The wait is finally over and here’s our Canon 5D Mark IV Review. It’s a whole 60g lighter than its predecessor. But will it satisfy the hungry DSLR video user who has been waiting for Canon to come up with a better priced 4K DSLR camera? What’s more, will this camera bring back all those users who once owned a video capable Canon DSLR camera, but ended up looking elsewhere? I will let you decide for yourself. But in the meantime, here are my thoughts after spending a short day with this new camera.
Perhaps the most important feature of the Canon 5D Mark IV is its ability to shoot 4K video internally and its advanced autofocus system. However, in my eyes, there’s no doubt that this feature-rich photo camera, with its 30.4 MP and Dual Pixel RAW, is mainly targeted at photographers. When it comes to video recording, it looks like Canon has decided once and for all to make a clear definition between their EOS line of video-enabled photography cameras, and their EOS C line, featuring large sensor cameras that shoot high quality video. Don’t get me wrong, this camera is capable of producing gorgeous-looking video, but lacks some essential features that would make the life of the occasional video shooter a lot easier.
Findings in our Canon 5D Mark IV Review:
Canon 5D Mark IV pros (in no particular order):
- DCI 4K (4096×2160) internal video recording in very nice 4:2:2 8 bit quality, with the texture we love from Canon. My video above was shot in very harsh lighting conditions and yet the camera preformed nicely. No overheating or shutting down.
- World camera with a large selection of frame rates and resolutions: 4K up to 30p, Full HD up to 60p and HD Ready (720) up to 120p.
- Dual Pixel AF with touchscreen functionality. It is also easy to control how fast the change between focus points happens.
- Dual CompactFlash and SD memory card slots for your choice of video recording.
- Full control of audio with the included headphone and mic jacks.
- To my eyes, very clean video image in all frame rates. We will review this in detail in our Lab tests.
- Recording in 1080/50,60p is possible, an important setting for broadcasters and moderate slow-motion lovers.
- In-camera realtime down convert from 4K to full HD.
- When picture style is set to “Neutral”, sharpness is already dialled all the way to minimum.
- Individual frames from 4K video can be saved as new 8.8MP still image files.
- Higher resolution LCD screen than the Canon 5D Mark III.
- Same old trusty batteries. Nice for everyone who is replacing their old 5D Mark II and III.
A photo extracted directly from the 4K video footage
Canon 5D mark iv video crop factor vs. full frame still
Canon 5D Mark IV cons (in no particular order):
- 1.64x crop factor in 4K video mode. While in Full HD and 720p you can shoot in full frame.
- No C-log. If it was missing on the Canon 1D X Mark II, I did not expect the cheaper 5D Mark IV to surprise me here.
- MJPEG compression type. Be ready to purchase a bunch of memory cards as it will chew through them fast!
- Like with other Canon DSLRs that shoot video, there is a 4GB file limit. The camera will automatically create a number for files based on the time of recording. (this apply for cards lower then 256gb).
- No peaking.
- No punch in zoom while recording.
- No screen overlays to help with simulating 2,35:1 or any other ratio but 16:9.
- Rolling shutter is noticeable. Full measurements coming soon in our lab test.
- High frame rate 100/120 fps is limited to HD Ready quality only (720p).
- HDMI output is full HD only, although this time also with embedded audio.
- Maximum recording time: 29:58 minutes.
- Canon continues with its tradition of not including an articulated screen in their 5D cameras.
Yet to be tested: HDR video mode (full HD only), and time lapse recording.
Canon 5D Mark IV HDR on vs. HDR off (functioning in FHD 25p/30p IPB mode only)
Conclusion:
In my opinion, the new Canon 5D Mark IV is first and foremost a photo camera that can shoot high quality 4K video, and by doing so, helps the professional photographer in his work. As customers, we have to realize that Canon is making a clear definition between its product lines, and if you are in the market for a video camera that shoots high quality video and has all the usual functions from Canon, then you have to look at their EOS C line.
We will continue to explore the new Canon 5D Mark IV in the next few days. We will put the camera through its paces in low light situations, check how good the audio quality is for run & gun documentary work, and publish our Lab tests, where we will evaluate dynamic range and rolling shutter. Stay tuned.
Camera Picture profile for this video: Neutral. Edited in Adobe Premiere latest edition. Footage from the 3 available resolution was used (4K/1080/720). Slightly color corrected with FilmConvert. (Canon 1D C Neutral preset applied).
Music supplied by Art-List, “The Monkey Funk by Yanivi“
|
|
|
|
- Adapters / Filters:
- Bags / Cases:
- Lenses:
- Media:
- Other:
- Rigging:
Jonathan Warner August 26, 2016
Nice. I notice you mention the Tokina 11-16 crop lens in your kit list. Would be interested to see how this mitigates the 4K crop factor for a wide angle shot – do you get vignetting with it?
Johnnie Behiri August 27, 2016
Hi Jonathan.
On the widest 11mm no vignetting at all. (to be expected with the crop factor).
Thank you!
Johnnie
Danny G. Taillon August 26, 2016
Great review Johnnie and nice video! Glad to see your upload in 4K aswell. (I thought the crop factor is 1.64x due to this 17:9 ratio of the DCI 4K)
Johnnie Behiri August 26, 2016
Danny, you are right. Article corrected and I added a photo to better simulate the crop factor.
Thank you.
Johnnie
Evan Shaw August 26, 2016
Guys I saw it listed as 1.74 crop factor Canon chose to take the 6720 x 4480 sensor and just use the center 4096 x 2160 pixels
Danny Taillon August 26, 2016
Since 4K is 17:9, I think you need to calculate using a 17:9 of the sensor which would be 6720X3454.
Alvaro García Undurraga August 26, 2016
could’ve easily accomplished that AR without cropping so much of the sensor honestly
Danny G. Taillon August 26, 2016
Alvaro García Undurraga I rather have a crop and a clean image!
Drew Geraci August 26, 2016
You were gentle with your review ;) definitely interested to see how it goes after a week or so testing. Nice job on the article!
Johnnie Behiri August 27, 2016
Hi Drew.
Thanks for your thumbs up and I would prefer being called “realistic” rather then “gentle”….
If you look at Canon’s latest releases, the 1D X Mark II and now the 5D Mark IV, then you see a clear path. EOS photo cameras are for photographers who can/want to shoot video too and the EOS C line is for professional videographers. Those lines are totally separated. We can dislike this decision until tomorrow but that won’t change that reality.
Thank you again!
Johnnie
Evan Shaw August 26, 2016
God almighty you are right Johnnie. Fairly spoken. No 4K HDMI out oh my. No Canon log oh boy. Even just these two things would make this a solid B camera to my C100 mark ii which by the way is much more of a workhorse than many understand. Canon does not realize it would not eat into their C line to do this. They are missing the boat here. The Dual Pixel sensor is the gateway to dominating the entire market of both DSLR and Cinema cameras. Look at the possibilities for just photography here. One can actually use both sets of pixels to refine and enhance images and soon video as well. Oh my. Wake up Canon
Mike Morrison August 26, 2016
The idea of crippling Your product’s common acquisition functionality found in the industry and competitors, so as to not “compete” against your separate video cameras .. has to be the most flawed logic I have ever seen. And I think will be the downfall of canon.
Gerbert Floor August 29, 2016
Your right, if you don’t compete against your own line others will. It’s stupid, because in my opinion it makes the C line less attractive because they don’t have a complete eco system (or at least a crippled one). If the 5d mk4 was a video powerhouse with all the tools you need (clog, zoom in, full frame) without making it bulky with an extra monitor etc, it would be a perfect b-cam compagnon to a c100 or c300.
Now it’s expensive and not that interesting. I would have definitely switched back if this was indeed a powerhouse, I love the form factor and the usability of the 5d line, compared to my a7s mk2. I love their color science as well. I hate that you have to wait for a long time for magic lantern to add some needed features (if they bother at all).
Mike Morrison August 29, 2016
Canon could have had their cake and eat it to.. If they had included C-log and a compression codec but only had 1080P hdmi.. out they would have throttled it back enough it would not compete against the C series AND still be powerhouse B camera and casual A camera…
Michael Großmann August 26, 2016
far to gentle!
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
TOO
Piyush Sharma August 30, 2016
Agree ,sound like paid review ..sorry for being negative
Johnnie Behiri August 30, 2016
Piyush Sharma, cinema5D don’t and will never do paid reviews. Face reality or move on.
Thank you .
Johnnie
Piyush Sharma August 30, 2016
i am sorry if it was too harsh. Did’t mean it that way ,all i feel it mentioned all good point about camera .. so..
Regards
piyush
Johnnie Behiri August 30, 2016
Hi Piyush Sharma.
We are all in the same boat, feeling a bit frustrated that Canon did not go all the way in fulfilling our wish in releasing a photo camera that can shoot high quality video BUT, this is a clear sign from Canon that from that point on they are marking a clear line between their “C line” and “photo line”. I’m loud and clear about drawing that line in my article. In regards to “cons”, here is the list in case you’ve missed reading it in my review:
– 1.64x crop factor in 4K video mode. While in Full HD and 720p you can shoot in full frame.
– No C-log. If it was missing on the Canon 1D X Mark II, I did not expect the cheaper 5D Mark IV to surprise me here.
– MJPEG compression type. Be ready to purchase a bunch of memory cards as it will chew through them fast!
– Like with other Canon DSLRs that shoot video, there is a 4GB file limit. The camera will automatically create a number for files based on the time of recording. (this apply for cards lower then 256gb).
– No peaking.
– No punch in zoom while recording.
– No screen overlays to help with simulating 2,35:1 or any other ratio but 16:9.
– Rolling shutter is noticeable. Full measurements coming soon in our lab test.
– High frame rate 100/120 fps is limited to HD Ready quality only (720p).
– HDMI output is full HD only, although this time also with embedded audio.
– Maximum recording time: 29:58 minutes.
– Canon continues with its tradition of not including an articulated screen in their 5D cameras.
Please stay tuned. We will soon be publishing our lowlight and lab tests.
Thank you!
Johnnie
Piyush Sharma August 30, 2016
Agree.. next time i will be more careful with what i type.thanks for review .. looking forward to more tests.
Regards
Mike Zorger August 26, 2016
I’m not sure if you said you’ll test this later but I’d really like to see how it handles in low light / no light and what’s the max usable ISO.
Nino Leitner August 26, 2016
I’ll do something in low light over the weekend with it.
Mike Morrison August 26, 2016
“4GB size files..”… Wait, so you are saying It creates new files every minute?? That SUCKS! How would you keep track of all those files when trying to do editing on an NLE? that sounds like a real headache.. And for transcoding too.
I own a 5dM3 and was going to upgrade.. but 4k sounds just wayy to crippled with no pathway to improve it like 4KHDMI out.
Canon really needs to wake up. They keep with this strategy of trying to “prevent competing with cinema camera sales” when in fact, what they are doing is cannibalizing their flagship camera sales. They lost my sale period. They use a flawed logic of not wanting to competing against their other videocams by not being competitive against the market! They should be making the sensor the difference between their still and video product line not the tools of acquisition!
John Norton August 27, 2016
If you format greater than 256gb in size cards in camera they will be exFat, so greater than 4gb files can be saved in one go.
Johnnie Behiri August 27, 2016
Thank you John for the insight. My card was 128gb.
Will update the article accordingly.
Johnnie
John Norton August 27, 2016
WhaI I’m not sure of is whether formatting 64Gb cards say in a PC to exFat and using them in camera would cause any problems.
Odd that Canon only does in camera greater than 256GB to exFat?
Ez Bz August 26, 2016
1DX mkii does not have 4Gb file limit, although only when 256Gb, or larger, capacity card is used
Mike Morrison August 26, 2016
The video colors and contrast and sharpness look beatifull.. but the dynamic range looks pretty disappointing.. I see a lot of near crushed blacks or blown out highlights in the 5dM4 videos that I have seen so far.
Pablo Rollan August 26, 2016
Nice “First Impressions” review. I’m eager to see what you find out in your lab tests. Just quick observation: 720p resolution is known as “HD” just like 1080 is “Full HD”. The “HD Ready” moniker was/is found on early lcd panels to reference that they were indeed capable of displaying HD broadcast and Blu-ray video even though some of them were not even 720p and had to downscale the image.
Anthony browning August 26, 2016
Thank you Johnnie for sharing early footage! You are awesome always. I must say though this is some of the most disappointing footage I have seen coming from a 4k camera, the dynamic range is terrible and I want nothing to do with MJPEG files and the crop is so bad.I love dual pixel af but what good is it if the image is not up to par? I have been with Canon for over 2 decades now and this is the camera that will make me finally jump ship and head over to sony as I am more excited with their cameras. Hopefully they announce the a9 soon.This Camera makes no sense because it is a photo camera but who would buy this over the 5ds? Thanks again for Posting so soon you are always appreciated.
Johnnie Behiri August 29, 2016
Hi Anthony.
If the images are disappointing, then I’m the one to blame for it. The camera CAN produce beautiful images. It is unfortunate that the light was truly harsh tat day.
In regards if to jump over to Sony. Well, for now, Sony is offering a total solution (XLR attachment and zoom lenses to go with their mirrorless cameras), while the Canon 5D Mark IV (or any other Canon DSLR for that matter), is a stand alone product.
Thank you.
Johnnie
Thomas Pohl August 26, 2016
Sorry – The crop factor is a deal breaker.
Ram Sarup August 26, 2016
GREAT SCOTT!!!!
Phil Hainline August 26, 2016
Subject matter seems very apropos for the 5D: almost catching a wave, but indeed many fails.
While a fun departure from your usual ‘personal story’ mini-docs, the harsh lighting reveals much about this camera. Rough stuff. Seems like many tight shots. By choice or perhaps a side effect of crop factor?
I hope in both your lab tests, and hopefully another real world (varied color temp, low light), you really excercise the full-frame HD. Long shots, particularly of faces with varying key/fill ratios.
I’m sure I’m in the minority of just wanting a great HD camera with more emphasis on maleable color and dynamic range. Ideally 10-bit 4:2:2. My other motivation is for a B-cam for my C100mkii.
Do wish an analyst could find/extrapolate the number of Canon DSLRs sold primarily for video. I’m guessing less than 1% of their DSLR market.
Thanks again for your first impressions.
– Phil
Johnnie Behiri August 29, 2016
Hi Phil.
Thank you for contributing to the conversation!!
We will be publishing our lowlight test and lab result later this week.
Stay tuned.
Than you!
Johnnie
Luke Wen August 26, 2016
Not quite right regarding 4GB file limit, since 1DX II and 5D IV, Canon added support for exFAT format which gives you the option to record any file size without having to merge the split files in post.
Johnnie Behiri August 29, 2016
Hi Luke.
Apparently this is true when using memory cards larger from 256GB.
Ville-Veikko Heinonen August 26, 2016
Paid my pre-order today, not sure if I want to click this. :)
Pasi Romppanen August 26, 2016
Käkäkäkäkäkäkäkäkä.
Umberto Stragapede August 26, 2016
4200€ you buy an ursa mini for film making. Definetly Canon doesn’t change mind…a pro photographer buy the 1dx2 and a rich consumer does the Leica’s with that budget, so what’s the point with this new body? Hdr video is already there thanks to ML and 4K also on FF (not 1.64x). Just to say… Thanks for the review, bye👍
William Sommerwerck August 26, 2016
Whether Canon’s decision to draw a distinction between its still and video products will be commercially successful remains to be seen. But I’ve long felt that you do not succeed by copying what others do, and that trying to make a single product that “does everything” is ultimately only going to confuse potential buyers.
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
Why would it “confuse” them?
If they’re interested in stills, they can evaluate the still capability of the camera. If they’re into video, they can evaluate that capability. What’s the problem?
Patrick Murray August 26, 2016
Serious question: Why would I want a camera that doesn’t have global shutter and has a 1.74 crop factor, when I can have a Black Magic for less than $3,500 and get RAW, 1.5 crop, global shutter, and UHD?
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
I’m not defending Canon’s outdated and under-performing product line, but you’d want it because it’s way smaller than the BMPC, powers itself internally, can shoot high-resolution stills, and has way better low-light performance.
This camera’s crop factor is dumb. If they’re going to crop, they should crop at 1.6 so we get a “normal” 35mm cinema-sized image and can choose our lenses accordingly. The 1.74 doesn’t match anything in particular.
Once again, Canon displays its ignorance of motion-picture acquisition. They need a major management house-cleaning and people who know WTF they’re doing.
Luke Wen August 27, 2016
The crop is 1.64 not 1.74, 6720/4096=1.64
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
Hopefully the author will take note.
Johnnie Behiri August 29, 2016
The author took a note and updated the article.
Thank you.
Ram Sarup August 27, 2016
Or go for an A7SII and get all of the above in Full Frame.
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
Full-frame isn’t optimal for video. The depth of field is excessively shallow and doesn’t match 35mm motion-picture film.
William Sommerwerck August 27, 2016
Who says it has to?
You haven’t been paying much attention the past few years. There have been repeated complaints that sub-full-frame sensors have too much depth of field, and a larger sensor allows greater control.
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
Yes, those DPs shooting on 35mm film all these decades have been just CATERWAULING about the excessive depth of field.
And so have the Red shooters. And the Alexa shooters.
The cacophony has been deafening.
Alex Kalimat August 27, 2016
Actually many of them did say they liked the aesthetic of full frame, but they’re locked into a lens ecosystem which is based on a frame size determined back in the silent film days for economic reasons (to get more frames on a reel of film).
The crop on this camera is inconvenient. If you’re shooting for 16:9 or UHD delivery (rather than DCI 4K) then the effective *is* 1.75. To match the super 35 field of view in both 4K and UHD it would need to be a crop factor of around 1.4, which wouldn’t be a problem when using full frame lenses…
Plus if you shoot full frame and don’t like the shallow DoF… Simply stop down the lens!
William Sommerwerck August 28, 2016
This is altogether backwards.
The 18x24mm format for motion pictures was developed by Edison. The way it “sits” on the film is consistent with running the film “vertically” through the camera to obtain a landscape image. (Edison did not invent VistaVision!)
As the movie industry grew, a lot of “tail ends” became available, and camera manufacturers made miniature cameras that took this film and produced 18x24mm negatives. (This was the common format. The dimensions weren’t fixed, other than one dimension not being larger than 24mm.)
Then came one of the great moments in photography — the Leica. It was the first high-precision camera, using 35mm film running sideways, producing 24x36mm negatives. This was called “double frame”, as opposed to the “single frame” of motion pictures.
Please note: The 18x24mm IS NOT a reduction of the 24x36mm format “to get more frames on a reel of film”. 18x24mm is the original standard motion-picture format.
As 35mm still photography became commonplace, it became the norm, and was called “full-frame”. 18×24 became “half frame”.
Almost all still-camera sensors have an aspect ratio of 3:2 (the same as 35mm full frame) regardless of the sensor size. The major exception is Four-Thirds, with the 4:3 ratio of half-frame 35mm photography.
There is no “lens ecosystem … is based on a frame size determined back in the silent film days”. All that’s required for any lens is that it have sufficient coverage for the camera’s sensor.
Alex Kalimat August 28, 2016
Maybe it was an oversimplification on my part – but it certainly wasn’t backwards!
Super 35mm uses a 3-perf pull-down instead of a 4-perf pull-down to reduce wasted space.
Edison used 1-3/8 inch film from which the width of “super 35mm” sensors is derived. My point is that this is an arbitrary standard, but this is image circle size that most *cine* lenses still cover…
Therefore, I stand by my comment, that while many DPs have expressed a liking for the aesthetics of 135 film “full-frame” size (another arbitrary standard, developed by – as you mention – Leica… mostly to avoid patenting issues), most cine lenses do not cover this format.
And so (in response to the previous commenter) the reason cinematographers have not adopted “full-frame” has nothing to do with uncontrollably shallow depth-of-field; it is primarily to do with the available lenses, the image circle of whcih, dates back to standards developed in 1909.
Now I am aware that increasingly there are cine lenses that offer 135 film frame-size coverage (or larger)… But they are still in the minority.
William Sommerwerck August 28, 2016
I’ve been involved with photography for 50 years. I sure don’t know everything, but the terms you use and the way you use them seem badly garbled. (How is a reader supposed to know you’re contrasting regular 35mm movie format with Super 35?)
Rather than get into an argument, I’ll let this drop.
Alex Kalimat August 29, 2016
No argument required :-) Reading my first comment back, I see that it wasn’t entirely clear what I was referring to – particularly as I’d put two points together that perhaps belonged separately, and made an assumption that the reader would understand what I was referring to. I’ve worked in TV and film for 20 years, and I’ve never had a problem with people understanding me. I blame the Internet. It encourages rushed responses!
William Sommerwerck August 28, 2016
Who cares about facts? All one has to do is simply deny the truth.
Anyone who reads photographic publications knows that some movie makers aren’t happy with the greater DOF of smaller sensors.
Palmer Woodrow August 30, 2016
Smaller than what?
Patrick Murray August 27, 2016
The A7SII does definitely stand out as currently the premiere DSLR option.
Gene Nemetz August 28, 2016
The issue I have with BM is the a bit off color science. Some people want that though.
Louis Wong August 28, 2016
No RAW in video for a7s II but it does have S-log3 which is the next best thing. 5D4 doesn’t even have C-log
Akram Ibrahim August 26, 2016
Way to diplomatic Johnnie, I hate to say this but the video function of this camera for 2017 SUCKS! And if you want a DSLR many for stills then I think the options from Nikon is better and cheaper!
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
TOO diplomatic
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
Thanks.
But the review doesn’t state the video bitrate, a critical spec when evaluating any video recording. You must know the codec, color sampling, and bitrate to even guess whether the quality is likely to meet your needs.
It also doesn’t say whether Canon has finally addressed the inexcusable lack of a basic feature on all of its cameras: an intervalometer (for time lapse or other sequence shooting). There’s no excuse for ANY camera today to lack this essentially free-to-implement function. And I’m not talking about some dumb “time-lapse movie” feature that makes crappy compressed videos.
On a related note, any reflex camera should have unlimited mirror lock-up, so you can lock the mirror up at the start of a sequence and release it after the sequence is done. Why have a mirror slapping up and down thousands of times unnecessarily, wearing out the mechanism and making a shitload of noise?
William Sommerwerck August 27, 2016
I hate to spoil things for Palmer Woodrow, but the mirror in a DSLR does not flap up and down with each frame.
Do you really know anything about photography, cinematic or still?
Palmer Woodrow August 27, 2016
WTF are you talking about? It obviously DOES, or the image would not fall onto the sensor. The mirror is down to direct the image from the lens onto the ground glass in the viewfinder. When you take a picture, if flips up to let the image fall onto the sensor. Just as it does to let the image strike film in a film camera.
The only exception would be a pellicle (partially silvered) mirror.
How do you not know this? If you’re looking for ignorance, look to yourself. Check your facts before posting something insulting.
Here’s video of the mirror in a 5D mark II doing what? FLIPPING UP AND DOWN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptfSW4eW25g
You’re welcome.
William Sommerwerck August 28, 2016
Sometimes, as I’m posting a comment, I realize I don’t really know what I’m talking about. So I either do some research, or don’t post anything. I don’t like looking ignorant in public.
You think the mirror in a DSLR flips up and down with each “movie” frame. That is, if you’re shooting at 24fps, it flaps up and down 24 times a second. AND YOU SAID SO, in so many words:
“…any reflex camera should have unlimited mirror lock-up, so you can lock the mirror up at the start of a sequence and release it after the sequence is done. Why have a mirror slapping up and down thousands of times unnecessarily, wearing out the mechanism and making a shitload of noise?”
Why should you? And you don’t. When shooting motion pictures on DSLRs, the mirror flips up and stays there. When the sequence is complete, the mirror flips down. One up, one down, as if you were making a still photo.
Have you ever made a movie on a DSLR? Of course not.
It’s not the //camera// making a shitload of noise, Mr Woodrow.
Palmer Woodrow August 30, 2016
“You think the mirror in a DSLR flips up and down with each “movie” frame. ”
So now you’re telling me what I THINK? I NEVER said such an absurd thing. In fact, if you had read my comment, you’d have read this clear statement:
“And I’m not talking about some dumb “time-lapse movie” feature that makes crappy compressed videos.”
I won’t claim 50 years in the business, but I can claim more than 30, much of that working in high-end image processing and editing software for the film industry. You can continue posting made-up assertions that other people never posted and replying to them with smugly delivered falsehoods.
The fact is, you failed to think about what you were saying, got proven wrong, and now you want to put words in my mouth when the truth is right up there for everyone to see.
Grow a nut and own your mistake.
William Sommerwerck August 30, 2016
Where else would the “shitload of noise” come from if the mirror didn’t flip up and down with each frame? The truth is indeed up there for everyone to see.
There’s a basic rule of writing — “Do not write to be understood, write so that you cannot be misunderstood.” You need to learn this.
“An empty vessel makes the loudest noise.”
Palmer Woodrow August 30, 2016
Nobody said this happened when shooting VIDEO except YOU.
Glad you’ve finally grasped that the noise comes from the mirror slapping up and down. Unless there’s no camera involved; then it’s your gums.
Thanks for the empty-vessel quote to fill us in on your strategy: You’ re the empty vessel, echoing everyone else’s statements with no understanding and no value added.
William Sommerwerck August 27, 2016
Most of the remarks fall into the “This product isn’t what I want, so it isn’t any good” category.
Gene Nemetz August 27, 2016
Underwhelmed again by Canon video. No snap. Maybe I’ve been watching too much Red, or GH4, or a7S.
Anthony browning August 27, 2016
For Real!
Witek SfilmujMnie August 27, 2016
Too little, too expensive, too late. Canon disapointment for 3500 euro.
Alexandre Miguel August 27, 2016
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2KLXxq19Zz8
Nicola Verdi August 27, 2016
CANON is this a JOKE? This is the end of the 5d Legend!
1.64 crop (On a 4k -full frame camera???)
No Slow motion in FullHD
No 4K HDMI output
MJPEG codec (No hardware acceleration support)
Internal FullHD recording only 4:2:0
No articulated screen
No Canon LOG
No Metabones Speed Booster
$3,499.00 ???
Richard Gerst Visuals August 27, 2016
Must say- despite the issues of crop and no C-log, I am impressed with this footage.
It’s the picture.
I don’t really see awful blown highlights, or too many crushed blacks- particularly given the 8 bit and in camera profile.
See 0:34, I can see color and slight texture detail (when I blow up the 4k image – keep in mind this is compressed for delivery) on my retina screen on the man’s black T-shirt. (it is not crushed) – although I am unsure about the upper left light fall off in the sky?, but it looks like a smooth gradient, and the highlights have nice fall off for a non log 8 bit image.
at 0:43 I still see some detail on his black sleeve, and his shadowed face has more detail and less noise than I would expect from this type of exposure, pushed through even a a small amount of Film Convert as this is.
The image is classic Canon- although a bit more modern appearing- and looks “expensive” to my eye- more filmic and less video looking than many competitors with better specs on paper.
I think despite the issues, for primary stills photographers who sometimes have assignments to dip into video, they may have a winner here.
thrower thrower August 27, 2016
Hey Johnnie, that’s good clip!
Some moist chicks!;-)
A lot of slo-mo is kinda good trolling at Canon. Btw quality difference between slo-mo and 4k environment shots are eye-bleeding.
As i was afraid 720p and 1080 is no better than 1dxII ( = terrible)
As for rest – i caught myself thinking that i expect dual-cam Iphone 7 or 8 to have such quality.
Probably, that was very challenging scene but DR and highlights looks not so good, i have prediction that mk III with ML will do way better.
Also as far what i’ve seen from around the web, picture in general looks quite “baked in”.
With not much space for Magic Lantern upgrades due to ancient memory slots, i cannot see any professional purpose for video features of this camera.
Interviews sounded good (and that initial warmth would be quite to the table), but with that HUMONGOUS codec it isn’t acceptable.
I don’t expect low-light and “low-light latitude” be anywhere close to a7sII, especially with that CROP.
I think this time canon overcrippled camera too much, and there’s way to much stuff will emerge during mark 4 lifespan….
thank you so much for prompt preview! have to look elsewhere for small B- camera, in the end there’s GH5 on horizon….
Kevin Almodovar August 28, 2016
Didn’t notice much improvement in the dynamic range. Will you be testing this?
Johnnie Behiri August 29, 2016
Hi Kevin.
Lowlight review and our lab test results featuring DR measurements are coming later this week.
Thank you!
Johnnie
Thomas Diehl August 30, 2016
btw: why is there (nearly) no “proper” fullframe-video-camera out there, no FF C300 or FF URSA Mini for example?
concerning the 5d mkIV I have to say: I work for TV and don’t need 4k – and specs are not everything. To me it is ONLY the image that counts and I like canon aesthetics a lot.
Alex Kalimat August 30, 2016
I think because most cine lenses are designed for super 35 coverage, and the majority of DPs are familiar with working at that frame size, so it’s a self-perpetuating thing.
Palmer Woodrow August 31, 2016
And cinema 35mm provides a nice compromise in terms of DOF. You can blur the background if you want, but it isn’t too fussy for one-man operation.