# Review: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV by Lensrentals.com



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 3, 2016)

```
Roger <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/teardown-canon-eos-5d-mark-iv/">completed his teardown of the EOS 5D Mark IV</a> relatively quickly, now the folks at Lensrentals.com have completed their review of the EOS 5D Mark IV, and I pretty much agree with their assessment of the camera and its place in the industry.</p>
<p><strong>From Lensrentals.com</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Heads up, here comes a short rant. Upon the announcement of this camera, it was instantly met with some harsh critics on the feature list of the system. People want a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon – and they want the price to sit under $3,000. Sure, this camera doesn’t have anything and may not have pushed the bounds of the industry, but the Canon 5D series has never been about being revolutionary in features, but being revolutionary in practicality….. <a href="https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/09/lensrentals-com-reviews-the-canon-5d-mark-iv/">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Canon EOS 5D Mark IV</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>USA </strong><em>$3499</em><strong>:</strong> <a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1274705-REG/canon_eos_5d_mark_iv.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/2bk6MtW">Amazon</a> | <a href="http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5574981434&toolid=10001&campid=5337955022&customid=&icep_item=172357382724&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg">ebay</a> | <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/cameras/canon-5d-mark-iv">Lensrentals</a></li>
</ul>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 3, 2016)

BigAntTVProductions said:


> this review is from sept 29 u guys are just seeing this and or reposting it again?



So what. Everybody takes some time off now and then.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 3, 2016)

Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!

People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
- Articulating screen
- Silent Photo Shooting
- EVF reviewing and filming
- Sensor stabilization
- Pixelshift
- Focus Peaking
- Zebra
- Fully assignable buttons 
- Third wheel for ISO 
- APS-C Crop Lens compatibility
- Speedbooster Option
- App installation
- Hot Shoe multi use for audio etc
- Thumbnail Videos
- Video Log/Raw Mode
- 4K shooting in real Full Frame
- 4K shooting in any zoom range between Full Frame and the middle 8 MP crop
- 4K in 3840 width
- 4K with efficient codec
- HDMI out in 4K
- 4K 60fps
- 240fps Video
- Focus stacking mode

The worst thing is that Canon just did release their best flagship cameras with the 5D4 and 1DX2, that have to last until 2020 with a big gap in specs, as the follow ups of the 6D and 5DsR will hardly include anything of a long list of convenient and modern features. At the same time you can expect that Sony will come out with a new camera until 2017 that merges the best specs of the A99II and A7RII, who are both not having a nearly equally long list of missing features compared to the 5D4.

The times have changed. In 2008 the 5D2 was alone on the market with its set of features and offered (unfortunately by chance it seems) more than people expected, which is why the feedback was 95% positive. Now we have 2016, and subjectively 50% of all people are disappointed about the 5D4, because Canon still acts as if they just have to be a bit better than Nikon and nothing else, like in the last decades.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 4, 2016)

YAWN!
The troll just can't help it. Shame that the billy goats of reality have higher IQ.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Oct 4, 2016)

I have only one big complaint about the review: it touts the Dual Pixel RAW feature as it's top Pro while the article states this, "So while I wasn’t able to test this feature (yet), I’m looking forward to seeing how it works when it becomes more readily available." I don't think you can [credibly] list a feature that you haven't tested as one of the top assets of the camera.

I agree that the Dual Pixel RAW has potential in the future, but as it stands the feature is pretty close to useless. The differences you can make are so minuscule as to not at all be worth doubling your file size.

I like the 5D Mark IV a lot, but of the reasons that I do like it so far, Dual Pixel RAW is certainly not one of them.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 4, 2016)

That's a LR marketing article. I won't take it seriously.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 4, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> YAWN!
> The troll just can't help it. Shame that the billy goats of reality have higher IQ.



You got astray in the wrong forum, this one is for Canon users and about the future of Canon products. The forums for offending other people without a reason are elsewhere. Goodbye.


----------



## pwp (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > YAWN!
> ...



+1

-pw


----------



## Alex_M (Oct 4, 2016)

If true, than the price of the Canon 5D Mark IV should come down rapidly and by significant amount. We should also expect a flood of used cameras on eBay offloaded by their disappointed owners. Who is going to neeed such a lacking product for US$3500 when there tons of cheaper and better options around? Unfortunately (for cash limited would be buyers), not true and not going to happen. Wedding photogs will continue vote for the camera with their dollars and value of the camera will hold well in time as it should. 




douglaurent said:


> Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> 
> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen
> ...


----------



## unfocused (Oct 4, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> YAWN!
> The troll just can't help it. Shame that the billy goats of reality have higher IQ.



So true. Trolls seem to think that if they repeat themselves frequently enough, their falsehoods will become true. This rant has been more than sufficiently debunked on other threads, I see no reason why we have to keep hearing it over and over again.

[quote author=troll]
subjectively 50% of all people are disappointed about the 5D4[/quote]

Oh how I long for the good old days of "Karma," when readers could instantly identify a troll by their record.


----------



## Ryananthony (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> 
> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen
> ...



Sounds like you need a dedicated video camera and not a stills camera with video features. I sure don't need any of that shit in my camera.


----------



## eguzowski (Oct 4, 2016)

I've been published in National Geographic, Shot for The New York Times, Associated Press etc etc..I was a photojournalist for 10 years and been around the world to super bowls, march madness, politics in Gaza, Bosnia, Africa etc....I don't care if I shoot Canon, Nikon or a Brownie as long as it's the best tool at the time!

For the last 10 years (Ive been a pro photographer for over 20 years) I've shot mostly weddings and corporate events. I need low-light cameras what also autofocus well in low light. I also need video now! My clients want it, my bank account needs it and it's an industry standard in DSLR cameras now.

Today and forever more DSLR cameras will have both (video is just a bunch of stills anyway?) Sony and Panasonic have stepped up the game in this market... Sony's 5 axis IS (even canon's c300 doesn't have this!), it shoots 4k at a reasonable processing codec unlike canon's ridiculous one, both camera's crazy high Mega Pixels are unimportant to me...why do I want my computer and camera to slow down when I'm shooting several thousand images at a wedding? Why do I want to process and store those large of files? with the sony I can shoot 120FPS at full HD and Canon only 60FPS (my iPhone 6plus is better!)...SOny has the 16x9 format I need always while canon is cinema 35mm crop in 4k??? Canon is not allowing companies like Sigma to use their glass correctly on the 5D Mark IV. etc etc...Canon's AF in video with touch screen AF is the only big plus over Sony. (something I'll miss for sure) 

Canon is like a lame duck president on it's way out... Looks like I'll be be dropping them and making the switch to the innovator in low light, image stabilization, allowing lenses from all manufacturers, using a reasonable codec, keeping 16x9, ........Canon dropped the ball and isn't going to try and catch up as it makes more video cameras.

No worries... time to invest in the present/future...hello Sony!


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 4, 2016)

eguzowski said:


> No worries... time to invest in the present/future...hello Sony!



You should certainly buy the gear that suits your needs best...there's nothing wrong with that.


----------



## TeT (Oct 4, 2016)

eguzowski said:


> ...No worries... time to invest in the present/future...hello Sony!



and goodbye eguzowski, dont let the door etc.. etc..



Orangutan said:


> You should certainly buy the gear that suits your needs best...there's nothing wrong with that.



+1


----------



## Alex_M (Oct 4, 2016)

None of the pros with 20 years of industry leading experience behind his shoulders will act as this person does: childish, immature short sighted approach.


----------



## Moulyneau (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> 
> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen
> ...



Since you seem to just regret 5D4 is not a MILC. you could just say it and move along. It just so happens that the 5D4 is selling by boatloads (and 5D3 still by truckloads...). Like it or not, looks like lots of people are happy with it and its mirror and will continue so for years to come. So, what's the whining?

To me, you're the one on the wrong forum.


----------



## M_S (Oct 4, 2016)

Ryananthony said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> ...



See thats the problem imo. No you don't. These are features that more or less exist in todays cameras of lesser caliber than the Mark IV. Not in one camera, but that would be a bang-camera if it would have all the features. The Mark IV was the camera I believed would do the trick, once again, like in old times. But it failed for me. Hence: I won't buy it, keeping my Mark III. Its the only way I can "show" Canon to improve (not me alone of course, but sales figures is the feedback they should understand), what other alternative besides talks on trade fairs do I have?
Hybrid is the way these cameras have to evolve or they become obsolete in the future. Videos are shot more and more these days with smartphones with small devices like the gopro or nikon 360 or whatever. Cameras are used for "both" now, like smartphones are used for surfing the net+taking pics+organizer+shooting video. There will always be room for dedicated video cameras for the pro market. But to say to get a hugely expensive video camera just for shooting proper video, knowing that there are devices out there, that can do both, is, at least for me, a statement of yesteryear...


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 4, 2016)

M_S said:


> See thats the problem imo. No you don't. These are features that more or less exist in todays cameras of lesser caliber than the Mark IV. Not in one camera, but that would be a bang-camera if it would have all the features. The Mark IV was the camera I believed would do the trick, once again, like in old times. But it failed for me. Hybrid is the way these cameras have to evolve or they become obsolete in the future. Videos are shot more and more these days with smartphones with small devices like the gopro or nikon 360 or whatever. Cameras are used for "both" now, like smartphones are used for surfing the net+taking pics+organizer+shooting video. There will always be room for dedicated video cameras for the pro market. *But to say to get a hugely expensive video camera just for shooting proper video, knowing that there are devices out there, that can do both, is, at least for me, a statement of yesteryear...*


Er...in case you hadn't noticed the 5DIV does have video. The issue comes in that people expect in the 5DIV the same standard of video as they get in top class video machines (as typified by the text in bold).
Sure the Sony has full-whack video but from what I read also has significant heating issues after a short time. Canon has a long history of including functions only when those functions offer genuine advancement and as far as I can see it is no point asking the camera to do professional grade video if you cannot shoot for professional periods of time. Which is shy Canon believes a really, really serious videographer will choose a dedicated machine not a DLSR or mirrorless DSLR-type.


----------



## arcer (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> 
> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen
> ...



Dear Doug,

I hope you can put your effort, money, and time in writing thousands of letters to all Canon offices that can receive mails, as I think it might be much more effective than sharing your precious opinions on this forums. None here works for Canon directly and it is not likely for any Canon officials to be wandering in this forum often enough to read your insights.

So, I plead that you stop wasting your time here as it will not bring you any fruitful conclusion. Only short-sighted people populates this forum and you don't have the obligation to show them the light. So please, let me repeat it again, give up this dark place which will only make you more miserable.

If in the end, Canon still cannot serve you, then it is fully your right to transfer to another system. Why wait for them to serve you when there are other better choices?

Yours sincerely,
Fellow forum reader


----------



## arcer (Oct 4, 2016)

eguzowski said:


> I've been published in National Geographic, Shot for The New York Times, Associated Press etc etc..I was a photojournalist for 10 years and been around the world to super bowls, march madness, politics in Gaza, Bosnia, Africa etc....I don't care if I shoot Canon, Nikon or a Brownie as long as it's the best tool at the time!
> 
> For the last 10 years (Ive been a pro photographer for over 20 years) I've shot mostly weddings and corporate events. I need low-light cameras what also autofocus well in low light. I also need video now! My clients want it, my bank account needs it and it's an industry standard in DSLR cameras now.
> 
> ...



Thanks for sharing.

Looks like the tools are what put you onto magazines, newspaper, and other places. I really hope that you can buy the best tools in the industry and fully rely on them to keep yourself important. Don't let yourself be limited to one system.

By the way, skills are not important anyway, so don't linger on it.

Cheers.


----------



## LDS (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen
> [...]
> - Focus stacking mode



What part of "_People want a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon – and they want the price to sit under $3,000._ " you missed? Probably he should also have added "the iPhone experience" too...

Mixing pro video features with generic consumer oriented ones ("apps installation"? c'mon!) is not sound design... and it's clear the 5D IV is not aimed at filmmakers.


----------



## M_S (Oct 4, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> M_S said:
> 
> 
> > See thats the problem imo. No you don't. These are features that more or less exist in todays cameras of lesser caliber than the Mark IV. Not in one camera, but that would be a bang-camera if it would have all the features. The Mark IV was the camera I believed would do the trick, once again, like in old times. But it failed for me. Hybrid is the way these cameras have to evolve or they become obsolete in the future. Videos are shot more and more these days with smartphones with small devices like the gopro or nikon 360 or whatever. Cameras are used for "both" now, like smartphones are used for surfing the net+taking pics+organizer+shooting video. There will always be room for dedicated video cameras for the pro market. *But to say to get a hugely expensive video camera just for shooting proper video, knowing that there are devices out there, that can do both, is, at least for me, a statement of yesteryear...*
> ...



Yeah. Er... I noticed. But you didn't get what I was trying to say. Just giving the capability of getting top class gear and leaving out the stuff that makes that capability useable is just leaving the stuff out of the camera. Its like saying "hey that car drives as fast as a ferrari" but putting not seat in the car. From a marketing standpoint the company can say that the car is as fast as a ferrari, but the user will scratch his had and will move on to a car, that is equally priced, has the speed of the ferrari and still costs as much as a ford.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 4, 2016)

No idea what your analogy is about but 


> Just giving the capability of getting top class gear and leaving out the stuff that makes that capability useable is just leaving the stuff out of the camera.



Fact is, Canon hasn't given the capability so in that respect has not left anything out. It was a design choice. They have made it clear that they will not put that functionality in their stills-oriented cameras (yet). 
They have however given it the capability of a stills camera (which is what it is) and done a damned fine job.


----------



## LDS (Oct 4, 2016)

M_S said:


> But to say to get a hugely expensive video camera just for shooting proper video, knowing that there are devices out there, that can do both, is, at least for me, a statement of yesteryear...



The issue is how properly they can do both, really. The ergonomics of a camera to shoot professional video is very different from a still one. You can rig a DSLR to mimic a video camera, and still you have a DSLR which is clumsier to use for professional video. And if a DSLR would move toward a video camera, it would lose its comfortable ergonomics for stills.

Sometimes, a device that can do both even with limitations is OK, often it is not. A product that can't really deliver what it promises will just make users discontent, but those who just look at the specs and never really use the features they demand for...


----------



## suburbia (Oct 4, 2016)

If I have to read about zebras one more time...


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 4, 2016)

To be fair, zebras have a use even for stills photographers when shooting with LiveView. I think their association with video may be where Canon does not incorporate it to their DSLRs. Similarly for focus peaking in manual focussing. Maybe Canon don't rate LiveView function as highly as their OVF whereas with EVFs focus peaking and zebras are more useful simply because they are visible in the viewfinder. 

Still not a deal breaker for me, just musing.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 4, 2016)

M_S said:


> These are features that more or less exist in todays cameras of lesser caliber than the Mark IV. Not in one camera, but *that would be a bang-camera if it would have all the features*.


Features cost money: R&D, integration, documentation, tech support, repair, etc. Piling on new features with low demand just pours money down a hole. To repeat, yet again: I'd love to have all of these features in my Canon body, but I can see that Canon is making the smart business choice by improving the features that promote sales, and deferring features that do not.


----------



## bmpress (Oct 4, 2016)

Thank you all for your comments. My personal decision is to keep my 5D III for another three years until the dynamic range is improved.


----------



## Memdroid (Oct 4, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> To be fair, zebras have a use even for stills photographers when shooting with LiveView. I think their association with video may be where Canon does not incorporate it to their DSLRs. Similarly for focus peaking in manual focussing. Maybe Canon don't rate LiveView function as highly as their OVF whereas with EVFs focus peaking and zebras are more useful simply because they are visible in the viewfinder.
> 
> Still not a deal breaker for me, just musing.



I think this is why Canon is not incorporating this feature. DPAF tackles this in Liveview already and is highly accurate.


----------



## Alex_M (Oct 4, 2016)

Let the Canon's official explain what was the driver behind their decision not to include some of the video features that are being discussed. please watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqF-DxCqczA


----------



## M_S (Oct 4, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> No idea what your analogy is about but
> 
> 
> > Just giving the capability of getting top class gear and leaving out the stuff that makes that capability useable is just leaving the stuff out of the camera.
> ...


It's a hybrid camera, it has stills and video capability, like every other camera out there today on the market. One of many. So it is at best "also" a stills camera not only a stills camera per se. It has some cool features in the stills area, granted, but even there, there are obstacles which show that they made some very odd design choices, to which they sticked to the end.


----------



## LDS (Oct 4, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> To be fair, zebras have a use even for stills photographers when shooting with LiveView.



I would find much more useful the viewfinder right side exposure meter which AFAIK comes with the 7D II and 1DX only, which allows for taking separate measurement in spot mode, assessing differences, and, if it works like in the old T90, also create a designed "average" exposure.

Zebras tell me little about contrast and lighting ratios. And unlike a video, people peruse a photo details much more. And not everything can be properly fix in postproduction.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 4, 2016)

Alex_M said:


> Let the Canon's official explain what was the driver behind their decision not to include some of the video features that are being discussed. please watch:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqF-DxCqczA



Excellent link. Thanks for posting.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Oct 4, 2016)

bmpress said:


> Thank you all for your comments. My personal decision is to keep my 5D III for another three years until the dynamic range is improved.



That's ironic, as this is one area that is vastly improved over any previous Canon camera. http://bit.ly/2dB2W6f

The difference between the 5D Mark IV and the Sony A7r II is minuscule, and the 5D Mark IV is an infinitely better handling camera.


----------



## nehemiah (Oct 4, 2016)

M_S said:


> Yeah. Er... I noticed. But you didn't get what I was trying to say. Just giving the capability of getting top class gear and leaving out the stuff that makes that capability useable is just leaving the stuff out of the camera. Its like saying "hey that car drives as fast as a ferrari" but putting not seat in the car. From a marketing standpoint the company can say that the car is as fast as a ferrari, but the user will scratch his had and will move on to a car, that is equally priced, *has the speed of the ferrari and still costs as much as a ford*.



Where is this car? I'd like to purchase one.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Oct 4, 2016)

nehemiah said:


> M_S said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah. Er... I noticed. But you didn't get what I was trying to say. Just giving the capability of getting top class gear and leaving out the stuff that makes that capability useable is just leaving the stuff out of the camera. Its like saying "hey that car drives as fast as a ferrari" but putting not seat in the car. From a marketing standpoint the company can say that the car is as fast as a ferrari, but the user will scratch his had and will move on to a car, that is equally priced, *has the speed of the ferrari and still costs as much as a ford*.
> ...



The Ford GT qualifies on the speed front, and since it is a Ford, I guess it costs as much as a Ford  Get in line...I'm afraid they're all sold out, though.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Oct 4, 2016)

I always find posts like this curious, it's kind of like things those who have not had any experience with the camera say...soooo...here we go



douglaurent said:


> Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> 
> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper (cheaper than what? d810 is around the same price, so is the a7r2. d750 is IMO not a direct competitor)and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen not everyone wants that, in fact, many are very vocally against it - myself included.
> ...



In summary, have fun with your sony camera's, because it sounds like you just need to buy a sony. I really really hope that the folks at canon are taking the demands of video people with a huge grain of salt, because video folks seem to be really hard to please....


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Oct 4, 2016)

Alex_M said:


> If true, than the price of the Canon 5D Mark IV should come down rapidly and by significant amount. We should also expect a flood of used cameras on eBay offloaded by their disappointed owners. Who is going to neeed such a lacking product for US$3500 when there tons of cheaper and better options around? Unfortunately (for cash limited would be buyers), not true and not going to happen. Wedding photogs will continue vote for the camera with their dollars and value of the camera will hold well in time as it should.



holy crap, pinch me, I am actually agreeing with you


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 4, 2016)

This forum will be interesting in the years 2020-2030, when all the Canon customers who are happy with the current limitations have to become very angry, as Canon by then over the years had implemented all those features of the competitors. All of you please store my wish list from today, so you have a "feature removal" list at hand in the future you can send to Canon - because focus peaking, sensor stabilization etc are really devil's work.

I am a happy person now and in the future, as depending on the project I will use a 5D4, 1DX2, A7R2, A7S2 or other cameras I own, which means any minute I can already work with all relevant features - just not all of them in the same camera, which is inconvenient sometimes. The missing features are much more inconvenient for those who only have access to one camera, or the cameras of one brand.

At the same time I feel sorry for all who don't see any necessity to put pressure on manufacturers, and pay the highest possible prices for intentionally limited products. Maybe someone could answer me which disadvantage you see for the Canon consumers, when someone asks Canon to implement features of their competitors? Any camera includes dozens of features an individual user will not need, so where is the problem?


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 4, 2016)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> I always find posts like this curious, it's kind of like things those who have not had any experience with the camera say...soooo...here we go
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am very happy with all of my Canon and Sony cameras, but I am sad to see Canon being historically behind its competition regarding features in current cameras - especially when we all know they could offer much more and are the overall best brand.

Your red comments do explain why YOU don't need these features. Many other people like and need these features, which is why many bought an A7R2 that already includes most of my list. If you think change and progress is bad, you think against the nature of the planet, business and markets.


----------



## that1guyy (Oct 4, 2016)

So many dinosaurs in this room.


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Oct 4, 2016)

CanonFanBoy said:


> BigAntTVProductions said:
> 
> 
> > this review is from sept 29 u guys are just seeing this and or reposting it again?
> ...



know ya role mind ya business


----------



## LordofTackle (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> This forum will be interesting in the years 2020-2030, when all the Canon customers who are happy with the current limitations have to become very angry, as Canon by then over the years had implemented all those features of the competitors. All of you please store my wish list from today, so you have a "feature removal" list at hand in the future you can send to Canon - because focus peaking, sensor stabilization etc are really devil's work.
> 
> I am a happy person now and in the future, as depending on the project I will use a 5D4, 1DX2, A7R2, A7S2 or other cameras I own, which means any minute I can already work with all relevant features - just not all of them in the same camera, which is inconvenient sometimes. The missing features are much more inconvenient for those who only have access to one camera, or the cameras of one brand.
> 
> At the same time I feel sorry for all who don't see any necessity to put pressure on manufacturers, and pay the highest possible prices for intentionally limited products. Maybe someone could answer me which disadvantage you see for the Canon consumers, when someone asks Canon to implement features of their competitors? Any camera includes dozens of features an individual user will not need, so where is the problem?



You do realize that if Canon would implement everything that is on YOUR Wishlist, the camera would cost probably 1000-2000$ more than its already pretty high price? For that price they would sell probably about 90% less units. In MY view, this is neither in Canons interest nor in the interest of most of the users. Maybe you are part of the really really small minority that would pay the premium for these features, but from what I read here at CR and elsewhere, other users are already unhappy with the current price (but usually NOT unhappy with the feature set). 

There is actually not a single item on your list that I would want/need. My only personal critique with the 5D4 (haven't used it) is the choice of cards. No CFast or other fast medium really is a bad move. Other than that, I think it's a great all-round camera, and that's what it is supposed to be! If you want to film professionally, by all means, buy a professional video rig. 
And judging from your wishes, as others already pointed out, just buy a Sony and be happy. 

Of course all users and buyers have different wishes and use-scenarios, so probably no one will ever be entirely happy, but it's a pretty decent rig judging from the specs (and my experience with the 1DX2).
Just my 2c.


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> 
> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen
> ...



YOUR POST IS SPOT ON
i have no complaints bout the 5d4 i dont shoot video like i have before so im not worried bout the 4k crop bs
i have wide angle lens for it though so im covered just my macbook hd will not even touch the super huge 4k files unless canon changes the codec asap


----------



## arcer (Oct 4, 2016)

Shh....... Do anyone hear that? Someone is screaming out loud that his demands represents the majority. Nah....maybe I'm just hallucinating.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV is marketed as a DSLR stills camera that happens to also have video capabilities. Just enough video features for those who need to take some quick clips with the camera he got on hand. If you need equipment to produce video professionally, Canon also provides the quite capable EOS Cinema line introduced a few years ago. Yes, it might still lacks some features but at least most stuff on it works reliably, like what a Canon product should do. I really love the word "Market Segmentation", because it makes sense for a business. If you run a profitable one, then you absolutely understand what it represents.

Canon do things differently. Nikon do things differently. Sony tried to do a lot of things differently. Pentax is at his own corner doing his own stuff differently. Fuji makes different stuff differently. etc etc. If a company serves you better, you're better off at their camp.

Empires rise and fall, and maybe, just maybe, Canon will meets its doom by 2020. Why does it matters to you like its death will equals your death? Canon might become the next Kodak, or the Blackberry of the camera industry. But why must you dwell in decrying the way Canon do stuffs? Yes, they might be slow, they might be conservative, or they might just be trying to deliver reliable products to their intended market (aka absolutely not you). Or......they are deliberately doing a bad job so they can infuriate forum dwellers for their own leisure.

The mass consumer market do hold the greatest vote in the life and death of a company (as repeated by numerous contributors here) and it seems that a lot of people are still satisfied with the status quo as shown by the released numbers.

Requesting for features is not a sin, but repeating your claims on a forum not operated by Canon does not really help anything at all. So why bother repeating yourself like a broken record? Or.....are you really just a broken record?


----------



## LordofTackle (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Your red comments do explain why YOU don't need these features. Many other people like and need these features, which is why many bought an A7R2 that already includes most of my list. If you think change and progress is bad, you think against the nature of the planet, business and markets.



Conversely, your comments show what only YOU want/need, many other people don't want or need them. 
Obviously, you are a pretty small minority (according to Canon, otherwise they would have implemented at least some of the features).
Sure, progress it good and important (and Canon shows that, eg with the implementation of DPRAW (something that is, at least for me, completely unnecessary)), but only when I get a well functioning product.


----------



## LordofTackle (Oct 4, 2016)

arcer said:


> Shh....... Do anyone hear that? Someone is screaming out loud that his demands represents the majority. Nah....maybe I'm just hallucinating.
> 
> The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV is marketed as a DSLR stills camera that happens to also have video capabilities. Just enough video features for those who need to take some quick clips with the camera he got on hand. If you need equipment to produce video professionally, Canon also provides the quite capable EOS Cinema line introduced a few years ago. Yes, it might still lacks some features but at least most stuff on it works reliably, like what a Canon product should do. I really love the word "Market Segmentation", because it makes sense for a business. If you run a profitable one, then you absolutely understand what it represents.
> 
> ...


+1


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> 
> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen
> ...



what a moronic post.. basically you're complaining it's not a mirrorless and comparing a camera based upon spec sheets.

what's even more idiotic is that you think you can use a speed booster in a full frame camera.


----------



## arcer (Oct 4, 2016)

I'm so sorry guys, I tried to stop myself from answering trolls, it's making me an addict. And finally after a short two months, I relapsed. Please forgive me guys. This is worse than having GAS.

Ok, back to the topic.

As Canon does not currently compare their products with Sony, I don't think you will ever see a Sony-spec'ed camera from Canon in your lifetime. It's like comparing the Ferrari 458 with the Ford F-150, it looks cool comparing them both on paper, but in reality, it doesn't really make any sense at all.

Just my 2cents.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> This forum will be interesting in the years 2020-2030, when all the Canon customers who are happy with the current limitations have to become very angry, as Canon by then over the years had implemented all those features of the competitors. All of you please store my wish list from today, so you have a "feature removal" list at hand in the future you can send to Canon - because focus peaking, sensor stabilization etc are really devil's work.
> 
> I am a happy person now and in the future, as depending on the project I will use a 5D4, 1DX2, A7R2, A7S2 or other cameras I own, which means any minute I can already work with all relevant features - just not all of them in the same camera, which is inconvenient sometimes. The missing features are much more inconvenient for those who only have access to one camera, or the cameras of one brand.
> 
> At the same time I feel sorry for all who don't see any necessity to put pressure on manufacturers, and pay the highest possible prices for intentionally limited products. Maybe someone could answer me which disadvantage you see for the Canon consumers, when someone asks Canon to implement features of their competitors? Any camera includes dozens of features an individual user will not need, so where is the problem?



You really are an intellectual minnow.
Nobody that I can see said that they are happy with the current limitations. What they have said is that they see no pressing need to implement the additions you so badly need to the point where they believe (as you do) that Canon is ******* as a commercial proposition. 
Neither has anyone said that Canon will NOT implement the changes you requested. Simply that Canon see no imperative to implement them now. You are clearly unable to understand that piece of logic.




> I am a happy person now and in the future, as depending on the project I will use a 5D4, 1DX2, A7R2, A7S2 or other cameras I own, which means any minute I can already work with all relevant features - just not all of them in the same camera, which is inconvenient sometimes.



You say you are happy carrying all these cameras around - so what are you whining about?
But I trust you have been on the Sony forums telling anyone who will listen how incompetent Sony are for not putting everything in one camera so you only need carry one body with you. How they are so short-sighted the company is ******* to failure by deliberately crippling their products. 




> At the same time I feel sorry for all who...pay the highest possible prices for intentionally limited products.



Do you feel sorry for yourself for using a 5D4 (which you say you are happy using)? What an odd little boy you are.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 4, 2016)

arcer said:


> I'm so sorry guys, I tried to stop myself from answering trolls, it's making me an addict. And finally after a short two months, I relapsed. Please forgive me guys. This is worse than having GAS.



Two months before falling off the wagon? I'm proud of you, I wish I could say the same for myself.


----------



## arcer (Oct 4, 2016)

unfocused said:


> arcer said:
> 
> 
> > I'm so sorry guys, I tried to stop myself from answering trolls, it's making me an addict. And finally after a short two months, I relapsed. Please forgive me guys. This is worse than having GAS.
> ...



Haha, thanks. That's what happens when you're too busy taking photos and cataloging and post processing, than going troll hunting on this forum for the summer.

Disclaimer: I AM A PHOTOGRAPHER AND I LIKE WHERE CANON IS GOING WITH THE 5D4.


----------



## LordofTackle (Oct 4, 2016)

arcer said:


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



+1

I like your signature phrase below: *Shoot more, whine less.*
We should all take that to heart....some maybe more than others


----------



## Refurb7 (Oct 4, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!!!
> 
> People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
> - Articulating screen
> ...



I don't care about anything on that list. Not one thing. So I guess the 5D4 was made specifically for me. Thank you Canon!

I'm going to happily keep making photos without "app installation" etc. Let other cameras do that.


----------



## dak723 (Oct 4, 2016)

I do a lot of hiking and traveling with my dog, and I must say that after using the camera now for 2 weeks, I am quite disappointed. I don't like to rant and whine, because I do understand that my wants are not everyone's wants, but if I can't share my thoughts here on CR, where can I?

I agree with those who think the Canon 5D IV's spec list is really lacking (I won't say crippled) - especially for those who use the camera on field trips, hiking adventures and vacations in the woods. Here's my list:
-retractable toothbrush
-nail file
-mini flashlight
-folding scissors
-can or bottle opener
-screwdriver 
-saw (manual or power)
-insect repellent canister (refillable)
-dog poop bag holder
-tissue dispenser
-flare launcher

I am sure there are even more items that Canon could have added, but we all know how conservative they are. I was really hopeful that these items would be included in the spec list for the 5D IV, but now it looks like I will have to wait until at least 2037 or so, when the Mark V comes out. Stupid Canon!


----------



## dadohead (Oct 4, 2016)

dak723 said:


> I do a lot of hiking and traveling with my dog, and I must say that after using the camera now for 2 weeks, I am quite disappointed. I don't like to rant and whine, because I do understand that my wants are not everyone's wants, but if I can't share my thoughts here on CR, where can I?
> 
> I agree with those who think the Canon 5D IV's spec list is really lacking (I won't say crippled) - especially for those who use the camera on field trips, hiking adventures and vacations in the woods. Here's my list:
> -retractable toothbrush
> ...



Bravo!


----------



## zim (Oct 4, 2016)

dak723 said:


> ......
> -can or bottle opener
> ....



Actually they've had that feature for quite some time, the left hand strap lug 8)


FWIW my list of things I'd have like to have seen on the 5div

8fps RAW with a 4sec buffer. (I know it's close but if I'm honest it's annoying me)
A mechanical switch lock on the lens release button - when in the off position the button works as is, slide to on position and the button cannot be pressed in. (yeah I'm paranoid)

Are those deal breakers, no. The price is but I was never going to buy in the first year anyway.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 4, 2016)

I hope the mods are working hard to determine who is using multiple accounts, because we have a poster, a very annoying one, who is trying to dominate this thread with the same rants she uses in many other threads, and, I'm very sure, providing her own support by using other NEW names to chime in. I've seen this same pattern now for months; I believe one or two persons are using about six different names.

Maybe it's beyond the mods ability to detect multiple accounts; if so, can the forum software be updated to help with this?

Makes for very uneven, frustrating reading of the threads.
*
One of the tell-tales is that the NEW name joining the thread is a photographer with a world class resume, having worked for the biggest publications, courageous under fire--but still coming here anonymously to make snarky, ridiculous assertions supporting the equally ridiculous huffing and puffing of the person who is constantly making the same rants.*


----------



## uxr51 (Oct 4, 2016)

that1guyy said:


> So many dinosaurs in this room.



I'm having deja vu. Endless discussions years ago with older people on film vs digital SLRs. 

The thing is they are old and canon fans. If canon gave them a turd sandwich, they would be perfectly happy and go on about how its tasty enough and the pros are not complaining so it should be good and everyone else is wrong because they have been taking pictures for years.

It useless to have a discussion that criticizes the very same thing which they are fanatic about or what they cannot understand. 

Me? I own canon. But not a fan. There is a difference. And no, I will not switch to Sony for the time being. (in case some one was writing it already  )


----------



## dafrank (Oct 4, 2016)

Because I'm in the middle of adding a new computer to my herd, and rotating the other two for different duties, I thought I'd take a break, read CR and do that rare thing, chime in on the forum.

Well, like some of the posters here who didn't like the 5D4 (we still love them anyway, right?), I'll present some bona fides. I have been a professional image maker since about 1978, or a little before that - I can't really recall right now. I have shot for the biggest media in the town where I settled - around Detroit - and, as far as national media is concerned, for (sorry if some of you whippersnappers haven't even heard of some of these "dead tree" publications): Time, People, Fortune, Newsweek, Business Week, Money, Forbes, Vogue, Playboy, Ladies Home Journal, Car and Driver, Automobile, Motor trend, Hot Rod, HBO and many, many more, even, at one time having Secret Service credentials to cover a couple of Presidential elections for various Time, Inc. publications. As far as corporate stuff, most of what I do today, let's just say that I've shot for dozens of the very largest corporations in the world and many of their ad agencies as well, mostly shooting people, cars, smaller products, a little fashion, industrial and commercial environments, and general corporate capability.

I've actually been a "producer" and director - but never the camera operator - on some fairly big video productions for some big names like Ford Motor Company, but, currently, as a lone wolf, one-man show with a part-time assistant, I'm entering into a different video category, wearing many hats instead of one. In this new role, I have shot some video for some clients, but I am just starting to truly add video work in a more serious way. I am a pioneer of digital imaging, starting to scan my own large format film and drum scan it in-house for the serious ad-level retouching I did, starting in 1995 or so, By 2002, my studio was almost 100 percent digital capture, using whatever device would suit the job - Nikon or Canon cameras, Phase One backs on medium format, etc.

All that is prologue to this: last week I bought a 5D4. Haven't yet done more than test it for stills and video so far, but it appears to be a great professional tool, just like its predecessors were, only better. Yes, some other cameras may have some nicer video features. They may squeeze out one stop or less additional DR, or a few more megapixels for stills, have zebra stripes and low contrast log settings, but for actually taking pictures and shooting good, sharp and colorful video, this camera seems to be a terrific improvement over the 5D3 and most every other "fx" DSLR or mirrorless out there in its class.

I hate to use a cliché, but if you can't produce beautiful and valuable stills and video that your clients will like and, more importantly, pay for, with this camera, forget the new hardware and take a couple more classes to improve yourself. And, I'm quite sure the 5D4 will be usable in the same way 3 years from now.

Going on about some wish-feature list that this camera lacks simply ignores what it does have - what most people in this part of the photo market actually need. And, if you're sure that some other camera suits you so much better - fine, just buy that one and have a great life!

Well, back to work for me.

Good luck and good shooting to all.

Regards,
David

Don't worry, be happy.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 5, 2016)

About the Lensrentals review: Thank you! This is an on the level, sober assessment of Canon's new entry in the extremely solid 5D series.

From what I read, photographers who have worn out their 5DIII will be very happy using the 5DIV. Photographers itching to move up to full frame will be thrilled.

Those looking for included video that rivals dedicated cinema quality cameras will be buying the wrong camera, but for those of us wanting to add video elements to presentations and 90% of event and wedding slide shows, mission accomplished.

Not everybody is going to "get" this review. But people who love photography and have enough hours of passionate experience certainly appreciate it!


----------



## JoeDavid (Oct 5, 2016)

My only criticism is all of the ranting he does about the menus when shooting video. All you have to do is set up some "My Menus" tabs with the settings that you would regularly change or tweak during a shoot and you're good to go. I set up 3 tabs and that was all I needed for both stills and video. I only go hunting through the standard menus for items that I rarely change...


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > I always find posts like this curious, it's kind of like things those who have not had any experience with the camera say...soooo...here we go
> ...



And that is the difference - I am speaking on behalf of myself - I'm not assuming the features I want and need are the thoughts and feelings of the majority - unlike you who assumes that everyone not only agrees but is ranting and raving about this. Yes, there are some who agree with you, an yes, there are others who agree with some of the things on your list, but there are others who have features they desired that aren't on your list - (like one who mentioned C-fast). There are also quite a few who think the 5d3 was so good they don't need the 5d4. And there are others as well that like the 5d4 pretty much as is. The thing of it is, as many here will point out, sales figures do show some tangible evidence that a vast amount of people are still pretty happy with canon products. So, not saying I speak for the majority, but, my opinion on things does seem to line up more with the majoirty of buyers than yours does.



douglaurent said:


> This forum will be interesting in the years 2020-2030, when all the Canon customers who are happy with the current limitations have to become very angry, as Canon by then over the years had implemented all those features of the competitors. All of you please store my wish list from today, so you have a "feature removal" list at hand in the future you can send to Canon - because focus peaking, sensor stabilization etc are really devil's work. note, I'm not against your list in it's entirety - but - I don't shoot video ever, and while I do use live view, I am quite happy manually focusing. Would focus peaking help there, yeah, but, I don't see it as a problem that I don't have it, nor do I find my ability to create fine images hampered by the lack of it.
> 
> I am a happy person now and in the future, as depending on the project I will use a 5D4, 1DX2, A7R2, A7S2 or other cameras I own, which means any minute I can already work with all relevant features - just not all of them in the same camera, which is inconvenient sometimes. The missing features are much more inconvenient for those who only have access to one camera, or the cameras of one brand. everythings a compromise, if the others brands were that great then why would you have the need to supplement your canon with sony or vice versa?
> 
> At the same time I feel sorry for all who don't see any necessity to put pressure on manufacturers, and pay the highest possible prices for intentionally limited products. Maybe someone could answer me which disadvantage you see for the Canon consumers, when someone asks Canon to implement features of their competitors? Any camera includes dozens of features an individual user will not need, so where is the problem?the problem is the same as what I said above, not everyones needs are the same.


----------



## Bennymiata (Oct 5, 2016)

If I had to choose between DPAF and zebras, I'll take DPAF anytime. 

Anyway, the true test will be sales and re-sale values, and the Canon will win everytime.
One of the main reasons I choose to use Canons is the colours. No Sony or Nikon even comes close without extra pp and as a pro, I want it to look gorgeous out of the camera, video included.
I don't want to spend extra hours to grade videos and photos. I'm often up till after midnight anyway.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 5, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > This forum will be interesting in the years 2020-2030, when all the Canon customers who are happy with the current limitations have to become very angry, as Canon by then over the years had implemented all those features of the competitors. All of you please store my wish list from today, so you have a "feature removal" list at hand in the future you can send to Canon - because focus peaking, sensor stabilization etc are really devil's work.
> ...



Canon did release cameras in 2 versions before, like with and without filter, with and without 4K or with and without articulating screen. So why not release a 5D4 in 2 versions? One that's more expensive with more video features, articulating screen, and one dedicated for stills. 

Obviously right now stills only shooters do pay too much because the 5D4 does include 4K and many other video related features, so anybody who complains that more features are not necessary and make the camera too expensive should already complain now about the existing 5D4.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 5, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> I hope the mods are working hard to determine who is using multiple accounts, because we have a poster, a very annoying one, who is trying to dominate this thread with the same rants she uses in many other threads, and, I'm very sure, providing her own support by using other NEW names to chime in. I've seen this same pattern now for months; I believe one or two persons are using about six different names.
> 
> Maybe it's beyond the mods ability to detect multiple accounts; if so, can the forum software be updated to help with this?
> 
> ...



You are wrong. There is indeed more than one person on the planet who is able to do a thorough analysis of the state Canon products are in. 

*<inappropriate statement deleted by mods>*


----------



## LordofTackle (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Canon did release cameras in 2 versions before, like with and without filter, with and without 4K or with and without articulating screen. So why not release a 5D4 in 2 versions? One that's more expensive with more video features, articulating screen, and one dedicated for stills.



What camera was releases with and without articulating screen? Really just curious, can't remember anything in that direction. I guess an articulating screen would be useful, especially for macro work, however I would be concerned about the durability...
I guess releasing a video-centric 5D4 would be a way to go, and IIRC there have been some rumors regarding that topic. Maybe you'll still get one. OTOH, I suppose this would be a really small target market (similar as 1DC), and therefore the camera would be really expensive (not necessarily because of the features it has, but due to the small volume). I would assume north of $6000. Out of curiosity: what would YOU be willing to pay for a video-centric 5D4 that has, let's say, 2/3 of that feature list you posted?



douglaurent said:


> Obviously right now stills only shooters do pay too much because the 5D4 does include 4K and many other video related features, so anybody who complains that more features are not necessary and make the camera too expensive should already complain now about the existing 5D4.



I agree with you on that price. Not necessarily because of the video features, but I do find it too high, especially in Europa compared to the US (4065€= $4562 vs $3499 at B&H). And I have had that complaint about most of Canons recent releases. But this discrepancy tops all of it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > I hope the mods are working hard to determine who is using multiple accounts, because we have a poster, a very annoying one, who is trying to dominate this thread with the same rants she uses in many other threads, and, I'm very sure, providing her own support by using other NEW names to chime in. I've seen this same pattern now for months; I believe one or two persons are using about six different names.
> ...



The fact that a few other people agree with your personal assessment does not make it correct. The Flat Earth Society has quite a few members. 

As for the statements you made (which I had the misfortune to read before they were deleted by the mods), to draw the comparisons that you did should be beneath you and clearly demonstrates the fact that you are out of touch with reality.


----------



## George D. (Oct 5, 2016)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> nehemiah said:
> 
> 
> > M_S said:
> ...




Instead of kicking the can down the road what would be better in the future for Canon is to adapt to voice of customer in a modular way. Video 4K/8K pack for those who need video, added CPU pack for faster fps, etc. This is my suggestion. Pro cameras used to have this modularity, now they offer one body for all and no-one is happy. So those guys who shoot video please pay and upgrade your 5DIV accordingly. Same goes for others. In a similar manner a Ford gets upgraded to different suspensions, powertrain, etc. That's the only way to end the (top) gear wars.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

George D. said:


> Instead of kicking the can down the road what would be better in the future for Canon is to adapt to voice of customer in a modular way. Video 4K/8K pack for those who need video, added CPU pack for faster fps, etc. This is my suggestion. Pro cameras used to have this modularity, *now they offer one body for all and no-one is happy*.



I guess you have god-like omniscience, to know the emotional viewpoint of everyone regarding current pro cameras. Either that, or you lack the ability to comprehend what you read. I wonder which is more likely? :


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 5, 2016)

George D. said:


> Instead of kicking the can down the road what would be better in the future for Canon is to adapt to voice of customer in a modular way. Video 4K/8K pack for those who need video, added CPU pack for faster fps, etc. This is my suggestion. Pro cameras used to have this modularity, now they offer one body for all and no-one is happy. So those guys who shoot video please pay and upgrade your 5DIV accordingly. Same goes for others. In a similar manner a Ford gets upgraded to different suspensions, powertrain, etc. That's the only way to end the (top) gear wars.



Modular cameras have been tried and failed spectacularly. Great in practice but effective implementation is very difficult.

They are not offering one body for all, they are offering one body for what their market research identifies as the biggest market.


----------



## George D. (Oct 5, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> George D. said:
> 
> 
> > Instead of kicking the can down the road what would be better in the future for Canon is to adapt to voice of customer in a modular way. Video 4K/8K pack for those who need video, added CPU pack for faster fps, etc. This is my suggestion. Pro cameras used to have this modularity, *now they offer one body for all and no-one is happy*.
> ...



You seem to be answering everywhere in this forum. When you reach 1 million replies you get extra miles?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

George D. said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > George D. said:
> ...



Well, it takes very little time to recognize and call out asinine posts.


----------



## George D. (Oct 5, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> George D. said:
> 
> 
> > Instead of kicking the can down the road what would be better in the future for Canon is to adapt to voice of customer in a modular way. Video 4K/8K pack for those who need video, added CPU pack for faster fps, etc. This is my suggestion. Pro cameras used to have this modularity, now they offer one body for all and no-one is happy. So those guys who shoot video please pay and upgrade your 5DIV accordingly. Same goes for others. In a similar manner a Ford gets upgraded to different suspensions, powertrain, etc. That's the only way to end the (top) gear wars.
> ...



I know, but there seem to be more and more voices about video. Instead of shutting them out I think it's better to somehow offer them the option. That's more sales than less.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 5, 2016)

George D. said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > George D. said:
> ...



In any pre-school there are a bunch of happy, well adjusted toddlers getting along with each other, enjoying their days, and learning. Then there are those few unfortunates that cry all day long, throw toys, and kick over chairs. 

Because a handful of unfortunates, who seem to be opening multiple accounts, are obsessed with demanding high end video on a camera that is a still-photographer's dream machine, great for pleasure or professional use, doesn't mean that the other children or the teachers should let the cry babies control the agenda.

As for neuro posting a lot, the vast majority of his writing is helpful and informative. In fact, I'd bet many members consider him and a core of other experienced, knowledgeable photographers who give their time to helping others, among the top reasons they keep coming back to CR! 

I believe he and other CR members take pride in the forum and respond to hecklers and hooligans with tact to point out utter nonsense. And some of these replies are funny enough to start my day with a big ;D


----------



## arcer (Oct 5, 2016)

George D. said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > George D. said:
> ...



If people really want professional video equipment from Canon, Canon offers the splendid EOS Cinema Line. I thought it was quite clear how Canon has defined their market strategy since the introduction of the Cinema line.

As a lot of forum dwellers love to repeat themselves, I shall repeat myself too. Different company have different goals. Exciting Sony is here to gain market, Canon is keeping themselves consistent and profitable, Fuji is targeting interesting markets, while Nikon keeps on strutting on.

Nevertheless, I saw merit in your suggestion of a modular camera where it works like a PC you built yourself. But I guess it might fall into a very niche market, as most research and human behavioral studies shows that the common homo sapiens would tend to buy one thing or two that can serve their needs, not buying dozens of different parts and messing them up. Haven't you seen all the IKEA memes? Do you also remember Google's Project Ara, the modular phone? Looks like the largest data mining company deems the project a sinkhole also. Yes, it might introduce new sales in a new market, but does that small market worth the billions of dollars Canon might need to introduce the products from the drawing table to full realization?

Canon's profit movers are the multiple industry that needs precise optical technologies that costs really a lot, and the mass consumer markets that buy a DSLR and 2-3 lens to serve their photography hobbies. So it seems contradictory to Canon's philosophy to go down that pathway in the consumer market.


----------



## arcer (Oct 5, 2016)

Usually, the contributors here are not trying to stifle ideas and opinions, but when demands starts to defies common logic and fundamental business sense, some are just fed up with these immature cries and might reply with sarcasms that these blabbers can't understand.


Canon have their own business methodology, they get love for it, they get hate from it, but you cannot deny that most products it delivers do deliver what it claims and much more. Canon might be forever in following the steps of Sony from here on out, but for corporations, it is not about who goes ahead by a margin, but who goes the farthest. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## ksgal (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Canon did release cameras in 2 versions before, like with and without filter, with and without 4K or with and without articulating screen. So why not release a 5D4 in 2 versions? One that's more expensive with more video features, articulating screen, and one dedicated for stills.
> 
> Obviously right now stills only shooters do pay too much because the 5D4 does include 4K and many other video related features, so anybody who complains that more features are not necessary and make the camera too expensive should already complain now about the existing 5D4.



I'm actually hopeful that Canon does put out a 5Dvideo for a video body, I think they are missing a significant piece of the market unless they do that... how to implement that and not eat away at the cine market they have but still pull back those that went to Sony is a puzzle I'm glad I dont' have to worry about. 

But some of your gripe are just space fillers? Speed Booster? Focus Peaking? APS-C Crop Lens compatibility? I mean really if you want to put that 50-100mm f1.8 Sigma Art on the 5D3 you can so I'm sure it can fit on a 5D4 - and you don't even need an adaptor. 

I could come on here and whine about my 7D2 not having the 80D sensor, or the 5D4 having way too many pixels for me, and list all the missing specs, but instead I choose to read up on the specs and reviews and find the best compromise for me. 

I certainly don't go onto the Sony forum and bash their cameras because they don't meet my needs.. so really don't understand what you hope to gain here. Sony makes some GREAT stuff.. and I keep up on them as I really do love that little package with full frame quality, but it doesn't fit my needs.. and if the 5DIV doesn't meet yours, I really don't understand what you hope to accomplish here.. Make a poll and see how many are like minded, but I don't think it will be a majority of those who really want a 5D4. 

Focus on what you want, with the camera that will work, and go for it.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > I hope the mods are working hard to determine who is using multiple accounts, because we have a poster, a very annoying one, who is trying to dominate this thread with the same rants she uses in many other threads, and, I'm very sure, providing her own support by using other NEW names to chime in. I've seen this same pattern now for months; I believe one or two persons are using about six different names.
> ...



Interesting. In this space there was a statement about the characteristics of some people who are not happy with different opinions, then claim there is a conspiracy theory and those with different opinions need to be systematically shut down and outlawed - and the moderator does exactly that.

Maybe some users wouldn't be annoyed if there was a forum thread system that doesn't copy the same old entries over and over again?


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 5, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Canon did release cameras in 2 versions before, like with and without filter, with and without 4K or with and without articulating screen. So why not release a 5D4 in 2 versions? One that's more expensive with more video features, articulating screen, and one dedicated for stills.
> ...



The two cameras with and without articulating screen have been the 750D and 760D. In other territories of the world they might have been called Rebel, Trouble, Bubble or whatever else idea the marketing dept. had.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Interesting. In this space there was a statement about the characteristics of some people who are not happy with different opinions, then claim there is a conspiracy theory and those with different opinions need to be systematically shut down and outlawed - and the moderator does exactly that.



Well, when you compare those on a forum who express an opinion that differs from your own to dictators, despots and former world leaders responsible for genocide, I think it was generous of the mods to just edit your post and not ban you from the forums entirely.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> The two cameras with and without articulating screen have been the 750D and 760D. In other territories of the world they might have been called Rebel, Trouble, Bubble or whatever else idea the marketing dept. had.



Dilbert, is that you?

Please explain which camera, the 750D or the 760D, lacks an articulating screen? Dazzle us with your astounding knowledge. :


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 5, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > YuengLinger said:
> ...



Some forum users share the exact same characteristics of radical extremists, there is no way around it. The forum users who insult others on a very low personal level - because their camera has been insulted - go way to far. 

The attitude of some is "Your thoughts are not mine, so you are an idiot and you have to shut up". Like it's basically a common attitude of many people and internet users now - I just wonder how such users will work in the real world with clients and models? That's hard to imagine.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Some forum users share the exact same characteristics of radical extremists, there is no way around it. The forum users who insult others on a very low personal level - because their camera has been insulted - go way to far.
> 
> The attitude of some is "Your thoughts are not mine, so you are an idiot and you have to shut up". Like it's basically a common attitude of many people and internet users now - I just wonder how such users will work in the real world with clients and models? That's hard to imagine.



I guess I missed the part where anyone was told to shut up over a disagreement of opinion. Now, when someone makes outrageous statements with nothing to back them up (e.g. "_Now we have 2016, and subjectively 50% of all people are disappointed about the 5D4._") and completely inaccurate statements about easily verifiable facts (e.g. "_The two cameras with and without articulating screen have been the 750D and 760D._"), then perhaps the term 'idiot' is quite applicable. 

To be clear, anyone is welcome to have any opinion they choose, and they are welcome to share that opinion here. But if they express opinions that are not supported by facts or make unwarranted assumptions about the impact or prevalence of their opinions, they should expect to have their opinions challenged. And if they make ridiculous statements, ridicule may follow. If someone cannot handle that, s/he should consider that before posting their opinion in an open forum on the internet.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 5, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Some forum users share the exact same characteristics of radical extremists, there is no way around it. The forum users who insult others on a very low personal level - because their camera has been insulted - go way to far.
> ...



You constantly overread words (like "subjectively"), and misinterpret things (it doesn't matter if Canon has multiple twin camera releases that differ in monitors, wheels, top displays or anything else, the main point was that Canon easily can release two versions of a camera).

You do that just to prove that the person who lists features that many consumers would welcome is an idiot. Why? Which positive affects do your actions have on future Canon products, which this forum is all about?


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 5, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Some forum users share the exact same characteristics of radical extremists, there is no way around it. The forum users who insult others on a very low personal level - because their camera has been insulted - go way to far.
> ...



The core of what I write in a first post is always a list of missing features that Canon's competitors already do offer. The personal insults start right after these hard facts, and only because of that. Then in the later progress of posts some people try to use each and every word against the one who came up with the facts. 

While being extremely generous with Canon about their policies, suddenly the same people become very strict about details that have nothing to do with the main arguments. 

I am very sorry that some users see their 5D4 camera as a family member and the company Canon as a private club of friends I might have insulted. That was not my goal.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> The core of what I write in a first post is always a list of missing features that Canon's competitors already do offer. The personal insults start right after these hard facts, and only because of that.



Sure, the objections have nothing to do with your characterization of the lack of those features as 'shameful'. Of course, the disputes have nothing to do with the fact that you make totally unsupportable claims like, "50% of all people are unhappy with the 5DIV." (Yes, you said 'subjectively'...fine, subjectively your statement is idiotic and moronic...don't overread that word, 'subjectively'.) Certainly, the counter-arguments are unrelated to some of your 'hard facts' being completely silly (lack of a speedbooster option _for a FF camera_ is somehow Canon's missing feature). 

You just go right on sharing your 'hard facts' and likening those who disagree with you to genocidal dictators. As I stated, you're welcome to share your opinion, no matter how foolish you sound as a result.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 6, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > The core of what I write in a first post is always a list of missing features that Canon's competitors already do offer. The personal insults start right after these hard facts, and only because of that.
> ...



Canon and Canon users consider their brand as being the #1 on the market, so my personal opinion about cameras that I bought myself and are excellent in itself, but still having a historical deficit in features compared to the competition was "shameful". It could have been another word, like disappointing or weak.

I don't even miss some of the features myself. But I also get a lot of disappointed personal feedback from others - people who bought a 5D2 and 5D3 and now won't buy a 5D4, although it's a much stronger camera. Those people can't afford to buy several camera systems at the same time, and they rent and buy other products because they need a lot of the features the Canon cameras are missing today. Seeing this is sad and unnecessary.

The Speedbooster option is the only point Canon couldn't add by changing the camera - of course. Still it is a disadvantage over Sony that can be listed. I also know that speedboosters for the 5D4 already exist, as I used 645 mount lenses on it myself. But even if full frame lenses would exist that could be mounted on the 5D4 with a speedbooster, a speedbooster option would be useless, as the camera - unlike Nikon or Sony FF cameras - doesn't offer a crop mode which is necessary (except the one exclusively for 4K).


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 6, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting. In this space there was a statement about the characteristics of some people who are not happy with different opinions, then claim there is a conspiracy theory and those with different opinions need to be systematically shut down and outlawed - and the moderator does exactly that.
> ...



You and the moderator should have read word by word. People who show characteristics (!) of dictators is a valid description, when someone wants to outlaw others by pleading non-existing conspiracy theories.

Other than that, from now on I might not have anything to write about Canon cameras anymore until the year 2020 or 2024, when the 5D5 and 5D6 can be compared to the 2017 Sony A9 camera.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 6, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Canon and Canon users consider their brand as being the #1 on the market, so my personal opinion about cameras that I bought myself and are excellent in itself, but still having a historical deficit in features compared to the competition was "shameful". It could have been another word, like disappointing or weak.
> You really think the words 'shameful' and 'disapointing' are synonymous?
> 
> I don't even miss some of the features myself. But I also get a lot 'a lot'?  of disappointed personal feedback from others - people who bought a 5D2 and 5D3 and now won't buy a 5D4, although it's a much stronger camera. Those people can't afford to buy several camera systems at the same time, and they rent and buy other products because they need a lot of the features the Canon cameras are missing today. Seeing this is sad and unnecessary. Can't aford to buy multiple systems but they will buy a camera made a couple of thousand more expensive by adding video features? Why don't they just by the Canon video cameras?
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 6, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Interesting. In this space there was a statement about the characteristics of some people who are not happy with different opinions, then claim there is a conspiracy theory and those with different opinions need to be systematically shut down and outlawed - and the moderator does exactly that.



So you were shut down and outlawed? How is it that you're still here, and still posting? 




douglaurent said:


> You and the moderator should have read word by word. People who show characteristics (!) of dictators is a valid description, when someone wants to outlaw others by pleading non-existing conspiracy theories.



Nonexistent? The complaint was about the possibility of a member creating multiple usernames and posting under them, which is a violation of the forum ToU. That's happened several times that I've seen (sometimes to support their own points, in at least one case to promote their own blog), so it's not an unreasonable suggestion. If it's going on in this case, the mods will most likely take steps, as they've done previously. 




douglaurent said:


> Other than that, from now on I might not have anything to write about Canon cameras anymore until the year 2020 or 2024, when the 5D5 and 5D6 can be compared to the 2017 Sony A9 camera.



I notice you include the words 'might not' so that when you soon contravene the spirit of your claim, you can claim that you technically didn't lie.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 6, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting. In this space there was a statement about the characteristics of some people who are not happy with different opinions, then claim there is a conspiracy theory and those with different opinions need to be systematically shut down and outlawed - and the moderator does exactly that.
> ...



One user suggested multiple times (without ANY proof and truth behind it) that all people like me who have different options are in fact the same user - and all of these accounts should be banned. Isn't that trying to outlaw others?

I understand if you rush against other opinions on the net when it comes to politics, because bad politics could make your life worse. I can also understand if you curse about celebrities, as they will have no impact on your life at all and can be annoying. But why are forum users going crazy about others that campaign to make your own next products better and cheaper? These are who I would call trolls, because it's the dumbest form of internet criticism, if you act against yourself.

But the main annoying problem of this forum is not that some users repeat themselves too often, it's the system that creates endless copies of the same text. In that regard the oldfashioned forum software behaves like Canon cameras.

Aside from that, today is a day to celebrate for Canon product owners - because through the release of the Sony A6500, over night all non-stabilized Canon lenses can be used as 5-axis stabilized lenses for the first time with a large sensor camera! That would be good blog news by the way!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 6, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> it's the system that creates endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.



Erm...you _do_ realize that you can edit the quoted text that 'the system creates' to make your replies cleaner, don't you? Or messier, as the case may be.



douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.





douglaurent said:


> endless copies of the same text.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 6, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > it's the system that creates endless copies of the same text.
> ...



Yes, one could delete the text (or most of it) of the people you're replying to. But then wo understands the context, when it was spread all over many earlier pages of the thread?

Makes much more sense to have trees, like in the Disqus system that half of the planet seems to use. Each statement will only be displayed once, and everything can be found directly.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 7, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Yes, one could delete the text (or most of it) of the people you're replying to. But then wo understands the context, when it was spread all over many earlier pages of the thread?



How, indeed? See, there's this thing formally called Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), but most people just use the term 'link'. If you click on the excerpted quote attribution, it takes you to the full, original quote. Context...like magic! You can even follow that quote back to other quotes just by clicking. Why, it's like all of them are connected in some kind of stuck-together arrangement that can be followed from all over the planet. We should come up with some sort of useful term for that. How about the Global Broad Lattice, or GBL. Catchy, right?


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 7, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, one could delete the text (or most of it) of the people you're replying to. But then wo understands the context, when it was spread all over many earlier pages of the thread?
> ...



So what you are saying is that all forum users including you are doing it wrong because they copy the same text over again, but you're making fun of the fact that it could be much easier and you're still not doing it that way yourself?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 7, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> So what you are saying is that all forum users including you are doing it wrong because they copy the same text over again, but you're making fun of the fact that it could be much easier and you're still not doing it that way yourself?



Sorry, but...huh? ???


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 8, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > So what you are saying is that all forum users including you are doing it wrong because they copy the same text over again, but you're making fun of the fact that it could be much easier and you're still not doing it that way yourself?
> ...



Again you copied my text in your answer. Didn't you write it's not necessary because hyperlinks are enough?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 8, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> Again you copied my text in your answer. Didn't you write it's not necessary because hyperlinks are enough?



Yes, the _relevant_ part, to which I was responding. You were asking for context, i.e. the text not selectively quoted, that's what the link provides. Since the act of quoting prior text creates the link, obviously that's needed...which is why your previous post (click the quote link in this post for context) was nonsensical. 

I get it, you want a threaded/tree view instead of a flat view. Both have advantages and disadvantages (personally, I prefer the flat view). 

Why don't you write up a list of 20 basic, necessary features that competing photo forums have that Canon Rumors forum lacks. Then explain how 50% of all people (subjectively!) are disappointed with CR forums. After that, predict doom for CR if they don't follow your extremely reasonable suggestions, because everyone will switch to other forums for those critically important features, the lack of which is preventing them from sharing their opinions here on CR. Then in 2020 you can come back here and tell us all how right you were. Mmmmkay?


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 10, 2016)

Anyway, I remain happy with my way of thinking, which always was responsible for the situation that I can afford all products by all brands through self earned money - making it possible to compare and go a bit deeper.

Thee whole nature of the planet is based on change and progress - if Canon and some users want to slow it down, and most don't care, in the longterm it mostly will be their problem.

My favourite part of this thread is that I was remembering Canon did release a 750D and 760D with and without articulating screen - as I couldn't imagine that they indeed only released an alternative version of a camera just to eliminate a top display and rear wheel. 

Finding this fact again maybe shows best which confusing path Canon has taken. Amateur cams do have a swivel screen, pro cams don't because pros are so stupid and break it? Or pros are geniuses that always want to lie down in the mud or jump in the air to get the shots? Is it definite that 100% of all pros never want an articulating screen? I guess not, as all people I met would like to have one.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 10, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> My favourite part of this thread is that I was remembering Canon did release a 750D and 760D with and without articulating screen - as I couldn't imagine that they indeed only released an alternative version of a camera just to eliminate a top display and rear wheel.
> 
> Finding this fact again maybe shows best which confusing path Canon has taken.



It shows nothing about Canon or their path, it merely shows that you are confused.


----------



## douglaurent (Oct 13, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > My favourite part of this thread is that I was remembering Canon did release a 750D and 760D with and without articulating screen - as I couldn't imagine that they indeed only released an alternative version of a camera just to eliminate a top display and rear wheel.
> ...



If it comes to cameras I own, features and main conclusions I have absolute clarity. Unfortunately each day there's new annoying facts to be discovered about Canon products (and it helps to forget about them). Today's discovery:

The lens on the XC10 says it's a 24-240mm. In fact the real focal length is 9-89mm, and equivalent to full frame for photo it's 25-250mm and for 4k video 27-273mm. 24 or 27 is always a big difference when it comes to wide angle shots. In any event the numbers on this fixed lens are pretty useless. A daily blog could be filled just with Canon fails.


----------

