So Canon has finally released the 5D Mark IV. I'm sure anyone who decides to shoot with this camera will get excellent results and it's probably a workhorse that will last for years. But the question is, is it enough to compare with what's already available? Open to comments, and there's a quick poll below.
Product Overview:
Continuing on in their legacy of powerful workhorse cameras, Canon has released the 5D Mark IV DSLR which is an outstanding still photography option and an able 4K-capable video machine. This multimedia maven offers a newly developed 30.4MP full-frame CMOS sensor paired with the DIGIC 6+ image processor in order to balance fine detail and resolution with low-light performance and sensitivity. It is able to work within a native range of ISO 100-32000, which can then be expanded to an impressive ISO 50-102400, for sharp, low-noise images in a variety of conditions. Along with these improvements to image quality, users will enjoy a performance boost across the board with an enhanced AF system, built-in Wi-Fi, NFC, and GPS, and much more.
Quick Poll: Are you thinking of buying new #Canon #5DMKIV? https://t.co/NgFn3sz3yk
— CheesyCam (@cheesycam) August 25, 2016
Canon 5D Mark IV DSLR
Olli
I have had one for about year and a half now. No issues with the body and works for me. It was a big step up from 5D MkII. I'm mostly a portrait shooter and I don't shoot a lot of video. It did work well when used as a second camera in a short documentary project.
I feel like the battery life is shorter than with MkII, but that might just be me. I haven't done side by side tests.
Pixelriffic
If I was in the market for a new full frame still camera, perhaps. I still have my 5D MKII and am very fond of it. It will no doubt be with me for years to come. I still shoot video with it once in a while, but mostly stills now.
After I picked up a C100, I will never buy another DSLR to shoot video. Or even a mirrorless. It's soooo much nicer to shoot with a camera that was actually designed to shoot video.
VanWeddings
makes me glad i didn't wait for this. terrible video features. canon wants to make their dslr unsuitable for video work, and they've succeeded.
Apostolos
Yup, it's kind of underwhelming. It's like Canon have become Sony (pre-5dmk2) and Sony has become Canon and is trying to reclaim the throne with much more innovative products.
Cheesycam
Post author@Apostolos - I heard the HDMI out is nothing special. I don't think it adds a lot of benefit. Canon is still trying to protect their higher end Cinema cameras by not giving certain features. The lack of a LOG profile in this camera is not difficult and every other camera company is throwing in LOG profiles. Just shows they still are limiting features, otherwise they can't sell their Cinema EOS line..
Apostolos
I shoot both photography and video. My primary camera for stills is the 5dmk3, and for video we shoot with several Panasonic G7s for multiple angles. My next purchase was going to be either an A7sII or this one. The 1.76 crop on this one is bad news. I don't know how the MJPEG codec will hold up in grading either. For me to even consider shelling out the money it would have to have at least two stops better low light performance (for stills). Is there an option to shoot better quality video via HDMI?
Alan Halfhill
The price for what you get? 1.7 Crop MJpeg 500mb. No