Kunisawa
Forum Enthusiast
If you had to buy a new camera today, would you still buy the 5D IV? Why/Why not?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Current 5D IV owners - Would you buy it again today?
- Thread starter Kunisawa
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon eos 5d mark iv
No. Reliability is the main issue.
Forgetting the initial rejects because of sensor spots, the first 5DIV died a few days into a long trip. The replacement malfunctioned and was repaired by Canon in the summer, with the circuit boards replaced. The repaired camera failed with a similar fault in the autumn and the mirror box was replaced. So far it is still ok, but I have lost all confidence in it and Canon, not least because my 1DXII has also had to go back for repair twice in 2017, not reading the CFast card.
To me, this is unacceptable for top of the range models. In the last few days I have been pricing up the Nikon D850 and a replacement system, but the sheer amount of Canon glass I have precludes a system swap being financially sensible. From what I have seen, the D850 is superior in most respects, except lack of GPS and less good live view (neither big issues for me, and I have no interest whatever in video). I will stick to Canon only because of my financial investment in its system, but were I starting without this constraint, I am in no doubt that I would go for the D850 in preference to to 5DIV.
Graham
PhotoKhan
Forum Pro
Let me get this straight:
From a mix of 5DMKIV and 1DXII, you had 5 failures in the last 12 months?
I am in no way trying to be facetious and I say this strictly from an analytical point of view:
Have you considered the hypothesis that you might be operating these cameras beyond their design scope, be it in environmental or procedural terms?
PK
--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.humbertoborgesfotografia.com/
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)
-------------------------------------------------
Last edited:
PWPhotography
Forum Pro
Nice photos although personally I'd use slower shutter to fully leverage IBIS. Why the first photo used 1/4000 shutter?
Hand hold (IBIS now!), the color could be adjusted better after my monitor re-calibration. I am expressed with the details
In my experience, if I hold breath and hold camera against cheek or forehead firmly, it's not difficult to get sharp photo from this lens at 1/6~1/10 sec even @70mm side, even at 1/5 sec. Sometime blur cars give moving feeling.
Nevertheless a great lens on a great sensor and IBIS gives 'IS' function is a great combo. I have lots of photos from this combo as shown in my Flickr.
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com
Last edited:
PWPhotography
Forum Pro
PWPhotography
Forum Pro
OK, try ISO 640 instead of 800 in case if you want sufficient shutter. Nevertheless ISO 100 is still the best if without compromising sharpness.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7r-mark-iii-review/5
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony ILCE-7RM2,Sony ILCE-7RM3
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com
Last edited:
Graham,
Seems like you might have ended up with 5 heads in a row here, as probabilities suggest would happen sometime.
My sense is that overall, Canon seems to have reliability as a core attribute so may deserve another chance.
On the LiveView - it is actually very useful on 5D4 even for general photography situations as it very quick, and very accurate.
Seems like you might have ended up with 5 heads in a row here, as probabilities suggest would happen sometime.
My sense is that overall, Canon seems to have reliability as a core attribute so may deserve another chance.
On the LiveView - it is actually very useful on 5D4 even for general photography situations as it very quick, and very accurate.
Yes, I do use live view sometimes, and the 5DIV live view is leagues ahead of previous iterations. The point I was making is that in choosing between cameras, the two areas relevant to me in which the D850 does not match or exceed the 5DIV (live view and GPS - which I also find very useful) would not be sufficiently important to me to sway my choice, were I choosing a new system from scratch, in favour of Canon. Even the live view downside for the Nikon is mitigated by the tilting screen, which I personally would find very useful.
The question was whether one would buy the 5DIV again. Maybe the “again” part needs to be defined: is this by reference to your actual system, or compared to a theoretical broadly comparable camera by another maker? If, like me, you are constrained by existing investment in the Canon system, and the question were to be slightly recast into, would you update from an earlier 5D version such as the 5DIII again, then I would have to say yes, because of the improved autofocus, live view, GPS, high ISO performance, DR, resolution etc. When it works, my 5DIV is head and shoulders above any previous version, for my purposes. If I were able to start again with no system constraints, the answer would be no, because overall I think the D850 is the better camera. Were I to change systems (which I probably will not), I might be just as unlucky with Nikon as I have been with the latest generation of Canons, who knows!
Graham
PhotoKhan
Forum Pro
Invested heavily in Canon so unlikely to change. While the other system bodies (A7Riii and D850) maybe at the cutting edge, Canon is very, very close so practically, unlikely to make any real difference for my photography.
Not the question that was posed but one significant point in Canon’s favor - the lenses range, which has a wide range in terms of price, and the type of glass available.
Not the question that was posed but one significant point in Canon’s favor - the lenses range, which has a wide range in terms of price, and the type of glass available.
Rexgig0
Veteran Member
I agree, regarding Canon lenses. I shoot with both Canon and Nikon equipment. There are specific Nikkors that I love, but my personal lens “road map” is populated by significantly more Canon L lenses than Nikkors.
I will mention the Speedlites, too. Canon Speedlites moved ahead of Nikon Speedlights with the 580EX II, and solidified this lead with the 600EX-RT. I own, or have owned, several flashes from both, including the 580EX, 580EX II, 600EX-RT, SB-80DX, SB-800, and SB-910. Plus, Nikon has no current macro ring flash; the discontinued SB-29s works with at least some DSLRs, but only in Manual flash mode.
The Nikon D5/D500/D850 do seem to be superior, in multiple ways, to their Nikon counterparts. (A significant exception is that the 5D IV has better AF during video. Nikon shooters lament this, loudly.) The D500 and D850 are, of course, notably newer than their Canon counterparts, so this is to be expected. I have noticed that our D500 cameras do, indeed, have amazing AF, better than my 7D Mark II cameras, but not enough to make me want to abandon Canon.
A financial windfall, in early 2018, may enable me to justify spending up to about $10K US on cameras, and if this proves to be the case, I believe that I would like to add a Nikon D5, and a Canon 5D Mark IV. If I am, instead, limited to being able to spend $3300 for a new camera, it will be a 5D IV, not a D850.
--
I wore a police badge and pistol, and made evidentiary images at night, incorporating elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. (Retirement is in-process.) I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.
Last edited:
David Franklin
Senior Member
I am, in fact, thinking about buying my second 5D4 right now, to replace my last 5D3. If my finances ally themselves as I expect, I will do so.
Yes, a Sony and a Nikon camera are both competitive with the 5D4. So what? Is this some sort of tech contest? Not for me. I make a living taking pictures and retouching them. I own a lot of great Canon "L" lenses. Other companies' cameras may be, in some measurable technical ways, slightly better than the 5D4. They are also newer than the 5D4. There will be a 5D5, and, if not by another name, it will still be a successor camera. It will probably be as good or better than the competition in many of the areas in which they are not now superior. Again, so what? In some ways, the 5D4 is superior to those offerings right now. Again, so what?
Yes, it is somewhat fun to do tech comparisons and assign percentages of approval on how some minority of light waves get translated from live scenes to storage cards, but this endeavor has almost no use when actually trying to suit up for one's next photo assignment.
My job, and my hobby and my passion, all involve taking pictures, not measuring light waves or counting focus points. If I couldn't do my job as well or better than someone using a different brand of camera, and that situation did't change for an unacceptable length of time, then I might consider not buying another Canon. But, none of the above are at all true for me, and likely not for the majority of professional Canon users. And my Canon lenses, my flashes, and Canon Professional Services are all either the best available, the best value for the money, or both.
Kudos to Sony and Nikon for making some great gear, but that doesn't affect the efficacy and utility of a 5D4 for me. Mine has been rock solid reliable in every hostile environment I've encountered, with fantastic image quality, has very malleable files allowing me to make great images in unfavorable lighting, has great auto focusing, and amazing live view and video focusing ability.
Do I want an even better camera from Canon in it's next iteration of the 5 series. Of course. Do I desperately need it now. Of course not.
I wish that when every new camera that is introduced that competes with Canon is announced, that legions of those with axes to grind or those with ownership or purchasing anxieties, would not come forward in such large numbers and repetitiveness. It gets awful boring for me, and maybe for others as well.
Meanwhile, I'm happy as a clam with the 5D4.
Happy New Year to all.
Yes, a Sony and a Nikon camera are both competitive with the 5D4. So what? Is this some sort of tech contest? Not for me. I make a living taking pictures and retouching them. I own a lot of great Canon "L" lenses. Other companies' cameras may be, in some measurable technical ways, slightly better than the 5D4. They are also newer than the 5D4. There will be a 5D5, and, if not by another name, it will still be a successor camera. It will probably be as good or better than the competition in many of the areas in which they are not now superior. Again, so what? In some ways, the 5D4 is superior to those offerings right now. Again, so what?
Yes, it is somewhat fun to do tech comparisons and assign percentages of approval on how some minority of light waves get translated from live scenes to storage cards, but this endeavor has almost no use when actually trying to suit up for one's next photo assignment.
My job, and my hobby and my passion, all involve taking pictures, not measuring light waves or counting focus points. If I couldn't do my job as well or better than someone using a different brand of camera, and that situation did't change for an unacceptable length of time, then I might consider not buying another Canon. But, none of the above are at all true for me, and likely not for the majority of professional Canon users. And my Canon lenses, my flashes, and Canon Professional Services are all either the best available, the best value for the money, or both.
Kudos to Sony and Nikon for making some great gear, but that doesn't affect the efficacy and utility of a 5D4 for me. Mine has been rock solid reliable in every hostile environment I've encountered, with fantastic image quality, has very malleable files allowing me to make great images in unfavorable lighting, has great auto focusing, and amazing live view and video focusing ability.
Do I want an even better camera from Canon in it's next iteration of the 5 series. Of course. Do I desperately need it now. Of course not.
I wish that when every new camera that is introduced that competes with Canon is announced, that legions of those with axes to grind or those with ownership or purchasing anxieties, would not come forward in such large numbers and repetitiveness. It gets awful boring for me, and maybe for others as well.
Meanwhile, I'm happy as a clam with the 5D4.
Happy New Year to all.
... or just pure and really bad luck.
DuckShots
Leading Member
in the snap of a shutter. I understand the camera and it likes me.
GARRIGA
Forum Enthusiast
I'd buy it again. For my semi product/still life/close up/macro not sure what to call it needs it provides most of my wants and needs. Fast focus and lots of them, Wi-Fi so I'm not physically tethered, touch screen that doesn't articulate (would just not scream professional), 30MP with option to shoot smaller, enough DR for my needs, don't shoot sports but if it was 50MP then I'd probably trade it assuming all the other variables exists. Plus I have L lenses and like my lenses so not running to another camp anytime soon or possibly ever. I'm a Canon lifer. I just deal with it. 
As for movie mode. Just getting into that and don't grasp all the fuss over the cropped 4K or the codec which allows still frames. Yes the codec could have been better for smaller files but isn't the one used providing the best details and those still images you would otherwise lose? It's a camera not a video recorder. I'd rather it excelled at stills and if I really needed video and took the time to learn it than Canon has a professional offering I can look at and get lenses specifically tasked for movie versus leveraging photo lenses which aren't optimized for that process. They deal in T stops not F stops and the frame remains the same throughout the zoom process. For now 1080P at 60 or 4K at 30 (cropped) does me just fine. Besides, I can stand further back or choose a wider FL if it really mattered.
As for movie mode. Just getting into that and don't grasp all the fuss over the cropped 4K or the codec which allows still frames. Yes the codec could have been better for smaller files but isn't the one used providing the best details and those still images you would otherwise lose? It's a camera not a video recorder. I'd rather it excelled at stills and if I really needed video and took the time to learn it than Canon has a professional offering I can look at and get lenses specifically tasked for movie versus leveraging photo lenses which aren't optimized for that process. They deal in T stops not F stops and the frame remains the same throughout the zoom process. For now 1080P at 60 or 4K at 30 (cropped) does me just fine. Besides, I can stand further back or choose a wider FL if it really mattered.
Digitalshooter2
Leading Member
Hi Graham, based on probability theory, what you have experienced is just luck of the draw. Canon is not perfect in reliability area but it is pretty good. It is very probable that your future experience with Canon cameras will be much better. It is unlikely to continue to get heads or tails forever. So good times are ahead
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum