My understanding as well is that they will be parfocal but the same glass, just mechanically redesigned to maintain focus throughout the zoom range. Which explains why they are both a little larger and heavier than their still equivalents.

You and me both: I'm in the camera market myself, and was holding off on Sony waiting to see what the Mark IV would bring.

Sony (or MAYBE Blackmagic) here I come.

I agree that they SHOULD go 4k in the C100mII, but I don't think they will.

Remember, cinema and still are different divisions from each other in Canon, and like a lot of big corporations, they aren't always great at coordinating with each other.

My guess with the C100 is that the cinema folks think "well, that's our entry-level cinema camera, they'll go for C300 or C500 for 4k."

Of course, the C100mkII is still pricier than the 5DmkIV will be, so it's a strange move, but Canon HAS to put 4K in the 5D. Even with it, without H.264 or FF, it's gonna have problems.

My guess it that the fact that the camera that costs twice as much doesn't do it, they'll keep it out of the Mark IV.

Dumb, but, y'know, pretty normal.

I did mention PC in the post, and folks are moving that way, but as Chris Lambert points out, sometimes you've already invested heavily in a platform and you just want a little bit more power.

I'd go Hackintosh, but the only person I know who uses one in a pro facility spends way more time troubleshooting issues than he does doing work. I'll think about it more seriously if there are folks really making it work.

In the current environment, thunderbolt expansion just makes sense.

Woah, you are correct, that typo definitely lets the world know that I'm way old.

thanks.