rob norton
Well-known member
Hopefully the swivel screen isn't a cause for concern. My view can change but I think a slightly smaller c70 would be nice for size.
Cinema EOS Announcement on 19th Jan - EOS R5C
- Thread starter indiawilds
- Start date
NorBro
Well-known member
I don't know what's with that manufacturing choice...there's a screw right on the hinge.
Their other hybrids appear to not have one there or at least not in the same manner where it's visible (R3, R5, R6), and they are solid whereas C70 complaints about the LCD seem somewhat a bit more than infrequent.
Their other hybrids appear to not have one there or at least not in the same manner where it's visible (R3, R5, R6), and they are solid whereas C70 complaints about the LCD seem somewhat a bit more than infrequent.
rob norton
Well-known member
Interesting and strange about those design choices. I feel like slightly smaller than c70 is better for unrigged (or barely rigged) handheld all day long, as well as small gimbal work. Compared to the c70, if adding any bits and pieces, I'd rather the smallish size increase to something like a c200 body where it's easier to accommodate a few add ons (not talking full cinema set up).
NorBro
Well-known member
Anything smaller than a C70 is going to start to look like a R5 again but I'm with it...because as far as I'm concerned the traditional days of cinema cameras are finished and mirrorless-like bodies have taken over mostly because of the newer generation and YouTube.
Anything that's left is for the 1% and whatever ARRI and RED give them, or whatever is left from Canon and Sony if they want to keep their own box/rectangle hobby going.
Anything that's left is for the 1% and whatever ARRI and RED give them, or whatever is left from Canon and Sony if they want to keep their own box/rectangle hobby going.
NorBro
Well-known member
If this thing had a proper RED touchscreen LCD built into the top of it (not the current flat one) that swivels up and down and clicks into place to rest like some old school cameras, I'd love that as well.
I'd figure out how to hold it later. lol
[That's kind of a joke because they have nice handles but they aren't like their best DSMC2 handle.]
I'd figure out how to hold it later. lol
[That's kind of a joke because they have nice handles but they aren't like their best DSMC2 handle.]
Thomas Smet
New member
I agree. I ended up getting a R6 over the R5 since it handles 4k 60p a bit better with over sampling and full sensor. 4k over sampled on the R5 is essentially 8k and like you said pretty slow sensor speeds. Its great for static shots or little motion but there are much better tools out there to capture motion. The faster 4k is pixel binned and honestly that should no longer exist on cameras. Especially for a cinema camera.
The R6 may be only 20MP for stills and 4k video but its pretty solid at both of those. Lots of pro photographers use the R6 for stills and as a over sampled 4k camera its pretty solid with 10bit 4:2:2 c-log3. As long as it doesn't overheat. I personally would be a lot more interested in a R6 that has an external raw firmware update or a R6c that never overheats. I have submitted numerous feature requests to Canon and Atomos to add external raw to the R6. Atomos seems like they really want to. At least their response was very enthusiastic about it. 5.1k raw from a R6 would be pretty darn sweet for me. Perfectly happy to upscale that to 8k for the rare person that insists they actually need 8k for some odd reason.
Bassman2003
Well-known member
Day late and a dollar short... How can I break the cycle?
Doe it really matter what the design of a "cine" camera is? Many of them are a box with connectors. One can only go up from there.
NorBro
Well-known member
It does matter for those who are pretty particular about how they use their gear and some people do need certain connections or they simply can't use the camera, but I think many non-1% individuals can adapt to designs and it's really some of the features that are non-negotiable like AF or high-resolutions & high-framerates.
morgan_moore
Well-known member
The c70.. which was a tossup when I bought my c200..
no sdi, hdmi pokes out the side
screen cant be seen in the sun
it really doesnt float my boat.
the c200.. 300 500 are really coming together.. apart from the cludgefXck of only taking ef lenses whch are feeling old quickly.
on a side note I was testing my r6 the other day. the AF wth the 'kit' lense is special, the last shot shows a comedy sky burn with no banding.
https://vimeo.com/664423527
this r5x will have to be special for me to want to trade up.. especially considering it is still (i guess) lacking ND xlr and the like.
no sdi, hdmi pokes out the side
screen cant be seen in the sun
it really doesnt float my boat.
the c200.. 300 500 are really coming together.. apart from the cludgefXck of only taking ef lenses whch are feeling old quickly.
on a side note I was testing my r6 the other day. the AF wth the 'kit' lense is special, the last shot shows a comedy sky burn with no banding.
https://vimeo.com/664423527
this r5x will have to be special for me to want to trade up.. especially considering it is still (i guess) lacking ND xlr and the like.
Last edited:
Clermond
New member
the R5c filename went through several Facebook groups but someone mentioned that the R5c came from one of the rumor sites not from Canon itself. I don't care how they name it as long it has full size HDMI port and a better / active cooling.
The rolling shutter time of the R5 when recording 8K RAW or 4K HQ is 15.5 ms (https://www.cined.com/canon-eos-r5-lab-test-to-film-in-raw-or-not/). Which suggests that the sensor readout speed is actually fast enough to do 8K 60p (16.67 ms/frame). So it's not entirely clear why the camera uses a faster sensor readout mode involving pixel binning/line skipping for 60 fps recording, but my guess is that this is due to processor or thermal limitations. The rolling shutter performance in the 4K non-HQ mode (which doesn't overheat) up to 30 fps is 9.6ms, the same as when recording 4K 60fps, suggesting that a similar sensor readout mode may be used for both.
Obviously, this is still too slow of a sensor readout for 120 fps without cropping or line skipping, but the R5 actually has a fairly fast readout given that it is a high megapixel sensor with a traditional (non-stacked) design. But Canon is still a bit behind Sony in terms of sensor tech, as Sony has both high-megapixel stacked sensors (in the a1) and even faster lower-megapixel sensors (in the a7s3, etc.).
G
Guest
Guest
agreed, this is the style most thought the Dslr revolution was going to spawn by 2012…. it took a while but they got there. C70 is my current favorite ergo wise.
G
Guest
Guest
also, knowing Canon, the R5C is going to be $8K+, pricing it out of its own use bracket.
Really? I would say that ergonomics and usability are the big downsides of the C70 - HDMI cable sticking out towards operator (when shooting handheld), mediocre LCD with a flimsy, floppy mount, lack of mounting points, odd choice of non-programmable buttons in prime positions, non-rotating side grip along with a general feeling of it not being balanced (though I suppose this depends on battery size and lens choice).
My everyday camera is the FX6 and to me they are like night and day ergonomics-wise. The only thing I prefer about the C70 is that you can send the camera's focus mag and peaking to an HDMI connected monitor / EVF.
ozmorphasis
New member
Yeah, I'm a bit shocked by James and Norbro's positive comments about the c70 ergos.
James and Norbro, have you shot on the C70 extensively in a variety of situations? Personally, I don't know anyone who loves the ergonomics of that camera ( I own one). It has a lot going for it, and it was clearly conceived to be shot handheld, and yet that is exactly where it doesn't feel right. The FX6 is leagues better in that regard, especially if you are shooting for longer stretches.
The number of important bells and whistles that the c70 packs into a relatively small package is indeed fantastic, but the overall ergonomics leave a lot to be desired when shooting with it extensively handheld.
The last point about the non-rotating handle and the balance being off is huge. In my experience, this camera will destroy your wrist if you try to shoot with it all day handheld. The HDMI is indeed seriously problematic since it sticks out exactly where your left hand needs to cradle the camera when pulling focus manually.
NorBro
Well-known member
Yeah, we're all different but what you guys are saying makes perfect sense for anyone who knows cameras and in general knows how production people vary.
For me, I don't use HDMI for anything or pull focus manually (no more manual focus ever for me) or attach anything to the camera, so none of the above is applicable.
With that said, I'm a mirrorless guy so using the camera comes pretty natural. A little chunky though.
But I've held out cameras like stills camera for many years so maybe my wrists are trained, IDK.
The programmability is a problem, but this is a Canon problem, IMO. They are at the bottom of what you're allowed to choose and where, and it's pretty frustrating (at least in the mirrorless' although they have improved).
I liked using the FX6 too and thought its handle was great.
For me, I don't use HDMI for anything or pull focus manually (no more manual focus ever for me) or attach anything to the camera, so none of the above is applicable.
With that said, I'm a mirrorless guy so using the camera comes pretty natural. A little chunky though.
But I've held out cameras like stills camera for many years so maybe my wrists are trained, IDK.
The programmability is a problem, but this is a Canon problem, IMO. They are at the bottom of what you're allowed to choose and where, and it's pretty frustrating (at least in the mirrorless' although they have improved).
I liked using the FX6 too and thought its handle was great.
NorBro
Well-known member
BTW, yeah, sounds like it...no way less than $6500, $7K.