Canon 5D Mark IV vs Ricoh GR II

The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV and the Ricoh GR II are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in August 2016 and June 2015. The 5D Mark IV is a DSLR, while the GR II is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (5D Mark IV) and an APS-C (GR II) sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 30.1 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 16.1 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Canon 5D Mark IV		Ricoh GR II
Digital single lens reflex		Fixed lens compact camera
Canon EF mount lenses		28mm f/2.8
30.1 MP – Full Frame sensor		16.1 MP – APS-C sensor
4K/30p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 100-32,000 (50 - 102,400)		ISO 100-25,600
Optical viewfinder		Viewfinder optional
3.2" LCD – 1620k dots		3.0" LCD – 1230k dots
Fixed touchscreen		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
7 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
900 shots per battery charge		320 shots per battery charge
151 x 116 x 76 mm, 890 g		117 x 63 x 35 mm, 251 g

Check 5D Mark IV price at
amazon.com
Check GR II offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV and the Ricoh GR II? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Canon 5D Mark IV and the Ricoh GR II. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh GR II is considerably smaller (58 percent) than the Canon 5D Mark IV. It is worth mentioning in this context that the 5D Mark IV is splash and dust resistant, while the GR II does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR II has a lens built in, whereas the 5D Mark IV is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the 5D Mark IV and their specifications in the Canon EF Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the 5D Mark IV gets 900 shots out of its LP-E6N battery, while the GR II can take 320 images on a single charge of its DB65 power pack. The power pack in the GR II can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.

The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, you can move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.

Body Specifications

		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Canon 5D Mark IV	151 mm	116 mm	76 mm	890 g	900	Y	Aug 2016	3,499	amazon.com
2.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
3.		Canon 6D Mark II	144 mm	111 mm	75 mm	765 g	1200	Y	Jun 2017	1,999	amazon.com
4.		Canon 1D X Mark II	158 mm	168 mm	83 mm	1530 g	1210	Y	Feb 2016	5,999	ebay.com
5.		Canon 5DS	152 mm	116 mm	76 mm	930 g	700	Y	Feb 2015	3,699	amazon.com
6.		Canon 5DS R	152 mm	116 mm	76 mm	930 g	700	Y	Feb 2015	3,699	amazon.com
7.		Canon G7 X	103 mm	60 mm	40 mm	304 g	210	n	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	152 mm	116 mm	76 mm	950 g	950	Y	Mar 2012	3,499	ebay.com
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	152 mm	114 mm	75 mm	850 g	850	Y	Sep 2008	3,499	ebay.com
10.		Canon 5D	152 mm	113 mm	75 mm	895 g	400	Y	Aug 2005	3,299	ebay.com
11.		Fujifilm X70	113 mm	64 mm	44 mm	340 g	330	n	Jan 2016	799	ebay.com
12.		Nikon D850	146 mm	124 mm	79 mm	1005 g	1840	Y	Jul 2017	3,299	amazon.com
13.		Nikon D800	146 mm	123 mm	82 mm	1000 g	900	Y	Feb 2012	2,999	ebay.com
14.		Nikon D800E	146 mm	123 mm	82 mm	1000 g	900	Y	Feb 2012	3,299	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GM5	99 mm	60 mm	36 mm	211 g	220	n	Sep 2014	749	ebay.com
16.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
17.		Sony RX100 III	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	290 g	320	n	May 2014	799	ebay.com
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The GR II was launched at a lower price than the 5D Mark IV, despite having a lens built in. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.

Sensor comparison

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon 5D Mark IV features a full frame sensor and the Ricoh GR II an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR II is 57 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 1.5. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

With 30.1MP, the 5D Mark IV offers a higher resolution than the GR II (16.1MP), but the 5D Mark IV nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 5.36μm versus 4.79μm for the GR II) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the 5D Mark IV is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 2 months) than the GR II, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the GR II has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Canon 5D Mark IV implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the 5D Mark IV for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 33.6 x 22.4 inches or 85.3 x 56.9 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 26.9 x 17.9 inches or 68.3 x 45.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 22.4 x 14.9 inches or 56.9 x 37.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Ricoh GR II are 24.6 x 16.3 inches or 62.6 x 41.5 cm for good quality, 19.7 x 13.1 inches or 50.1 x 33.2 cm for very good quality, and 16.4 x 10.9 inches or 41.7 x 27.6 cm for excellent quality prints.

The 5D Mark IV has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 32000, which can be extended to ISO 50-102400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh GR II are ISO 100 to ISO 25600 (no boost).

Technology-wise, both cameras are equipped with CMOS (Complementary Metal–Oxide–Semiconductor) sensors. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). Of the two cameras under review, the 5D Mark IV provides substantially higher image quality than the GR II, with an overall score that is 11 points higher. This advantage is based on 1.2 bits higher color depth, 0.1 EV of lower dynamic range, and 1.5 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Canon 5D Mark IV	Full Frame	30.1	6720	4480	4K/30p	24.8	13.6	2995	91
2.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
3.		Canon 6D Mark II	Full Frame	26.0	6240	4160	1080/60p	24.4	11.9	2862	85
4.		Canon 1D X Mark II	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4K/60p	24.1	13.5	3207	88
5.		Canon 5DS	Full Frame	50.3	8688	5792	1080/30p	24.7	12.4	2381	87
6.		Canon 5DS R	Full Frame	50.3	8688	5792	1080/30p	24.6	12.4	2308	86
7.		Canon G7 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	23.0	12.7	556	71
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	Full Frame	22.1	5760	3840	1080/30p	24.0	11.7	2293	81
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	Full Frame	21.0	5616	3744	1080/30p	23.7	11.9	1815	79
10.		Canon 5D	Full Frame	12.7	4368	2912	none	22.9	11.1	1368	71
11.		Fujifilm X70	APS-C	16.0	4896	3264	1080/60p	23.7	13.0	1608	80
12.		Nikon D850	Full Frame	45.4	8256	5504	4K/30p	26.4	14.8	2660	100
13.		Nikon D800	Full Frame	36.2	7360	4912	1080/30p	25.3	14.4	2853	95
14.		Nikon D800E	Full Frame	36.2	7360	4912	1080/30p	25.6	14.3	2979	96
15.		Panasonic GM5	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60p	22.1	11.7	721	66
16.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
17.		Sony RX100 III	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	22.4	12.3	495	67
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the 5D Mark IV provides a higher video resolution than the GR II. It can shoot video footage at 4K/30p, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the 5D Mark IV has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the GR II relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the GR II can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the GV-1. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Canon 5D Mark IV and Ricoh GR II in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.

Core Features

		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Canon 5D Mark IV	optical	Y	3.2 / 1620	fixed	Y	1/8000s	7.0/s	n	n
2.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
3.		Canon 6D Mark II	optical	Y	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	6.5/s	n	n
4.		Canon 1D X Mark II	optical	Y	3.2 / 1620	fixed	Y	1/8000s	16.0/s	n	n
5.		Canon 5DS	optical	Y	3.2 / 1040	fixed	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	n
6.		Canon 5DS R	optical	Y	3.2 / 1040	fixed	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	n
7.		Canon G7 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	6.5/s	Y	Y
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	optical	Y	3.2 / 1040	fixed	n	1/8000s	6.0/s	n	n
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	optical	Y	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/8000s	3.9/s	n	n
10.		Canon 5D	optical	Y	2.5 / 230	fixed	n	1/8000s	3.0/s	n	n
11.		Fujifilm X70	optional	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	n
12.		Nikon D850	optical	Y	3.2 / 2359	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0/s	n	n
13.		Nikon D800	optical	Y	3.2 / 921	fixed	n	1/8000s	4.0/s	Y	n
14.		Nikon D800E	optical	Y	3.2 / 921	fixed	n	1/8000s	4.0/s	Y	n
15.		Panasonic GM5	1166	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	Y	1/500s	5.8/s	n	n
16.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
17.		Sony RX100 III	1440	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
Notes: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One feature that is present on the 5D Mark IV, but is missing on the GR II is a top-level LCD. While being, of course, smaller than the rear screen, the control panel conveys some of the essential shooting information and can be convenient for quick and easy settings verification.

The Canon 5D Mark IV and the Ricoh GR II both have an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.

The 5D Mark IV writes its imaging data to Compact Flash or SDXC cards, while the GR II uses SDXC cards. The 5D Mark IV features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the GR II only has one slot. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV and Ricoh GR II and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Canon 5D Mark IV	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	Y	Y	-
2.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
3.		Canon 6D Mark II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	Y
4.		Canon 1D X Mark II	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	-	-	-
5.		Canon 5DS	Y	mono / mono	Y	-	mini	3.0	-	-	-
6.		Canon 5DS R	Y	mono / mono	Y	-	mini	3.0	-	-	-
7.		Canon G7 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	Y	mono / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Canon 5D	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Fujifilm X70	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
12.		Nikon D850	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	Y	Y	Y
13.		Nikon D800	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	-	-	-
14.		Nikon D800E	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	-	-	-
15.		Panasonic GM5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
16.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Sony RX100 III	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the 5D Mark IV has a microphone port, which is missing on the GR II. Such an external microphone input can help to substantially improve the quality of audio recordings when a good external microphone is used.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Canon 5D Mark IV (unlike the GR II) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Travel and landscape photographers will find it useful that the 5D Mark IV has an internal geolocalization sensor and can record GPS coordinates in its EXIF data.

The 5D Mark IV is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Canon. In contrast, the GR II has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the GR II was succeeded by the Ricoh GR III. Further information on the features and operation of the 5D Mark IV and GR II can be found, respectively, in the Canon 5D Mark IV Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh GR II Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is the Canon 5D Mark IV better than the Ricoh GR II or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Reasons to prefer the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (30.1 vs 16.1MP) with a 37% higher linear resolution.
• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (11 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (1.2 bits more color depth).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (1.5 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/30p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
• Easier framing: Has an optical viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• Easier setting verification: Features an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1620k vs 1230k dots).
• Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (7 vs 4 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• More flexible: Can take a variety of interchangeable lenses, including specialty optics.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (900 versus 320) on a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
• Easier geotagging: Features an internal GPS sensor to log localization data.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
• More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 1 year and 2 months after the GR II).

Advantages of the Ricoh GR II:

• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Ready to shoot: Comes with an integrated lens, while the 5D Mark IV requires a separate lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (117x63mm vs 151x116mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the 5D Mark IV).
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in June 2015).

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the 5D Mark IV is the clear winner of the match-up (24 : 8 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision. A professional sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Canon 5D Mark IV and the Ricoh GR II place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best DSLR Camera and Best Prime Lens Compact Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the 5D Mark IV and the GR II in practical situations. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate.

Expert reviews

This is why expert reviews are important. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Expert Camera Reviews

		Camera   Model	AP   score	CL   score	DCW   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Canon 5D Mark IV	4.5/5	+ +	4/5	87/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2016	3,499	amazon.com
2.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
3.		Canon 6D Mark II	4/5	+	4/5	80/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2017	1,999	amazon.com
4.		Canon 1D X Mark II	..	..	4.5/5	89/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2016	5,999	ebay.com
5.		Canon 5DS	..	+	..	83/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	3,699	amazon.com
6.		Canon 5DS R	5/5	+	..	83/100	5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	3,699	amazon.com
7.		Canon G7 X	4/5	+ +	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	..	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2012	3,499	ebay.com
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	4/5	91/100	..	79/100	4/5	..	Sep 2008	3,499	ebay.com
10.		Canon 5D	..	88/100	..	+ +	o	..	Aug 2005	3,299	ebay.com
11.		Fujifilm X70	4.5/5	..	..	76/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2016	799	ebay.com
12.		Nikon D850	4.5/5	+ +	5/5	89/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2017	3,299	amazon.com
13.		Nikon D800	5/5	+ +	..	82/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2012	2,999	ebay.com
14.		Nikon D800E	..	..	..	84/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2012	3,299	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GM5	3.5/5	+	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	749	ebay.com
16.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
17.		Sony RX100 III	5/5	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2014	799	ebay.com
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check 5D Mark IV price at
amazon.com
Check GR II offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

Check 5D Mark IV price at
amazon.com
Check GR II offers at
ebay.com

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.