Lensrentals.com Reviews the Canon 5D Mark IV
Announced in the light of Photokina, came the continuation of the Canon 5d series with the latest from Canon, with the Canon 5d Mark IV. The announcement was met with mixed opinions, but like all camera announcements, there is no telling how great the system is until someone you trust gets their hands on the camera for themselves. Hopefully, here at Lensrentals.com, we’ve developed that relationship, and we’re here to test, and give a comprehensive review on the new flagship system from Canon – the Canon 5d Mark IV.
And before we get into the review, I want to mention that this review is broken into two pieces – photo and video. Since the release of the Canon 5d Mark II, Canon has been adding more and more video functionalities into the 5D series. The Canon 5D Mark IV is no exception, allowing for 4K video to be shot at 30fps. However, I specialize in photo far more than video, so I’ve gotten colleague and video tech for Lensrentals.com – Ryan Hill – to write a video portion of the review. These reviews are written independently, as not to skew each other’s opinions, and then welded together through the power of proofreading. So if there are any repeating mentions of features, be patient with us, as we’re just trying to get you the best opinion available on the new system.
Photo Review
As a photographer, the simple announcement of the Canon 5D Mark IV got me excited. This camera has been speculated for years and the Canon 5d Mark III, released in March 2012, was overdue for an update. With a new sensor, new autofocusing system, and something called Dual Pixel RAW, Canon has seemed to refresh their favorite line with a bunch of nice upgrades for the working photographer. So let’s just right into the features.
Features
The new camera comes with an extensive list of features that are new when compared to the Mark III. Most important is the 30mp sensor that is powered by a Digic 6+ processor, allowing for up to 7fps of shooting in both normal and silent mode. Additionally, the Canon 5D Mark IV has built-in GPS and Wifi, allowing you to geotag your images with precision, and enable you to wirelessly transfer the images to a computer, tablet or phone, to post while on the go. When testing the Wifi, I found that it worked great at an event, allowing for small jpeg previews to be sent to an iPad at pretty rapid pacing. While the tech isn’t quite there, I imagine tethering wirelessly on commercial shoots is only a few years away.
It also sports a new autofocus system, which is compared to the Canon 1DX Mark II’s system, which I found to be incredible. My experiences with the system weren’t as elaborate as tracking fast moving objects, though I have no doubts that the camera would handle it with ease. Perhaps this itself is the biggest improvement over the Canon 5d Mark III. With each new system, Canon has managed to improve the focusing system, and this focus system might be the best in camera systems today. With an autofocus system that works exceptionally at tracking for both photo and video, it’s hard to believe that in a few years, this system will likely be obsolete. Like all new innovative technologies – I can’t see how this can be improved, but perhaps that is why I’m a consumer and not an engineer.
And the biggest announcement in the features came in the form of Dual Pixel RAW, which allows you to micro focus your images after the fact. In practicality, it’s brilliant. How often have you found that one winner in your frames, only to see that you have some slight back focusing? That said, it’s all theory now, as Adobe and Capture One have not added the feature into their RAW software, so the feature isn’t enabled unless you’re using Canon’s gaudy software. So while I wasn’t able to test this feature (yet), I’m looking forward to seeing how it works when it becomes more readily available.
However, I really think the biggest improvements come in the unspoken features – that may not be revolutionary, but allow for some neat little tricks that help you shoot faster, and more efficiently. Here are a few of my favorites.
The Unspoken Features
Much to my surprise, the Canon 5D Mark IV comes with a bunch of additional features that have been overshadowed by the announcement of the focusing system and Dual Pixel RAW. And sure, I get it, focusing is more important – but the little features are what made me fall in love with the camera. What are those features, let us just go down a list —
1. The focus-feature button
It allows you to switch focusing types quickly (from single point to cross point, etc, etc.).
**2\. Hybrid-ish Viewfinder**
The viewfinder allows you to add various pieces of information, from things as useless as battery power, to as useful as an electronic level built into the viewfinder.
**3\. An Actual Useful Touch Screen**
The touchscreen allows for a bunch of new controls, allowing you to focus, select images, zoom, and more. Up until now, Canon’s touchscreens on DSLRs have been pretty functionless by most people’s standards.
**4\. Quieter operation
**If you’re coming from the [Mark III](https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/cameras/canon-5d-mark-iii), you’ll find the [5D Mark IV](https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/cameras/canon-5d-mark-iv) to be quite a bit more quiet, with it’s new(er) mirror box design
However, there are some downfalls with the system as well. Most notably, is the lack of CFast card slot on the system – extending the life of the Compact Flash slot for another generation. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to switch to new memory cards either, but CFast is exceptionally better than Compact Flash at its current state. While Compact Flash is (currently) limited to around 100MB/sec (averaged), CFast achieves speeds five times as fast. While that may not be important to a camera that shoots 7fps, it can be a huge advantage to those who need to upload images to their computers quickly…and can really speed up the workflow for those in fast pace environments.
Video Review
I took a support call a couple of weeks ago that came to mind a few times while I was testing the 5D Mark IV. A relatively inexperienced customer (late high school or early college if I had to guess) called in for help putting together a 5D Mark III package. He was shooting a short film and needed a viewfinder, a top handle, and an XLR adapter. After getting the 5D Mark III in his cart, I recommended a Zacuto Z-Finder, a Wooden Quick Kit (just the top section), and Beachtek DXA-SLR Pro. He was ready to place the order before I interjected. “You know, you’ve created a Canon C100 here. If you’re willing to switch cameras, you’ll have a simpler setup, dual pixel autofocus, better battery life, and two card slots. Plus, it’ll be cheaper.” He’d never considered a dedicated video camera because his teachers had all told him that the only affordable way to shoot high-quality video with a cinematic look on a budget was to use a DSLR. Seven years ago, they would’ve been right. The 5D Mark II revolutionized the video market in ways that are still being felt today. Whole companies (including Lensrentals) sprang up to support amateur filmmakers who, all of a sudden, had a way to capture video with shallow depth of field and high dynamic range without pawning all their worldly possessions.
Now, though, we have a few more options. You no longer have to cobble together a Frankenstein’s monster of third-party accessories just to make a DSLR usable. Cameras like the Canon C100, Sony PXW-FS5, and Panasonic AF100, will give you video at least as good as what you can get from a DSLR (better in most cases), plus XLR inputs, physical audio controls, viewfinders, unlimited clip length, etc. In short, they’re designed with video in mind from the outset, rather than it being a feature tacked-on to a camera intended for stills. As a videographer, this leaves me wondering where exactly the 5D Mark IV fits in my workflow. Given the specs, under what circumstances would I reach for this particular camera over the myriad other options available?
About those specs: first of all, yes, you can shoot 4K (8-bit 4:2:2) with the 5D Mark IV. However, you’re limited to 30p or below. 1080 will give you up to 60p, and, frustratingly, 120p is limited to 720 resolution. Also frustrating is the total lack of 4K output over HDMI. 4K recording is limited to a 1.74 crop which, in addition to making reframing necessary when switching from stills to 4K video, introduces some very noticeable rolling shutter issues. Without scientific testing, I’d say the rolling shutter is nearly as bad as it is on the A7S, which is the camera I use in the office when I’m demonstrating what a bad rolling shutter looks like. The 5D IV also lacks some major features I’d expect out of any modern video camera: No peaking, no zebras, no focus magnification while recording, and no log profile. Hopefully, some of this can be fixed through firmware updates or by the good people at Magic Lantern, but your $3,500 camera shouldn’t have to be improved by volunteers accepting bitcoin donations. Finally, regarding usability, the menu structure just isn’t designed for video. As always, audio controls are too hidden, but there are smaller annoyances that snuck up on me. For instance, you initiate 120p recording by selecting an “Enable” button in the “Recording Settings” menu. You end high-speed recording by navigating to the same menu and selecting “Disable.” After disabling 120p, does the 5D return you to the recording setting you were using, say 4K 24p? Nope. It goes back to the default (1080, 60i) every time, necessitating another dive into the menu structure to change back to your chosen settings. This had me cursing under my breath multiple times while surrounded by children and Knights of Columbus at a fair.
There are things to like here, though or at least a thing. The autofocus performance, as in the C300 Mark II, is awesome, and I mean that in a literal sense. It inspires awe. The touch screen, rather than being the useless gimmick I was expecting, became my tool of choice for controlling focus. Accurate face tracking allowed me to just point at the person or thing (it seemed to work just as well on dachshund faces) I wanted to keep in focus, and then just re-frame as needed. It almost never hunted or lost track of subjects. The only downside I could find is that it doesn’t work during high-speed recording.
So, back to the initial question, under what circumstances would I choose this camera over everything else in the Lensrentals inventory? To answer that, I have to first admit that a lot of my criticism above is unfair. I can’t very well complain about a lack of good video features because this isn’t a video camera. Both the millions of other amateur filmmakers and I brought up on the 5D Mark II need to remember that. Video cameras have things like XLR inputs, internal ND filters, and menu structures designed for video work. What it is is a still photography camera and a fantastic one at that. I do almost all of my still photography on a 5D Mark III, and that’s where the 5D Mark IV will fit for me. If something comes up while I’m shooting stills that I think I’d like to take a quick video clip of, then I’ll be happy I can do it in 4K. If video functionality is a priority in any way, I will go with a camera designed for video, and I’d recommend you do the same.
Below is some sample footage I shot with the Mark IV this weekend. Since C-Log is, unfortunately, absent, I shot everything with Technicolor’s Cinestyle Profile, which is available for free here. Everything was left ungraded, including stuff I exposed imperfectly. Unless otherwise noted, the day footage was shot at 400 ISO, and the night footage was shot at 800 ISO. If you have any questions, feel free to let me know in the comments.
Build Quality
If you haven’t looked at it yet, look at Roger’s teardown of the Canon 5d Mark IV system. As shown by him, the weather sealing has been improved, and subtle changes have made the Canon 5D Mark IV and upgrade from the previous models. When holding, the system feels very similar to the Mark III, giving you a robust build in a comfortable form factor.
Price
The Canon 5D Mark IV is available for purchase at $3,500, and available for rental for about $125 for a weekend rental. This price is what we’ve come to expect from a pro-level DSLR body of this caliber.
Does it Meet Expectations?
Heads up, here comes a short rant. Upon the announcement of this camera, it was instantly met with some harsh critics on the feature list of the system. People want a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon – and they want the price to sit under $3,000. Sure, this camera doesn’t have anything and may not have pushed the bounds of the industry, but the Canon 5D series has never been about being revolutionary in features, but being revolutionary in practicality. The 5D Mark II came with video functionality, which set it apart from the competition – but it wasn’t perfect. You were limited to manual focus, and here even further limited to framerates and resolution. The Mark III introduced an useable focusing system (I kid, I kid), but improved on everything the Mark II had to offer, without overreaching with unusual or groundbreaking features. The Mark IV has taken every feature of the Mark III and improved it a little bit. It may not be completely cutting-edge, but they made an incredibly loved and capable camera even better on every single metric. People need to stop expecting the industry to evolve faster than it can. It’s already moving fast, and the Canon 5D Mark IV keeps pace with every single competitor in the DSLR field. It’s feature-full and practical – maybe not as revolutionary as the Sony a7 was to the mirrorless world, but it will certainly be the most used camera in the industry within a years time.
What We Liked –
- Dual Pixel RAW Looks to be an Incredible Feature
- Lighting Fast Autofocusing for both Photo and Video
- Wifi and GPS work great and have a lot of functionality
- Image quality is great, and the additional resolution is a nice touch
What Could Be Improved –
- It’s still a photo camera with video functionality
- 4K is cropped to a 1.7x sensor
- Still missing key features found on 3rd parties (in body stabilization for one)
- No CFast slot (Compact Flash & SD Slots Only)
Summary
So is the Canon 5D Mark IV a worthy upgrade? Yes….yes it is. Canon managed to combine what we loved about the Canon 5d Mark III, and improved on it in every metric. The autofocus is better, the camera is faster, the video functionality has improved, the lowlight has been improved, and there are plenty of additional features to set it apart. The Canon 5d Mark IV is an exceptional camera and fixes a lot of practical issues I’ve had with previous models.
Zach Sutton & Ryan Hill
174 Comments
Adam Sanford ·
Thanks for the review! A few thoughts:
1) The 5D4 is not remotely a flagship rig. Even though it may not be for everyone, the 1D line sits above the 5D w.r.t. stills and the Cinema line shows just how much Canon has nerfed the non-Cinema rigs for video. The 5D4 is a wonderful pro tool, but other than the DP RAW and -4 EV AF for LiveView (which are pretty specific things), there’s nothing about the 5D4 that it is best-at-*Canon*, let alone best-in-class.
2) There is little that is truly hybrid about the VF. It’s an OVF chocked full of great stills info, but it won’t illuminate a dark room or show focus peaking or a histo in the VF.
3) You drove right past the new sensor — easily the biggest improvement! If DXO is to be believed [cough / grumble], +2 stops of DR at Base ISO is a hallelujah moment for the Canon faithful.
Omesh Singh ·
Dustin Abbott posted his low ISO dynamic range assessment today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSeZwxRrf-4
the_ownage ·
you want a flippy screen too, huh!! Go get yourself a Sony, if you have not used the camera then your point is invalid.
Carl Eberhart ·
Back atcha…if you never leave your mom’s basement and get out and shoot with a real camera, then you have not much point at all, do you?
Adam Sanford ·
To both of you, I own a 5D3 and shoot with it all the time. I’m no Sony fanboy and I’m no mirrorless fanboy — I’m just into *facts*, and the story needed some corrections, that’s all.
#trollmuch?
Carl Eberhart ·
Adam, I was speaking to the twitter boy, not you…so yeah, get over yourself. I probably owned a 5D3 before you did. And I’m glad I sold it. No need to call me names. I have no problems with your original post, however the DR of the 5D4 is still lacking severely, if DXO is to be believed. It is basically tied with the 1DX2 (1/10 of an EV is essentially no difference)…so it’s nothing to brag about. It achieved a higher score than the 1DX2 simply because it out-pixeled it. That’s part of how DXO’s scoring “works”…emphasis on the quotes…:) #kneejerkmuch ?
Adam Sanford ·
Carl, my apologies. I misread the reply.
Carl Eberhart ·
No problem sir, happy shooting 🙂
Carl Eberhart ·
No problem sir, happy shooting :)
Scott ·
You’d love the MKIV then. It’s like the Make III on steroids. And HGH. And that stuff they have Captain America.
Carl Eberhart ·
Back atcha...if you never leave your mom's basement and get out and shoot with a real camera, then you have not much point at all, do you?
Adam Sanford ·
To both of you, I own a 5D3 and shoot with it all the time. I'm no Sony fanboy and I'm no mirrorless fanboy -- I'm just into *facts*, and the story needed some corrections, that's all.
#trollmuch?
Carl Eberhart ·
Adam, I was speaking to the twitter boy, not you...so yeah, get over yourself. I probably owned a 5D3 before you did. And I'm glad I sold it. No need to call me names. I have no problems with your original post, however the DR of the 5D4 is still lacking severely, if DXO is to be believed. It is basically tied with the 1DX2 (1/10 of an EV is essentially no difference)...so it's nothing to brag about. It achieved a higher score than the 1DX2 simply because it out-pixeled it. That's part of how DXO's scoring "works"...emphasis on the quotes...:) #kneejerkmuch ?
Scott ·
You'd love the MKIV then. It's like the Make III on steroids. And HGH. And that stuff they have Captain America.
Scott ·
Actually, the MkIV sensor IS the flagship of the EOS linr with the best noise and DXO score, and in this game, it’s all about the sensor.
Carl Eberhart ·
“The best noise”…not really. The best noise when lifted from an under exposed low ISO shot? Yes. But at high ISO? No…1DX2 still wins there, within the Canon line. As it should. DXO score is heavily weighted on subjective issues and also on megapixel quantity. If their sensor score was only rated on high ISO noise performance, the D5 would get a 99. But it’s not.
Carl Eberhart ·
Also even on shadow noise at low ISO and underexposed by even 3 stops, the D810 still wins there…let alone by more stops.
Adam Sanford ·
Thanks for the review! A few thoughts:
1) The 5D4 is not remotely a flagship rig. Even though it may not be for everyone, the 1D line sits above the 5D w.r.t. stills and the Cinema line shows just how much Canon has nerfed the non-Cinema rigs for video. The 5D4 is a wonderful pro tool, but other than the DP RAW and -4 EV AF for LiveView (which are pretty specific things), there's nothing about the 5D4 that it is best-at-*Canon*, let alone best-in-class.
2) There is little that is truly hybrid about the VF. It's an OVF chocked full of great stills info, but it won't illuminate a dark room or show focus peaking or a histo in the VF.
3) You drove right past the new sensor -- easily the biggest improvement! If DXO is to be believed [cough / grumble], +2 stops of DR at Base ISO is a hallelujah moment for the Canon faithful.
Omesh Singh ·
Dustin Abbott posted his low ISO dynamic range assessment today:
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Scott ·
Actually, the MkIV sensor IS the flagship of the EOS linr with the best noise and DXO score, and in this game, it's all about the sensor.
Carl Eberhart ·
"The best noise"...not really. The best noise when lifted from an under exposed low ISO shot? Yes. But at high ISO? No...1DX2 still wins there, within the Canon line. As it should. DXO score is heavily weighted on subjective issues and also on megapixel quantity. If their sensor score was only rated on high ISO noise performance, the D5 would get a 99. But it's not.
Carl Eberhart ·
Also even on shadow noise at low ISO and underexposed by even 3 stops, the D810 still wins there...let alone by more stops.
Tom ·
It is a very steady camera, for sure, but the price is very high indeed for the limited (if any real) benefits it brings over competition such as the D750 for stills and the deliberately crippled 4K codec. No camera can be evaluated independently from its price point and on that subject, I don’t understand what Canon is trying to achieve. It doesn’t provide ground breaking stills performance to justify double the price of a D750 (or 60% more than a D810) nor does it offer a compelling 4K platform. It’s neither fish, nor fowl and as a decent jack of all trades is priced inappropriately considering the competition. As The Camera Store says in their review, this camera will appeal to the Canon faithful and especially those upgrading from the 5D II and III, but its still an expensive pill to swallow. Maybe this is a genius plan from Canon, but I feel their aggressive protection of their cine line and their other models is not going to work in their favour in the long run. I suspect a lot of people who wanted a decent modern sensor with good DR for stills are just going to wait for the 6D II. Video shooters are probably wondering what on earth they will do…
Carl Eberhart ·
You make valid points, but I think video shooters are already using other cams, as Zach says. It’s not fair to compare a new camera’s price, to the price of other cams that have been out for 2 years or more. Intro prices are always higher. I am more bothered by the problems I point out in my post, than about price alone. The D750 has its problems and has their weak, old autofocus. It was intro’d at a very fair price, but none of the D800 or D600 series, were intro’d at a fair price. Only after time did their prices become more fair. I agree the 6D2 should be promising, unless of course Canon change their mind about taking it “upmarket” (presumably to compete closer to the D750). If they don’t take it upmarket, then it will keep the same crappy AF sensor, or at the very least will get the ancient one from the 7D and 70D. To take it “upmarket”, at a minimum it needs the 80D’s AF sensor, but I’m not holding my breath. Also, you may recall the intro price of the 6D was absurd, but no D750 existed back then in late 2012, and the D600 was also not good and overpriced…and the D800’s were bad. The D810 still seems superb to me, though…and yes…your strongest point of all…is also mine. The D810 is the better camera vs. the 5D4 overall, even at $3000 for the D810 vs. $3500 for the 5D4. But at $2700, or $2500 perhaps by the holidays (and $1800 for grey market D810’s?) Nikon is a screaming buy then, despite the fact they are the smaller company with crappy pro service vs. Canon…in my humble yada yada…
the_ownage ·
Why is a D810 a better buy with crappy AF, White Balance is off, better high ISO performance..
Carl Eberhart ·
Why are you such a willfully ignorant fanboy? Is it because you are closed minded, young, or both? White balance is determined in post if you shoot RAW, but maybe your camera doesn’t shoot RAW? I guess that’s a good thing since you are so blind that you think a camera with the strongest AA filter in history, and fewer pixels, somehow has “better high ISO performance”…
Marcel van Leeuwen ·
maybe you are the fanboy here? Maybe we don’t like the strong moire patterns? And the camera just CAN NOT focus in low light. Even with a fast 1.4 prime. That for me makes it a useless camera. And why are we comparing a Canon with a Nikon? When invested in a system it is a non issue.
Carl Eberhart ·
Not at all. I am being more objective here than you are, frankly. I am not fully invested in one system at this time, so I can be more objective than a fanboy that DOES fully invest in one system, and thus has to defend it. I am not getting this particular camera for low light, only a fool would. But I suspect you aren’t using your precious new toy in low light for anything critical either, so hop off your high horse, it needs a bath 🙂
Marcel van Leeuwen ·
again you presume too much. I also work at a camera rental store, so i use about every system out there which i can lay my hands on. And i have shot with virtually any camera that matters. I’m not heavily invested in anything.
Carl Eberhart ·
So what? If you work in a camera rental store, then you are shipping cameras out most of the time. What does that prove? Your point above was that if a person invests “in a system”, as in ONE system, comparing with another system is a non-issue. You are contradicting yourself.
Marcel van Leeuwen ·
No i did not. Learn to read first. but foremost be nice. You act like a spoiled child.
Carl Eberhart ·
Likewise, move on…
Carl Eberhart ·
Likewise, move on...
Carl Eberhart ·
Why are you such a willfully ignorant fanboy? Is it because you are closed minded, young, or both? White balance is determined in post if you shoot RAW, but maybe your camera doesn't shoot RAW? I guess that's a good thing since you are so blind that you think a camera with the strongest AA filter in history, and fewer pixels, somehow has "better high ISO performance"...
Marcel van Leeuwen ·
maybe you are the fanboy here? Maybe we don't like the strong moire patterns? And the camera just CAN NOT focus in low light. Even with a fast 1.4 prime. That for me makes it a useless camera. And why are we comparing a Canon with a Nikon? When invested in a system it is a non issue.
Carl Eberhart ·
Not at all. I am being more objective here than you are, frankly. I am not fully invested in one system at this time, so I can be more objective than a fanboy that DOES fully invest in one system, and thus has to defend it. I am not getting this particular camera for low light, only a fool would. But I suspect you aren't using your precious new toy in low light for anything critical either, so hop off your high horse, it needs a bath :)
Marcel van Leeuwen ·
again you presume too much. I also work at a camera rental store, so i use about every system out there which i can lay my hands on. And i have shot with virtually any camera that matters. I'm not heavily invested in anything.
Carl Eberhart ·
So what? If you work in a camera rental store, then you are shipping cameras out most of the time. What does that prove? Your point above was that if a person invests "in a system", as in ONE system, comparing with another system is a non-issue. You are contradicting yourself.
Tom ·
It is a very steady camera, for sure, but the price is very high indeed for the limited (if any real) benefits it brings over competition such as the D750 for stills and the deliberately crippled 4K codec. No camera can be evaluated independently from its price point and on that subject, I don't understand what Canon is trying to achieve. It doesn't provide ground breaking stills performance to justify double the price of a D750 (or 60% more than a D810) nor does it offer a compelling 4K platform. It's neither fish, nor fowl and as a decent jack of all trades is priced inappropriately considering the competition. As The Camera Store says in their review, this camera will appeal to the Canon faithful and especially those upgrading from the 5D II and III, but its still an expensive pill to swallow. Maybe this is a genius plan from Canon, but I feel their aggressive protection of their cine line and their other models is not going to work in their favour in the long run. I suspect a lot of people who wanted a decent modern sensor with good DR for stills are just going to wait for the 6D II. Video shooters are probably wondering what on earth they will do...
Carl Eberhart ·
You make valid points, but I think video shooters are already using other cams, as Zach says. It's not fair to compare a new camera's price, to the price of other cams that have been out for 2 years or more. Intro prices are always higher. I am more bothered by the problems I point out in my post, than about price alone. The D750 has its problems and has their weak, old autofocus. It was intro'd at a very fair price, but none of the D800 or D600 series, were intro'd at a fair price. Only after time did their prices become more fair. I agree the 6D2 should be promising, unless of course Canon change their mind about taking it "upmarket" (presumably to compete closer to the D750). If they don't take it upmarket, then it will keep the same crappy AF sensor, or at the very least will get the ancient one from the 7D and 70D. To take it "upmarket", at a minimum it needs the 80D's AF sensor, but I'm not holding my breath. Also, you may recall the intro price of the 6D was absurd, but no D750 existed back then in late 2012, and the D600 was also not good and overpriced...and the D800's were bad. The D810 still seems superb to me, though...and yes...your strongest point of all...is also mine. The D810 is the better camera vs. the 5D4 overall, even at $3000 for the D810 vs. $3500 for the 5D4. But at $2700, or $2500 perhaps by the holidays (and $1800 for grey market D810's?) Nikon is a screaming buy then, despite the fact they are the smaller company with crappy pro service vs. Canon...in my humble yada yada...
Carl Eberhart ·
Yes, I am troubled by the lack of CFast, too…especially since it will be 2020 before this camera’s replacement comes out. Standard CF cards will be ancient by then. Half of us will almost be ready to live (and die quickly) on Mars by then, according to Elon Musk…
So, basically this is a review of a stills camera that can shoot video, as done by a videographer. Ok. Zach admits the era of Canon DSLR’s as the most cost effective way to shoot high quality video, are long over…so why is he reviewing the camera? I understand if you wanted to lay out the minuses and the few pluses, but still…
This review needed to be done by a stills expert, imo…
So, to the stills photo experts, and/or Roger…can you PLEASE tell me why (just take an educated guess if nothing else)…DPReview’s test shots with this camera, when using their tool to compare to three other cameras, such as the Sony A7Rii, 5D3, and D810…(like if you scroll all over their test image and change ISO, which changes to the same ISO for all 4 cameras…very convenient…)…
…Why the heck the output from the 5D4 looks so soft and lacking in contrast? It looks like the 5D4 has a MUCH stronger AA filter than the 5D3, and again the contrast loss…why? 5D4 has a bit less noise than 2 of the 3 others (A7Rii beats it)…but the detail via 5D4 is so blurred that you could get the same lower noise effect from either of the Exmor-stocked cams just by adding NR or otherwise softening the image. To me it looks like the D810, at least at ISO under say 3200…is very capable of equaling the noise vs. detail, from the 5D4. The A7Rii exceeds it, no big surprise there. The 5D3 can do neither but at least its apparent contrast matches the others, beating the 5D4. At very high ISO it all becomes moot anyway, so that’s why it makes the most sense to compare at useable ISO settings, to me.
So what gives there? It almost looks like to me, that not only is the 5D4’s AA filter too strong, but also Canon has played with the in-camera processing a bit even for RAW, and added more NR than they should have…kind of like what Nikon seems to have done back with the D3S in the old days.
And, is the autofocus that much better than the 5D3? How about than the 5DSR? It has the RGB light meter from the 7D2, which was somehow said to almost be perfect at autofocusing when it was first released. Is it not so great now?
Sure Canon claims lower light sensitivity on the AF points, so does Nikon on their new AF sensor in D500 and D5. How do they compare with Canon? Kai at Digital Rev liked the D5 a bit better than the 1DX2.
So why can’t you guys go for it? You have more toys than Kai does, show them off!
I guess I want to see an AF test comparison done on your blog, between 5D4, 5D3, 5DSR, 1DX1 and 2, D4S, D5, D500, and D810. Mirrorless need not apply, let’s test real autofocus sensors while they still exist 🙂 !!
You could just use the 70-200 f/2.8’s, since those supposedly autofocus the fastest, and it’s usually what everybody else uses when they do these comparisons.
If you are too bored doing it in Memphis, you’re welcome to take them out in the desert and see which are the most impervious to dust at the same time…(lol sorry just joking, still can’t get over that poor D810 that went to “burning man”…should be called “dusty fanboy”…lol.)
“Am I axxxing ‘to’ much”? Thanks for your time ladies and gents…and thanks SO MUCH for your work at Lensrentals !! Always entertaining stuff 🙂
the_ownage ·
Kai never said he liked the D5, he was more interested on the D500, he liked the 1DX II better, try watching both videos.
Carl Eberhart ·
Sorry I did watch both, why don’t you try watching both, and the ones after? He said the D5 was more “3D-ish”, and “I like it better”…so yeah…buzz off, come back without hiding behind an alias, or maybe just hold your tongue?
Carl Eberhart ·
Sorry I did watch both, why don't you try watching both, and the ones after? He said the D5 was more "3D-ish", and "I like it better"...so yeah...buzz off, come back without hiding behind an alias, or maybe just hold your tongue?
Marcel van Leeuwen ·
Why not try using one yourself? I find that in IQ and usability, the step between the 5D II and 5D III is just as great as with the III and IV. I shot ISO 6400 and 25600 and i could not tell a difference between the shots (well maybe a bit softer on the 25600, but not so much that i would care not to shoot it), except for the numbers on my screen. Most people said the same not so great stuff about the mark III, but after people using it, everyone agreed it was sooooooo much better.
Carl Eberhart ·
It’s not a matter of me using it, it’s a matter of comparing it directly with competitors, which you have not done, but which others have done, as I noted above. Still waiting on why their results looked so soft. From what I gather the AA filter is fairly strong. I owned the 5D3, and am now going with Nikon for a while.
Marcel van Leeuwen ·
which i have not done? How do you know that?
Carl Eberhart ·
Because you are avoiding my points. You do not provide your own test shot comparisons, either. DPReview and others, have. Get over yourself.
Scott ·
I have one – and I can tell you the images are not soft or blurred, or lacking contrast in any way. It could be DPReview’s test shots, but this body creates stunning detail.
Resampled down to 1920px on the long edge: http://scottsmith.photos/albums/Fall-Colors/143325/Crystal-Mill-No-2
Carl Eberhart ·
Yes, I am troubled by the lack of CFast, too...especially since it will be 2020 before this camera's replacement comes out. Standard CF cards will be ancient by then. Half of us will almost be ready to live (and die quickly) on Mars by then, according to Elon Musk...
So, basically this is a review of a stills camera that can shoot video, as done by a videographer. Ok. Zach admits the era of Canon DSLR's as the most cost effective way to shoot high quality video, are long over...so why is he reviewing the camera? I understand if you wanted to lay out the minuses and the few pluses, but still...
This review needed to be done by a stills expert, imo...
So, to the stills photo experts, and/or Roger...can you PLEASE tell me why (just take an educated guess if nothing else)...DPReview's test shots with this camera, when using their tool to compare to three other cameras, such as the Sony A7Rii, 5D3, and D810...(like if you scroll all over their test image and change ISO, which changes to the same ISO for all 4 cameras...very convenient...)...
...Why the heck the output from the 5D4 looks so soft and lacking in contrast? It looks like the 5D4 has a MUCH stronger AA filter than the 5D3, and again the contrast loss...why? 5D4 has a bit less noise than 2 of the 3 others (A7Rii beats it)...but the detail via 5D4 is so blurred that you could get the same lower noise effect from either of the Exmor-stocked cams just by adding NR or otherwise softening the image. To me it looks like the D810, at least at ISO under say 3200...is very capable of equaling the noise vs. detail, from the 5D4. The A7Rii exceeds it, no big surprise there. The 5D3 can do neither but at least its apparent contrast matches the others, beating the 5D4. At very high ISO it all becomes moot anyway, so that's why it makes the most sense to compare at useable ISO settings, to me.
So what gives there? It almost looks like to me, that not only is the 5D4's AA filter too strong, but also Canon has played with the in-camera processing a bit even for RAW, and added more NR than they should have...kind of like what Nikon seems to have done back with the D3S in the old days.
And, is the autofocus that much better than the 5D3? How about than the 5DSR? It has the RGB light meter from the 7D2, which was somehow said to almost be perfect at autofocusing when it was first released. Is it not so great now?
Sure Canon claims lower light sensitivity on the AF points, so does Nikon on their new AF sensor in D500 and D5. How do they compare with Canon? Kai at Digital Rev liked the D5 a bit better than the 1DX2.
So why can't you guys go for it? You have more toys than Kai does, show them off!
I guess I want to see an AF test comparison done on your blog, between 5D4, 5D3, 5DSR, 1DX1 and 2, D4S, D5, D500, and D810. Mirrorless need not apply, let's test real autofocus sensors while they still exist :-) !!
You could just use the 70-200 f/2.8's, since those supposedly autofocus the fastest, and it's usually what everybody else uses when they do these comparisons.
If you are too bored doing it in Memphis, you're welcome to take them out in the desert and see which are the most impervious to dust at the same time...(lol sorry just joking, still can't get over that poor D810 that went to "burning man"...should be called "dusty fanboy"...lol.)
"Am I axxxing 'to' much"? Thanks for your time ladies and gents...and thanks SO MUCH for your work at Lensrentals !! Always entertaining stuff :-)
Marcel van Leeuwen ·
Why not try using one yourself? I find that in IQ and usability, the step between the 5D II and 5D III is just as great as with the III and IV. I shot ISO 6400 and 25600 and i could not tell a difference between the shots (well maybe a bit softer on the 25600, but not so much that i would care not to shoot it), except for the numbers on my screen. Most people said the same not so great stuff about the mark III, but after people using it, everyone agreed it was sooooooo much better.
Carl Eberhart ·
It's not a matter of me using it, it's a matter of comparing it directly with competitors, which you have not done, but which others have done, as I noted above. Still waiting on why their results looked so soft. From what I gather the AA filter is fairly strong. I owned the 5D3, and am now going with Nikon for a while.
Scott ·
I have one - and I can tell you the images are not soft or blurred, or lacking contrast in any way. It could be DPReview's test shots, but this body creates stunning detail.
Resampled down to 1920px on the long edge: http://scottsmith.photos/al...
Ralph Hightower ·
If I didn’t own the 5D III, this would be the camera that I would buy. Sure, there are incremental improvements. I would buy it for the improved autofocusing, expanded ISO, and GPS. A person mentioned to me around Memorial Day about upgrading his 5D II to a 5D III; I suggested that he hold off on the 5D III since the 5D IV was in the rumor mill at the time.
The boost in FPS is a slight benefit Sure I covet the 1Dx II! When I was researching a DSLR to buy, I created a spreadsheet matrix of my current cameras and Canon models. My Canon A-1 and New F-1, with their respective motor drives shoot 6 FPS and also full frame; they don’t support autofocus. The 5D III in 2013 paired up with my film cameras.
Do I need the blazing fast FPS of the 1Dx II all the time? No.
The 5D is a great general purpose camera for me.
Ralph Hightower ·
If I didn't own the 5D III, this would be the camera that I would buy. Sure, there are incremental improvements. I would buy it for the improved autofocusing, expanded ISO, and GPS. A person mentioned to me around Memorial Day about upgrading his 5D II to a 5D III; I suggested that he hold off on the 5D III since the 5D IV was in the rumor mill at the time.
The boost in FPS is a slight benefit Sure I covet the 1Dx II! When I was researching a DSLR to buy, I created a spreadsheet matrix of my current cameras and Canon models. My Canon A-1 and New F-1, with their respective motor drives shoot 6 FPS and also full frame; they don't support autofocus. The 5D III in 2013 paired up with my film cameras.
Do I need the blazing fast FPS of the 1Dx II all the time? No.
The 5D is a great general purpose camera for me.
mike921 ·
I own both the MK3 and the 1DX, I’m planning to upgrade the MK3 to the MK4 as I feel more has improved than the 1DX to 1DX2, maybe the next DX I’ll move up…. BTW, I don’t do video.
Cthulhu ·
The improvement is comparable and more noticeable on the 1d series in my opinion. I don’t care for wifi of touchscreens, just the ability to make better images
Silent Majority ·
I own both the MK3 and the 1DX, I'm planning to upgrade the MK3 to the MK4 as I feel more has improved than the 1DX to 1DX2, maybe the next DX I'll move up.... BTW, I don't do video.
Cthulhu ·
The improvement is comparable and more noticeable on the 1d series in my opinion. I don't care for wifi of touchscreens, just the ability to make better images
MS ·
The link to the Sony 55 is incorrect.
AmartinezPhotography ·
Thank you for the insightful approach found in your review. Looking back at my MK3 purchase, it was the little things commonly not reviewed that made me feel great about buying it after the fact. Whatever the opposite of buyer’s-remorse is…that. It seems that those smaller touches will be as welcomed of an addition as the increase in image quality and AF system. Combining this review with some other notable articles, I am beginning to believe that Canon does intentionally hold-back on its improvements by designing 5D’s as “worthy upgrade{s}” instead of swinging for the fences. Thanks. -AmartinezPhotography
AmartinezPhotography ·
Thank you for the insightful approach found in your review. Looking back at my MK3 purchase, it was the little things commonly not reviewed that made me feel great about buying it after the fact. Whatever the opposite of buyer's-remorse is...that. It seems that those smaller touches will be as welcomed of an addition as the increase in image quality and AF system. Combining this review with some other notable articles, I am beginning to believe that Canon does intentionally hold-back on its improvements by designing 5D's as "worthy upgrade{s}" instead of swinging for the fences. Thanks. -AmartinezPhotography
Doug Laurent ·
Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected “a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon”!
People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn’t have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
– Articulating screen
– Silent Photo Shooting
– EVF reviewing and filming
– Sensor stabilization
– Pixelshift
– Focus Peaking
– Zebra
– Fully assignable buttons
– Third wheel for ISO
– APS-C Crop Lens compatibility
– Speedbooster Option
– App installation
– Hot Shoe multi use for audio etc
– Thumbnail Videos
– Video Log/Raw Mode
– 4K shooting in real Full Frame
– 4K shooting in any zoom range between Full Frame and the middle 8 MP crop
– 4K in 3840 width
– 4K with efficient codec
– HDMI out in 4K
– 4K 60fps
– 240fps Video
– Focus stacking mode
The worst thing is that Canon just did release their best flagship cameras with the 5D4 and 1DX2, that have to last until 2020 with a big gap in specs, as the follow ups of the 6D and 5DsR will hardly include anything of a long list of convenient and modern features. At the same time you can expect that Sony will come out with a new camera until 2017 that merges the best specs of the A99II and A7RII, who are both not having a nearly equally long list of missing features compared to the 5D4.
The times have changed. In 2008 the 5D2 was alone on the market with its set of features and offered (unfortunately by chance it seems) more than people expected, which is why the feedback was 95% positive. Now we have 2016, and subjectively 50% of all people are disappointed about the 5D4, because Canon still acts as if they just have to be a bit better than Nikon and nothing else, like in the last decades.
Jesse Lee ·
Some of the things you listed above are either unimportant or trivial.
-Articulating screen: Would be a bonus, but not “necessary” by any means
-Silent photo: they already have a silent photo mode; not totally silent but I’ve not heard any complain about it being too loud
-EVF: absolutely a personal preference, plus it eats up the battery like mad (my A7S2 doesn’t last long)
-focus peaking, zebra, audio, thumbnails…: video features that a dominantly-photo camera doesn’t need; if you want such features, Canon has the C-series
I could go on all day. I mean absolutely no disrespect and do not intend to start a war with anyone, I just think that the points you listed, while important to you, are non-starters for me. If wanted to shoot video, I would not buy this camera. That invalidates the majority of your points. Remember this is a photo camera with some video functions. Nikon equivalents have worse video options, whereas the Sony Alphas have great video but meh photo. Each brand has its strength. To fit everything into one body would cost too much to be practical. Just my $0.02. Peace.
Doug Laurent ·
You obviously don’t do anything else than taking stills with stabilized autofocus lenses, which is fine (while nearly all of my points are very useful for stills shooters as well). But then your complaint could be, why a 5D4 is 65% more expensive than a 5D2, in a world of near zero interest rates since 2008?
The two reasons why Canon sets the prices that high might be:
a) they have added a lot more features like 4K which you also don’t need
b) they need to compensate decreasing sales that probably happenend because their lack of innovation compared to competitors and new mirrorless systems who have a bigger marketshare.
Canon should either charge the highest realistic prices like they do and add all realistic features they can implement, or release limited products for less money. Half of the points I have listed can already be found in Panasonic cameras that cost 500 bucks, so it should be no magic for Canon to add more features.
Jesse Lee ·
I actually shoot mostly primes without any stabilizing (last I checked, my 85 f/1.2 didn’t have IS) so nice try. I mentioned all that, and all you could come back with is stabilized lenses? Good grief, if you’re going to make a long list, at least be prepared to back it up. An articulate screen and your other points are mostly video-oriented (as I said and you obviously didn’t read). Most of your points have absolutely NO use for still shooters.
When I shoot video, I prefer to use cameras designed for that purpose, like the A7S2, but I wouldn’t take pictures with it because it’s not strong in that area. At the same time, anyone who buys a 5D4 for video purposes is just asking for trouble. Yes I shoot video on my 5D3, but for really tough jobs, you can’t beat a video-oriented DSLR. But keep dancing around the topic.
Doug Laurent ·
Like many photographers you haven’t realized how many of the so called “video functions” are useful for photo, too – probably because you never tried it. It starts with an EVF for reviewing material in bright sunlight, and ends with focus peaking for manual lenses, who like the Zeiss ones are usually delivering the best quality.
Another returning phenomen I see in your comment is “I don’t need a feature (like IS), so it should also not be important to anybody else, and your request is not valid”. That’s very narrow minded. Stabilization in lenses and especially on sensors is the big thing right now and will be in the future – because it helps in 90% of all shooting scenarios.
If you like at an A7R2 and A99II, an A9 fusion out of both cameras is not to far away, and you would have a nearly perfect camera for stills and video at the same time. If we had the year 2007, I would have agreed with the theory that stills and photo definitely need dedicated specialized cameras – but not in 2016.
The only one who is dancing around a topic is clearly Canon, who are releasing cameras like the 5D4 with several brilliant video features, while leaving others out on purpose. It’s as if they were saying: “Hey, please spend a 1000 bucks more for the 5D4 and buy it, as it has cool 4K and great video autofocus now – but PLEASE don’t really use the 5D4 for video in the real world, it wasn’t meant for that!” That’s the most extreme half-hearted concept of a company I have seen.
And Canon is missing the big media trend of this decade. Editors, Pros and amateurs are Photographers and Filmmakers at the same time, in the same location. Nobody wants to carry around 2 devices, when everything easily could have achieved with 1 device. Only for Canon it’s better to sell 2 devices instead of 1. This is why it’s justified to put pressure on Canon.
Jesse Lee ·
I’ve never tried it? I’ve been shooting video since 5D2 made shooting video on DSLRs cool. So yes, I’ve more than tried it. And I never once even insinuated that “because I don’t use a function it’s not important to anyone else.” I merely point out what I like and find useful, if you care to read at all.
If you go back and study your list of what’s good and bad, you’ll see that you were yourself very opinionated, as evidenced by your fervent defense of your comments. When people like me voice our opinions, now I”m narrow-minded? Read my first comment and name ONE thing that’s wrong.
Articulating screen is not necessary. True.
Silent photo already exists: True.
EVF is a personal preference: True.
Focus peaking etc. are not needed on photo camera: True. When was the last time you needed focus peaking on a photo camera? When did you need zebra for a still? When did you need AUDIO!?
I stand by my comments. The 5D4 is half-baked for video and to judge it for its video capabilities is downright laughable. Can it achieve good results? Absolutely. But are there better cameras for that? Absolutely.
the Plants Official ·
Thats crazy – my 1st Ac costs 300$ an hour when I use my URSA mini 4.6k (any decent one does). I own the A7rii, A7sii, the 5 D Mark IV, and if you know how to grade, Cinestyle plus the Dual Pixel Autofocus is a dream come true. Around 1600 iso and below they all look good and a 1.7 crop is about, Super 35 (the same as my URSA Mini 4.6k). I am atop writer on Sony on Quora own all Sony Gear but don’t knock Canon till you have tried it, its no gimmick.
Jesse Lee ·
Sorry for the really late reply. I almost never use Disqus. As for the topic in question (if it still breaths), I did use a 5D4 for video. My A7s2 does a better job in that area, hands down. Can I achieve good results with my 5D4? Having shot video since 5D2 made it sexy, yes, I can get good results with it. But the Sony just does a better job overall. It’s no knock to any brand, it’s simply a fact that different brands have different strengths and it’s best to maximize each.
Carl Eberhart ·
Jesse I think you are making good points. I think for Lensrentals (that I am not trying to bash here, I love you guys!!)…to use a videographer to review the 5D4, and for people like Doug who appear to constantly discuss the camera’s video usage here…It just does not correlate to what MOST of the Canon customers who buy the 5D4 will be doing. Most of them will be shooting stills with this camera, not video. Most of the “pro’s” are wedding or otherwise commercial photographers. These people already use something else (or someone else) for video. Indie filmmakers apparently continue to abandon the 5D2 thru 4, for their cinematic uses…as Zach states in his review.
From my perspective (primarily stills shooter, full time to part time real estate pro, and landscape / wildlife / portrait hobbyist), I still see the 5D4 as hobbled from the outset, needlessly. The dual pixel RAW is an embarrassing gimmick not worthy of Canon’s reputation…and the forgoing of CFast, is a very big mistake. Then there’s the lackluster image sensor performance vs. peers that has caused people like me to embrace the other brand, while we still aren’t totally abandoning Canon.
Have a look at even something like Pentax’s new K1’s sensor performance vs. the 5D4, if you are skeptical. At half the price, it actually beats not only the 5D4, but also the D810 (especially at lower ISO…it is actually beating the D810 at ISO 100!). It’s just that obviously the Pentax system, and even that camera body, are still not up to snuff. Kind of like Canon’s image sensors…not up to snuff!
Canon as a company though, regarding their customer support (and given also their size, largest in the camera industry), is FAR without peer.
Doug Laurent ·
Most still photographers never seem to realize that my lists (I do 50% video and 50% photo) are 95% very helpful for photos as well.
If you want to achieve the best stills quality, today you would need Zeiss still lenses on nearly all focal lengths (like today’s lensrental 50mm comparison shows again at 50mm). Features like Sensor stabilization, focus peaking and reviewing through an EVF in bright sunlight would all be very useful for the results and workflow. 4K 60fps is not only slowmo video, it is 60x 9 megapixel photos a second. The list goes on like that. Shooting stills doesnt mean standing still and stopping any progress.
Carl Eberhart ·
Thanks for the lecture, but it’s not necessary. You may not be the authority that you see yourself fulfilling. I make valid points, you are blowing in the wind a bit…
Doug Laurent ·
All points of forum users are valid, except the ones of those that say “I don’t need a feature in that camera, so Canon does a good job in not including this feature, no matter how many others would like to have it”. Unfortunately there are a lot of such comments.
Carl Eberhart ·
I don’t recall making such a comment. I simply feel it is a let-down. Canon still refuses to put forth the effort to bring their image sensors up to the performance of Exmor. And to top it off, they dialed in too much noise reduction within the RAW processing, and placed an AA filter in front of it that is too strong. Not saying that once prices come down below $3000, that it won’t be worth buying, for those heavily invested in the Canon system. But it definitely does not step up the performance enough to be a 4-year generational upgrade. And again, the dual pixel RAW feature is an abysmal failure and a gimmick. Nobody is going to use this feature very much. It makes the files too big, yet the files are still only 30 MP. Anyone who knows anything at all about properly dialing in AFMA, does not need the “correct their focus in post”. And with such a puny buffer and ancient standard CF card storage…it is shooting itself in the foot before it even gets started shooting 70 MB files that are inherently useless to pro’s.
Ertan Ozturk ·
Doug, show me a camera with all specs you have listed there.
But the camera you’ll tell me should be rock solid with no hiccups or lockups, be fast to operate, will be ergonomic, will not make me have to carry 20 batteries, will be able to focus under very dim light, will not wait for 5 seconds to zoom 100% to the picture I’ve just taken, moisture/dust resistant (real resistance, so real that technical service will not argue “it’s user error” when water leaks in my camera), best-in-industry AF in video with touch focus, and will give excellent color right out of camera.
OK I’m waiting here for your answer 🙂
Doug Laurent ·
A Camera with the specs I have listed: Sony A7R2, except Pixelshift which comes from Pentax, focus stacking which comes from sub-600 Panasonic cameras, 240fps which is available in a sub-1000 Sony RX100IV camera, and 4K 60fps which soon will be available in a sub-2000 GH5.
If you carry around a Sony A7R2 with a battery grip and 2 batteries, it will last longer than a 5D4, while still being lighter.
In 2017, Sony probably will have a fusion out between the A7R2 and the A99II, which could include your and my wish list. With Canon, I don’t see a sign right now that they will release such a camera before the year 2020.
Devils Advocate ·
A 5d mark IV with battery and memory card is 890 grams
the A7RII is 625 grams + VG-C2EM battery grip 250 grams + battery 57 grams, for a total of 932 grams
By my math the sony with grip and extra battery weighs more than the 5d mark IV with 1 battery
Doug Laurent ·
Even if the A7R2 weighs some grams more, it then has longer battery life because 2 of the smaller Sony batteries do last much longer than 1 of the larger Canon batteries. The A7R2 then also would also have the full functionality of the battery grip, and the option to remove the grip and be lighter.
An 8 hour shooting day with an A7R2 without a grip probably would mean an extra 15 seconds more for switching batteries compared to the 5D4. Now THAT’s really an irrelevant point. Did anyboy ever complain that the 5D4 batteries do last only half as long as the 1DX2 batteries, and that makes the 5D4 an unusable camera?
Devils Advocate ·
Please get you numbers correct before posting. Per sonys website the A7RII will do 290 shots per battery using the view finder, this is compared to 900 shots with the 5d mark IV using the view finder, per canon specs. Your math is faulty as I count that as three batteries needed for the sony
Doug Laurent ·
So you didn’t test it yourself – it’s just the specs of the manufacturers, who like in this case are as reliable as the fuel consumption specs of car manufacturers, because there are too many different preferences and conditions that make it uncomparable.
One main source for battery consumption of the camera is the monitor for liveview and playback. If you switch these on and wait, the 5D4 will maybe stay on 30% longer than the A7R2, but not 300% longer.
I can definitely say that comparable days with a 5D3/5D4 who did take 3 batteries did not mean the A7R2 did take 9 batteries, it’s more like 5.
The main question about battery life is: does the A7R2 have a real disadvantage through it, that overweighs the app 20 advantages it has over the 5D4? I guess not, as it costs you just seconds in a day. Not having an articulating screen or sensor stabilization on the other hand can suck the whole shooting day, unless you are an oldschool autofocus-stills-only user.
keynut5 ·
Well, I did test Sony A7RII against Canon 5DmkIII in real life for sports shooting. Sony’s battery drainage is really bad, and to add insult to injury, the camera also drains the batteries while stored (as in not being used)! No such thing with Canon. And in the cold (shooting winter sports), Sony eats battery power far more rapidly than Canon. And, for that matter, Sony is currently not suitable for sports shooting due to lack of fast, and fast focusing, glass. Yes, I know about the Metabones adapters, and have tried them, but focusing is way too slow and unpredictable for sports shooting when mounting relevant (Canon) glass on Sony A7RII. Long story short, I got rid of the Sony and opted for Fuji X-T2 as mirrorless supplement to Canon, and so far, after having covered fast action sports with both, happy as a bunny. Fuji will not replace Canon in my bag any day soon, due to a lot of reasons, but is a great supplement that shoots totally silent when needed (on thing I miss with Canon), and having superb portrait/anything human qualities file wise, and a great selection of top notch glass. Sony has a great, but yet unreleased, potential for real life pro reportage/sports. Sony needs (way) better ergonomics, speed, and, not the least, a much better selection of pro grade glass.
Doug Laurent ·
The E-mount lens lineup now consists of a very good and fast focusing 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 and an extender that makes it a decent 140-400/5.6. There is a set of very good Zeiss primes that – unlike on a Canon camera – are stabilized at least through the sensor, and have autofocus. Soon there will be a 16-35/2.8 and 135/2, so most problems are solved.
The wish list with Sony is long as well, but not as long as the Canon list. The main issue is that with Sony you have the feeling they always release the best they can AND add more than you except to keep up with Canon, which was already visible at Photokinas 2010, 2012 and 2014.
With Canon the feeling is the opposite – you know they are able to do much better, have the features and technology already and can achieve more – but they only hand it out step by step. This why someone who loves the brand also can hate the brand.
keynut5 ·
Lots of emotions and feelings here 😉 but joke aside: 70-200 or up to 400 with a converter is not good enough for long distance shooting at sports arenas or motorsports. And the A7 series houses do not have the relevant ergonomics for fast paced work (or work at all e.g. with gloves in the winter time) and cannot take all the physical beatings a pro grade reportage/sports camera can. Cameras are tools to me, and even if I wished – and wanted; I really tried to like them – Sony A7 series just is not a proper tool for demanding reportage/sports. I don’t care about brands; I also own and shoot with Fuji, Panasonic and Sony (A-6300), and I am generally happy with all of them in the use cases they are intended and suitable for. The A7 series are great cameras, just not suitable tools for demanding reportage/sports in arenas and demanding weather and climate conditions. A camera with the A7R II dynamic range, focus features and IBS and Canon ergonomics, robustness and glass would be great. But as for now, that does not excist. So in real world terms, working under real world conditons, I opt for the right tool in the tool box for any given assigmnent.
Doug Laurent ·
I do the same. It just would be cool if Canon – which would be the favorite brand for the majority of people – would be a bit faster in coming up with modern features and surprise with more that you can expect, instead of just releasing the minimum that people expect, at the latest possible point.
keynut5 ·
Well, that is an opinion, and just like other people, you are free to have yours. I cannot talk for the majority of people, since I have not asked them anything, but based on Canon’s sales figures, it seems like they are doing something right in relation to many people’s preferences. Personally, I do not care about all the bells and whistles. I shoot RAW files using manual shutter speeds and aperture, and sometimes auto ISO. That’s it. I am considering 5D mk4 because of the improved focus system, as I miss having more points for tracking at f8 long glass, but that’s about it. Craftmanship makes up for the rest, just like I can produce wooden marvels with a knife, an axe and a pair of chissels of good quality (sturdy and with good steel) – I would not need power tools. Well, that’s me. Some people require auto everything and guidance by digital wizards. If they want that, let them have it, but that does not change the importance of having – boringly predictable, perhaps, but very functional – sturdy tools for the job. Just look at how the unchanged physical interface of Canon’s pro series are selling points in their own respect. A seasoned pro can ditch his 1D mk3 or whatever, pick up a brand new 1Dx mk2, shoot and deliver within minutes. Sort of the same thing with the 5D series; the features that make these cameras boring to some people are highly appreciated qualities to others. It is the logic of branded goods: Know what to expect, and get it. Want bells and whistles? Buy Sony. Want sturdy tools? Buy Canon or Nikon. Simple as that 🙂
Doug Laurent ·
Canon’s sales figures are much worse than some years ago. There’s also no doubt that Sony and others took away sales from Canon. And it doesn’t help any Canon shooter in the field who is missing one of the many features that only other brands offer, that Canon has the best marketshare in that second. That’s only helpful for a Wallstreet Journal analyst. Putting pressure on Canon regarding prices and features is good for anyone who buys future products. Or which negative impact can it have?
keynut5 ·
None whatsoever. Feel free if you have the time for it 🙂 I am sure that you are right about Sony sales digging into Canon’a market share; I bought a Sony A7R2 myself when Metabones adapters became somewhat stable performance vice. But I did not see a lot of Sonys among the press photographers in the Rio Olympics, or at any sports event that I attend, for that matter. There are different markets segments, and whilst Sony no doubt excel in some of them, the “sturdy tools” segment is dominated by other manufacturers. Besides tech features, there is so much more to a press camera.
Doug Laurent ·
Not even 1% in a lifetime a human eye sees a sports event, and if it’s a relevant sports event, amateurs wouldn’t even be allowed to bring a pro Canon camera with dedicated lenses.
To cut a long story short: Compared to the competition, Canon today has way less technical edges than the other way around, which are useful in much fewer situations. Canon’s speed of innovation is much slower. The presentations are much weaker (Sony had a brilliant system brochure in mutliple languages at Photokina, Canon doesnt have it printed and not event as pdf). The stories you hear from shop owners or local employees are not positive. If a Canon user shouldn’t be alarmed right now, I ask when? Lifetime is short and precious, so there is a difference if photographers and filmmakers can work with near-perfect tools in 2017 (when Sony manages to mix the A99II and A7RII) or 2024, when the 5D6 comes out.
keynut5 ·
Where do you get these statistics from? And when did printed brochures make a difference to anything in 2106? And with regared to Canon’s or Sony’s or whatevermanufarcturer’s innovation rate, who are you trying to convince but yourself? If you have an issue with Canon, you got their address. Customer feedback that may improve sales is always welcome with most manufacturers. But this discussion is getting too weird. You are right that life is short and precious. I don’t have time for this. Have a good day 🙂
Doug Laurent ·
1) The statistics come from common sense. If in theory each person on this planet would spend MORE than 1% of their awake lifetime at live sports events, that would be 7+ billion people who spend more than 90 minutes time as spectators in a stadium every week. Pretty unlikely, right? At the same time it is obvious people could spend 3-30% of their lifetime taking pictures of food.
2) Print – or in this case also PDF brochures – give consumers a subjective impression about the state of a brand. Regarding a system overview, the result in this niche is Sony = very good, Canon = very bad as not existing.
3) I try to convince Canon. They will not listen to single emails. But they do read forums, and there are hundreds of readers who might see it the same way and express it – plus act with their purses. So it’s much more efficient to complain in public.
Doug Laurent ·
As you can see with today’s A6500 release – that by the way turns ALL non-stabilized Canon lenses into 5-axis stabilized lenses if you like – Sony is a lot faster in everything they do. You can expect they will release the missing E-mount lenses sooner, than Canon or Nikon will have an answer to the Sony mirrorless cameras – who by the way only would be attractive if they keep EF and F-mounts.
keynut5 ·
You have never been shooring sports, have you? Obviously not. If you had, you would know that IS is pretty much irrelevant because of the fast shutter speeds and all the movement going on with the motive. Sports photographers turn IS off when shooting such fast paced situations. A6500 may very well be a nice camera, but hardly a replacement for a pro grade Nikon or Canon DSLR any day soon, due to many reasons, some of which I have already mentioned. And regardless of IS or not, shooting Canon glass on Sony E with a Metabones adapter is still slow and does not take advantage of all the advanced Sony AF features.
Doug Laurent ·
So you didn't test it yourself - it's just the specs of the manufacturers, who like in this case are as reliable as the fuel consumption specs of car manufacturers, because there are too many different preferences and conditions that make it uncomparable.
One main source for battery consumption of the camera is the monitor for liveview and playback. If you switch these on and wait, the 5D4 will maybe stay on 30% longer than the A7R2, but not 300% longer.
I can definitely say that comparable days with a 5D3/5D4 who did take 3 batteries did not mean the A7R2 did take 9 batteries, it's more like 5.
The main question about battery life is: does the A7R2 have a real disadvantage through it, that overweighs the app 20 advantages it has over the 5D4? I guess not, as it costs you just seconds in a day. Not having an articulating screen or sensor stabilization on the other hand can suck the whole shooting day, unless you are an oldschool autofocus-stills-only user.
keynut5 ·
Well, I did test Sony A7RII against Canon 5DmkIII in real life for sports shooting. Sony's battery drainage is really bad, and to add insult to injury, the camera also drains the batteries while stored (as in not being used)! No such thing with Canon. And in the cold (shooting winter sports), Sony eats battery power far more rapidly than Canon. And, for that matter, Sony is currently not suitable for sports shooting due to lack of fast, and fast focusing, glass. Yes, I know about the Metabones adapters, and have tried them, but focusing is way too slow and unpredictable for sports shooting when mounting relevant (Canon) glass on Sony A7RII. Long story short, I got rid of the Sony and opted for Fuji X-T2 as mirrorless supplement to Canon, and so far, after having covered fast action sports with both, happy as a bunny. Fuji will not replace Canon in my bag any day soon, due to a lot of reasons, but is a great supplement that shoots totally silent when needed (on thing I miss with Canon), and having superb portrait/anything human qualities file wise, and a great selection of top notch glass. Sony has a great, but yet unreleased, potential for real life pro reportage/sports. Sony needs (way) better ergonomics, speed, and, not the least, a much better selection of pro grade glass.
Doug Laurent ·
The E-mount lens lineup now consists of a very good and fast focusing 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 and an extender that makes it a decent 140-400/5.6. There is a set of very good Zeiss primes that - unlike on a Canon camera - are stabilized at least through the sensor, and have autofocus. Soon there will be a 16-35/2.8 and 135/2, so most problems are solved.
The wish list with Sony is long as well, but not as long as the Canon list. The main issue is that with Sony you have the feeling they always release the best they can AND add more than you except to keep up with Canon, which was already visible at Photokinas 2010, 2012 and 2014.
With Canon the feeling is the opposite - you know they are able to do much better, have the features and technology already and can achieve more - but they only hand it out step by step. This why someone who loves the brand also can hate the brand.
keynut5 ·
Lots of emotions and feelings here ;) but joke aside: 70-200 or up to 400 with a converter is not good enough for long distance shooting at sports arenas or motorsports. And the A7 series houses do not have the relevant ergonomics for fast paced work (or work at all e.g. with gloves in the winter time) and cannot take all the physical beatings a pro grade reportage/sports camera can. Cameras are tools to me, and even if I wished - and wanted; I really tried to like them - Sony A7 series just is not a proper tool for demanding reportage/sports. I don't care about brands; I also own and shoot with Fuji, Panasonic and Sony (A-6300), and I am generally happy with all of them in the use cases they are intended and suitable for. The A7 series are great cameras, just not suitable tools for demanding reportage/sports in arenas and demanding weather and climate conditions. A camera with the A7R II dynamic range, focus features and IBS and Canon ergonomics, robustness and glass would be great. But as for now, that does not excist. So in real world terms, working under real world conditons, I opt for the right tool in the tool box for any given assigmnent.
Doug Laurent ·
I do the same. It just would be cool if Canon - which would be the favorite brand for the majority of people - would be a bit faster in coming up with modern features and surprise with more that you can expect, instead of just releasing the minimum that people expect, at the latest possible point.
keynut5 ·
Well, that is an opinion, and just like other people, you are free to have yours. I cannot talk for the majority of people, since I have not asked them anything, but based on Canon's sales figures, it seems like they are doing something right in relation to many people's preferences. Personally, I do not care about all the bells and whistles. I shoot RAW files using manual shutter speeds and aperture, and sometimes auto ISO. That's it. I am considering 5D mk4 because of the improved focus system, as I miss having more points for tracking at f8 long glass, but that's about it. Craftmanship makes up for the rest, just like I can produce wooden marvels with a knife, an axe and a pair of chissels of good quality (sturdy and with good steel) - I would not need power tools. Well, that's me. Some people require auto everything and guidance by digital wizards. If they want that, let them have it, but that does not change the importance of having - boringly predictable, perhaps, but very functional - sturdy tools for the job. Just look at how the unchanged physical interface of Canon's pro series are selling points in their own respect. A seasoned pro can ditch his 1D mk3 or whatever, pick up a brand new 1Dx mk2, shoot and deliver within minutes. Sort of the same thing with the 5D series; the features that make these cameras boring to some people are highly appreciated qualities to others. It is the logic of branded goods: Know what to expect, and get it. Want bells and whistles? Buy Sony. Want sturdy tools? Buy Canon or Nikon. Simple as that :)
Doug Laurent ·
Canon's sales figures are much worse than some years ago. There's also no doubt that Sony and others took away sales from Canon. And it doesn't help any Canon shooter in the field who is missing one of the many features that only other brands offer, that Canon has the best marketshare in that second. That's only helpful for a Wallstreet Journal analyst. Putting pressure on Canon regarding prices and features is good for anyone who buys future products. Or which negative impact can it have?
keynut5 ·
None whatsoever. Feel free if you have the time for it :) I am sure that you are right about Sony sales digging into Canon'a market share; I bought a Sony A7R2 myself when Metabones adapters became somewhat stable performance vice. But I did not see a lot of Sonys among the press photographers in the Rio Olympics, or at any sports event that I attend, for that matter. There are different markets segments, and whilst Sony no doubt excel in some of them, the "sturdy tools" segment is dominated by other manufacturers. Besides tech features, there is so much more to a press camera.
Doug Laurent ·
Not even 1% in a lifetime a human eye sees a sports event, and if it's a relevant sports event, amateurs wouldn't even be allowed to bring a pro Canon camera with dedicated lenses.
To cut a long story short: Compared to the competition, Canon today has way less technical edges than the other way around, which are useful in much fewer situations. Canon's speed of innovation is much slower. The presentations are much weaker (Sony had a brilliant system brochure in mutliple languages at Photokina, Canon doesnt have it printed and not event as pdf). The stories you hear from shop owners or local employees are not positive. If a Canon user shouldn't be alarmed right now, I ask when? Lifetime is short and precious, so there is a difference if photographers and filmmakers can work with near-perfect tools in 2017 (when Sony manages to mix the A99II and A7RII) or 2024, when the 5D6 comes out.
keynut5 ·
Where do you get these statistics from? And when did printed brochures make a difference to anything in 2106? And with regared to Canon's or Sony's or whatevermanufarcturer's innovation rate, who are you trying to convince but yourself? If you have an issue with Canon, you got their address. Customer feedback that may improve sales is always welcome with most manufacturers. But this discussion is getting too weird. You are right that life is short and precious. I don't have time for this. Have a good day :)
Doug Laurent ·
1) The statistics come from common sense. If in theory each person on this planet would spend MORE than 1% of their awake lifetime at live sports events, that would be 7+ billion people who spend more than 90 minutes time as spectators in a stadium every week. Pretty unlikely, right? At the same time it is obvious people could spend 3-30% of their lifetime taking pictures of food.
2) Print - or in this case also PDF brochures - give consumers a subjective impression about the state of a brand. Regarding a system overview, the result in this niche is Sony = very good, Canon = very bad as not existing.
3) I try to convince Canon. They will not listen to single emails. But they do read forums, and there are hundreds of readers who might see it the same way and express it - plus act with their purses. So it's much more efficient to complain in public.
Doug Laurent ·
As you can see with today's A6500 release - that by the way turns ALL non-stabilized Canon lenses into 5-axis stabilized lenses if you like - Sony is a lot faster in everything they do. You can expect they will release the missing E-mount lenses sooner, than Canon or Nikon will have an answer to the Sony mirrorless cameras - who by the way only would be attractive if they keep EF and F-mounts.
Cthulhu ·
How’s the 1dx2 a mistake? The camera is absolutely fantastic and best in class.
Doug Laurent ·
You are absolutely right. I love my 1DX2, and having 4K 60fps, dualpixel autofocus, touchscreen etc are great. But I’ve also listed what Canon easily and realistically could have added to their expensive flagship camera.
One very simple thing would have been to make buttons fully assignable, so we all could have had a third wheel dedicated for ISO now, like it’s possible on a Sony A7R2. Instead Canon did decide to artificially limit the functions you can assign for that wheel and other buttons. That’s even less understandable when you know that – which is much better than Sony – you are able to register any function into your own menu tabs.
In comparison, the 1DX2 also has very disappointing aspects. In higher ISO numbers from 6400 on especially in 4K video mode, the 1DX2 is much noisier than the old 1DC they have presented 4 years ago. How can that be???
It also sucks that the 1DX2 has no video log mode, like the 1DC – another artificial limitation. Now I always have to decide if I can shoot 60fps OR in log mode, but not both at the same time. Unnecessarily I need to carry 2 heavy cameras because of it.
Luckily Canon can get a big applause if they release a firmware update that does address all the simple things they could improve in a firmware.
Keith Reeder ·
“People rant…”
Because they’re whiny malcontents with First World problems, that really need to get a fecking grip of themselves…
Geniusknowsnobounds ·
Seriously? With a Wishlist like that it’s no wonder you’re disappointed. I’d give a price estimate of around $60k for a camera to have all those features and a form factor that would make Zacuto and all the other rig makers billionaires. If you really need all those features, learn all you can about arduino and get busy, but be prepared to go broke at the same time. Who among all the camera manufacturers has a single model with every single item on your bucket list? Answer: No one! There’s no point from any single element of logic or practicality of having the perfect stills camera and the perfect motion picture camera inhabiting the same space in time. When I’m shooting motion pictures, I work in a specific, considered headspace. When my attention is on creating a single great image, I don’t give a rats rectum for rolling shutter or audio waveform or anything else. The principle reason Canon added video to a stills camera was so that at least one very large news agency was able to rationalise its shooting workforce by 40%. A side effect was a new interest in a more cinematic style of shooting and a return to the joys of dual system production, but bottom line, it was about making certain that purchase orders for thousands of new camera bodies went to Canon, not Nikon. Simple thing here, stop being such a whiner. It’s not attractive and no one in a position to answer your inner five year olds’s requests for a pony that flies, will ever accede to your petulance.
Corky ·
You could buy a Sony and see how that works out for you.
Doug Laurent ·
Hell no, NOBODY on the planet did rant about the 5D4 because anybody expected "a camera that can shoot medium format quality images, with the speed of a Canon 1DX Mark II, and the video functionalities of a RED Weapon"!
People rant about the 5D4 because it doesn't have many features that cheaper and older camera products of competitors offer, like:
- Articulating screen
- Silent Photo Shooting
- EVF reviewing and filming
- Sensor stabilization
- Pixelshift
- Focus Peaking
- Zebra
- Fully assignable buttons
- Third wheel for ISO
- APS-C Crop Lens compatibility
- Speedbooster Option
- App installation
- Hot Shoe multi use for audio etc
- Thumbnail Videos
- Video Log/Raw Mode
- 4K shooting in real Full Frame
- 4K shooting in any zoom range between Full Frame and the middle 8 MP crop
- 4K in 3840 width
- 4K with efficient codec
- HDMI out in 4K
- 4K 60fps
- 240fps Video
- Focus stacking mode
The worst thing is that Canon just did release their best flagship cameras with the 5D4 and 1DX2, that have to last until 2020 with a big gap in specs, as the follow ups of the 6D and 5DsR will hardly include anything of a long list of convenient and modern features. At the same time you can expect that Sony will come out with a new camera until 2017 that merges the best specs of the A99II and A7RII, who are both not having a nearly equally long list of missing features compared to the 5D4.
The times have changed. In 2008 the 5D2 was alone on the market with its set of features and offered (unfortunately by chance it seems) more than people expected, which is why the feedback was 95% positive. Now we have 2016, and subjectively 50% of all people are disappointed about the 5D4, because Canon still acts as if they just have to be a bit better than Nikon and nothing else, like in the last decades.
Cthulhu ·
How's the 1dx2 a mistake? The camera is absolutely fantastic and best in class.
Doug Laurent ·
You are absolutely right. I love my 1DX2, and having 4K 60fps, dualpixel autofocus, touchscreen etc are great. But I've also listed what Canon easily and realistically could have added to their expensive flagship camera.
One very simple thing would have been to make buttons fully assignable, so we all could have had a third wheel dedicated for ISO now, like it's possible on a Sony A7R2. Instead Canon did decide to artificially limit the functions you can assign for that wheel and other buttons. That's even less understandable when you know that - which is much better than Sony - you are able to register any function into your own menu tabs.
In comparison, the 1DX2 also has very disappointing aspects. In higher ISO numbers from 6400 on especially in 4K video mode, the 1DX2 is much noisier than the old 1DC they have presented 4 years ago. How can that be???
It also sucks that the 1DX2 has no video log mode, like the 1DC - another artificial limitation. Now I always have to decide if I can shoot 60fps OR in log mode, but not both at the same time. Unnecessarily I need to carry 2 heavy cameras because of it.
Luckily Canon can get a big applause if they release a firmware update that does address all the simple things they could improve in a firmware.
Keith Reeder ·
"People rant..."
Because they're whiny malcontents with First World problems, that really need to get a fecking grip of themselves...
Geniusknowsnobounds ·
Seriously? With a Wishlist like that it's no wonder you're disappointed. I'd give a price estimate of around $60k for a camera to have all those features and a form factor that would make Zacuto and all the other rig makers billionaires. If you really need all those features, learn all you can about arduino and get busy, but be prepared to go broke at the same time. Who among all the camera manufacturers has a single model with every single item on your bucket list? Answer: No one! There's no point from any single element of logic or practicality of having the perfect stills camera and the perfect motion picture camera inhabiting the same space in time. When I'm shooting motion pictures, I work in a specific, considered headspace. When my attention is on creating a single great image, I don't give a rats rectum for rolling shutter or audio waveform or anything else. The principle reason Canon added video to a stills camera was so that at least one very large news agency was able to rationalise its shooting workforce by 40%. A side effect was a new interest in a more cinematic style of shooting and a return to the joys of dual system production, but bottom line, it was about making certain that purchase orders for thousands of new camera bodies went to Canon, not Nikon. Simple thing here, stop being such a whiner. It's not attractive and no one in a position to answer your inner five year olds's requests for a pony that flies, will ever accede to your petulance.
tirmite ·
Wow. There was a time when strangers were polite to each other. It’s called civility. The way people attack each other when only talking about cameras is incredible. Not shocking because I’ve come to expect it in today’s culture, but it is sad. Really sad. If disagreeing about camera features or sensor DR gets someone to act this nasty it’s no wonder people get killed due to road rage. There are a lot of “adults” here who really need to grow up.
Sator Photo ·
If this comment is about Doug Laurent…don’t fret. He is a well known troll who goes on the same tiresome rants everywhere on the internet. He is infamous as a one of the shrillest trolls at the Canon Rumors forum. The most ridiculous thing on his wish lists is the one about focal length reducers/lens “speed boosters”. Doug thinks that Canon deserve to go bankrupt because they failed to please him by personally offering him the use of medium format lenses on full frame bodies. As if Canon are going to make a profit selling adapters to mount Hasselblad lenses on a 5DIV. Doug regards himself an “expert” because he has a small photography equipment hiring business, and wishes to impress his expertise upon us by screeching the same thing into our ears over and over again.
Doug Laurent ·
Sator, you might be one of the “adults” tirmite is talking about: useless forum users that only offend others, while not adding any hard facts or useful logical thoughts. I own app 50 cameras (including 5D3, 5D4, 1DC, 1DX2, Red Epics and medium format) and 250 lenses that I use daily and sometimes rent out to pro friends, so I gain a lot of experience in comparing all these products and brands in detail.
I love Canon and their latest cameras. But like many others we have to use them for the next 4 years. And for many purposes in a modern media world that require to act faster, transport less and do stills and video at the same time, Canon does not come up with solutions that are as convenient as their competitors. For all those who are happy to spend 4000 bucks for the 5D4 the way it is, congratulations. Many people are not happy and would like to openly talk about it, me just with more detailed reasoning.
sfcameraman ·
Wait, you have all those cameras, making money? And you are complaining about a few hundred bucks difference between camera models? I suppose if you do the math and the camera won’t make you money… then don’t buy it. But, if I enjoyed the Canon functionality and the specs makes sense… I’d be buying that camera. I have a 5D Mark 3, a C300 and the C300 MarkII. They all cost me money on outlay but they are all great tools that make money for me eventually.
I come from the video side… and I see the value in the 5D series… but when I really need a video camera I go with a dedicated video camera. They all have their place in the stable and the costs are minor compared with the money they will make over time. In my case, the DSLR for video is seeing very little use these days… so I have no desire to upgrade at this point.
If I was a hobbyist, or not making money on my images… sure, I would take a hard look at all cameras and the costs between them. There is plenty to shrug shoulders at with the 5Dm4 but there are pretty great things, too.
The 5Dm3 might not be the tool for everyone but there sure seems to be a lot of shade thrown at it, for unrealistic reasons.
Doug Laurent ·
Now I tell you a secret: if you want to become a millionaire, you need to value small money, relativity and details.
If Canon and some users think that filmmakers and photographers each should buy seperate dedicated cameras and it doesn’t make sense to integrate all functions into one, then they missed where the media and the planet are going since autumn 2008.
At Photokina, Canon presented their working 8K (of course mirrorless) Cinema camera. I might have been only 1% of the stand visitors who saw this, but Canon had a wall with large prints of single app. 32 megapixel framegrabs of the 8K demo clips, plus magnifying glasses for visitors. The results did look extremely good!
Anybody who saw this please don’t tell me that stills and video don’t go together, and Canon doesn’t know that the fusion will happen in the future. They just milk every last cent out of the traditional technology, so consumers will have to buy many steps in between. That’s their right as a company, but the right of the consumer is to put pressure on them to make the progress of innovation a bit more speedy.
Juha Bly ·
You are using the word ‘app’ wrong. Were you trying to abbreviate ‘approximately’?
Doug Laurent ·
Of course not “approximately”. The only possible context anyone could read or understand in the sentence “app. 32 megapixel” is the short form of “The Apprentice” with Donald Trump.
Juha Bly ·
I have no apprenticeship experience so far, but I am happy to see you want to see the world burn. I wish I could vote – a face off between the oligarch and a less succesful challenger would create an interesting global dynamic. Even more interesting than the brand wars. I trust you’ll do the right thing.
Doug Laurent ·
You are writing quite confusing stuff here.
The background is: you obviously wanted to make a forum user look incompetent by going after a completely irrelevant fact (which short form of approximately is correct), probably because you feel that I have personally insulted your family member “Canon” by writing facts about missing modern features.
That lame attempt did deserve an equally stupid answer.
Juha Bly ·
Indeed, I crolled, for the comments were going nowhere after the list and first reactions to it. The train of thought had to be derailed, so trolling the dice and improvising on keywords were needed.
Devils Advocate ·
If you are going to use numbers you really need to fact check them, I too would be unhappy if I spent 4,000 for a camera with a MSRP of 3,499
Doug Laurent ·
In europe it’s app. 4000 Euros including sales taxes, in america it can be 3500 USD without taxes. That doesn’t change anything about the main point that the price is app. 65% higher than the 5D2, while in the 8 year period of zero interest rates and low inflation since the 5D2 release many things by far didn’t become that much more expensive.
By the way, it’s funny to see how the same people who are extremely generous with Canon regarding lots of missing features and high prices, suddenly can become very detail-loving and strict when it comes to their own defending arguments.
Doug Laurent ·
In europe it's app. 4000 Euros including sales taxes, in america it can be 3500 USD without taxes. That doesn't change anything about the main point that the price is app. 65% higher than the 5D2, while in the 8 year period of zero interest rates and low inflation since the 5D2 release many things by far didn't become that much more expensive.
By the way, it's funny to see how the same people who are extremely generous with Canon regarding lots of missing features and high prices, suddenly can become very detail-loving and strict when it comes to their own defending arguments.
fred ·
Wow. There was a time when strangers were polite to each other. It's called civility. The way people attack each other when only talking about cameras is incredible. Not shocking because I've come to expect it in today's culture, but it is sad. Incredibly sad. If disagreeing about camera features or sensor DR gets someone to act this nasty it's no wonder people get killed due to road rage. There are a lot of "adults" here who really need to grow up.
Sator Photo ·
If this comment is about Doug Laurent...don't fret. He is a well known troll who goes on the same tiresome rants everywhere on the internet. He is infamous as a one of the shrillest trolls at the Canon Rumors forum. The most ridiculous thing on his wish lists is the one about focal length reducers/lens "speed boosters". Doug thinks that Canon deserve to go bankrupt because they failed to please him by personally offering him the use of medium format lenses on full frame bodies. As if Canon are going to make a profit selling adapters to mount Hasselblad lenses on a 5DIV. Doug regards himself an "expert" because he has a small photography equipment hiring business, and wishes to impress his expertise upon us by screeching the same thing into our ears over and over again.
Doug Laurent ·
Sator, you might be one of the "adults" tirmite is talking about: useless forum users that only offend others, while not adding any hard facts or useful logical thoughts. I own app 50 cameras (including 5D3, 5D4, 1DC, 1DX2, Red Epics and medium format) and 250 lenses that I use daily and sometimes rent out to pro friends, so I gain a lot of experience in comparing all these products and brands in detail.
I love Canon and their latest cameras. But like many others we have to use them for the next 4 years. And for many purposes in a modern media world that require to act faster, transport less and do stills and video at the same time, Canon does not come up with solutions that are as convenient as their competitors. For all those who are happy to spend 4000 bucks for the 5D4 the way it is, congratulations. Many people are not happy and would like to openly talk about it, me just with more detailed reasoning.
sfcameraman ·
Wait, you have all those cameras, making money? And you are complaining about a few hundred bucks difference between camera models? I suppose if you do the math and the camera won't make you money... then don't buy it. But, if I enjoyed the Canon functionality and the specs makes sense... I'd be buying that camera. I have a 5D Mark 3, a C300 and the C300 MarkII. They all cost me money on outlay but they are all great tools that make money for me eventually.
I come from the video side... and I see the value in the 5D series... but when I really need a video camera I go with a dedicated video camera. They all have their place in the stable and the costs are minor compared with the money they will make over time. In my case, the DSLR for video is seeing very little use these days... so I have no desire to upgrade at this point.
If I was a hobbyist, or not making money on my images... sure, I would take a hard look at all cameras and the costs between them. There is plenty to shrug shoulders at with the 5Dm4 but there are pretty great things, too.
The 5Dm3 might not be the tool for everyone but there sure seems to be a lot of shade thrown at it, for unrealistic reasons.
Doug Laurent ·
Now I tell you a secret: if you want to become a millionaire, you need to value small money, relativity and details.
If Canon and some users think that filmmakers and photographers each should buy seperate dedicated cameras and it doesn't make sense to integrate all functions into one, then they missed where the media and the planet are going since autumn 2008.
At Photokina, Canon presented their working 8K (of course mirrorless) Cinema camera. I might have been only 1% of the stand visitors who saw this, but Canon had a wall with large prints of single app. 32 megapixel framegrabs of the 8K demo clips, plus magnifying glasses for visitors. The results did look extremely good!
Anybody who saw this please don't tell me that stills and video don't go together, and Canon doesn't know that the fusion will happen in the future. They just milk every last cent out of the traditional technology, so consumers will have to buy many steps in between. That's their right as a company, but the right of the consumer is to put pressure on them to make the progress of innovation a bit more speedy.
Juha Bly ·
You are using the word 'app' wrong. Were you trying to abbreviate 'approximately'?
Doug Laurent ·
Of course not "approximately". The only possible context anyone could read or understand in the sentence "app. 32 megapixel" is the short form of "The Apprentice" with Donald Trump.
Juha Bly ·
I have no apprenticeship experience so far, but I am happy to see you want to see the world burn. I wish I could vote - a face off between the oligarch and a less succesful challenger would create an interesting global dynamic. Even more interesting than the brand wars. I trust you'll do the right thing.
Doug Laurent ·
You are writing quite confusing stuff here.
The background is: you obviously wanted to make a forum user look incompetent by going after a completely irrelevant fact (which short form of approximately is correct), probably because you feel that I have personally insulted your family member "Canon" by writing facts about missing modern features.
That lame attempt did deserve an equally stupid answer.
Jo ·
Yeah 5d4 is an improvement compared with 5d3. In Canon world it’s good enough, but in the real world these r only incremental improvement. whether Canon loyalist will accept it? leaving out cfast just crippled it on the video side.
Jo ·
Yeah 5d4 is an improvement compared with 5d3. In Canon world it's good enough, but in the real world these r only incremental improvement. whether Canon loyalist will accept it? leaving out cfast just crippled it on the video side.
paul mcpherson ·
As a Wedding photographer, this camera is the PERFECT solution. Been shooting mIII’s since they released. Finally got my hands a mIV. The low light sensitivity is freaking amazing. Slo mo is killer. 4K looks awesome even with the crop. The shutter, autofocus, speed and touch screen are incredible. For someone who is a hybrid wedding shooter, toggling between stills and video simultaneously it doesn’t get any better currently in the market. First video shot, both the mIII and mark4. All the slo mo was shot with the m4. https://vimeo.com/184722761. Body rented from Lens Rentals. 🙂
paul mcpherson ·
As a Wedding photographer, this camera is the PERFECT solution. Been shooting mIII's since they released. Finally got my hands a mIV. The low light sensitivity is freaking amazing. Slo mo is killer. 4K looks awesome even with the crop. The shutter, autofocus, speed and touch screen are incredible. For someone who is a hybrid wedding shooter, toggling between stills and video simultaneously it doesn't get any better currently in the market. First video shot, both the mIII and mark4. All the slo mo was shot with the m4. https://vimeo.com/184722761. Body rented from Lens Rentals. :)
Andy ·
Many thanks for this extensive review. It definitely helps to encourage myself to go for the 5D Mark IV: As a travel photographer working with the MKIII since 2012 I am really happy to read about all those improvements Canon introduced – especially in regards of the imrpoved dynamic range, the better autofocus and all those small features that will make my life easier. Can´t wait to work with this camera. Thanks again.
Andy ·
Many thanks for this extensive review. It definitely helps to encourage myself to go for the 5D Mark IV: As a travel photographer working with the MKIII since 2012 I am really happy to read about all those improvements Canon introduced - especially in regards of the imrpoved dynamic range, the better autofocus and all those small features that will make my life easier. Can´t wait to work with this camera. Thanks again.
Mohd Shamsul ·
I keep being pushed to the edge. Swore I would not upgrade from III to IV but tethering on the edge now …
Mohd Shamsul ·
I keep being pushed to the edge. Swore I would not upgrade from III to IV but tethering on the edge now ...
Doug Laurent ·
You obviously don't do anything else than taking stills with stabilized autofocus lenses, which is fine (while nearly all of my points are very useful for stills shooters as well). But then your complaint could be, why a 5D4 is 65% more expensive than a 5D2, in a world of near zero interest rates since 2008?
The two reasons why Canon sets the prices that high might be:
a) they have added a lot more features like 4K which you also don't need
b) they need to compensate decreasing sales that probably happenend because their lack of innovation compared to competitors and new mirrorless systems who have a bigger marketshare.
Canon should either charge the highest realistic prices like they do and add all realistic features they can implement, or release limited products for less money. Half of the points I have listed can already be found in Panasonic cameras that cost 500 bucks, so it should be no magic for Canon to add more features.
Doug Laurent ·
A Camera with the specs I have listed: Sony A7R2, except Pixelshift which comes from Pentax, focus stacking which comes from sub-600 Panasonic cameras, 240fps which is available in a sub-1000 Sony RX100IV camera, and 4K 60fps which soon will be available in a sub-2000 GH5.
If you carry around a Sony A7R2 with a battery grip and 2 batteries, it will last longer than a 5D4, while still being lighter.
In 2017, Sony probably will have a fusion out between the A7R2 and the A99II, which could include your and my wish list. With Canon, I don't see a sign right now that they will release such a camera before the year 2020.
Devils Advocate ·
A 5d mark IV with battery and memory card is 890 grams
the A7RII is 625 grams + VG-C2EM battery grip 250 grams + battery 57 grams, for a total of 932 grams
By my math the sony with grip and extra battery weighs more than the 5d mark IV with 1 battery
Doug Laurent ·
Even if the A7R2 weighs some grams more, it then has longer battery life because 2 of the smaller Sony batteries do last much longer than 1 of the larger Canon batteries. The A7R2 then also would also have the full functionality of the battery grip, and the option to remove the grip and be lighter.
An 8 hour shooting day with an A7R2 without a grip probably would mean an extra 15 seconds more for switching batteries compared to the 5D4. Now THAT's really an irrelevant point. Did anyboy ever complain that the 5D4 batteries do last only half as long as the 1DX2 batteries, and that makes the 5D4 an unusable camera?
Pixel ·
“While the tech isn’t quite there, I imagine tethering wirelessly on commercial shoots is only a few years away.”
What do you mean with that? Tethering dont’t work with the 5d IV ???
Pixel ·
"While the tech isn’t quite there, I imagine tethering wirelessly on commercial shoots is only a few years away."
What do you mean with that? Tethering dont't work with the 5d IV ???
Gary Gray ·
I’m a working pro. I use both Nikon and Canon bodies & lenses. I primairly shoot full frame bodies, but do have a couple of crop bodies as well. The right tool for the the job. I’m not brand centric.
The 5D MK IV is a great camera. I won’t be buying it. Why? It doesn’t solve any photographic problem I have. Between the existing and aging Nikon and Canon Full Frame offerings, it isn’t worth $3,500 to put one of these in my kit. Plain and simple.
Carl Eberhart ·
Nice to see someone else who uses both brands !
Rick Murray ·
Agreed – I use both systems, too.
Rick Murray ·
Agreed - I use both systems, too.
Yuki Sung ·
Wait.. did you really say that the Dual Pixel RAW is a pro for this camera?.. I am canon user, and love 5D4 and just don’t care about other brands, but.. that Dual Pixel RAW is a biggest gimmick in the camera industry in a long time IMO. LOL
Carl Eberhart ·
I totally agree. If the dual pixel RAW feature, makes a difference with missed focus shots on supertele lenses, I have yet to see evidence of it. And most birders and sports shooters that shoot supertele, are not going to use this mode. Why? 75 to 90 MB or larger RAW files for only a 30 MP image? Makes zero sense, not going to happen with them, they would not tolerate the impact on the buffer. Couple this with a feeble and ancient CF slot, no CFast !! Canon has hobbled this camera and it is going to be mocked heavily in the coming years, imo…since it won’t be replaced until 2020 !! (It may actually force Canon to do a “minor” update on the camera after two years…that would make a lot more sense, especially if you’re going to deliberately cripple the camera at the outset of production!) DPReview already found that for wider than 70mm there isn’t much improvement if any (when using dual pixel RAW)…So the only other use scenario for dpR, could be the possible addition of a stop in highlight DR (assuming Canon issues some extreme firmware update in the future, and that’s a big “if”…or if magic lantern still cares enough about Canon that they would attempt to hack the firmware to experiment with this “theory”). But even if it did work, is that extra highlight stop worth such a huge file size? I suppose maybe, for high ISO shots that could use an extra stop of DR, but for low ISO…there’s already almost enough DR. And even adding a stop for highlights wouldn’t amount to much, it seems to me…since higher DR shots at low ISO, are generally under exposed and then pushed. Something the 5D4’s sensor already fails miserably at, vs. the D810 even at +3 EV push (in post), let alone more. Imagine how far behind the 5D4 will be vs. the D810 replacement next year? And no I am not a Nikon fanboy either, I am aware of that much smaller company’s many, many flaws. Certainly I admit the 5D4’s AF murders the D810’s…but by the same token, the D500 and D5’s AF kicks the butts of both the 5D4 and the 1DX2 (according to all who have tried and compared both directly, so far.)
Yuki Sung ·
Wait.. did you really say that the Dual Pixel RAW is a pro for this camera?.. I am canon user, and love 5D4 and just don't care about other brands, but.. that Dual Pixel RAW is a biggest gimmick in the camera industry in a long time IMO. LOL
Carl Eberhart ·
I totally agree. If the dual pixel RAW feature, makes a difference with missed focus shots on supertele lenses, I have yet to see evidence of it. And most birders and sports shooters that shoot supertele, are not going to use this mode. Why? 75 to 90 MB or larger RAW files for only a 30 MP image? Makes zero sense, not going to happen with them, they would not tolerate the impact on the buffer. Couple this with a feeble and ancient CF slot, no CFast !! Canon has hobbled this camera and it is going to be mocked heavily in the coming years, imo...since it won't be replaced until 2020 !! (It may actually force Canon to do a "minor" update on the camera after two years...that would make a lot more sense, especially if you're going to deliberately cripple the camera at the outset of production!) DPReview already found that for wider than 70mm there isn't much improvement if any (when using dual pixel RAW)...So the only other use scenario for dpR, could be the possible addition of a stop in highlight DR (assuming Canon issues some extreme firmware update in the future, and that's a big "if"...or if magic lantern still cares enough about Canon that they would attempt to hack the firmware to experiment with this "theory"). But even if it did work, is that extra highlight stop worth such a huge file size? I suppose maybe, for high ISO shots that could use an extra stop of DR, but for low ISO...there's already almost enough DR. And even adding a stop for highlights wouldn't amount to much, it seems to me...since higher DR shots at low ISO, are generally under exposed and then pushed. Something the 5D4's sensor already fails miserably at, vs. the D810 even at +3 EV push (in post), let alone more. Imagine how far behind the 5D4 will be vs. the D810 replacement next year? And no I am not a Nikon fanboy either, I am aware of that much smaller company's many, many flaws. Certainly I admit the 5D4's AF murders the D810's...but by the same token, the D500 and D5's AF kicks the butts of both the 5D4 and the 1DX2 (according to all who have tried and compared both directly, so far.)
Unrest ·
What? More Canon bias at Lens Rentals. Imagine that, lol.
whereisaki ·
I wonder if the fact that Canon makes video cameras has an impact on the video features they incorporate in their still cameras. I know, Sony this, Sony that, but Canon sells lots more cameras, and maybe they want you to buy a video camera to shoot video.
Carl Eberhart ·
Jesse I think you are making good points. I think for Lensrentals (that I am not trying to bash here, I love you guys!!)...to use a videographer to review the 5D4, and for people like Doug who appear to constantly discuss the camera's video usage here...It just does not correlate to what MOST of the Canon customers who buy the 5D4 will be doing. Most of them will be shooting stills with this camera, not video. Most of the "pro's" are wedding or otherwise commercial photographers. These people already use something else (or someone else) for video. Indie filmmakers apparently continue to abandon the 5D2 thru 4, for their cinematic uses...as Zach states in his review.
From my perspective (primarily stills shooter, full time to part time real estate pro, and landscape / wildlife / portrait hobbyist), I still see the 5D4 as hobbled from the outset, needlessly. The dual pixel RAW is an embarrassing gimmick not worthy of Canon's reputation...and the forgoing of CFast, is a very big mistake. Then there's the lackluster image sensor performance vs. peers that has caused people like me to embrace the other brand, while we still aren't totally abandoning Canon.
Have a look at even something like Pentax's new K1's sensor performance vs. the 5D4, if you are skeptical. At half the price, it actually beats not only the 5D4, but also the D810 (especially at lower ISO...it is actually beating the D810 at ISO 100!). It's just that obviously the Pentax system, and even that camera body, are still not up to snuff. Kind of like Canon's image sensors...not up to snuff!
Canon as a company though, regarding their customer support (and given also their size, largest in the camera industry), is FAR without peer.
Doug Laurent ·
Most still photographers never seem to realize that my lists (I do 50% video and 50% photo) are 95% very helpful for photos as well.
If you want to achieve the best stills quality, today you would need Zeiss still lenses on nearly all focal lengths (like today's lensrental 50mm comparison shows again at 50mm). Features like Sensor stabilization, focus peaking and reviewing through an EVF in bright sunlight would all be very useful for the results and workflow. 4K 60fps is not only slowmo video, it is 60x 9 megapixel photos a second. The list goes on like that. Shooting stills doesnt mean standing still and stopping any progress.
Carl Eberhart ·
Thanks for the lecture, but it's not necessary. You may not be the authority that you see yourself fulfilling. I make valid points, you are blowing in the wind a bit...
Doug Laurent ·
All points of forum users are valid, except the ones of those that say "I don't need a feature in that camera, so Canon does a good job in not including this feature, no matter how many others would like to have it". Unfortunately there are a lot of such comments.
Carl Eberhart ·
I don't recall making such a comment. I simply feel it is a let-down. Canon still refuses to put forth the effort to bring their image sensors up to the performance of Exmor. And to top it off, they dialed in too much noise reduction within the RAW processing, and placed an AA filter in front of it that is too strong. Not saying that once prices come down below $3000, that it won't be worth buying, for those heavily invested in the Canon system. But it definitely does not step up the performance enough to be a 4-year generational upgrade. And again, the dual pixel RAW feature is an abysmal failure and a gimmick. Nobody is going to use this feature very much. It makes the files too big, yet the files are still only 30 MP. Anyone who knows anything at all about properly dialing in AFMA, does not need the "correct their focus in post". And with such a puny buffer and ancient standard CF card storage...it is shooting itself in the foot before it even gets started shooting 70 MB files that are inherently useless to pro's.
Doug Laurent ·
Like many photographers you haven't realized how many of the so called "video functions" are useful for photo, too - probably because you never tried it. It starts with an EVF for reviewing material in bright sunlight, and ends with focus peaking for manual lenses, who like the Zeiss ones are usually delivering the best quality.
Another returning phenomen I see in your comment is "I don't need a feature (like IS), so it should also not be important to anybody else, and your request is not valid". That's very narrow minded. Stabilization in lenses and especially on sensors is the big thing right now and will be in the future - because it helps in 90% of all shooting scenarios.
If you like at an A7R2 and A99II, an A9 fusion out of both cameras is not to far away, and you would have a nearly perfect camera for stills and video at the same time. If we had the year 2007, I would have agreed with the theory that stills and photo definitely need dedicated specialized cameras - but not in 2016.
The only one who is dancing around a topic is clearly Canon, who are releasing cameras like the 5D4 with several brilliant video features, while leaving others out on purpose. It's as if they were saying: "Hey, please spend a 1000 bucks more for the 5D4 and buy it, as it has cool 4K and great video autofocus now - but PLEASE don't really use the 5D4 for video in the real world, it wasn't meant for that!" That's the most extreme half-hearted concept of a company I have seen.
And Canon is missing the big media trend of this decade. Editors, Pros and amateurs are Photographers and Filmmakers at the same time, in the same location. Nobody wants to carry around 2 devices, when everything easily could have achieved with 1 device. Only for Canon it's better to sell 2 devices instead of 1. This is why it's justified to put pressure on Canon.
Michael Clark ·
I must have missed the “gaudy” update of Digital Photo Professional. What, exactly, is gaudy (adj. – extravagantly bright or showy, typically so as to be tasteless.) about it?
I prefer it over Adobe Camera Raw for several reasons: I like the color I get from it better, finer gradations of adjustments are much easier to do, it initially opens raw files with the in-camera settings at the time the files were shot applied to the image, the lens correction available using the DLO module when you need it is phenomenal, and the continuous updates don’t cost $120/year.
Michael Clark ·
I must have missed the "gaudy" update of Digital Photo Professional. What, exactly, is gaudy (adj. - extravagantly bright or showy, typically so as to be tasteless.) about it?
I prefer it over Adobe Camera Raw for several reasons: I like the color I get from it better, finer gradations of adjustments are much easier to do, it initially opens raw files with the in-camera settings at the time the files were shot applied to the image, the lens correction available using the DLO module when you need it is phenomenal, and the continuous updates don't cost $120/year.
the Plants Official ·
Thats crazy - my 1st Ac costs 300$ an hour when I use my URSA mini 4.6k (any decent one does). I own the A7rii, A7sii, the 5 D Mark IV, and if you know how to grade, Cinestyle plus the Dual Pixel Autofocus is a dream come true. Around 1600 iso and below they all look good and a 1.7 crop is about, Super 35 (the same as my URSA Mini 4.6k). I am atop writer on Sony on Quora own all Sony Gear but don't knock Canon till you have tried it, its no gimmick.
relinquis . ·
Great camera… torn between this and the 1DC… will get one of them unless I’m swayed by Nikon’s rumoured new full frame in the summer
relinquis . ·
Great camera... torn between this and the 1DC... will get one of them unless I'm swayed by Nikon's rumoured new full frame in the summer
Corky ·
I recently traded my MkIII for a Mk4 with some degree of ambivalence after hearing all the negative noise on the web and the corresponding praise for the Sony A7R3 and the Nikon D850. After using the camera for a few weeks (I am a full time pro) the strengths of the camera became apparent.
AF is extremely accurate and fast. Making the argument for mirrorless AF accuracy less compelling.
The shutter and mirror mechanism is greatly improved with reduced sound and vibration.
The viewfinder is more useful (for me) with a level indicator. And the frame rate increase, though modest, was welcome. Most remarkable was the image quality. While at first glance the files seem no different than other Canon files working with them in Lightroom revealed a new elasticity of the files in their ability to be adjusted. The files were sharper because the AF seemed to nail focus more reliably and the slight increase in resolution gives one a bit more confidence in cropping aggressively if necessary.
While Canon did not deliver the Sony in Canon clothing some seem to want, they did deliver a well developed professional tool that has proven itself these many years.
For the working pro different features have different priorities. Canon has wisely realized that the bulk of professional and semi professional users value bulletproof AF, useful and consistent ergonomics and refinement of the features that actually bring home the moneymaking shot.
No matter how cool your tech is, the only thing your client will notice is that the image is missing/out of focus or over/underexposed. Canon has worked to get the image safely and consistently. That is money to me.
Corky ·
I recently traded my MkIII for a Mk4 with some degree of ambivalence after hearing all the negative noise on the web and the corresponding praise for the Sony A7R3 and the Nikon D850. After using the camera for a few weeks (I am a full time pro) the strengths of the camera became apparent.
AF is extremely accurate and fast. Making the argument for mirrorless AF accuracy less compelling.
The shutter and mirror mechanism is greatly improved with reduced sound and vibration.
The viewfinder is more useful (for me) with a level indicator. And the frame rate increase, though modest, was welcome. Most remarkable was the image quality. While at first glance the files seem no different than other Canon files working with them in Lightroom revealed a new elasticity of the files in their ability to be adjusted. The files were sharper because the AF seemed to nail focus more reliably and the slight increase in resolution gives one a bit more confidence in cropping aggressively if necessary.
While Canon did not deliver the Sony in Canon clothing some seem to want, they did deliver a well developed professional tool that has proven itself these many years.
For the working pro different features have different priorities. Canon has wisely realized that the bulk of professional and semi professional users value bulletproof AF, useful and consistent ergonomics and refinement of the features that actually bring home the moneymaking shot.
No matter how cool your tech is, the only thing your client will notice is that the image is missing/out of focus or over/underexposed. Canon has worked to get the image safely and consistently. That is money to me.