, especially their art line. Not a bad idea to purchase a Sigma in the future in case you need to convert over the mount to a new system.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 1, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> Sinjunb said:
> 
> 
> > A lot of the comments here are baffling. I'm a professional videographer/cinematographer and I use a 5D3. I only just this month lost my first gig for not having a 4k camera, clients have been more than happy with my 5D3 for almost 2 years now. Why am I not using a 1DC? Because I can't afford it. It's over $5k more than a 5D3, and that's the cheapest camera in Canon's line that provides a noticeable increase in IQ over the 5D3. I'd LOVE it if the 5D4 has 4k, that would make an upgrade only cost around $1.5k after selling my 5D3.
> ...



If you want Canon's 'cheap' 4k option, here it is http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1134581-REG/canon_0565c013_xc10.html

The 5D MkIV will not have 4k, the 1DX MkII will, start _"transitioning"_.


----------



## pedro (Dec 1, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> clarksbrother said:
> 
> 
> > Sinjunb said:
> ...



Concerning the fact, that Canon only have a 1" sensor fix lens cam to offer for 4K video within a lower priced segment and then up next the top level DSLR to do this, is just a tad too much of product diversification IMHO...The çK 5DIV without that is a huge let down to thousands of photographers who helped make the 5D line what it is known for. Canon made enough profit out of them to give something back. I know, this is an irrational way of thinking but I couldn't keep from speaking it out...


----------



## melbournite (Dec 1, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> The 5D MkIV will not have 4k, the 1DX MkII will, start _"transitioning"_.



Is that fact?


----------



## pedro (Dec 1, 2015)

melbournite said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D MkIV will not have 4k, the 1DX MkII will, start _"transitioning"_.
> ...



Or should I say a rumored fact ? ;-)


----------



## 3catsinky (Dec 1, 2015)

When I was trying to decide if I should buy a C100MKII this past January, i couldn't swallow that price tag of yesteryear tech, no matter how good the camera is. I shoot both stills and video, and ended up in the Samsung camp with the NX1. Like other's have said, I really don't want to switch to Sony, but now with the demise of Samsung, it's unknown where their sensors will end up, and it's possible they may wind up in future Nikon products, which means 4K capability at Nikon at a nice price point. Canon would be foolish not to put 4K into the 5D IV.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Dec 1, 2015)

Sinjunb said:


> timmy_650 said:
> 
> 
> > Sinjunb said:
> ...


If you're after EF mount full frame mirrorless then here's Canon's solution for you:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=ME20f-SH&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=

It's only $20k. Oops it's not 4K :'(


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 1, 2015)

StudentOfLight said:


> If you're after EF mount full frame mirrorless then here's Canon's solution for you:
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=ME20f-SH&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=
> 
> It's only $20k. Oops it's not 4K :'(



It might be expensive for the camera, but at ISO 4 million, think about how much you will save on flashes and lighting....


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 1, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> If you want Canon's 'cheap' 4k option, here it is http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1134581-REG/canon_0565c013_xc10.html
> 
> The 5D MkIV will not have 4k, the 1DX MkII will, start _"transitioning"_.



We actually have one of those. Frankly, it's a tremendous letdown. I was excited as anyone when Canon came out with this and we got one almost immediately... but...

Here's just some of the issues with that camera:

1) Non-constant aperture... this...drives...me...crazy...
2) Feels cheap for the price. Yes, $2500 in the video world is on the lower end... but you should expect a lot more than what you get.
3) Controls are functionally garbage - Canon on their still cameras has a great menu system. On this...worthless. Shooting video on DSLRs meant for still is way easier than on this thing which is supposedly meant for video.
4) No viewfinder. Yes, DSLRs don't have it either (unless its EVF) but for a video product, this is sacrilege. 
5) Minimum ISO in video mode is 500... really Canon... REALLY???!?!?!?
6) Video quality is...eh... alright. Frankly, if my iPhone had a deeper DOF, it'd trump this thing in the video department. 

There's way too many to list, but the XC10 should have been aborted before it got this far. They were much closer to getting it right in the 5D Mark II and 5D Mark III even while keeping a primary photo focus.


----------



## NorBro (Dec 1, 2015)

The XC10 is certainly not what many of us hoped for, but the quality can be really nice. The functionality (not enough programability) is the worse, and the aperture change does drive one crazy. I believe you can use a lower ISO in a non-CLOG PP/setting. If you think 500 is bad, try having to use a minimum of 3200 or 1600 in Sony's S-Log2 on some of their cameras...


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 2, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > If you want Canon's 'cheap' 4k option, here it is http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1134581-REG/canon_0565c013_xc10.html
> ...



So get a 1DC, or a C300 MkII, or an iPhone, a GH4, A7RII.............


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 2, 2015)

dilbert said:


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



Yes and no. Under bright lighting conditions, if I want to smooth out 24p footage at 4K, it's helpful to have a little bit of motion blur for faster action items. (Yes, I know you can do it in post, but the more I can shoot in camera, the better) This means if I want to keep that, I have to crank down my F-Stop, which means I lose what little shallow DOF I had from the 1 inch sensor in the first place. Having it arbitrarily set so high when it seems to be nothing more than a software config is pretty silly. 




privatebydesign said:


> So get a 1DC, or a C300 MkII, or an iPhone, a GH4, A7RII.............



I did, a GH4. Very happy with the video so far. Much like the 5D Mark II and III rolling shutter can be an issue, but really only at 4K - have to plan shots out a little more carefully. For the price, the camera is a bargain. V-Log makes it a no-brainer especially if you need a B-camera for video shots or just something small for run-n-gun.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 2, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > clarksbrother said:
> ...



So going back to the point, why should Canon give a damn about what you want? You already have your small 4K camera which they have shown no desire to make as yet, they are happy and you are happy, just don't expect them to put good 4K in the 5D MkIV.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 2, 2015)

the more responses I see in this thread and many others before, the more am i convinced that Canon should split the 5D line into a stills-model (5D IV) and a video-model (5Dc) with 4k. There seems to be sufficient demand for a 4k video DSLR with EF mount. Even if it would cost 500 more than the stills model, it would probably sell. 
Sony took the right decision with their A7 trifecta (A7 / A7R / A7S (II) S) ... Canon would be well advised to also offer 3 versions: 5D IV (stills, universal), 5Ds/R (Resolution) and 5Dc (Video)


----------



## NorBro (Dec 2, 2015)

YES - there is more than a sufficient demand for a 4K DSLR from CANON!

I've only recently joined this forum just for fun and it's instantly come to my attention that it's heavily influenced by photography (why not, right?).

But if you go to some of the filmmaking forums (where 1/100 people may specialize in stills), Canon is being ripped apart. I and others who love the company still fight for them, but even the C300 Mark II is kind of a joke still living on the excellent C300's reputation. I don't think anyone ever bought the C500, did they? The C100 is extremely popular with wedding guys, and I don't think anyone uses a 5D Mark III anymore to shoot unless they are a photographer too. (Quality is atrocious for 2015 although Magic Lantern has saved it to some degree.)

The 1DC is that special camera that not many people got to use because it was just too expensive for a filmmaking DSLR (I think over $12K at one point), and it certainly is not justifiable now with the 3-year-old tech (sorry, Canon is not Arri) and soft 1080/60P.

Anyone/everyone that's into video, including myself, who still loves Canon is really desperate for a new 4K DSLR from them.

So I don't care if it's in a 1DXII, 1DCII, 5DMarkIV, XD#X#X.......just make something!!!!!!!!!!

(And I own lots of cinema cameras, but the point is I want a small footprint CANON-made 4K DSLR not only for the wonderful color science, but because the company can truly make an amazing product when it really wants to.)


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 2, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> So going back to the point, why should Canon give a damn about what you want? You already have your small 4K camera which they have shown no desire to make as yet, they are happy and you are happy, just don't expect them to put good 4K in the 5D MkIV.



Ah, but there's the rub - I'm forced to go that route because Canon doesn't provide anything in that space. A M4/3 sensor will never stack up against a full frame for light gathering, neither will the bokeh, it's just physics. 

Why should they give a damn? Because I and people like me probably represent a solid 8-10% of their sales. Yes a company will focus more attention on features that the majority want, but to eschew and potentially alienate a very significant portion of your sales base isn't good business. 

Some numbers for thought. From 2006 to 2008, Canon and Nikon almost saw almost identical DSLR sales number increases. For instance, in 2007, Canon sold 3.18M units worldwide. Nikon sold, 2.98M. In 2008, Canon sold 3.73M, Nikon sold 3.62M. In later 2008 into 2009, Canon introduced video in the 5D Mark II, the T1i and the 7D. *EVERY* DSLR manufacturer decreased in sales in 2009 except for Canon who increased 16.8% to 4.36M (Panasonic increased from .15 to .27M but statistically unimportant). For instance, Nikon decreased from 3.62 to 3.35M, even newcomer Sony who had seen strong gains decreased from 1.31 to 1.06M.

What did Canon do, they added amazing video features, and anyone would have a very hard time convincing me that just because Canon added groundbreaking video features to the 5D Mark II (and to a much lesser extant, the Mark III) that it hurt the ability of those cameras to take amazing photos or truly impeded those who don't use the video functionality at all. 

This isn't a zero sum game. Canon can add great video functionality to their cameras without nerfing their ability to take amazing photos. They've proved that. To assume that one has to come at the sacrifice at the other is silly.


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 2, 2015)

NorBro said:


> ...I don't think anyone ever bought the C500, did they? ...



We use one at work - even for the large global media company that I work for, they were just too expensive and impractical. If it was a marquee project we'd break it out and shoot stuff on it using a Steadicam rig. We have some 300s floating around...not sure we ever bothered with the 300 II honestly...

That said, we have dozens of 5D Mark II and Mark III in the company. From a practical standpoint, the form factor and price make it a much more attractive option for everyday usage.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 2, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > So going back to the point, why should Canon give a damn about what you want? You already have your small 4K camera which they have shown no desire to make as yet, they are happy and you are happy, just don't expect them to put good 4K in the 5D MkIV.
> ...



As far as I can see Canon don't yet consider 4K a consumer feature, and they are not alone, neither do Apple in the latest Apple TV (that has a three year life cycle). Until they do the cameras they consider 'consumer cameras' won't get 4K, the 1DX MkII will by default because they won't make a 1DC MkII, the 5D MkV will because it will be a standard feature by then.

Again, I believe you are missing product maturity out of your numbers equations, people are not buying more DSLR's because those that want them are happy with the capabilities of the ones they have, yes adding video by mistake to the 5D MkII created sales Canon didn't anticipate, but now people have cameras that do very high quality 1080 most are happy with that, the difference between good 1080 and mediocre 4K is that the 1080 is 'better' especially when viewed on the majority of todays tv and video screens and it is considerably easier to edit, grade, process, transcode and store, most consumers don't want the hassle of slow computers and mediocre 4K, yet. The people that do want and need 4K are generally content creators who are looking for an extended shelf life for their footage, they are not what Canon would consider the consumer stills camera market core.

Now how many people will upgrade from the 5D MkIII to the 5D MkIV for the sole reason of 4K? I suspect on these forums twenty or thirty people, and we are camera geeks, so how does throwing that 4K premium in on this round of consumer cameras help Canon? If you look at it like that, which is just as valid as any other scenario, it makes no sense for Canon to give 4K away in the MkIV.


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 2, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Again, I believe you are missing product maturity out of your numbers equations, people are not buying more DSLR's because those that want them are happy with the capabilities of the ones they have, yes adding video by mistake to the 5D MkII created sales Canon didn't anticipate, but now people have cameras that do very high quality 1080 most are happy with that, the difference between good 1080 and mediocre 4K is that the 1080 is 'better' especially when viewed on the majority of todays tv and video screens and it is considerably easier to edit, grade, process, transcode and store, most consumers don't want the hassle of slow computers and mediocre 4K, yet. The people that do want and need 4K are generally content creators who are looking for an extended shelf life for their footage, they are not what Canon would consider the consumer stills camera market core.



Substitute out 1080P for 4K and SD for 1080p and you have the same argument made by photo purists in 2008 in regards to the 5D Mark II. Back in 2008, 1080P was generally a pain to edit and quite a few people were still fine with SD, although HD was starting to become ubiquitous. 

Keep in mind, the same people/companies who bought the 5D Mark II in 2008 didn't buy into a system because it is "good enough". They buy on for immediate needed/wanted features and to futureproof. A lot of the same audience that bought on for 1080p back then would buy on for 4K today. You're not talking about grandma and grandpa who bought a $300 camera and couldn't care less about capabilities and future proofing. 

Also - you make the assumption that 4K necessarily would have to be mediocre if implemented. I don't think even Evel Knievel could make that leap.  I have yet to see an implementation of 4K on a full frame sensor on any brand that wasn't at least "good". 

I do agree in regards to the shelf life on the footage though. We are getting usage out of 4K even today. Just in terms of my own usage, it's handy to have today but based on current trends, in about 18-24 months, its going to be an absolute necessity. 



privatebydesign said:


> Now how many people will upgrade from the 5D MkIII to the 5D MkIV for the sole reason of 4K? I suspect on these forums twenty or thirty people, and we are camera geeks, so how does throwing that 4K premium in on this round of consumer cameras help Canon? If you look at it like that, which is just as valid as any other scenario, it makes no sense for Canon to give 4K away in the MkIV.



It makes sense to include because as someone pointed out several pages back in the thread, the real profits aren't from the camera bodies, it's from the lenses. You lose someone buying the bodies, you lose someone buying into the lens system. 

Take a look through the whole thread, you've not seen a single person say, "If it doesn't have X number of dynamic range I'll swap to Nikon/Sony/etc" or, "If they don't increase AF accuracy I'll be forced to move to a different system." The thing is, Canon can make moderate non-dramatic improvements to the photography side of the equation and not lose an appreciable amount of customers buying into their system. 

HOWEVER, if they fail to keep up on the video side of things, you've seen a vocal but sizable minority of people say they would swap. If they included those video features, it would once again not likely cause an exodus of photo-centric customers but would retain and possibly gain video-centric customers. Just seems to make good business sense.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 2, 2015)

We'll see.


----------



## unfocused (Dec 2, 2015)

All I can say is that there will be a lot of embarrassed people on both sides if this rumor is wrong and the 5D IV has 4K video.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 2, 2015)

unfocused said:


> All I can say is that there will be a lot of embarrassed people on both sides if this rumor is wrong and the 5D IV has 4K video.



I won't be embarrassed, I'll just be wrong. I have been wrong once or twice before, just ask my wife ;D

I really don't care one way or the other, I have never owned a video shooting DSLR, though my next body will either be the 1DX MkII (4k or not), or the 5DSR (without 4k), I was really just trying to be a counter point, devils advocate, against all those that are positive it will and say Canon is ******* if it doesn't.


----------



## andylok (Dec 2, 2015)

5D4... 

Let's look at the history of 5D, which shaped the dslr world that we see today; 

5D1 - the FIRST full frame 35mm DSLR in the market; a breakthrough in the industry, an icon.
5D2 - the FIRST full frame 35mm DSLR that does FULL-HD 1080p video capture, revolutionized the film industry.
5D3 - the....?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!.... kind of gets lost here.. not the first full frame to shoot 4k (SONY did that), not the first full frame that has gazillion megapixel (Nikon D800 done that), not the first full frame that does extremely low light (SONY again)...

5D4 - what can we expect for it to be another industry FIRST that will revolutionize ?


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 2, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > All I can say is that there will be a lot of embarrassed people on both sides if this rumor is wrong and the 5D IV has 4K video.
> ...



I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2015)

andylok said:


> Let's look at the history of 5D, which shaped the dslr world that we see today;
> 
> 5D1 - the FIRST full frame 35mm DSLR in the market; a breakthrough in the industry, an icon.



I think you need to study history a little better.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 2, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> andylok said:
> 
> 
> > Let's look at the history of 5D, which shaped the dslr world that we see today;
> ...



True. 5D1 was the first AFFORDABLE (for many enthusiasts) FF DSLR. 

I very much agree with the gist of andylok's FIRST posting. Canon really did loose its magic between 5D2 and 5D3. It just got the AF system the 5D2 should already have had. From industry and tech leader, Canon fell behind. 

5D IV with 4k but no significant improvement on the stills side (=sensor performance, speed, Af performance, firmware features eg intervalometer, auto iso, exposure metering on Active AF point, etc) will also not be enough. 

If and as long as Canon stubbornly refuses its customers an all-out FF mirrorless system (which would much more naturally allow for inclusion of 4k video in a very affordable and small-footprint camera) then Canon should at least deliver an all-out, but affordable to most enthusiasts (=5D class) mirrorslapper ... But Canon obviously is still pretty much clueless. Weirdo products like the XC10 instead of a kick-ass 5DIV plus a kick-ass 5Dc video-centric model prove this. Apparently Canon still believe they can sell big $$$ 1Dc/1Dx-2 bombers to the masses. They won't. 

A lacklustre 5D IV will be bad for Canon and good for the final changeover from mirrorslappers to mirrorless camera systems. Sony being the first and most immediate winner, their willingness to really innovate and deliver next gen "truly-digital" imaging gear will pay off. Deservedly so.


----------



## pedro (Dec 2, 2015)

andylok said:


> 5D4...
> 
> Let's look at the history of 5D, which shaped the dslr world that we see today;
> 
> ...



*Maybe a FIRST BIG LETDOWN, due to the fact that there ain't nothing that will revolutionize?* ;D


----------



## dufflover (Dec 2, 2015)

Why are people treating 4K as if it's mutually exclusive with it being a good still cameras or having improved DR? The cost of 4K is probably minuscule these days, probably just a standard software module for EOS cameras they build into the Digic firmware to make it work.
If there's no 4K, it ain't because of comprises or costs. It's crippli... I mean product protection.


----------



## koenkooi (Dec 2, 2015)

dufflover said:


> Why are people treating 4K as if it's mutually exclusive with it being a good still cameras or having improved DR? The cost of 4K is probably minuscule these days, probably just a standard software module for EOS cameras they build into the Digic firmware to make it work.
> If there's no 4K, it ain't because of comprises or costs. It's crippli... I mean product protection.



4k will most likely mean it's using HEVC as codec, which is *very* computationally expensive. So it needs to be implemented in hardware, unless they go the 1DC route where canon uses mjpeg instead of a h26x type codec.


----------



## aa_angus (Dec 2, 2015)

100% of my income comes from photography. I was hanging out when the 5DIII was released, just as I anticipate the 5DIV. In the entire time I've been operating as a professional, I've NEVER put my camera into video mode. If you want to shoot video, NEWSFLASH: buy a video camera. In conclusion, I could not care less if Canon do or don't include 4K video in the 5DIV, so long as it performs exceptionally as an SLR.


----------



## tron (Dec 2, 2015)

I do not care about video but I understand that others may care (But let's not forget that it is a camera that takes stills and the video is an addon).

I believe it all depends on the price and the still features: 

Price: Would it be the same, a little cheaper, or much cheaper without video?

Still features: Would they be hit by video, improved, or would they be the same?


----------



## scyrene (Dec 2, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> It makes sense to include because as someone pointed out several pages back in the thread, the real profits aren't from the camera bodies, it's from the lenses. *You lose someone buying the bodies, you lose someone buying into the lens system. *



I don't disagree with what you're saying in general (I don't know enough about it), but this is not necessarily true. There are lenses that other companies simply don't make, or for which the Canon option is the best (or the best within a certain budget). I don't think any of the Sony converts on these forums has said they got rid of their/would never again buy Canon lenses.


----------



## scyrene (Dec 2, 2015)

andylok said:


> 5D4...
> 
> Let's look at the history of 5D, which shaped the dslr world that we see today;
> 
> ...



"[N]ot the first full frame that has gazillion megapixel" isn't a first really - newer cameras have more MP than older ones. 30+ is a gazillion but 20+ isn't? And 50+? It's a continuum, even if some leaps are larger than others. Ditto 'extremely low light'. So ISO 409600 is *extremely* but 204800 or 102400 aren't? One or two stops.

And I'd imagine there are fewer true firsts to be had as time goes on...


----------



## scyrene (Dec 2, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > andylok said:
> ...



*Sigh* I know you're not really listening to facts, but I'll repeat what someone else said (further up this thread or in another? There's a lot of repetition) by listing some of the improvements - you know, actual facts, rather than your opinion on the camera.

There's actually a section on the Wikipedia article that describes the improvements: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III#Compared_to_EOS_5D_Mark_II

I will quote selectively to highlight:

"100–25600 ISO (expandable to H1 (51200), H2 (102400)), compared to 100–6400 ISO (expandable to H1 (12800), H2 (25600))"
So an extra stop of ISO at the low end and two stops at the high end.

"61 Point AF + 41 Crosstype AF compared to 9 Point AF + 6 Assist Points. The Mark III's autofocus system is inherited from the recently announced EOS-1D X, and marks the first time since the EOS-3 film SLR that Canon has put its top-of-the-line autofocus system in a non-1-series body."
You've acknowledged this but it bears repeating, this was a massive improvement.

6 frames per second continuous shooting compared to 3.9 frame/s
That's a more than 50% increase!

"Silent, low vibration TTL shooting modes (single shot or 3 frames/s), compared to live-view-only silent shooting modes."
Makes a big difference to some.

"Headphone-out to monitor audio, the previous one having none."
Quite useful for video?

"Dual card slots—one CompactFlash (CF) with full UDMA support, and one SD (including SDHC and SDXC cards, but does not exploit the UHS-I mode). The Mk II has only one CF slot."
Judging by the shrillness of some folk on here, dual card slots matter a lot to some people.

And marginal improvements in resolution, rear screen, viewfinder coverage. You can belittle it all you want, but ignoring or rejecting these things is wilful ignorance. The 5D3 is a better camera than the mark 2. Naturally as a model matures and gets newer iterations, it's going to be less fundamentally different to its predecessors (clearly the mark 1 of anything is a big change as there's nothing previous to compare it to!).


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 2, 2015)

aa_angus said:


> 100% of my income comes from photography. I was hanging out when the 5DIII was released, just as I anticipate the 5DIV. In the entire time I've been operating as a professional, I've NEVER put my camera into video mode. If you want to shoot video, NEWSFLASH: buy a video camera. In conclusion, I could not care less if Canon do or don't include 4K video in the 5DIV, so long as it performs exceptionally as an SLR.



Then perhaps, if you have never used video on a DSLR, and you have no expertise or experience using video on a DSLR, then you have no knowledge or any information on which to make an informed opinion on why there are those of us who do want video improvements on the 5D IV and to why it's a much more suitable platform than a "video camera". 

I wouldn't presume to lecture someone who has significant photography experience on what's a suitable platform for their uses, especially if I didn't have any knowledge or expertise on the subject (for the record, I do, professionally).


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 2, 2015)

scyrene said:


> clarksbrother said:
> 
> 
> > It makes sense to include because as someone pointed out several pages back in the thread, the real profits aren't from the camera bodies, it's from the lenses. *You lose someone buying the bodies, you lose someone buying into the lens system. *
> ...



Agree, but I think it's far more likely that the chances of them buying new lenses are greatly, greatly diminished. I would guess that they would be likely to get a lens adapter to use their existing collection but over time they would transition over to the new lens ecosystem. Adapters are usually a compromise that can get old after a while. That said, looking at the Sony lens lineup (http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/lenses/lineup/) there are a lot fewer gaps than one would imagine. Those gaps are often filled in pretty well by Sigma as well.


----------



## scyrene (Dec 2, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > clarksbrother said:
> ...



I think you're right that the overall demand will diminish from those people; I'd add though, that Canon bodies take third party lenses, so that part might even out, and the more specialist lenses that people would still look to Canon for (tilt shift, extreme macro, and a lot of the super telephoto options) must surely have higher margins that the more everyday ones. Incidentally has anyone ever seen (or even seen for sale) a Sony 500mm f/4? I had no idea such a thing existed! (Oh, delving a little, it says 'built to order', so that explains it).


----------



## unfocused (Dec 2, 2015)

scyrene said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > If and as long as Canon stubbornly refuses its customers an all-out FF mirrorless system (which would much more naturally allow for inclusion of 4k video in a very affordable and small-footprint camera) then Canon should at least deliver an all-out, but affordable to most enthusiasts (=5D class) mirrorslapper ... But Canon obviously is still pretty much clueless...
> ...



*double sigh* I get so tired of people who are so focused on their own narrow wants that they refuse to accept that if a company is not making their dream product, that doesn't mean they are somehow ******* to failure. 

Too many people on this forum way overestimate the importance of small differences in specifications. Having a longer list of new features does not automatically translate into either success or a better product.

I would say that most people, by the time they have reached the level where they are buying a 5D, know pretty much what they are getting and have chosen it because of what it offers -- one of the best all-around professional and advanced amateur cameras on the market. Most buyers are not chasing specifications. They need a reliable, all-around camera that can do everything well. The original 5D was that camera at the time, but it was not perfect. The 5DII was an improvement but was not perfect. The 5DIII was an improvement over the 5DII, but it isn't perfect either. The 5DIV will improve on the 5DIII, but it won't be perfect.

I'm not a car person, but I'll use a car analogy. If I have been buying Mustangs since the 1960s, I don't want Ford to replace it with something totally new. I want the next Mustang to continue to offer the same things that have prompted me to buy earlier versions. I don't want some completely new 5DIV, I want an improved version of the 5DIII.


----------



## Sporgon (Dec 2, 2015)

unfocused said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Porche 911 owners would all be nodding in agreement 

I thought AvTvM was a rather fine fellow when he ceased calling slrs ''mirror slappers'' and toned it down to ''mirror flippers'' in deference to those of us that find the term ''mirror slapper'' so irrationally irritating, but I see he has reverted back to type. Shame.


----------



## Sinjunb (Dec 2, 2015)

andylok said:


> 5D4...
> 
> Let's look at the history of 5D, which shaped the dslr world that we see today;
> 
> ...



This is why I think it's extremely likely the 5D4 will have 4k. It would be a backwards, archaic move for Canon to not put it in when probably even Nikon will have an affordable 4k DSLR next year. They'd be the only ones in the game with such underspecced video, and as many people here are saying "the market isn't there", I don't think that's true at all. The market was there for the 5D2 and has only grown since then, and most of those people will not pay a $5k premium for the Canon name. $1k or even $2k, sure, but that's it. I don't know where this idea is coming from that young filmmakers/videographers can all now afford 1DC's or C300's. 

The only way I can see the 5D4 not having 4k is if the 1DXmk2 comes out at a price point of around $4500-$5000, which I'm pretty sure it won't.


----------



## clarksbrother (Dec 2, 2015)

scyrene said:


> clarksbrother said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



FWIW for someone who would navigate to that ecosystem for video reasons, the need/want for tilt shift/extreme macro and super telephoto are an almost non-issue/concern. I've used a 400mm for video of wildlife in Africa and on an NFL sideline...and...well I think that's it. That said, those use cases are much fewer and farther between in the video world than in the photography world. Your bread and butter are between 20mm and 135mm mostly. 

Delving off topic and to play devils advocate, I wonder if the margins on the specialty lenses are really that much higher. The development costs are probably the same, but the total production is much lower which means that development/tooling cost gets spread out amongst a smaller amount of lenses decreasing margins. *shrugs*


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2015)

scyrene said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



La la la la la. The only thing that matters is the sensor. La la la la la I can't hear you. The only other thing that matters is that mirrorless has already killed the dSLR. La la la la la. My brain is yelling too loud in my ears, and the horrible noise of a flipping mirror is even louder. La la la la la.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Dec 2, 2015)

I think the best is inferring that the 5D2 should have had, in 2008, the AF system of the 1Dx, which wasn't available until 2012. So, Canon was 4 years late in their revolutionary AF system...

Even though Nikon or Sony still can't match it...

But enough fun, the 5D2 to the 5D3 was so very minor in improvements.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 2, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> I think the best is inferring that the 5D2 should have had, in 2008, the AF system of the 1Dx, which wasn't available until 2012. So, Canon was 4 years late in their revolutionary AF system...
> 
> Even though Nikon or Sony still can't match it...
> 
> But enough fun, the 5D2 to the 5D3 was so very minor in improvements.



Oh, come on. It should have had no mirror, too. Anyway, Sony cameras now have way more AF points. Who cares about the quality of them, there are more and that's all that matters. Unless we're talking about megapixels, in which case quality matters more than quantity, at least now that Sony has fewer. And no mirror.

Why can't you get with the program?


----------



## Proscribo (Dec 2, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Oh, come on. It should have had no mirror, too. Anyway, Sony cameras now have way more AF points.


I'm pretty sure Canon's DPAF has a lot more AF "points" than any Sony camera!


----------



## scyrene (Dec 2, 2015)

clarksbrother said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > clarksbrother said:
> ...



I suppose you're right.


----------



## tscholent (Dec 2, 2015)

expatinasia said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > There’s not a lot of information coming in about the replacement to the EOS 5D Mark III, which we expect to be announced no earlier than the spring of 2016. All signs point to it coming after the successor to the EOS-1D X.
> ...


Many other items such as built in ND filters,Pro connections,global shutter,higher frame rates and most important 
current codecs are motivating movie makers away from DSLR’s ( hell , a Sony FS5 or a BM URSA Mini at $6000 and $3000respectively come with most of it ).That also tells us that even though a Canon C100MII with HD 30fps (60fps with ext.rec.)was trying to bridge a gap for frustrated Canon DSLR owners but gradually lagged behind competitors.Canon still graphers would be better served with 2 processors,2 card slots or better yet , a A7RII competitor.


----------



## PureClassA (Dec 2, 2015)

Mirror Slapper = Hate Speech : We must protest on a college campus.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 2, 2015)

scyrene said:


> And I'd imagine there are fewer true firsts to be had as time goes on...



Funny, I can see so many potential FIRSTS for Canon, it's mindboggling ... Just a few: 
* first FF mirrorless FF camera without any mechanical moving parts ... mirror flapping, no shutter curtains shuttering, no iris blades convulsing ...
* first lightfield solid state camera with 100 MP spatial resolution
* or much more humbly, first Canon DSLR with real 13 stops DR ...


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 2, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Mirror Slapper = Hate Speech : We must protest on a college campus.



Hehe i got "mirrorslapper" trademarked .. but feel free to call 'em "mirrorflipper", "mirrorsnapper" or "mirror-banger" if that sounds more benign, positive and politically correct to you. ;-)


----------



## tron (Dec 3, 2015)

5D4 does not need anything ... "FIRST" just the obvious improvements:

1. 2/3 - 1 stop improvement in High ISO

2. 2 to 3 stops DR improvement in ISO 100 (7DII and even more 5DS(R) are already better than 5D3 so they are moving towards this direction)

3. 7.5 - 8 fps

4. A few more AF points (all cross type) maybe a little more spread out.

5. The already existing features (in other Canon cameras):

a. Ec in Auto ISO Manual Mode
b. Any speed selectable as minimum in Auto ISO Av Mode


----------



## K-amps (Dec 3, 2015)

tron said:


> 5D4 does not need anything ... "FIRST" just the obvious improvements:
> 
> 1. 2/3 - 1 stop improvement in High ISO
> 
> ...



How about AE linked to AF point? or Face recognition for exposure engine or Eye detection for AF.


----------



## tron (Dec 3, 2015)

K-amps said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > 5D4 does not need anything ... "FIRST" just the obvious improvements:
> ...


Doable I believe (and welcome). I assume you are referring to Partial and spot metering since I think Evaluative metering takes care of that. I am afraid though that they may leave this for the 1Dx series.


----------



## scyrene (Dec 3, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > And I'd imagine there are fewer true firsts to be had as time goes on...
> ...



Well the third is just a slight improvement, so you'd have rejected it as not a 'true' first, surely?

Um, how does a camera (lens) without iris blades stop down to narrower apertures?

And sure, a light field camera is a big departure, but wouldn't be part of the 5D series. And besides, we've yet to see if it's truly the way things will go. Plenty of new technologies fail to deliver on early promise.


----------



## Sinjunb (Dec 3, 2015)

tscholent said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



I'm not seeing filmmakers move away from DSLR's towards hardcore production cameras that require tons of expensive gear and are not even remotely as run and gun - DSLR's are still the go-to for indie filmmaking because of how easy they are to use and operate. Blackmagic requires at minimum a cage to use, along with plenty of other stuff.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 3, 2015)

scyrene said:


> Um, how does a camera (lens) without iris blades stop down to narrower apertures?



Solid state, no moving parts - e.g. along these lines: 
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6924547&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D6924547

------
"This work proposes an innovative solid-state variable micro aperture with no moving component. The aperture size can be varied by the change of applied voltage. PDLC (polymer dispersed liquid crystal) plays an important role in tunability of this device. By combing a micro dome structure and the PDLC, the tum-on threshold voltage at a farther radial position to the aperture center can be made higher than that at a closer position. This way, the aperture can open gradually as increasing the voltage."
-------


----------



## scyrene (Dec 4, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > Um, how does a camera (lens) without iris blades stop down to narrower apertures?
> ...



They need to work on their prose - that makes very hard reading. But I still don't understand. Something has to be moving to change the amount of light? Or is it making something more opaque?


----------



## brad-man (Dec 4, 2015)

scyrene said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



It is making a liquid crystal display go opaque, not unlike the display on a digital watch. No voltage and the glass is clear. Apply voltage to preprogramed "pixels" on the glass and you have a controlled pattern of whatever diameter for whatever duration that you want. It also sounds like the display is dimmable, which could lead to some new creative effects, as well as an electronic ND filter. So the question is, can they do it without screwing up the IQ?


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 4, 2015)

brad-man said:


> It is making a liquid crystal display go opaque, not unlike the display on a digital watch. No voltage and the glass is clear. Apply voltage to preprogramed "pixels" on the glass and you have a controlled pattern of whatever diameter for whatever duration that you want. It also sounds like the display is dimmable, which could lead to some new creative effects, as well as an electronic ND filter. So the question is, can they do it without screwing up the IQ?



Or: "will it screw-up IQ more than an Iris aperture does?" 

There will definitely ample opportunity to observe advantages and disasvantages of solid state variable aperture "mechanisms". It is not ready for primetime yet. Like so many other innovative features it will come first in smartphone cameras and last in larger sensor cameras and dead-last in "innovative Canon EOS DSLRs". 

Certainly not ready in time for 5D4, so i'll not go further OT on this. It was just to answer scyrenes' question re. Possibilities for apertures without moving parts.


----------



## scyrene (Dec 4, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> brad-man said:
> 
> 
> > It is making a liquid crystal display go opaque, not unlike the display on a digital watch. No voltage and the glass is clear. Apply voltage to preprogramed "pixels" on the glass and you have a controlled pattern of whatever diameter for whatever duration that you want. It also sounds like the display is dimmable, which could lead to some new creative effects, as well as an electronic ND filter. So the question is, can they do it without screwing up the IQ?
> ...



It's intriguing, but I'd put it in the category of ND filters, not aperture. It won't affect the depth of field, which is a primary motivation for stopping down.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 4, 2015)

scyrene said:


> It's intriguing, but I'd put it in the category of ND filters, not aperture. It won't affect the depth of field, which is a primary motivation for stopping down.



Of course it can create all DOF and optical effects an aperture can create. In its simplest form it will also just be a round hole of user selectable diameter blocking part of the lightpath. But ... It will be *perfectly round at any opening*.

And possibly we may even choose, whether the opening should be perfectly circular for great bokeh oof highlights (no cat eye shape) or with with points around the circumference for great sunstars when desired - with any number of points/rays. 

Or user selectable choice between clearly defined, hard edge between opaque and translucent area or a soft transition zone. 

Or a heart shaped opening for engagement shots ... Or any other optical effect possible with full user control over size and shape of that aperture opening ... programmable solid state electronics rule supreme over 19th century moving parts photo-mechanics. Shuttering iris blades, guillotining shutter curtains and flapping mirrors ... Be done with!

Except at Canon. Not even their 5D mark 99 will ever be innovative ...


----------



## scyrene (Dec 5, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > It's intriguing, but I'd put it in the category of ND filters, not aperture. It won't affect the depth of field, which is a primary motivation for stopping down.
> ...



Oh I see, so it would form a dark ring, that makes more sense.

You're excited by innovation, and that's great. So am I. But I have more reservations. If something is new, that doesn't mean it is better. Many innovations promise a great deal and fail to deliver. And many technologies are reliable after a long time.

So what if a technology was invented in the 19thC? It's been refined ever since. And things like aperture blades are extremely reliable and cheap. Maybe one day this will be too. But a company shouldn't abandon what works for every new thing that comes along.

(I take it you don't use electricity from coal or gas, for instance, as it's generated in an awfully old fashioned way. Heck, even nuclear energy is a good seventy years old now).


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 5, 2015)

scyrene said:


> (I take it you don't use electricity from coal or gas, for instance, as it's generated in an awfully old fashioned way. Heck, even nuclear energy is a good seventy years old now).



Hehe, i live in a beautiful country blessed with plenty of water and high mountains. Hydroelectrical power is our game. We got the perfect rechargable battery in combination with Solar energy harvested in Southern Europe and wind parks in northern Europe/off-shore.

At last and finally and before i die i want a truly electronic, truly digital, truly solid state camera. To me it is the only adequate tool in the 21st century to capture incoming photons and transform them into images. I want a total and ultimate cut from the tradition of photo chemistry, analogue stuff, moving parts and mechanical shenanigans. Although i do fully appreciate how innovative those solutions were 100+ Years ago. And how beautiful and elegant they are - in a museum. But not in my next camera, that Canon wants me to plonk down 3000 or 4000 of my hard-earned Euros (net, after paying heavy taxes, as i am not Conon or another multinational company that can legally avoid taxation).


----------



## scyrene (Dec 6, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > (I take it you don't use electricity from coal or gas, for instance, as it's generated in an awfully old fashioned way. Heck, even nuclear energy is a good seventy years old now).
> ...



Hydroelectric is a pretty old technology too... ;P

Once again you've not explained why non mechanical=better, but I accept that is your opinion. Please understand most other people just want solutions that work


----------



## martti (Dec 8, 2015)

I do not want a particular camera but there are pictures that I'd like to take.
What does it matter is a picture-making machine uses cow dung or wind power...that's not what counts but the pictures.

pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures pictures

f them cameras


----------



## AvTvM (May 20, 2016)

AvTvM said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > Um, how does a camera (lens) without iris blades stop down to narrower apertures?
> ...


----------



## Etienne (May 20, 2016)

scyrene said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



" Or is it making something more opaque?" That would be a neutral density filter. Aperture/Iris is a hole, and it affects DOF, amount of light, and often sharpness of the image. Some plastics might be flexible and controllable enough to flex to different aperture sizes.


----------



## AvTvM (May 21, 2016)

Etienne said:


> " Or is it making something more opaque?" That would be a neutral density filter. Aperture/Iris is a hole, and it affects DOF, amount of light, and often sharpness of the image. Some plastics might be flexible and controllable enough to flex to different aperture sizes.



it is a hole! A transparent circle in the center that can be varied in size, surrounded by an opaque/light-blocking area. Just like any iris/aperture. Only difference: no moving mechanical parts (no iris blades). 

Ramifications (as far as I expect them): 
* exposure and DOF control exactly as with old-style mech iris 
* diffraction: to be seen. Depends on how "hard-edged" or "soft/graduated" transition zone between transparent center and opaque surrounding area is 
* no pointy stars, since opening is perfectly circular at any size (I normally don't care for them anyways, they went out of fashion 100 years ago)


----------



## Ozarker (May 21, 2016)

scyrene said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > brad-man said:
> ...



Re: Lens with apertures without moving parts
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1132028-REG/lomography_z230c_petzval_85mm_f_2_2_lens.html?gclid=CM7judyY7MwCFU9cfgodOOoLgg


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 8, 2016)

If the speculation is right about an August annoucement this would be strange timing. Canon annouced the 
5D MKIII on March 2nd 2012 and the camera went on sale at the end of the same month, it also coincided with 25 years since the EOS system launch and Canon 75th anniversary. 
Photokina begins this year on September 20th slightly later than recent years and likely a good month after an August annoucement, contrast that with the 6D launch which was September 17th the day before Photokina 2012 (it went on sale at the end of November). 
If Canon do annouce the 5D MKIV in August is this allowing for annoucing the 6D MKII just before or during Photokina 2016 with a later on-sale date much like the 1D X MKII and the original 6D. 
Both these cameras are the oldest in the line up of both DSLRs and the M series cameras although the 7D had the longest recent production cycle being five years (the 7D MKII will not last that long given the Nikon D500).


----------

