The camera’s 30.4 megapixel 35mm Full Frame Canon CMOS sensor offers stunning image quality while the DIGIC 6+ Image Processor delivers 4K 30P video and up to and seven frames per second (fps) continuous shooting. To make video shooting even easier, the camera also features Canon’s propriety Dual Pixel CMOS AF, even when shooting 4K to help ensure sharp focus and subject tracking.

Read the full press release here: Canon USA reveals EOS 5D Mk. IV with 4K, new L-Series Lenses at DV Info Net (http://www.dvinfo.net/news/canon-usa-reveals-eos-5d-mk-iv-with-4k-new-l-series-lenses.html)

Pre-order from B&H here: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (Body Only) at B&H Photo Video (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1274705-REG/canon_eos_5d_mark_iv.html/BI/2855/KBID/3801)

I was right about windowed 4K. (And DPAF, but that was a no-brainer.) Windowed 4K is the cleanest way to get alias-free video from a DSLR. Unlike the 5D3, no digital filtering is needed and the native anti-aliasing filter does its intended job. I wonder how full frame HD will look and if it will be any crisper than 5D3 video.

The big missing item for me is HDR. There's no mention of it in the press release. Low compression Motion JPEG is nice, especially if it's 4:2:2 as expected, but these days I'm looking for bit depth above most all else.

No doubt, this is a killer stills camera and it should be able to capture very crisp, clean video. Wi-Fi and GPS should really simplify publish-now workflows. (But can we get shallow DOF, high res Pokemon Go shots?)

Can't wait to see some low-light images and learn about more of the details.

I received a mail from a Dutch store with the price: 4129 euro for the body while the mark 3 is currently 2900 euro.

Rediculous because in the USA they offer at B&H $3499,-- . Is Europe putting € 600 more on this camera ;>((

The big missing item for me is HDR. There's no mention of it in the press release.


According to the notes I took during a recent press briefing, HDR is indeed available in video mode at HD 1080p30. But not in 4K it seems.

4129 euro for the body while the mark 3 is currently 2900 euro.

I got an email from Canon Europe they want €4,899.99 according to their web site, i'll be keeping the 5D Mk III for a while yet.

If you wait long enough I'm sure the price will go down significantly.

According to the notes I took during a recent press briefing, HDR is indeed available in video mode at HD 1080p30. But not in 4K it seems.

Excellent. Hopefully, HD (with HDR) will be crisp.

I'm watching the B&H panel live. It seems that HDR is a dual-exposure solution that blends 60 fps to create a 30 fps result. So this is more of a "photo HDR" style where you put a wider range into an 8-bit output. This is as compared to "video HDR" that uses more bits and uses a transfer function such as PQ (SMPTE ST2084) or HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma).

On HD resolution, 30.4 MP means 6753 x 4502 or so photosites. Crop to 16x9 and it's 6753 x 3799. In one dimension, that's roughly 3.5 photosites per pixel. That's R-G-B-G/2 ;). Like the 5D3, it would be too much data to read out for processing in the DIGIC chip. There would need to be some upstream hardware to pre-filter and decimate the content before output. Hopefully, the hardware filters are complex enough to keep things sharp.

I feel Canon has done well by full-frame video shooters in this release:

* DPAF - excellent AF, a no-brainer as Jon pointed out above. Unexpected but very welcome is the first touch screen on a 5D. This really unleashes AF as a professional-level tool.

Though I started many decades ago with MF broadcast cameras, I really can't say enough about Canon's latest gen DPAF/touchscreen as a pro-level tool. After decades of AF that was useless for pros, it's finally come of age.

* 4k, of course. If a little behind at 30p max, we'd expect it to be a good implementation.

* New versions of the already excellent 16-35 f/2.8 and 24-105 f/4. Though, it will be hard for some shooters to give up the EF-S (crop only) 17-55 f/2.8.

* Low light performance isn't highlighted in the press release, but the web site lists improvements in sensor and image processing S/N.

* I do wonder if the cam will continue to record in 4k if you plug in a monitor to the HDMI port, which is FullHD only.

As a 70D shooter considering the 80D, full-frame on the 5D3 with all the latest AF goodness and more will make it hard to settle for the 80D.

4k, of course. If a little behind at 30p max, we'd expect it to be a good implementation.

I have read the 4K mode is with a 1.74x crop, not sure if that is a good implementation?

I've seen both 1.64 (DPreview) and 1.74 (newsshooter). Realistically this is close to super35, and for a direct read out 4k, it's probably much better than a binned or line skipped 4k if they'd used the entire sensor. Canon's sample video seems to make a big deal out of an early shot that would probably moire like crazy if it had been line-skipped.

I went through the math on the crop factor, assuming an exact 30.4 MP, 3:2, 36x24mm sensor. The actual sensor might vary.

If you just look at the width of the 4096x2160 4K image, it's 1/1.65 of the width of the full-frame sensor. However, if you look at the image circle radius, it's 1/1.75 the radius of the full frame circle. It's a bit weird as the photo circle is around a full frame 3:2 rectangle and the video crop is 17:9. If you look at the UHD, 16x9, 3840x2160 crop, it's 1/1.84 of the image circle.

Whatever. It's within a 1.6x crop, so the corners won't get cropped from an ASP/C lens.

And I agree with Barry that avoiding line skipping is the key to delivering photo-like images.

I watched part of the B&H live panel on the launch. The photographers gushed about being able to shoot 4Kp30, select the best frame, and save that frame to the card. Examples included an infant delivering that perfect micro expression and the rice/petals falling just right in front of a bride's face. Lightning and meteors are other great examples. It's like a 30 fps motor drive.

They also noted that 8.8 MP for the crop is a nice balance point. It's enough resolution to make a nice print, and it's not too large to upload via Wi-Fi to social media sites.

One can capture 30MP RAW or 60MP Dual Pixel RAW. With Dual Pixel, there are three options: 1) micro adjust the focal point, 2) shift the bokeh (like a tilt-shift), or 3) do ghost/flare reduction. One person mentioned that this is perfect for macro work so you can pinpoint the glint off an eye or a diamond ring. Of course, the 4K extraction is another solution. Just shoot macro handheld, drift through the focal point, and select the right frame.

There are more focus points and they have more vertical spread, so you can (finally) focus at the rule of 3rds. There is an additional control that you can assign to selection of focus points. And all the focus points will AF at f/8, which is nice for long lenses with extenders.

The viewfinder has a lot more information too, so you can see more settings without looking at the displays. Given that I wear reading glasses (but not with a diopter on the viewfinder), this is great news for me.

It includes photo flicker reduction (in mirror mode) that detects the cycle of lights and shifts the shutter timing slightly to snap at the brightest point. The 7D2 has this, but the 5D4 has a smarter version that works even if only a portion of the view is affected. I've got a whole slew of badly colored and badly exposed stills that I shot under fluorescent lights. Probably only one in five is ideal. Removing that error is a big win in institutional (school, church, work...) settings.

One DIGIC 6 chip is dedicated to lens compensation. There were some artifacts that could only be cleaned up in Canon's Digital Photo Professional that are now part of the camera's native JPEG workflow. Stand, Shoot, Deliver (I'm yours.)

Lots of good stuff for the shooter who does both stills and video and wants a single body (with a single invoice.)

I like the dual pixel AF and touch screen combination.
Judging from a demo, it gives powerful possibilities:

https://youtu.be/MdiTaUjUiJ0

The windowed 4k is a bit limited (you cannot do much wide angle), and I guess that the HDMI is no 4k capable.
The EU price is definitely unreasonable, compared to the USA one (but let's not forget it includes VAT, while USA prices do not include sales tax).

I feel that a 9 Mpixels a7S killer should be next...

Waiting for a 6D mk2 with dual pixel AF and touch screen myself...

N. F.

Apparently, there are ten speed options for rack focus. In addition, it's now smart enough to ignore objects moving through the frame (such as a car driving between camera and subject) and the sensitivity to unwanted objects is adjustable.

I have watched all of the videos, read all of the reviews. The 5D MKIV is a killer stills camera that can be used to occasionally shoot video, usually by photographers or other light users. Canon really hasn't deviated from the purpose of the camera since the 5D MKII. It seems as if everyone was expecting Canon to answer our wildest dreams with video features, when they have obviously ceded the hybrid mirrorless market to Panasonic, Sony and Fuji. Canon will tell you that if you are a videographer/cinematographer to buy a C300 MKII. Why would they give you a $3,500.00 DSLR that has good video features?

If you want a hybrid stills video camera, ditch Canon and buy a Sony, Panasonic or Fuji. There, all done.

Dan has succinctly and concisely expressed the 5D facts so well that I wouldn't know how to improve upon them. The Canon EOS 5D line has always been *first and foremost* a photographer's camera. Three of the four 5D iterations include a video recording mode, but that feature has *always* been *secondary* to its role as a still photo camera.

I'm sure that Canon has been delighted that some (many?) videographers have chosen to shoot video with EOS cameras, but that's not what their chief purpose is, nor will it ever be. For that, there's Cinema EOS as Dan correctly points out. Canon is going to blur the two separate product lines only slightly.

Ditto here.....I'm so exasperated by the complaints on the various boards complaining that basically, the video sucks...as they are expecting a C300 MK II in a DSLR body for $3000.....just delusional.

Jim Martin
EVSonline.com

+1 Dan, Chris, and Jim! Said so well.

I am going to take it a step farther and explain a camera marketing strategy that manufacturers have used since the early eighties and is still mostly true today. I will explain why new technology and features appear first in models like a 5D that are a step down from a top tier flagship model where one might think new tech would go first.

First, please do not read a lot into my use of terms like “full time professional” or “serious amateur” or “enthusiast”. I am not even sure which terms to use because I am not judging or labeling anyone. I mean no offence, it is simply part of the marketing strategy.

The 5D is a classic example of why new tech shows up second teir first instead of in the flagship EOS1 series (I know this is not always the case).

Sometimes, flagship models are slow to receive revisions and new model iterations because the full time professional is more concerned about his return on investment than new technology and convenience features. The top tier shooter has made a huge investment in his top of the line gear. They do NOT run out and upgrade it every year for the “latest and greatest features”. It takes a truly new innovation that will genuinely improve the quality of his product before the top tier pro will consider replacing his expensive flagship model. Ten cool new convenience features do not achieve that. It may even take a new technological improvement that clients understand and ask for before he upgrades. Case in point being things like MAJOR changes in resolution, format, or workflow. Or most importantly a new innovation that will allow him to create an image he could not shoot before. Big low light improvements being the first one that comes to mind.

On the other hand, there is a HUGE market of consumers in the (here comes the labels I’m not sure about using) semi pro, serious hobbyist, working professional, low budget film maker, and high disposable income class. That is the primary market for the 5D.

I am willing to bet the average DVINFO contributor underestimates the number of Canon 5D cameras out there owned by the photographic hobbyist (serious amateurs) with high level disposable income. That group still reads popular photography and Luminous Landscape. They are not hanging out here on DVINFO. Many of them do not know what a slider or jib is but their numbers are not to be underestimated. That is because they help drive new releases of second tier camera models like the 5D.

The seasoned professional knows it is his talent, knowledge, and experience that will determine the quality of his images. To the hard core amateur new features are often perceived as must have improvements over the model they currently have. Convenience features or new feature upgrades are sometimes mistakenly perceived as a way to dramatically improve the quality of their images.

Today, websites, forums, and paper publishing drive the “feature frenzy” to astonishingly high levels. Just like this thread is doing. Canon and every other manufacturer know that and play the game very well.
All of this is why you are not likely to see a new model of the Canon EOS1d C come along until they have a significant improvement to put into it.
Just food for thought……………………

Kind Regards,

Steve

as they are expecting a C300 MK II in a DSLR body for $3000.....just delusional.

On the contrary, as someone who owns a C300 Mark II, I don't want, nor expect all of that in a DSLR body for $3500. What I want is a compact, smaller version with a similar color science as a second camera and as a backup body for jobs in which I have to travel light, i.e. destination shoots.

I would love for the XC10 to fit this bill for me, and it's so close to being what I need I can smell it, but unfortunately that fixed lens is a no-go, and the resulting footage is just far too soft for my liking. I want actual resolved detail, not just reported dimensions. All Canon had to do was give the XC10 an EF-M mount and then, hey, now we're talking, but they went in another direction and it's not suitable.

I am using a Sony A7R Mark II for this now, a camera with more resolution (42.5MP vs 30MP), more options (both full frame and APS-C 4K video), EVF for video, a Log profile, and peaking/magnified focus assist while recording. However, it's 8-bit 4:2:0 for every shooting mode (5D4 is only 4:2:0 in the 1080 modes), has a much different look that the C300 Mark II (necessitating a lot of post work to match), overheating (though we'll have to see if the 5D4 has this issue at all with the new 4K recording mode), requires a third-party adapter for my lens collection, and poor battery life. But, guess what? I make it work, and the workarounds are less annoying than what I would need for the 5D Mark IV to get the basic tools I need to deliver a proper image.

The 5D4 also requires brand-new media for me to purchase, as I have never owned CompactFlash cards, and even for those who have them already, the 4K 500Mbps rate probably requires them to purchase newer cards. Why not CFast? Already got a nice collection of those! At least the 1DX gets this right, and is a better option for me than the 5D4, but it also does not have Clog or Peaking/Mag. Assist (the VFs on the Canons will never be useable for video because they are not electronic).

What does the 5D Mark IV need for me to dump Sony? At the very least, CLog and Peaking. That's really it. I would also prefer Mag. Assist while recording, but I need peaking at the very least. I would also like 8-bit 422 MJPEG for the 1080 modes as well, but the CompactFlash slot probably makes that not a valid option (for 120p).

See? I'm personally not asking for the world, but my god, I'm not going to use a Z-Finder and focus by eye on this damn thing. And using the touchscreen and relying on DPAF does not work when you're outside and can barely see the screen. And having to lug around a monitor or EVF to use defeats the whole purpose of having a self-contained camera to begin with for, what I consider, very basic and useable video features.

Regarding video, I wonder what differences there are between the 5D4 and the 1DX2. Since the old 1DC is now the only DSLR with C-log, maybe there's a 1DC2 in the pipe..? Btw, the 1DC is currently listed at just under $5k at B&H.

-- peer

I got an email from Canon Europe they want €4,899.99 according to their web site, i'll be keeping the 5D Mk III for a while yet.

If it makes you feel any better, it will be available in Japan at Yodobashi Camera for 467,100 JPY. At an exchange rate of 98 JPY to $1.00 USD, that would cost me $4766.33. I usually order my cameras from B&H and if they won't ship to Japan, then I use a 3rd party.

I'd be curious to know the pixel size if anybody has that info. Or if you can't give a number, maybe tell how it compares to the 6.4 micron pixel pitch of the 6D.


Mark

On a side note, it never ceases to amaze me how interested people are in what camera someone else is buying. Who cares? Do your own research and buy what you want/need.

Looks great camera but can someone explain me the reason why there is a so huge difference in price between USA and Europe (> 600,- USD).

VAT maybe? (USA prices do not include sales tax, which is different per state)

N. F.

+1 Dan, Chris, and Jim! Said so well...

...On the other hand, there is a HUGE market of consumers in the (here comes the labels I’m not sure about using) semi pro, serious hobbyist, working professional, low budget film maker, and high disposable income class. That is the primary market for the 5D...
The lines are continuing to get blurrier. Clearly the C300m2 is a desirable camera in many markets, but so is the 5D series. Different markets, of course.

I'd expand Steve's "semi pro" category to include more; down-market weddings & events, students, budding indies, documentarians sans cash, corporate in-house, etc.

We're witnessing a great democratization of access to the tools of production, and a Canon DSLR will shoot rings around the broadcast cameras I started on. I'd give every encouragement to those moving up from a sub-$1000 camera to consider the 5Dm4.

On the other hand, one of the best deals going in budget filmmaking is a C100m1, which is a mind-blowing value at $2,500 or $3k with DPAF.

And, what's wrong with a hobby camera? Or a cheap cam that supports a good cause? I've never made money with DSLR video, but on a good day, when the ergonomics don't get in the way, it shoots just fine!

We're witnessing a great democratization of access to the tools of production, and a Canon DSLR will shoot rings around the broadcast cameras I started on.

We're not. That democratization has already come and gone, and it happens a number of years ago. What we are seeing now are the modest improvements after the revolution. After all, the 4K is still 8-bit, and in MotionJPEG, which is about 3 generations old now, as far as codec efficiency goes. The 1080 modes are still the same codec from the 5D3.

I'd give every encouragement to those moving up from a sub-$1000 camera to consider the 5Dm4.

I wouldn't, because at that level, what exactly are you getting that will make any difference? It's just for the shits and giggles at that point. If you are making money with the work you are doing with your sub-$1000 camera, then it's probably time to consider something larger, an FS5, and FS7, C300 Mark II, or even up from there. If it's hard for you to get to the point where you'd consider dropping $3k to go from a Pansonic GH-series, or a Canon T-series, or a Blackmagic PocketCam, then I'm assuming money is tight (i.e. you're not making enough to consider $6k and up) and thus your clients are in no position to demand (or probably even want in the first place) 4K and you're only considering such an upgrade because of gear lust.

I've never made money with DSLR video, but on a good day, when the ergonomics don't get in the way, it shoots just fine!

Funny, because I made it through commenting without reading the very last line here, which proves my point. Since you are not making money with DSLR video, then you should not be encouraging anyone to plunk down $3500 + new media (that CompactFlash that most people have probably cannot sustain 500Mbps for 4K anyway, plus the cards will need to be larger than the common 32GB to be useful anyway).

If you're on a camera purchased in the last 5 years, there is no reason to consider just willy-nilly upgrading to the 5D Mark IV. It's not a good video cam. It's a good stills cam that has some killer features that has video when you need it. It's not necessarily good for video. It has no Log, no WideDR, no peaking, no mag. assist while recording, a fixed screen, no EVF, basic audio. Frankly, nothing outside of DPAF (which I do love, don't get me wrong) and 4K. And if you've come this far with 1080 and are still not making money with DSLR video, then 4K is not going to change that.

In my case, the interest is in efficient use of cash. For $3,500 one gets a world class stills camera. If you can get (near) world class video in the same package and same lenses, that's a win. Yeah, there are limitations and workarounds, but if you're not in a pressure cooker, you can take a few extra moments without a problem. And if you already have DSLR accessories, you're good to go.

So the question is, if I jump through some hoops, can I make video that punches above it's weight? With windowed 4K, this is the first 5D to capture truly non-aliased video. (I'm not including Magic Lantern Raw, which windows down to 1/3 of the sensor and has a devilish workflow.) I expect that it will continue to have Canon's nice skin tones and handling of highlights. It will have excellent chroma resolution, so it should also pull nice keys.

The one downside is that the output is limited to 8-bits. Recently for photography (still on the 5D2), I've been doing more of a JPEG workflow. That means nailing the settings and framing up front. I can crop as needed on the iPad and ship it.

With 8-bit video, we don't get a Hollywood, super-hero grading output. But we can get a nice realistic or B&W output, which goes back to the original 5D2 video market of photojournalists. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the C100 MkII also limited to 8-bits? For 10 or 12 bits, bump your credit line and get the C300.)

Of course, the 5D4 also has (photo-style, dual shutter) HDR. Given the 8-bit workflow, this is killer, As long as motion isn't too bad (and we don't get ghosting), this should help us fill the 8-bit space without blowing out highlights, showing overly dark faces, or shooting overly flat without enough bits to do it justice.

The last component is compression. With Motion JPEG at a firehose rate, the results (if not one's media budget) should be exceptional.

So as long as one is willing to put up with DSLR limits, one can get 8 bit video without any additional significant compromises in video quality. For about the same money, one could get a C100 MkII, but you give up the killer stills camera in return for a better workflow, more convenience, and fewer bolt-on bits in the field. With HDR and 4K, the 5D4 might even deliver the better video result in some cases.

I can see the dedicated video pro getting the C100 MkII and the occasional videographer/photographer buying the 5D4. And with talent, both can make great pictures. But if you want to film your script for Ultraviolet Neon Lava Spark Woman, get the C300.

Nice summary, Jon!

Gary, I appreciate your point of view, but do have some different interpretations of the evolving market and democratization.

You make a *good* point that there's been a substantial threshold crossed with high performance at low cost. I agree. In this, you're also suggesting, I think, that the revolution is over. Here I strongly disagree. In my view, the revolution continues as ever higher performance becomes available at the low end of cost.

To be clear, the revolution I'm thinking about is: more people generating more content at ever higher production value at easily accessible cost. Per Benjamin Franklin, the freedom of the press only accrues to those who own one. For a $60-100/yr. web hosting account, any of us can publish online (and try to connect with an audience).

Sadly, communication value and storytelling skill are somewhat degraded over the course of this continuing revolution. Also, the low-end markets have dramatically expanded, cannibalizing the hi-end markets to some degree.

Where does that leave today's working pros in business for themselves? Most need to have an eye to down-market companies expanding into their territory. Most clients don't care about video engineering superiority. If the project does what they want at a lower cost they're all for it.

You've misunderstood, I think, what I wrote about making money with a DSLR. I guess I didn't give enough context. When I have a paying project I rent a conventional camcorder - I'm done being an owner/operator, the gear changes too fast, and, I'm more of a producer who also sometimes shoots than a full-time shooter.

But, there are a bunch of personal and benefit projects in which I use a DSLR for video. And, I shoot a lot of stills!

And, especially, DSLR video continues to provide a path of learning for students I work with. They're the reason I picked up my first video-capable DSLR.

Not sure what your work is in particular, but I do think that none of us should be comfortable with our position standing on a mountaintop, because the tide's rising, there's an ocean of people learning to tell stories with whatever technology they can afford. The markets are changing. The revolution continues.

In my view, the revolution continues as ever higher performance becomes available at the low end of cost.

What do you mean by "higher performance"? Resolution? DR? Data bitrate? What about that contributes to a continued "revolution"? Would you stretch that fully to say that we are still in the middle of a CG "revolution"? Would you say we're still in the middle of a revolution of "internet publishing" perhaps? Or desktop publishing? How about the Industrial Revolution? That still ongoing as well? All of these things still have developments going on, all bringing about "higher performance...at the low end of cost", so with your description, the answer would have to be "yes" would it not?

Sadly, communication value and storytelling skill are somewhat degraded over the course of this continuing revolution.

I disagree with this. Communication value (not sure what you mean specifically by that) and storytelling skills are not degraded at all, instead people without these skills are making content now. That's the nature of the beast. The ability for us to write amazing books hasn't degraded at all, but some people who envision themselves as authors who have neither the talent nor the skill have been (for a long time now) not stopped by any gatekeepers, and so there is more of a plethora of crap than in the past. But the solution is to reinstate the gatekeepers, and that is a Pandora's Box that will never be closed.

But nothing you have said is making a case for a recommendation to buy a $3500 5D Mark IV + media (at the very least) over anyone who already has any kind of large sensor DSLR-style hybrid camera already. Do you need 4K to teach students? Do you need DPAF to teach students? Do you need MotionJPEG with that 4K to teach students?

Again, this is a business, and as such, it needs to make business sense to justify a purchase. Do you shoot with a 5D Mark III and are you losing jobs because of it and/or are current clients asking for and willing to pay a premium for 4K content? Is a 5D Mark IV in this case really a better option than a FS5/7 or C300 Mark II? But if it's not a business, and someone has the money and wants a 5D IV, then sure, go nuts. However, it's not a good recommendation for someone, especially someone who is looking to "improve" the look of their work because, more often than not, their work is hamstrung by lighting, art design, composition, and editing far more than it is being hurt by the camera they use.

What do you mean by "higher performance"? Resolution? DR? Data bitrate? What about that contributes to a continued "revolution"?
The revolution is social, cultural, and in business. More people are doing more work, at increasing value.
Communication value (not sure what you mean specifically by that) and storytelling skills are not degraded at all, instead people without these skills are making content now. That's the nature of the beast. The ability for us to write amazing books hasn't degraded at all, but some people who envision themselves as authors who have neither the talent nor the skill have been (for a long time now) not stopped by any gatekeepers, and so there is more of a plethora of crap than in the past. But the solution is to reinstate the gatekeepers, and that is a Pandora's Box that will never be closed.
Actually, I think we're agreeing in this. It's the *average* of storytelling that has degraded - as you say, there's a lot more crap out there.

But nothing you have said is making a case for a recommendation to buy a $3500 5D Mark IV + media (at the very least) over anyone who already has any kind of large sensor DSLR-style hybrid camera already. Do you need 4K to teach students? Do you need DPAF to teach students? Do you need MotionJPEG with that 4K to teach students?
Nope, not at all. I don't teach on DSLR. There are about 16 conventional camcorders in our program. But, with students buying T2i, T5i, 7D, 5Dm? and etc., not to mention this or that Sony, I got into it to understand their experience.

It's a pretty simple equation to describe DSLR video: best image for the money. Of course ergonomics and sound, and the lack of standard exposure monitoring tools can get in the way of good imagery, but, still, best image for the money. Period.

Again, this is a business, and as such, it needs to make business sense to justify a purchase. Do you shoot with a 5D Mark III and are you losing jobs because of it and/or are current clients asking for and willing to pay a premium for 4K content? Is a 5D Mark IV in this case really a better option than a FS5/7 or C300 Mark II? But if it's not a business, and someone has the money and wants a 5D IV, then sure, go nuts. However, it's not a good recommendation for someone, especially someone who is looking to "improve" the look of their work because, more often than not, their work is hamstrung by lighting, art design, composition, and editing far more than it is being hurt by the camera they use.
It's not *a* business. It's not one industry. It's many types of businesses, across a host of industries. That diversity is part of the revolution as well. A professional does have to keep their pencil sharp to work in the black, but for some it will continue to be DSLR video that pencils out best.

There definitely *are* quite a few people hamstrung by soft focus. Which Canon's DPAF/touchscreen AF solution is absolutly head and shoulders above most other methods. In my book that's a really big deal for large-sensor HD, not to mention 4K.

I myself don't much like the current Sony look, and I was brought up on Sony. We could argue about 8-bit vs. 10/12-bit, but, having done my share of video engineering and purchase by specs, I'm now more interested in camera codecs that look good *without* deep cc or grading. Workflow. Time is money. Or, in the case of most students, a good workflow means they can sleep at night! 10-bit looks good on paper, but I'll take good-looking 8-bit over icky 10-bit any day of the week.

Absolutely it is your right to piss all over DSLR video, and I have some reservations about it too. But, it is happening, it is a thing, and Canon's sensor/processing aesthetics, 4k, and DPAF/touchscreen themselves will be enough to interest many people in the 5Dm4 for video. In my opinion.

Do you shoot with a 5D Mark III and are you losing jobs because of it and/or are current clients asking for and willing to pay a premium for 4K content? Is a 5D Mark IV in this case really a better option than a FS5/7 or C300 Mark II?


For me, the price of an FSx or C300 isn't an option. Video shooting isn't my full time gig.

Regarding 4K, 4K itself is not the point. 4K allows a high res DSLR shoot clean video with the native optical antialiasing filter at a reasonable crop factor. In post, you can bring it down to HD or do a 2:1 reframe. It's a more appropriate solution than a low res DSLR, the soft digital filter of the 5D3, or a separate optical filter, like from Mosaic Engineering. It's the ideal solution for video plus stills.

Frankly, where 4K truly matters is 30 fps frame grabs. But that's really a photo use case (with short shutter), rather than for videographers.

I think the mark 4 will be very popular among weddingvideographers who want full frame, mainly because of it's DPAF, finally a way to keep your subject in focus :)

4K allows a high res DSLR shoot clean video with the native optical antialiasing filter at a reasonable crop factor.

A C100 Mark I is cheaper and will do the same thing without requiring you to spend that time in post.

In post, you can bring it down to HD or do a 2:1 reframe.

I am working on a project right now that I am reframing up to 150% from a 1080 source on a 1080 timeline. This is with footage from my C300 Mark II, which is more than capable of some great 4K footage. You know why I am doing this? Because I have filled up nearly 4TB of content from this job from 1080 footage. Shooting these long pieces of content in 4K just to have the ability to reframe would make that blow up to about 15TB.

If you're constantly needing 4K in order to reframe shots, perhaps the problem isn't not having 4K.

Frankly, where 4K truly matters is 30 fps frame grabs. But that's really a photo use case (with short shutter), rather than for videographers.

Which makes strobe lighting useless, and requires a really high shutter speed to eliminate motion blur (frankly, for photos, 60p is the only rate that makes sense to me). Also, who exactly is doing this?

I think the mark 4 will be very popular among weddingvideographers who want full frame, mainly because of it's DPAF, finally a way to keep your subject in focus :)

In 1080 only. 4K is a 1.7ish crop factor. Plus, given the lighting situation in a lot of wedding shoots (especially during the reception), DPAF can be unusable.

Also, can clients tell the difference in photos that are taken with the latest camera ... or is it only us?

Andrew

A C100 Mark I is cheaper and will do the same thing without requiring you to spend that time in post.

True. But it won't do stills.

Yes, for the video only shooter, get the video cam. For the hybrid shooter who can put up with some headaches to get great end results for photos and stills on a budget, the 5D4 looks like a nice buy.


I am working on a project right now that I am reframing up to 150% from a 1080 source on a 1080 timeline. This is with footage from my C300 Mark II, which is more than capable of some great 4K footage. You know why I am doing this? Because I have filled up nearly 4TB of content from this job from 1080 footage. Shooting these long pieces of content in 4K just to have the ability to reframe would make that blow up to about 15TB.

If you're constantly needing 4K in order to reframe shots, perhaps the problem isn't not having 4K.

Regardless, windowed 4K is the ideal solution on a DSLR.


Which makes strobe lighting useless, and requires a really high shutter speed to eliminate motion blur (frankly, for photos, 60p is the only rate that makes sense to me). Also, who exactly is doing this?

The panel of photographers loved it. Yep, natural light only. Yep, higher shutter speed. The goal of the feature is for that perfect moment. Sports, handheld macro, baby photo, the bouquet, rice in front of the bride's face. Apparently, you can shoot 4K, select the best frame and save it to the card as a still. Then delete the video. At 8.8 MP you can send it to your phone and post immediately. The panel spent a lot of time talking about this feature.

Regardless, windowed 4K is the ideal solution on a DSLR.

Windowed 4K for aliasing has zero to do with reframing in post.

The panel of photographers loved it.

Of course they did. The panel of photographers sponsored by Canon. What else are they going to say? Do you always buy the marketing?

Apparently, you can shoot 4K, select the best frame and save it to the card as a still. Then delete the video. At 8.8 MP you can send it to your phone and post immediately.

That is so overwrought. My A7R Mark II can do that as well, which I never use it for. A handful of times I have sent a photo from it to be posted on Instagram. The vast majority of the time, I am using my own cell phone to take and send the photo because you cannot beat that ease of use. And the quality is very good considering the delivery medium when it's all said and done.

The panel spent a lot of time talking about this feature.

Of course they did. It was one of the points the marketing department told them to expound upon.

Marketing aside, they offered real-world use cases that make sense. As I don't use strobes, the feature would work for me. It's all about hit rate. With handheld macro, it's hard to get that perfect focus point. My wife does public speaking. It's tough to get that perfect moment when the emotion is right and her mouth isn't in a funny position as she speaks. For action shots, I recently photographed some kids doing martial arts, breaking boards. At 4fps, I wasn't able to get that perfect moment, or those perfect three frames to show the approach, the hit, and the immediate result. So yeah, I'd use it. Certainly not always, but I have a collection of "almost" photos that this feature would have improved.

Along those lines, anti-flicker is another killer feature for me. Shooting stills under fluorescent lights means that the exposure and color temp are all over the place. Sync'ing to the lights when you need a faster shutter will be great. Yeah, I could use a flash, but it's too conspicuous for candids.

I'm thinking that the DSLR vs video camera thing is off track. Clearly, dedicated video cameras remove compromises, but video cameras do even worse as still cameras than DSLRs as video cams. You can buy one of each, but that's expensive. For great quality for stills and video on a budget, DSLRs remain a great option for many.

The real question is whether the 5D4 competes against offerings from Nikon and Sony. That's the real competition. The A7 line may still have the edge in video, but it's mirrorless, which typically doesn't focus as fast as a true DSLR. Nikon is on par for stills but I don't know that they are on the video side. Frankly, I'd have to dig deeper to really understand the pros and cons. And given that I already have L glass...

Frankly, I'd have to dig deeper to really understand the pros and cons. And given that I already have L glass...

So how close are you to spending $3500 + new CF cards for 4K at this moment in time? Have you pre-ordered?

I'm not buying right away. It's not for my business and I'm doing a major remodel on the house right now. And I just replaced my 20 year only riding mower with a new Toro Zero Turn. The question about buying has as at least as much to do with personal finances as product capabilities.

But I never really considered the 5D3. Its digital filters for video were just too soft. If I had an important project recently, it would have been between a rental, A7s II or C100 i/ii, depending on the project requirements.

The 5D4 looks viable for me, but I'm still in evaluation mode. It would certainly improve on my hit rate for stills and be more sensitive than my 5D2. And the video quality would be crazy better. (Though note that I have the Mosaic Engineering filter for the 5D2, so I don't have to put up with DSLR aliasing. And my son has a Shogun that I can borrow, so I can improve on the coding too.) But windowed 4K and DPAF are sweet improvements.

I don't plan to buy right away, but maybe in 2017...

BTW, I took a look at Nikon and their D810 doesn't really compete. It's cheaper, should but lacks 4K, DPAF, touchscreen, and WiFi. But it was released in 2014 and who knows what they might release next.

Sony's A7x looks great, but with no mirror and a different lens mount. I don't think it has enough advantages to tempt me more than the 5D4 does today.

So what about a C100? If I had an 8-bit, video intensive project that didn't need higher frame rates, I'd probably go for it. But as a general purchase, I prefer the 5D4 as it's more of a Swiss Army knife.

The question about buying has as at least as much to do with personal finances as product capabilities.

The question about buying is always tempered with finances. Which is why I don't just willy-nilly recommend an upgrade to everyone over some nebulous features I saw in a marketing video.

The 5D Mark IV is a good upgrade for those who had the Mark III if it makes financial sense to them and if they can see an improvement in their work with the features it offers. However, as someone who is very much a fan of the Canon color science and DPAF, and who is currently using a C300 Mark II and A7R Mark II, I am in no way enticed by this. The 1DX Mark II is a better choice with its use of CFast media, but still neither competes with what I need as a B-cam to my C300 Mark II that the A7R Mark II is currently providing.

And this is also from someone who, if the 5D IV had peaking and Clog, would have spent that $3500 now. Because, you know, I have actual paid projects I would have liked to use it on.

The 5D Mark IV is a good upgrade for those who had the Mark III if it makes financial sense to them and if they can see an improvement in their work with the features it offers.

Coming from the Mark II, I have no doubt that the improvement will be significant for me. A lot happens in eight years!

Oh yeah, the new iPhone 7 will be announced on Sept 7th. My iPhone 5 has one broken microphone, the screen is popping out on one side, and the memory is full. I've been putting off replacing it to be on the favorable side of the upgrade cycle, but it's yet one more purchase that delays my DSLR upgrade. Oh well. 1st world problems...

...if the 5D IV had peaking and Clog,

Personally, I've never cared for peaking. (I'm not saying it's bad; it's just not my preference.) I've used it in my son's Shogun, but it always seems a bit eager to say that things are in focus. Maybe I need to look more at the peaking in front of and behind the subject, rather than at the subject itself.

That said, a flat profile and more bits is the thing I most want, but isn't in the spec. I believe that one can dial in a flat profile (is Technicolor's CineStyle still available?), but it won't be exactly Clog. I don't need Clog as I'm not matching other cams, but I can appreciate that if I had a Cinema EOS camera, I'd strongly want Clog in my b-cam too.

Speaking of the Shogun, I wonder how well this will work with the 5D4?

I expect that the HDMI will have a clean video output, given that this is true on the 5D3 and its competitors.

The open question is about resolution and sharpness. When shooting full frame, DSLRs depend on line skipping or filtering on the sensor in order to reduce the data rate from the device. The 5D3 video is soft. Will full-frame HD on the 5D4 be sharper? We will see...

And then there's windowed 4K. When shooting in this mode, the HDMI output is HD. I wonder if the downsampling is good? The nice thing is that all of the 4K data is available to the Digic chip without pixel skipping. It's possible that the Digic downsampler will have high quality, and then the Shogun can provide peaking and a variety of recording formats to SSD. Yes, it's extra kit, but it would make the camera quite useful for bigger projects.

Personally, I've never cared for peaking. (I'm not saying it's bad; it's just not my preference.) I've used it in my son's Shogun, but it always seems a bit eager to say that things are in focus. Maybe I need to look more at the peaking in front of and behind the subject, rather than at the subject itself.

Having worked with different brand camera's the implementation of peaking can be very different, from unreliable and difficult to judge to very accurate, my jvc ls300, eventhough it has not good a good quality lcd, has the best and most accurate peaking of any camera I ever had, this combined with magnified focus while recording has become a critical function for all my shoots when it comes to guaranteeing it's in focus. I think if you say you don't care about peaking is because you never had a camera that has good peaking, especially with full frame camera's peaking/magnified focus is not a luxury as how good a autofocus system can be, in most situations you want to be able to check up and finetune if needed, having no peaking and no magnification during recording is not very reassuring.

Thanks, Noa. I've played around with a few cameras with peaking at trade shows, and each time I felt that I could do better by eye and that the peaking actually obscured the details that I wanted in focus. Good to hear that some implementations are better than those I've seen.

Still, I'm wondering if looking for peaking just in front of and behind the subject might be a good technique. Not all compositions provide the right context, but when they do, one could confirm that the subject is in the middle of the focus band.

Then again, if DPAF works as well as I've read, this might be somewhat moot. For solo shooting, DPAF would be my go-to solution. For team shooting (though it's been a while), we do the traditional 1st AC / follow focus thing. In that case, the focus puller doesn't look at a monitor. It is, however, important that the camera op be able to see when focus is "buzzed."

One thought on this: for team shoots, maybe it's even better if the camera op sees the full picture for framing only and if an additional person has a larger or zoomed monitor and watches for buzzed focus only. It's always best when each person can focus on a single task.

In other Canon news (not related to the 5D4), Canon has developed a global shutter sensor.
Canon develops global shutter-equipped CMOS sensor that achieves expanded dynamic range through new drive method | Canon Global (http://global.canon/en/news/2016/20160831.html)

For 5D4 performance, the 8-bit limit is a disappointment. The remaining big questions are low-light sensitivity and rolling shutter. Canon's announcement of a global shutter sensor might be another key step in moving to mirrorless cameras. Combine a fast, global electronic shutter with improved DPAF-style focus and the mirror will no longer be necessary. That makes cameras smaller, more robust, and cheaper to produce. Canon executives have previously stated that they don't plan a high-end mirrorless camera because they don't believe that the performance is quite there yet. (Keyword: "yet.")

Hey Chris! My 5D mk4 arrived!

Here's my official DVinfo article:
It takes a good picture. It only comes in black.

.
.
.
Please deposit my paycheck directly into my NAB bail fund.
Thanks!

Gordon Smith appreciates your donation.