# A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 23, 2015)

```
I missed this a few weeks ago, but over at Northlight, they posted that there would be an EOS 5D C instead of a direct EOS-1D C replacement. This is said to be due to lack of sales for the $12,000 (at launch) cinema DSLR.</p>
<p><strong>From Northlight</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>we’re told that the ‘general purpose’ 5D4 will come along with 5D C specialist video DSLR. 1D C sales have not been good enough to get the return on development of a new version.</p></blockquote>
<p>That idea may shed some light on <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/02/possible-canon-eos-5d-mark-iv-spec-talk-cr2/" target="_blank">what we posted yesterday in regards to a test camera that shoots 4K in a 5D sized body</a>. I’ll say again, the source stressed that such a camera may not appear as a consumer product, just that it has been tested.</p>
<p>We will note that Canon has said themselves that they’re going to make more focused products in the DSLR space, and not worry about pleasing everyone with every camera.</p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_5d4.html" target="_blank">NL</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## sanj (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

Every passing day I feel I should sell off both my 1dc.


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

YES! Just LOVE the idea of such a model split. Canon should bring a stills optimized 5D IV for the conservative, stills-only mirrorslapper crowd. And all those yelling for 4k in every DLSR should be asked to put their wallet where their mouth is and shell out a couple 100 or 1000 more for a "video-optimized" 4k video 5D C. 

And for me please a EOS M5 mirrorless FF camera with all the capabilities of the 5D IV in a smaller, lighter package without mirror and without video out. 8)


----------



## AE-1Burnham (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

This has made the most sense since hearing those rumoured specs. 


Good way for canon to give 4K at a high-but-not-too-high price point. 


Wonder what they will call it...


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

If we consider the rumor over a 18 megapixel camera, 12 frames per second, video 4K, double CFast card slot, it fits well in a hypothetical 5D Cinema.

Although I believe that Canon can limit it to 10 photos per second, not to eat the sales of 1D series. :


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

This makes no sense to me.

If the development costs of the 1DC were prohibitive, despite the fact that it's basically just a 1DX, how would doing the exact same thing with a 5D4/5DC make any difference as far as development cost goes?

The problem with the 1DC wasn't the development cost, it was the body cost. Charging $5000+ to add a feature that's included in a $900 camera was insulting, and most people wouldn't pay it. Can't blame them!


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

Saw that at Northlight too. It would make sense, and it fits into the notion of a 4k 1DX2 and a 5D4 and/or 5DC. If they really DO make a 5 series Cinema body, then I would think we may not see 4k in a 5D4, or at least not to the extent in a dedicated 5DC body.

A true Cinema body could have about 12MP... and then when used to shoot video, it would mask down to 8-9MP. (Exactly what the Sony A7S is/does). So you can still get great low light stills but have a perfect pixel for pixel capture of true 4k with no bining. But if they do actually produce such a machine, they need to get it out sooner than later and make sure they allow it to have a TRUE clean HDMI output


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



Lee Jay said:


> This makes no sense to me.
> 
> If the development costs of the 1DC were prohibitive, despite the fact that it's basically just a 1DX, how would doing the exact same thing with a 5D4/5DC make any difference as far as development cost goes?
> 
> The probably with the 1DC wasn't the development cost, it was the body cost. Charging $5000+ to add a feature that's included in a $900 camera was insulting, and most people wouldn't pay it. Can't blame them!



Yup. That's why it dies with a 4k - 1DX2. That model was largely non-viable at its price when it came out and is even less so today, even with the big price drop.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



AvTvM said:


> YES! Just LOVE the idea of such a model split. Canon should bring a stills optimized 5D IV for the conservative, stills-only mirrorslapper crowd. And all those yelling for 4k in every DLSR should be asked to put their wallet where their mouth is and shell out a couple 100 or 1000 more for a "video-optimized" 4k video 5D C.



You think a 5DC would only cost $100 or $1,000?


----------



## adventureous (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

This is great news !!!!!! I have about 80,000 clicks on my 5d2 and about 2 minutes of video.


----------



## jebrady03 (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

I sincerely hope this is true! Why? So all the morons who type 5Dc instead of 5D realize they have no business changing the name of a camera for a company. 

Wait... No... I just remembered... These are Internet idiots, they're unlikely to realize much of anything. In fact, at least one will probably try and be funny and say that Canon owes them for infringement with the name 5Dc.

I have no idea why I let Internet morons bother me...


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



Lee Jay said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > YES! Just LOVE the idea of such a model split. Canon should bring a stills optimized 5D IV for the conservative, stills-only mirrorslapper crowd. And all those yelling for 4k in every DLSR should be asked to put their wallet where their mouth is and shell out a couple 100 or 1000 more for a "video-optimized" 4k video 5D C.
> ...


I understand what he means $200 or $2000 more for the version that records 4K video.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



jebrady03 said:


> I sincerely hope this is true! Why? So all the morons who type 5Dc instead of 5D realize they have no business changing the name of a camera for a company.


Hopefully Canon really launch a 5D Cinema. ??? So every time someone asks for advice on the next Rebel (or 70D), people will stop responding the old 5D Classic is the best inexpensive camera for all users of this planet. :-X


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



ajfotofilmagem said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Well, if I want an SLR that has 4k, with his approach, I'd need both a 5DIV and a 5DC. That's not $100 or $1000 extra, that's a whole new body extra.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*

I guess Canon's logic was that because the 1DC sold poorly, no one was interested in high end video in DSLRs, and consequently they didn't bother with implementing that in consumer products.


----------



## docsmith (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



Lee Jay said:


> This makes no sense to me.
> 
> If the development costs of the 1DC were prohibitive, despite the fact that it's basically just a 1DX, how would doing the exact same thing with a 5D4/5DC make any difference as far as development cost goes?
> 
> The problem with the 1DC wasn't the development cost, it was the body cost. Charging $5000+ to add a feature that's included in a $900 camera was insulting, and most people wouldn't pay it. Can't blame them!



I think what you are saying is that the spin does not make sense. 

The spin--development costs for a 1DC Mk II are too high so we'll make a 5DC.

Agreed, that doesn't make much sense for the reasons you mention.

The reality...a "cinema/video" oriented DSLR will provide more revenue/profit for Canon if they target the market segment/price point below their C100/300/500. 

I can see that making sense and seems to reflect what I have read on this forum from people that would actually use a cinema DSLR.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



docsmith said:


> The reality...a "cinema/video" oriented DSLR will provide more revenue/profit for Canon if they target the market segment/price point below their C100/300/500.
> 
> I can see that making sense and seems to reflect what I have read on this forum from people that would actually use a cinema DSLR.



Sure...putting the 1DC's video functionality into the 5DIV makes complete sense to me. That would allow you to do what they did with the 5DII - sell it to both the stills crowd and the video crowd, and therefore increase volume and therefore reduce amortized development costs.

However, Canon seems to be trying to go the other way - segmentation. The idea being, apparently, to get people to buy multiple bodies for different purposes instead of buying one do-it-all body like they did with the 5DII.

I don't know if that will work or not, but it generally doesn't work with me. I've skipped 10 years of Canon bodies because of slow feature and performance additions, and this segmentation approach is likely to cause me to skip another 10 years, if not more, once I finish the next year's upgrade cycle (targeting a 7DII and a 5DIV, or maybe just two 7DII's).


----------



## docsmith (Feb 23, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



Lee Jay said:


> However, Canon seems to be trying to go the other way - segmentation. The idea being, apparently, to get people to buy multiple bodies for different purposes instead of buying one do-it-all body like they did with the 5DII.



Segmentation is fine as long as there is a real differentiator. For example, the 5Ds is clearly a differentiated camera--sacrificing high ISO for low ISO/high MP. Let's see what Canon does to differentiate the 5Dc and 5DIV, if that is in fact what they are doing.

I suspect your concern is that they will stupidly cripple one of the bodies or lose out on the "jack of all trades" body. We'll see. 

But, say they release only moderately differentiated bodies, say a 5DIV with weaker video functions (no 4K), but optimized for stills (24-28 MP, AF, fps, etc) vs a 5Dc (rumored specs - 4K, 18 MP, etc). Both could be valuable bodies. I'd personally opt for the 5DIV specs. But those that do more video would likely opt for the camera with the 5Dc specs.


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 23, 2015)

It is really easy:
Those who only want stills get a 5D IV without video at a very decent price. 
Those who want both hi-end video capture and stills pay more for a 5D C.
No need for anybody to buy 2 bodirs just to cover stills and video.
But ni more free-riding for those clamoring for 4k video to record their cats and dogs farting in every DSLR. You want video in addition to atills in a camera zype that is ill-suited to capture an image stream since a flapping mirror needs to get out of the light path ... You pay extra. So fair, so good. Should have been like that all along.

Sony is quite successful with that approach in their A7 series. More or less resolution, more or less video capabilities. Take your choice and pay for it. a7s is more expensive than A7, A7 II and A7R.
The more multifunctional, the higher the price. Rightfully so.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 23, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> It is really easy:
> Those who only want stills get a 5D IV without video at a very decent price.
> Those who want both hi-end video capture and stills pay more for a 5D C.
> No need for anybody to buy 2 bodirs just to cover stills and video.
> ...



The flapping mirror doesn't get in the way. It is lifted and the camera turns into a MILC when video is being shot. Granted, a OFV screws things up a bit relative to true MILCs, but since most users would probably be monitoring the LCD anyway, it should not be too big of a problem provided that video friendly tools are incorporated. It is not as though Canon don't know how to do that, since effective video tools are incorporated into their camcorders.


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 23, 2015)

Please explain to me why somebody seriously interested in video / "demands" 4k video would want to mess with a DSLR when a truly video-optimized MILC like a A7s or a GH4 cost as little as 2000.



Tugela said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > It is really easy:
> ...


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Please explain to me why somebody seriously interested in video / "demands" 4k video would want to mess with a DSLR when a truly video-optimized MILC like a A7s or a GH4 cost as little as 2000.



So I don't have to carry two different things, with two different sets of lenses and accessories, to do both functions.

Sort of like now, but with higher res video.


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Please explain to me why somebody seriously interested in video / "demands" 4k video would want to mess with a DSLR when a truly video-optimized MILC like a A7s or a GH4 cost as little as 2000.
> ...



Why should this be in a DSLR rather than in a mirrorless camera that is more suitable for video stuff from its very construction proiciple? And why should the combined functionality ("convergence") come free of charge?

Asking for a dslr with 4k video is like asking for a big SUV that is also capable to reach 250km/h on the german autobahn. It exists, e.g. a Porsche Cayenne ... You can buy it. But it costs ... a little extra.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Almost everything I shoot is moving, often at high speed. OVFs are crucial for this, as are high-performance phase-detection AF sensors. Mirrorless is totally unsuitable.



> And why should the combined functionality ("convergence") come free of charge?



Because it will increase volume and thus decrease the amortized cost of development. This is how "convergence" works.



> Asking for a dslr with 4k video is like asking for a big SUV that is also capable to reach 250km/h on the german autobahn.



No it's not. The sensor already has more than enough pixels for that, so it's just a matter of sampling, processing and saving them. I remember the same argument about full-HD video when 640x480 was the standard in compacts. The compact in my pocket has full-HD. You're making the same argument as those arguing that 640x480 was sufficient and that full-HD would be reserved for expensive cinema and production cameras.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 23, 2015)

15FPS on a MILC really great .....if you need to take loads of pictures of something that is NOT moving :

And yes, agree with Lee Jay on OVF. I use a 1DX to shoot competition dance recitals. There's no way I could do it with even a half second lag on an EVF, and I wouldn't be able to track anything without real DSLR AF. I shot 8000 frames last year in one weekend during a total of 14 hours or recitals with about 350 dancers. I had about an 80-90% keeper rate (based on correct focus tracking). No way that's happening yet with MILC.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> 15FPS on a MILC really great .....if you need to take loads of pictures of something that is NOT moving :
> 
> And yes, agree with Lee Jay on OVF. I use a 1DX to shoot competition dance recitals. There's no way I could do it with even a half second lag on an EVF, and I wouldn't be able to track anything without real DSLR AF. I shot 8000 frames last year in one weekend during a total of 14 hours or recitals with about 350 dancers. I had about an 80-90% keeper rate (based on correct focus tracking). No way that's happening yet with MILC.



A half second? I've tried shooting with a measured 25ms lag (total, including frame lag) and it was totally unusable for my application.


----------



## Peer (Feb 24, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



Tugela said:


> I guess Canon's logic was that because the 1DC sold poorly, no one was interested in high end video in DSLRs, and consequently they didn't bother with implementing that in consumer products.



Well, I think the problem was who the 1DC was aimed at -- i.e. at people who actually knew what an 8-bit codec can do (or not do) -- and, of course, that Canon initially priced it at a whooping $15,000. It's too little & too late to now drop it to $8,000. 

But if Canon announces a next generation 1DX with 4K 10-bit and peak/zebras for, say, $8,000 -- then they are back in business. Until then, I'll be sitting on the 4K fence (at least when it comes to Canon) -- 4K 8-bit is so gnarly that it's not even funny. 

-- peer


----------



## preppyak (Feb 24, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



PureClassA said:


> A true Cinema body could have about 12MP... and then when used to shoot video, it would mask down to 8-9MP. (Exactly what the Sony A7S is/does). So you can still get great low light stills but have a perfect pixel for pixel capture of true 4k with no bining. But if they do actually produce such a machine, they need to get it out sooner than later and make sure they allow it to have a TRUE clean HDMI output


I think Sony is on the right path with their A7 line, they just havent actually supported it with lenses like Canon and Nikon have. But, the idea of a high MP studio/landscape cam, a more general workhorse (wedding/sport/event), and then a low-light video/street cam is a pretty smart differentiation. I'd settle for 12MP stills if it came with ISO performance like the A7s.

May have taken a few years longer than necessary, but, seems Canon is coming around to a decent strategy


----------



## findamir (Feb 24, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> We will note that Canon has said themselves that they’re going to make more focused products in the DSLR space, and not worry about pleasing everyone with every camera. [end quote]
> 
> Can Canon make a note that something like a Canon DC1 is not worth that price, no matter how you cut it. Sure if you are rich and don't give a flying rat, good for you that you can afford it. And even so, all you are is some individual who owns an overpriced equipment. My best best would be other options that would cost more, JUSTLY, or less with add ons. I guess they can't look at the market and realize they have Sony, Panny and BMC correctly pricing their items.
> Love Canon, only because of my mistake of investing so much $$$ in their lenses, but they truly have their heads up their rear with pricing.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Feb 24, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



ajfotofilmagem said:


> If we consider the rumor over a 18 megapixel camera, 12 frames per second, video 4K, double CFast card slot, it fits well in a hypothetical 5D Cinema.
> 
> Although I believe that Canon can limit it to 10 photos per second, not to eat the sales of 1D series. :



Except for the fact that a 12fps FF mirror box costs a lot of money and why does a cinema camera needs 12fps?

It's bizarre.

They apparently plan to give high DR to the 1DX2 but not the 5Ds?!!!!! or 5D4?!.

They give 12fps to a 5DC but lock 5Ds to 5fps in crop mode??

If it's all true, it seems strange. But in way that almost makes it seems true....


----------



## AE-1Burnham (Feb 24, 2015)

1D-C in a 5D package: Canon & Magic Lantern (ML):
The rumor goes that Canon threatened ("agreed with") ML that ML would not touch the 1-series firmware or else face the corporate legal wrath of Canon. ...by putting Canon's premo DSLR functions like 4K in a 5-series (non 1-series) body, Canon essentially tells ML and their fan club to go to town: "use our hardware, use your software." This way Canon doesn't need to innovate (or keep up with) the DSLR user interface in the DSLR video market (which really isn't an ideal form factor for video anyways and Canon knows it and perhaps rightfully doesn't try to sell a DSLR as movie making kit).

I truly believe ML makes a Canon DSLR much more functional for video -- it also makes for a community around Canon DSLR video run and gunners. This has large benefits towards building product hype, extending product life and perhaps you could say even adds dollar value as the Canon product is on a continuous development cycle with new ML releases. How has the 1D-C functionality expanded since its release? Does Canon care about this? Probably not, though somewhere in the market research they could hear/see some of this.

Those are my thoughts. No insults intended about DSLR video (it has its uses!). :-* Best wishes all

P.S. I love jebrady03's comments regarding 5D "classic". Hehe.


jebrady03 said:


> I sincerely hope this is true! Why? So all the morons who type 5Dc instead of 5D realize *they have no business changing the name of a camera for a company.* [emphasis by AE-1Burnham] ...


----------



## M_S (Feb 24, 2015)

I definitly hope that this rumour is not true. As this makes alternatives more attractive than the canon ones. The High megapixel camera has a direct competition in the D810 and the Pentax. The 5DC is attractive when it comes to video, but not when it comes to shooting stills. A 5d Mark 4 would be crippled in the video department. So as much as I want a 4K camera for video, this won't be it then, as I love to shoot stills too and I would look for other manufacturers to replace my 5DIII.


----------



## pedro (Feb 24, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> I missed this a few weeks ago, but over at Northlight, they posted that there would be an EOS 5D C instead of a direct EOS-1D C replacement. This is said to be due to lack of sales for the $12,000 (at launch) cinema DSLR.</p>
> <p><strong>From Northlight</strong></p>
> <blockquote><p>*we’re told that the ‘general purpose’ 5D4 will come along with 5D C specialist video DSLR.* 1D C sales have not been good enough to get the return on development of a new version.</p></blockquote>
> <p>That idea may shed some light on <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/02/possible-canon-eos-5d-mark-iv-spec-talk-cr2/" target="_blank">what we posted yesterday in regards to a test camera that shoots 4K in a 5D sized body</a>. I’ll say again, the source stressed that such a camera may not appear as a consumer product, just that it has been tested.</p>
> ...



If the rumored 5DC is somewhere near the 3.6k USD price tag, I could opt for such a high ISO monster instead of a direct 5D3 follow up body. As I do mostly astro and low light it seems to be the right thing. I am looking forward to do moonlight event photography at astounishingly ISO 51k! Tried it out on a 5D3 using the nifty fifty F/ 1.4 wide open...well, it was still a tad too noisy ;-) But I will revisit my photographs and look what LR can do with them... Bring it on Canon. Three years down the road, I might be in the game for such a beauty ;-) !!!


----------



## Viper28 (Feb 24, 2015)

Hmm, could I use a 12FPS, 18mpx camera in a 5D body form? .... hell yes, if the price is right, if only as a backup for a 1DX. I'll superglue the video switch in the off position!


----------



## pedro (Feb 24, 2015)

Viper28 said:


> * I'll superglue the video switch in the off position!*



Good one! I am a stills only photographer. An 1Dx wouldn't match with my budget, but this one here looks promising...


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 24, 2015)

Clearly all this talk of the 5Dc on internet forums has given Canon the idea.

This could be where the modular design that we have hear about comes in: the real 5Dc will have an interchangeable viewfinder, one a traditional prism and works with the mirror as normal, just like a Canon F-1, Nikon F3 etc, and another viewfinder that is an EVF, primarily for video. Mirror automatically locks up when the 'finder is fitted, and away you go. AvTvM will love it.

If Canon don't do this I think they will really have missed a trick, but maybe they have forgotten that some of their SLR design from years ago had an interchangeable viewfinder. 

I'm not surprised about the 1Dc. I've seen loads of 5DII / III's being used for professional video at all different types of functions; I've never once seen a 1Dc.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Feb 24, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



jebrady03 said:


> I sincerely hope this is true! Why? So all the morons who type 5Dc instead of 5D realize they have no business changing the name of a camera for a company.
> 
> Wait... No... I just remembered... These are Internet idiots, they're unlikely to realize much of anything. In fact, at least one will probably try and be funny and say that Canon owes them for infringement with the name 5Dc.
> 
> I have no idea why I let Internet morons bother me...



You realize they'll just start calling it the 5D1, or 5Do, or something else, right? Why is it up to you to defend Canon's camera name? Especially when the "mark" system means that the original's name becomes ambiguous about whether it refers to the first model in the line, or the line in general? No different from "Chevy", or "Bimmer". They're not saying unkind things about your mother.


----------



## Machaon (Feb 24, 2015)

*Re: A Suggestion on the EOS-1D C Replacement [CR1]*



PureClassA said:


> If they really DO make a 5 series Cinema body, then I would think we may not see 4k in a 5D4, or at least not to the extent in a dedicated 5DC body.



Good point.



adventureous said:


> This is great news !!!!!! I have about 80,000 clicks on my 5d2 and about 2 minutes of video.



+1
Differentiation of the 5D product line into high res, high sensitivity & cinema would be a win for most, provided it doesn't inflate price and the various products are truly optimised to task.



AvTvM said:


> Sony is quite successful with that approach in their A7 series. More or less resolution, more or less video capabilities. Take your choice and pay for it.



Yup... it would make sense for Canon to hijack that the successful strategy for their higher volume FF product line.

If they get the feature set and price point right for these bodies, they have the opportunity to trounce Sony with the Canon lens fleet.

After all, cameras are a system, not just a body: Canon's EOS should monster the alternatives. That's why we're all here, right?


----------



## gjones5252 (Feb 24, 2015)

I think the idea of spreading the lines is silly. The reason that the 1dc didn't sell as well is because it was hard to pay an extra 6000 dollars just for the video features. 
I need cameras that do both pictures and video. I would buy and be more than willing to pay an extra premium for a 5dc but not double the price. There are far to many things missing that are common to other cameras for me to pay double the price.


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 24, 2015)

Canon should just put these features in the 5D4. It would sell more 5D4s than splitting the line again for a camera I won't buy solely for 4K but also won't upgrade to a 5D4 because it lacks 4k.


----------



## gsealy (Feb 24, 2015)

It seems to me that the various cameras and options make for more analysis, and therefore, I am not as inclined to pull the trigger. The 5DIII was a no-brainer because it is so versatile and great as a stills camera. And then in addition, I can even record HD video externally using Pro Res and achieve interesting angles and cinematic effects using various lens. Now we might be faced with getting some of that here and some of that there. There are all kinds of tradeoffs, and so, we have analysis paralysis. 

For me, shooting video (documentary style) means a minimum of two cameras, but 3 and even 4 is so much better. I can capture a lot more and get the shots that make a huge difference in production quality. We use camcorders to capture the overall scenes and to lay down baseline tracks. But we use other cameras like the 5DIII and the C100 to capture interesting closeups, participant reactions and action following. 

So, to go to 4K for me means looking for low cost solutions as I will need a number of cameras. 4K is not in huge demand right now. I would probably use it more for giving me framing options for HD than creating final 4K productions. I don't care about 'future proofing' either. But we know 4K is on the way. So there WILL come a time when that trigger has to be pulled.


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 25, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> Canon should just put these features in the 5D4. It would sell more 5D4s than splitting the line again for a camera I won't buy solely for 4K but also won't upgrade to a 5D4 because it lacks 4k.



From a marketing point of view, offering more product variants typically sells more units and brings greater sales revenue than just offering one. I am quite certain that Sony sells more A7 cameras by offering 4 variants for different primary uses compared to offering only one expensive "all in" camera.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 25, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Canon should just put these features in the 5D4. It would sell more 5D4s than splitting the line again for a camera I won't buy solely for 4K but also won't upgrade to a 5D4 because it lacks 4k.
> ...



Right. That's why mp3 players + cell phones + small tablet computers + poor compact cameras combine to sell way more units than smart phones.


----------

