The official canon 5d mk4 thread

Raymond Lin said:
It's not more features, I want the same features found on older, cheaper cameras.

I am not even talking about special out of the world features, not talking about new tech that no one else have, not cutting edge tech that found only in the 1D. I am talking about adopting memory card format that is the norm in an older camera, a cheaper camera.

It is a new camera, Mk3 buffer sucks, it is one of it's negative points. New camera ought to address it, it didn't.

The criticism is valid.

I thought this view is quite accurate, on paper. Don't get me wrong, I am still getting 2...but it doesn't mean I think the camera is perfect. It's better than the Mk3, but it could be so much more...so easily.

Click to expand...



I half expected the terrible 4K video solution but didn't expect it to be ss lame, e.g. 1.75x crop factor makes it similar to just using a Panasonic G4H etc. The problem is the 5DMK3 was taking sales away form Canon's dedicate video camera line. All the hype about Hollywood movie/TV show X using a Canon 5DMK3 for filming spelled bad news for Canon because they just lost our a load of sales of their $20K video cameras.

Nikon haven't bothered entering the dedicated video market so they nave the luxury of adding better and better video capabilities to their DSLRs and not risk loosing sales but gaining sales. However, Nikon are pretty half-arsed about video. The D800 was a big exception with a lot of features like RAW over HDMI etc that pros wanted.


The other problem Canon had was they couldn't go with a 42/54MP sensor as would that would destroy the 5DS sales so they had to artifcially limit the sensor resolution rather than going all out. Likewise a 30MP sensor without an AA filter will give very similar images to the 5DS with the AA filter.

The AF in the 5DMK3 was already very good and if they really made the 5DMK4 with a brand new top of the line AF system, high burst speed and a large buffer they will kill f 1D sales.


So Canon were ind of between rock and a hard place. They couldn't improve anything too much from the MK3 or they loose sales of more profitable cameras. At some point they must have thought their dual pixel is was the bees knees but its pointless.



I still don;t get why canon don;t link exposure ot the AF area, soemthign which all other camera manufacturers have been doing on the entry level cameras since they year 2000! My lowly D70 from 2004 did that.
 
Last edited:
Jase said:
I'm looking forward to seeing what they do the D820 or whatever it will be called. I still think the D810 is an amazing camera and i still has plenty of life in it, a photokina announcement may be a little soon I think but guess we'll find out very soon.
Click to expand...

It will get the new AF technology form the D5/D500 and one of the latest Sony sensors, 42 or 54Mp. Buffer size and speed will bump slightly, especially if it is the 42Mp sensor. They will likely drop a couple of hundred grams in body weight with a greater use of composites and carbon fiber. 4K video, liekly from most of the sensor and a decent codec but still some minor niggles.

It will be pretty killer IMO. However, my D800 still stuns me with the detail and dynamic range. I still don;t have any issues tracking subjects in continuous AF, don't yearn for higher FPS etc.


So unlikely to upgrade. More liekly i will add a D500 for wildlife.
 
D.P. said:
I half expected the terrible 4K video solution but didn't expect it to be ss lame, e.g. 1.75x crop factor makes it similar to just using a Panasonic G4H etc. The problem is the 5DMK3 was taking sales away form Canon's dedicate video camera line. All the hype about Hollywood movie/TV show X using a Canon 5DMK3 for filming spelled bad news for Canon because they just lost our a load of sales of their $20K video cameras.

Nikon haven't bothered entering the dedicated video market so they nave the luxury of adding better and better video capabilities to their DSLRs and not risk loosing sales but gaining sales. However, Nikon are pretty half-arsed about video. The D800 was a big exception with a lot of features like RAW over HDMI etc that pros wanted.


The other problem Canon had was they couldn't go with a 42/54MP sensor as would that would destroy the 5DS sales so they had to artifcially limit the sensor resolution rather than going all out. Likewise a 30MP sensor without an AA filter will give very similar images to the 5DS with the AA filter.

The AF in the 5DMK3 was already very good and if they really made the 5DMK4 with a brand new top of the line AF system, high burst speed and a large buffer they will kill f 1D sales.


So Canon were ind of between rock and a hard place. They couldn't improve anything too much from the MK3 or they loose sales of more profitable cameras. At some point they must have thought their dual pixel is was the bees knees but its pointless.



I still don;t get why canon don;t link exposure ot the AF area, soemthign which all other camera manufacturers have been doing on the entry level cameras since they year 2000! My lowly D70 from 2004 did that.
Click to expand...

The cropped factor for 4k is understandable from that video i linked to, I saw somewhere that it could be related to heat as direct pixel to pixel recording means little to no processing. To use the whole sensor and encode in real time takes processing power and will generate heat. And to be honest, personally I don't care about 4k on a DSLR. I don't even have a 4k TV so it's not a concern for me. But I can see how and why others and annoyed by it.

Your point on the AF point linked to exposure is another example why i just don't understand Canon at times. Massive company, dominate market share, these cameras go through testing with real world photographers, somebody somewhere got to have or ought to have mentioned it!
 
I understand the technical challenges of using video form the whole frame but its the consequences of not overcoming them. Instead of having a Full frame 35mm sensor for video you now have something akin to a micro43 sensor being used. Canon had solved the issues in the Mk2 and Mk3 but didn't put in a solution for mk 4 because doing so would mean the Mk4 would take sales away form their dedicated video line. That is what annoys people, the MK4 is a big downgrade form the MK3 for video people
 
The real question with the release of the 5D Mk 4 is this : has Canon hit a brick wall with its technology development, or is it taking extreme measures to protect its flagship products by handicapping prosumer merchandise ?

Neither reality is particularly palatable for those heavily invested in Canon gear. If Canon truly is struggling with R&D then that is bad for the photographic industry ; on the other hand if they are deliberately holding back on advancing their products then that is a slap in the face for the millions of loyal fans.

What do you think ?
 
D.P. said:
I understand the technical challenges of using video form the whole frame but its the consequences of not overcoming them. Instead of having a Full frame 35mm sensor for video you now have something akin to a micro43 sensor being used. Canon had solved the issues in the Mk2 and Mk3 but didn't put in a solution for mk 4 because doing so would mean the Mk4 would take sales away form their dedicated video line. That is what annoys people, the MK4 is a big downgrade form the MK3 for video people
Click to expand...

How can the video be a downgrade from the Mark III? Nothing got worse.

The Mark IV has a 30 megapixel sensor that apparently has a slightly better dynamic range, instead of a 22 megapixel sensor.

The Mark III records video at 1920 x 1080 (29.97, 25, 23.976 fps fps), 1280 x 720 (59.94, 50 fps), 640 x 480 (25, 30 fps), whilst the Mark IV records in 4096 x 2160 (29.97p, 24p, 23.98p), 1920 x 1080 (59.94p, 29.97p, 24p, 23.98p), 1280 x 720 (119.9p).

They've added 4K video to the Mark IV. The Mark III doesn't have it. I appreciate compared to some cameras with 4K capabilities it isn't up to par, but it is an addition to a Camera series that didn't have it before.

Lastly have you seen the videos of the Dynamic HDR video recording on the Mark IV?
 
xaldub said:
The real question with the release of the 5D Mk 4 is this : has Canon hit a brick wall with its technology development, or is it taking extreme measures to protect its flagship products by handicapping prosumer merchandise ?

Neither reality is particularly palatable for those heavily invested in Canon gear. If Canon truly is struggling with R&D then that is bad for the photographic industry ; on the other hand if they are deliberately holding back on advancing their products then that is a slap in the face for the millions of loyal fans.

What do you think ?
Click to expand...
Ok then if they was to produce the 5d4 with every top end feature available inside, tell me, what will happen to there cinama line, 1d line and there 5ds line?

Do tell me what will happen to those cameras.
 
Andy90 said:
How can the video be a downgrade from the Mark III? Nothing got worse.

The Mark IV has a 30 megapixel sensor that apparently has a slightly better dynamic range, instead of a 22 megapixel sensor.

The Mark III records video at 1920 x 1080 (29.97, 25, 23.976 fps fps), 1280 x 720 (59.94, 50 fps), 640 x 480 (25, 30 fps), whilst the Mark IV records in 4096 x 2160 (29.97p, 24p, 23.98p), 1920 x 1080 (59.94p, 29.97p, 24p, 23.98p), 1280 x 720 (119.9p).

They've added 4K video to the Mark IV. The Mark III doesn't have it. I appreciate compared to some cameras with 4K capabilities it isn't up to par, but it is an addition to a Camera series that didn't have it before.

Lastly have you seen the videos of the Dynamic HDR video recording on the Mark IV?
Click to expand...

Well said, Its not a downgrade. Nothing on the 5d4 is a downgrade compared to the 5d3.

Listen im all for critisism of the camera and my main grip is the card slots(they could have made it faster and it wouldnt harm the 1dx2 series as its still faster and more robust) and af point spot metering.

So after me using the camera compared to most here who are just bashing it based on spec sheets, this is my critisism so far.

  1. No linked spot metering on AF points
  2. Cant add the wifi on/off settings in the quick menu's or assign a button to it
  3. Old tech card slots( should have gone with cfast or two cf card slots or cf card and UHS II sd card slot)

Not much to complain about and maybe the wifi quick setting could be fixed in a firmware but thats about it.

We can all pick and slate every single camera out and critise it.

I seem to be the only person here that has this camera so i imagine my own perspective from using it in the real world is more valid then most of the peoples complaints here.
 
Andy90 said:
How can the video be a downgrade from the Mark III? Nothing got worse.

The Mark IV has a 30 megapixel sensor that apparently has a slightly better dynamic range, instead of a 22 megapixel sensor.

The Mark III records video at 1920 x 1080 (29.97, 25, 23.976 fps fps), 1280 x 720 (59.94, 50 fps), 640 x 480 (25, 30 fps), whilst the Mark IV records in 4096 x 2160 (29.97p, 24p, 23.98p), 1920 x 1080 (59.94p, 29.97p, 24p, 23.98p), 1280 x 720 (119.9p).

They've added 4K video to the Mark IV. The Mark III doesn't have it. I appreciate compared to some cameras with 4K capabilities it isn't up to par, but it is an addition to a Camera series that didn't have it before.

Lastly have you seen the videos of the Dynamic HDR video recording on the Mark IV?
Click to expand...


A lot got worse in regards to the video . the MK3 used the entire sensor for video, which is why it was popular for hobbyists and had some used in commercial production. With tiny crop MK4 has it is worse than the canon APS-C cameras and more or less equal to any M43 in equivalent sensor size for video.


And then there is the codec, the 5DMK3 provided Full HD sampling the entire frame and recording to an efficient H.264 codec. The 4K mode of the MK4 uses Motion Jpeg which is just a joke considering the file sizes.



So there isn't really 4K recording at all, which is why in the review above it is explicitly not recommended for 4K video use.
 
I was sure I'd get one, but not so sure now as it's not a huge leap of an improvement to warrant the price.

Better off just getting another 5D3.
 
I am supprised Canon did not use the faster memory cards instead of sticking with Compact Flash.
When are the major DSLR manufactuers going to include USB charging. As almost everyone has a micro USB charging cable for smart phones & tablets.
Plus Canon need to have something simular to Nikons Snap Bridge.
Then the 5D MK IV would be a bloody amazing camera.
 
Tysonator said:
I am supprised Canon did not use the faster memory cards instead of sticking with Compact Flash.
When are the major DSLR manufactuers going to include USB charging. As almost everyone has a micro USB charging cable for smart phones & tablets.
Plus Canon need to have something simular to Nikons Snap Bridge.
Then the 5D MK IV would be a bloody amazing camera.
Click to expand...

I gripes with it isn't it doesn't have some amazing features. My gripes with it are it is missing some standard average features that is expected in a £400 camera now, never mind a £3500 one.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Ok then if they was to produce the 5d4 with every top end feature available inside, tell me, what will happen to there cinama line, 1d line and there 5ds line?

Do tell me what will happen to those cameras.
Click to expand...

But there are lots of things they could have added which wouldn't have compromised those other products eg. removed anti-aliasing filter, added CFast memory card slots ( or at least UHS-II ), provided a tilt-screen LCD, better AF point coverage etc. Instead, Canon have offered a product with 2012 technology at a premium price.
 
Got to agree with xaldub it is very 2012.
The price is a little OTT.
We have to look at the camera as a stills camera with a little bit of video bolted on and don't get me started on Motion Jpeg, what fool came up with that?
 
Yea the canon has some outdated suff but at least the sensor is up to date now as well as the AF system.

When it comes to stills, dont you think AF and IQ is important?
 
I had been waiting for this to come out for ages as I've wanted to upgrade from my 5d2. Been pleased to see the DR improvements with the change in sensor but disappointed with the lack of AF point metering. Seems a very basic function I can do even on my iPhone! To have this feature still missing when you're spending that much is making me question if I should wait even longer for the next generation and hope they sort more of this stuff out... does the 1DX2 have this feature does anyone know?
 
jonneymendoza said:
Yea the canon has some outdated suff but at least the sensor is up to date now as well as the AF system.

When it comes to stills, dont you think AF and IQ is important?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say the sensor is up to date, it now seems where it should have been with the Mk3. It is still over 1 stop behind the competition in terms of DR. That is not too bad and for most people the sensor is a good step forwards, but what happens when next generation Sony and Nikon sensors come out with 15.5 stops DR at 54MP, the canon sensor will look very dated again because they haven't really caught up yet, just closed the gap a little.
 
Canon is playing catch up with the sensor DR tech, that we know and unless they pay Sony a ton of money and use their sensors, they will be behind for a while, that in a way I understand.

It is the memory card thing that really bugs me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom