# Preorder: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR Camera with Canon Log



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 13, 2017)

```
You can now preorder the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV body with Canon log preinstalled at B&H Photo. The pricing of the body is $3599, whereas the <a href="https://bhpho.to/2plry5r">EOS 5D Mark IV is $3299</a> via B&H Photo and refurbished versions are <a href="https://bit.ly/2sxK76d">$2799 via the Canon Store</a>. To add Canon Log to the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV will be about $100 USD.</p>

<p>However, if you need Canon Log equipped EOS 5D Mark IV ASAP, this is probably the quickest way to get one.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://bhpho.to/2sU3ibq">Canon EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR Camera with Canon Log $3599</a></strong></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
<div style="font-size:0px;height:0px;line-height:0px;margin:0;padding:0;clear:both"></div>
```


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2017)

So apparently C-Log rates for getting its own standalone SKU. I'll read that again -- a _slightly differently hardwared body_ is getting its own SKU.

Enemies of AA filters and proponents of tilty-flippy screens on higher-end bodies _might_ take umbrage to this. We're often told their needs are not worthy of a standalone SKU, the added inventory, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I believe we knew a standalone SKU for C-Log was coming. But I don't think many of us would have rated [C-Log in the 5D4] as being a more pressing need for its own SKU than (say) a '5D4 R' or a 5D4 with a tilty-flippy.

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2017)

Well, if this is worth a new SKU, then they can damn well make both an EF mount FF mirrorless and one that's thinner!


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Well, if this is worth a new SKU, then they can damn well make both an EF mount FF mirrorless and one that's thinner!



That's just a _slightly_ different technical proposition. :

I'm talking about a single targeted delta to a base design that could dramatically expand the appeal of a given brand. 

Besides the various lens vs. body kitting options, which entail putting the same camera in numerous boxes, I've only seen the 'same camera with one small change' done a few times on recent nicer rigs:


For aesthetic / color / external styling reasons (Leica, Fuji, Nikon Df, I'm looking at you)
For AA removal reasons (5DS vs. 5DS R, D800 vs. D800E)
For memory card reasons (D5 had XQD and CF versions)

I remain a little dumbfounded that we don't see more of this from the industry, for the option to get (or pay less to _not_ get) 4K, tilty-flippy screens, etc.

- A


----------



## chrysoberyl (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Well, if this is worth a new SKU, then they can damn well make both an EF mount FF mirrorless and one that's thinner!
> ...



That's really what I want - a 5D IV with an articulating and interchangeable screen! Leave out the GPS and 4K! You're a genius!


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> That's really what I want - a 5D IV with an articulating and interchangeable screen! Leave out the GPS and 4K! You're a genius!



There's also an older modular swap-it-out yourself idea I posted (but surely I was not the first with this idea):

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=29923.msg598897#msg598897
(see the longer paragraph near the end)

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> That's just a _slightly_ different technical proposition. :
> 
> I'm talking about a single targeted delta to a base design that could dramatically expand the appeal of a given brand.
> 
> ...



Didn't think that deserved eye-rolling. Wouldn't it literally just be a different front shell where one includes the adapter built in (as with that Sigma you love showing) and one has the other mount? To get the correct flange distance either way, for native lenses or EF lenses.

And yes, it would be great to get the ability to build a camera up from an options sheet, like a car. It would be fascinating to see, as much noise is made about video (4k or HD or whatever), how many people would leave that box unchecked for a lower price. Me, certainly.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> There's also an older modular swap-it-out yourself idea I posted (but surely I was not the first with this idea)



Not the first.  Were you aware that Ricoh made something along those lines?


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > There's also an older modular swap-it-out yourself idea I posted (but surely I was not the first with this idea)
> ...



This is the one with the fixed lens + sensor modules, right? Neat but batsh-- crazy idea. However, this idea could get me the X-Pan 'one frame pano' aspect ratios I've always wanted to try. 8)

That said, I'm thinking much less ambitious and in-demand stuff here. A version with/without a tilty-flippy. A version with/without the AA filter. A version with/without 4K. Things like that.

- A


----------



## leGreve (Jul 13, 2017)

I'm probably missing something.... but why does the body with clog pre-installed cost 200 dollars more than having a body without and getting it firmware updated??


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2017)

leGreve said:


> I'm probably missing something.... but why does the body with clog pre-installed cost 200 dollars more than having a body without and getting it firmware updated??



I believe there's hardware involved. Heat sinks, I presume.

Someone here would know...

- A


----------



## Monchoon (Jul 13, 2017)

leGreve said:


> I'm probably missing something.... but why does the body with clog pre-installed cost 200 dollars more than having a body without and getting it firmware updated??



Looks like it's $300 not $200 but I would assume it's for the convenience of not sending your camera away.

And as Ash said above could have some hardware to install.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Didn't think that deserved eye-rolling. Wouldn't it literally just be a different front shell where one includes the adapter built in (as with that Sigma you love showing) and one has the other mount? To get the correct flange distance either way, for native lenses or EF lenses.



Not meant to flame, it's just that I see that as a major delta: OVF out, EVF in, mirrorbox out, and I would presume a crushing hit to the battery.

Canon 100% could do it, but I think the OVF/EVF call is not a sub-product-line option like a tilt-screen, AA filter, memory card, IR blocking for astro, etc. So if Canon did (say) an EVF'd 5D4, it would be it's own product line, wouldn't it?

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Didn't think that deserved eye-rolling. Wouldn't it literally just be a different front shell where one includes the adapter built in (as with that Sigma you love showing) and one has the other mount? To get the correct flange distance either way, for native lenses or EF lenses.
> ...



Oh, ok, sorry for being jumpy. And sorry, I wasn't clear on my end: I meant Canon could take (future FF M camera I will call FFM for now) and make two versions of the FFM (one with EF mount, one with EF-M/X/ whatever). Not that turning the 6D itself into a ML version would be easy, but that if they launched an FFM it wouldn't be too hard, I'd think, to have one SKU for each of two mounts on that camera. With only really the mount changing, since both would have EVFs and no mirrorbox, etc. Is that more sensible?


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> leGreve said:
> 
> 
> > I'm probably missing something.... but why does the body with clog pre-installed cost 200 dollars more than having a body without and getting it firmware updated??
> ...



There should be a teardown at some point. Heatsink would be a reason for me to get it, even with no intention of shooting video: it gets mighty hot here in Texas, and I love heatsinking things excessively. Especially since I've seen some reports of hot pixels appearing more quickly than you'd like on the 5D4.

Do we have published weights for each version? If there's a heatsink added, it'll be heavier...


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 13, 2017)

Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.

I feel like if Canon really wanted to take over they would just increase the quality on every camera they have down the whole lineup so that no other camera becomes obsolete to the other. 

I guess it really might be time to switch  Never thought this day would come


----------



## sebasan (Jul 13, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.
> 
> I feel like if Canon really wanted to take over they would just increase the quality on every camera they have down the whole lineup so that no other camera becomes obsolete to the other.
> 
> I guess it really might be time to switch  Never thought this day would come



Trollllllllllll detected!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 13, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.
> 
> I feel like if Canon really wanted to take over they would just increase the quality on every camera they have down the whole lineup so that no other camera becomes obsolete to the other.
> 
> I guess it really might be time to switch  Never thought this day would come



Can you tell me where I can get DCI compliant 4k at 60fps in a DSLR form factor, thanks?


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.



Supposedly. Yeah, I heard Canon has something coming in the pipeline that'll be even better than that Nikon.


----------



## Jopa (Jul 13, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.
> 
> I feel like if Canon really wanted to take over they would just increase the quality on every camera they have down the whole lineup so that no other camera becomes obsolete to the other.
> 
> I guess it really might be time to switch  Never thought this day would come



What quality do you mean? Overheating and crappy weather sealing are signs of good quality? 
Sharpness? Is 50Mpx/noAA of the 5DsR not sharp enough?
DR? Would you mind to post a sample that's not possible to take with a Canon camera due to insufficient DR?


----------



## Jopa (Jul 13, 2017)

sebasan said:


> WeekendWarrior said:
> 
> 
> > Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.
> ...



Crap I just fed him


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> So apparently C-Log rates for getting its own standalone SKU. I'll read that again -- a _slightly differently hardwared body_ is getting its own SKU.




Where are you getting this different hardware thing from? If you take your 5d4 to a Canon center you'll be in and out in 30 minutes with Clog.

I'm pretty mind blown that they think they should raise the price for a firmware update.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2017)

Cthulhu said:


> Where are you getting this different hardware thing from? If you take your 5d4 to a Canon center you'll be in and out in 30 minutes with Clog.
> 
> I'm pretty mind blown that they think they should raise the price for a firmware update.



1) Because the 5D4 body without C-Log has a different Canon part # than the original body without it. To Canon, it is a different product. I don't recall them having done this for other firmware updates.

2) And because they said so: https://youtu.be/Ok8qfgdCDko?t=7m20s

- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > Where are you getting this different hardware thing from? If you take your 5d4 to a Canon center you'll be in and out in 30 minutes with Clog.
> ...



The 1DC is the same, when it got the 'same' firmware updates as the 1DX you had to send it in. Canon are VERY protective of their C line firmware.

There is no 'hardware' component in the upgrade to the C-Log enabled 5 series.


----------



## Cthulhu (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Cthulhu said:
> 
> 
> > Where are you getting this different hardware thing from? If you take your 5d4 to a Canon center you'll be in and out in 30 minutes with Clog.
> ...



1- so does a refurbished body vs a brand new one, that means nothing.

2- don't believe it for a second, can't imagine what hardware modification they can tear down your camera for and get it back in your hands in 30 minutes. And charge $100.
I'd imagine even if it's basic thermal paste / pads it'd take longer and not justify a $300 price increase.


----------



## testthewest (Jul 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Well, if this is worth a new SKU, then they can damn well make both an EF mount FF mirrorless and one that's thinner!
> ...



So very true! A more customizable product would make alot of complains go away. So anyone who wants 4K can pay for it and spare us the angry comments, and people like me could get their tilty-flippy screens I loke so much on more models. And everybody could choose for themselves if they want a AA filter.
Heck, I would even be fine if their is a main version, and any modification would cost you something.
Isn't Canons tech department large enough to make that a reality?


----------



## JBSF (Jul 14, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.
> 
> I feel like if Canon really wanted to take over they would just increase the quality on every camera they have down the whole lineup so that no other camera becomes obsolete to the other.
> 
> I guess it really might be time to switch  Never thought this day would come



Dilbert? Is that you?


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 14, 2017)

sebasan said:


> WeekendWarrior said:
> 
> 
> > Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.
> ...



Say what you want, but I've shot with Canon for the last 5 years and spent lots of my money with them. You can probably even dig up a few posts of mine where I was supporting Canon over Sony but my patience has just worn thin.. Can only make excuses for so long


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 14, 2017)

Jopa said:


> WeekendWarrior said:
> 
> 
> > Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.
> ...



Come on man, lets be honest here.. I've shot with Canon for the last 5 years and having said that I would still be willing to carry an extra battery or two in order to maintain higher image quality/sharper image/more detail in the shadows. I understand the Sony menu sucks, I understand the battery drains faster, and I understand that the Sony will fall apart in the rain/cold weather.. But at the end of the day it's a tool that offers me more image quality. I really wanted to like my 5D4 but It's just reliable... And that's about it.


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 14, 2017)

JBSF said:


> WeekendWarrior said:
> 
> 
> > Those Rumors really killed this "update" for me honestly.. :/ and that's tough for me to say. I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony and still Canon hasn't brought anything significant or major to compete.. Even Nikon is now supposedly making a camera to raise the bar now.. I understand Canon makes a very reliable camera but the sheer lack of image quality always has me feeling left behind.. The mark 4 is truly 5-10 steps better than the Mark 3 no doubt in my mind, but still remains 10 steps behind Sony when coming to the quality, dynamic range and sharpness.
> ...



I'm not terribly sure what a Dilbert is, so I'll have to look that one up.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> The 1DC is the same, when it got the 'same' firmware updates as the 1DX you had to send it in. Canon are VERY protective of their C line firmware.
> 
> There is no 'hardware' component in the upgrade to the C-Log enabled 5 series.



Wow. It's just firmware, but non-public firmware you pay for? That would explain the separate SKUs.

- A


----------



## MayaTlab (Jul 14, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > The 1DC is the same, when it got the 'same' firmware updates as the 1DX you had to send it in. Canon are VERY protective of their C line firmware.
> ...



It has been confirmed to DPreview that the 5D IV without C-log and 5D IV with C-log are exactly the same regarding hardware. C-log on the 5D IV is just a software update :

https://www.dpreview.com/news/9160679900/canon-will-add-c-log-to-the-eos-5d-mark-iv-for-99

The reason you don't (or at least shouldn't) see multiple SKUs for various things is that cameras are items typically sold "in stock", and dealers would have to carry the right amount of stock for each SKU. Canon already royally screwed up the demand ratio between the 5DS and 5DSR at launch (despite very clear indications that the 5DSR would be the preferred version), if they had to manage this multiplied by ten for various reasons, it would be a complete mess. 

The stock issue is also why I think that having different SKUs for the exact same hardware is a rather stupid idea, and I even hadn't considered the effect of rebates and refurb cameras.


----------



## Zv (Jul 14, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > WeekendWarrior said:
> ...



JUST reliable? Ummm I'd take reliable over any other attribute. Least you know it won't let you down when it matters most - when actually taking pictures! What use is a camera that doesn't work?


----------



## IglooEater (Jul 14, 2017)

Zv said:


> JUST reliable? Ummm I'd take reliable over any other attribute. Least you know it won't let you down when it matters most - when actually taking pictures! What use is a camera that doesn't work?



I've said a few times; a camera with a dead battery has zero features. And no image quality. (Film cameras aside . 
Same goes for one that is malfunctioning.


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 14, 2017)

Paying $300 for log: no. Paying $300 for less crop in 4K (1.3x for instance) plus log: yes.


----------



## Jopa (Jul 14, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > The 1DC is the same, when it got the 'same' firmware updates as the 1DX you had to send it in. Canon are VERY protective of their C line firmware.
> ...



How they are going to update it in the future? Maintaining two separate versions for the regular mk4 and mk4C? It could be something else besides firmware...


----------



## Jopa (Jul 14, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > WeekendWarrior said:
> ...



Let's be honest indeed. I don't think Sony menu sucks, it's just different. Shooting Sony cameras also about 5 years I don't see any problem there. I don't really understand what did you mean by *higher image quality/sharper image*. DR alone doesn't make better image. Any sensor made after 2008 paired with a great lens will deliver a great result. The rest depends on shooting technique (light, composition, common sense) and processing technique. If you are NOT trolling, please post a picture you've taken with a Canon camera, and tell us what exactly you don't like. If you ARE trolling, please disregard my request


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Let's be honest indeed. I don't think Sony menu sucks, it's just different. Shooting Sony cameras also about 5 years I don't see any problem there. I don't really understand what did you mean by *higher image quality/sharper image*. DR alone doesn't make better image. Any sensor made after 2008 paired with a great lens will deliver a great result. The rest depends on shooting technique (light, composition, common sense) and processing technique. If you are NOT trolling, please post a picture you've taken with a Canon camera, and tell us what exactly you don't like. If you ARE trolling, please disregard my request



Jopa, you don't understand -- he/she wants north of 36 MP *AND* the ability to horrifically underexpose an image and push it 5 stops in post. 

You know, like any reasonable person would want. :

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2017)

Jopa said:


> How they are going to update it in the future? Maintaining two separate versions for the regular mk4 and mk4C? It could be something else besides firmware...



Was wondering about that myself. I suppose some version specific firmware could cover that, but one would think the C-Log magic is in *that* firmware as well. That would imply every firmware update to the C-Log version of the body -- _for the life of the product_ -- would need to go back into the shop, wouldn't it?

1) How did this work on prior Canon-installed-only firmware tweaks? Is the firmware secretly partitioned in a way that you can drop general firmware updates on top of it without scrubbing the costly secret sauce that was in there before?

2) _Are we sure it's just firmware?_ :

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 14, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony



You _do_ realize that Sony has been losing market share to Canon, right? Sucks when reality punches your argument in the face, doesn't it?




WeekendWarrior said:


> I guess it really might be time to switch



Well, if you play with the contrast and saturation, the grass really _can_ be greaner. 

Bye.


----------



## foo (Jul 14, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> So apparently C-Log rates for getting its own standalone SKU. I'll read that again -- a _slightly differently hardwared body_ is getting its own SKU.



Have you ever worked in a manufacturing environment? I have.. 

Different SKU's get used for all sorts of reasons, trivial ones like you're selling the exact same hardware to France vs Spain and the different SKU is to identify that the language setting is different.

There will already be different SKU's due to differing Wifi regulations in different countries,

Then there's the question of whether you're talking about the SKU for the camera body alone, or the one for the kit including the manuals, chargers, cables etc. Does the body-only kit have the same SKU as the one that includes a kit lens? If so, how do you tell them apart?


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 14, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > WeekendWarrior said:
> ...



You are right. Better battery life, better weather sealing, better menus, and better reliability are way overrated.

Sharper image? Uhhhhhhhhh.... :


----------



## foo (Jul 14, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > How they are going to update it in the future? Maintaining two separate versions for the regular mk4 and mk4C? It could be something else besides firmware...
> ...



You're assuming that there's only one device in there that has firmware. It could be secondary firmware on a seperate device. It could be something that needs a JTAG cable or some other piece of hardware connected to the camera before it can be accessed.

You do also realise that you can partition the hard drive in your PC, or put a second one in it, so that when you need to re-install windows you don't lose the data on the other partition / drive? You shouldn't expect the camera to be different in this regard, at a simplistic level it's just an embedded computer specialised for use in the camera.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2017)

foo said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > So apparently C-Log rates for getting its own standalone SKU. I'll read that again -- a _slightly differently hardwared body_ is getting its own SKU.
> ...



I do presently, actually, but not with electronics -- where I understand this is commonly done for power/communications reasons.



foo said:


> Then there's the question of whether you're talking about the SKU for the camera body alone, or the one for the kit including the manuals, chargers, cables etc. Does the body-only kit have the same SKU as the one that includes a kit lens? If so, how do you tell them apart?



I'd presume it would just be listed one-level deeper in the bill of materials that makes up the upper-level final carton'd catalog item. But we can't really see that, can we... Perhaps it's in the manual, or in a summary of 'what's in the box' at the B&H or Canon website?

Pan up in the thread, I've been corrected by PBD above. Looks like this is firmware only -- but Canon installed firmware only -- which implies this may be the same physical body coming off the line with two different firmware type/versions involved. Whether Canon wants to inventory the aforementioned lower-level body-only item in two configurations or not is up to them. They might do it for convenience, they might not do it to simplify their inventory to be more flexibly applied to either need as the market evolves.

- A


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 14, 2017)

IglooEater said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > JUST reliable? Ummm I'd take reliable over any other attribute. Least you know it won't let you down when it matters most - when actually taking pictures! What use is a camera that doesn't work?
> ...



Lol you're getting so defensive over there it's funny. My buddy shoots for Adidas with a A7R2 and only goes through about 2-3 batteries a day.. Try again


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 14, 2017)

Jopa said:


> WeekendWarrior said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



If you get a Sony a7R2 photo and downscale it to the resolution of the 5D4, the Sony will still retain more sharpness and fine detail. And it KILLLLLLS me to say that... I waited so long for the 5D4 to come out and I love everything about it.... Except the image quality. There's no trolling from this end, just disappointment


----------



## Jopa (Jul 14, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > How they are going to update it in the future? Maintaining two separate versions for the regular mk4 and mk4C? It could be something else besides firmware...
> ...



LOL. If you post this pic on a camera geek magazine, some people actually may try to disassemble their mk4's to find those dip switches.

I think you're right - they may have a boot loader for the firmware and rely on some marks / modifications in it. Or maybe even a serial number range for those _new_ models. If we see one firmware package (which is likely), it should contain the C-Log code as well. Maybe one day someone will figure out how to trick it for the _regular_ models...


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 14, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Let's be honest indeed. I don't think Sony menu sucks, it's just different. Shooting Sony cameras also about 5 years I don't see any problem there. I don't really understand what did you mean by *higher image quality/sharper image*. DR alone doesn't make better image. Any sensor made after 2008 paired with a great lens will deliver a great result. The rest depends on shooting technique (light, composition, common sense) and processing technique. If you are NOT trolling, please post a picture you've taken with a Canon camera, and tell us what exactly you don't like. If you ARE trolling, please disregard my request
> ...



Or just a 5D4 with good quality but I guess that was just too much to ask of Canon from a $3500 camera lol


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 14, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> WeekendWarrior said:
> 
> 
> > I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony
> ...



Lol I can taste the salt in your comment. Must suck to be upset all the time eh?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 14, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > WeekendWarrior said:
> ...



Nice job ignoring the facts that refute your statements.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 14, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



So, you dropped $3,500 on a camera you could have rented to see whether or not it met your needs. Why don't you post some pics with the exif data still attached? I'd like to see the poor IQ from a properly exposed photo with good glass attached.


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 14, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> WeekendWarrior said:
> 
> 
> > I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony
> ...



But Sony FF sales are looking promising. First Nikon, then Canon? Canon owns reliability but Sony is generating excitement. 

https://petapixel.com/2017/04/14/sony-now-2-u-s-full-frame-interchangeable-lens-cameras/


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 14, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > WeekendWarrior said:
> ...



Well, if I sold one camera last year and then sell two cameras this year... my sales have doubled.  As far as the market contracting if Sony wasn't in the business? Nope. Buyers would have just bought something else.

Sony generating excitement? :


----------



## Talys (Jul 15, 2017)

To me, the most obvious reason for Canon having an extra SKU is simply that it allows them to charge more for CLOG out of the box. Some people who want CLOG would pay more for CLOG pre-installed, even if the upgrade were free but required a visit to the Canon centre. That might be because there's no Canon centre nearby, because it's not worth their time (if it's a corporate device, for instance), because they're impatient and want their new toy NOW, or because $300 just isn't that important to them one way or the other.

Heck, some people would pay more for CLOG preinstalled, even if you could download it and install it yourself for free. You see that all the time in PCs.

In terms of inventory at local camera shops, I think that isn't a problem. Most camera shops aren't going to have more than one or two 5D4 on hand anyways, because it's not like they're going to sell three of these in a day on most days. They can almost always get one sent out from a local Canon warehouse, which won't take long -- so the onus is on Canon to stock their shelves, not the dealer. It's a low risk anyhow, because someone who wants a 5D4 NOW may take either the more expensive model, or the less expensive one and deal with the upgrade, unlike 5DS/R where it's not like you can add (or take out) the filter after, so the wrong model on the shelf is likely useless to the buyer.

The other reason to have separate SKUs is that it lets them discount the non CLOG version for people who will never shoot video anyways. And finally, it also gives Canon some additional insight into what 4k is worth to people, based on the upgraded model sales as well as the upgrade ratio of existing devices. I have suspected that one reason to do it in the Canon Centre is that this allows them to track which devices are upgraded, and which are not, which gives them a good handle on the ratio of stills-only shooters who are on the 5D4 platform. I think that's a valuable piece of information.


----------



## -pekr- (Jul 15, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> WeekendWarrior said:
> 
> 
> > I've been so patient with Canon while everyone was jumping ship to Sony
> ...



Since when is the market share any relevant measure to judge the level of innovation?


----------



## Jopa (Jul 15, 2017)

WeekendWarrior said:


> If you get a Sony a7R2 photo and downscale it to the resolution of the 5D4, the Sony will still retain more sharpness and fine detail. And it KILLLLLLS me to say that... I waited so long for the 5D4 to come out and I love everything about it.... Except the image quality. There's no trolling from this end, just disappointment



You are comparing apples to oranges. You need to compare to the 5DsR. I shot the A7r2 since it first hit the shelves, sold it about 2 months ago since weren't using it at all. It's an ok system if you on some kind of medication that slows you down so you can tolerate sluggishness of the camera and the EVF.

Here is a picture shot with the 300/2.8 II, on of the sharpest lenses, sharper than the Otus 85:




And here is a crop - please tell me if it's not sharp...


----------



## foo (Jul 15, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> I do presently, actually, but not with electronics -- where I understand this is commonly done for power/communications reasons.



Power is largely a non-issue these days, can't think of anything in the last decade or more that hasn't had a universal power supply.

Comms is different, and it's rarely about the hardware, mostly it's down to the laws in different countries.

Stupid example of laws making a difference was French language PC's. Simplistically, you'd be shipping them to France, Belgium, Switzerland, Canada. France had (not sure if they still do) some laws banning encryption, so different skus for France, Canada, rest.



> see that, can we... Perhaps it's in the manual, or in a summary of 'what's in the box' at the B&H or Canon website?



Yep, Canon aren't exactly going to give us the BOM, and we probably don't care as every last screw, spring, plastic, metalwork etc will have a part number. Probably even the paint has one..

But you may have hit the nail on the head there.. Presumably there's an updated manual in the box that details the clog stuff - could be as simple as that.


----------



## foo (Jul 15, 2017)

Talys said:


> To me, the most obvious reason for Canon having an extra SKU is simply that it allows them to charge more for CLOG out of the box. Some people



Sure. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't the release price in the US $3499? So $3599 is just the same $100 as taking it in to be upgraded.
Of course the camera has reduced in cost since release, but we'd need to know whether that's a Canon reduction or whether it's a local dealer/distributor driven thing.

Also a seemingly larger differential may be due to Canon getting a smaller percentage of that difference on a new sale compared to what they'll pocket if you take the camera to CPS for an upgrade.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 15, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > WeekendWarrior said:
> ...



Who was talking innovation? Which, mind, Canon has been doing plenty of. The argument at hand, though, was "everyone jumping ship to Sony". Which, factually, market share is an _extremely_ relevant measure of.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2017)

transpo1 said:


> But Sony FF sales are looking promising. First Nikon, then Canon? Canon owns reliability but Sony is generating excitement.



So did Pontiac. Have you seen any new Pontiacs on the road in the last few years? :

- A


----------



## Khalai (Jul 15, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > But Sony FF sales are looking promising. First Nikon, then Canon? Canon owns reliability but Sony is generating excitement.
> ...



Sony may be building excitement, but Canon is surely building up profits


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 16, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > But Sony FF sales are looking promising. First Nikon, then Canon? Canon owns reliability but Sony is generating excitement.
> ...



I must have forgotten when "excitement" became a synonym for "body cladding".


----------



## Jopa (Jul 16, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > But Sony FF sales are looking promising. First Nikon, then Canon? Canon owns reliability but Sony is generating excitement.
> ...



PONTIAC: *P*oor *O*ld *N*ikon *T*hinks *I*t's *A* *C*anon


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 16, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > But Sony FF sales are looking promising. First Nikon, then Canon? Canon owns reliability but Sony is generating excitement.
> ...



Haha. That was a good one- I forgot about that tag line. I don't see a lot of Pontiacs but I DO see a lot of Sonys.


----------



## pinoyplaya4life (Jul 21, 2017)

Just buy the standard without C-Log, send it in and install C-Log and save a couple $$$ to spend on a Battery Grip? Easy decision.


----------



## bsbeamer (Jul 25, 2017)

For anyone who's interested, this "repair" upgrade to Canon Log for the 5D Mark IV will be $120.77 with return shipping. Shipping to Canon with insurance for full value via FedEx Ground was $44.84 total. The total for the "repair" upgrade will be $165.61 USD.

Breakdown:
Labor is $219.00 with an Adjustment % of 54.79% to -$120.00 to bring the Canon charge to $99.00 total. Then $14.00 for return shipping and $7.77 for tax, bringing the total to $120.77


----------

