G
Guest
Guest
then there is Canon’s cripple hammer at work.
Cinema EOS Announcement on 19th Jan - EOS R5C
- Thread starter indiawilds
- Start date
then there is Canon’s cripple hammer at work.
The unicorn was supposed to show up on .... (either the NAB or some other major expo from 2021).
BTW, as to R5 - IMO, it was a dual failure, but in different terms. It sent a shudder through the Canon and Sony cinema divisions while taking serious hits at the cartel back scratching lineups. And, at the same time, the original cripple hammer peeved off a lot of Canon customers, who have been taught over the years to, at least, expect a dependably working camera. Canon scrambled a bit with the firmware update and licensed the external recorder to Atomos but, by the time 5c comes out, it'll be close to two years from the original release. I wouldn't call it long range planning but more of a reply to Z9 and A1.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I sort of thought that it was maybe the same thing stated differently. Like maybe you could record ISO 100 in stills and have incredible latitude in the shadows. Or you could record ISO 800 in video and be able to pull down the highlights more. I haven't heard that, but it was my assumption. Like all these s-log3 Sony cameras with a super high base ISO because that's the reality of encoding all the shadow information they'd get at ISO 100. Something like that. I dunno
NorBro
Major Contributor
The 8K R5 was around before the Z9 and A1 so it can't really be a reply to them.
I think it's a reply to their own camera, the R5, and makes perfect sense to make more money based on its success.
Canon hasn't had a 2nd version (or kind of a second version) of something very successful in a while.
___
As far as making money with the camera, I'm going to share a revelation I've recently had.
For the longest time, I've preached about not spending too much money on a camera, especially if it's a long-term keeper, because many are constantly outdated every 6 months by the latest and greatest. But as I've been picking up a bit more shoots lately and renting different cameras I have realized I don't feel good about owning/using a cheap camera for some of the things I do.
When I was younger, "beating the system" with a $1K-$2K BM with exceptional quality was the ultimate form of winning and a slap in the face to RED owners, lol - but I actually want a more expensive camera now.
Nothing crazy, but something between $6K-$10K that's relatively 'future-proof', which is really only about the resolution and framerate for me. I think I'd be good with that.
Plus, I don't have many choices. No Panasonic, and likely no Sony unless an A2 would be coming soon, or a new cinema camera is announced like now (doubt it). And we'll see what the Z9 looks like and how it behaves with AF.
I think it's a reply to their own camera, the R5, and makes perfect sense to make more money based on its success.
Canon hasn't had a 2nd version (or kind of a second version) of something very successful in a while.
___
As far as making money with the camera, I'm going to share a revelation I've recently had.
For the longest time, I've preached about not spending too much money on a camera, especially if it's a long-term keeper, because many are constantly outdated every 6 months by the latest and greatest. But as I've been picking up a bit more shoots lately and renting different cameras I have realized I don't feel good about owning/using a cheap camera for some of the things I do.
When I was younger, "beating the system" with a $1K-$2K BM with exceptional quality was the ultimate form of winning and a slap in the face to RED owners, lol - but I actually want a more expensive camera now.
Nothing crazy, but something between $6K-$10K that's relatively 'future-proof', which is really only about the resolution and framerate for me. I think I'd be good with that.
Plus, I don't have many choices. No Panasonic, and likely no Sony unless an A2 would be coming soon, or a new cinema camera is announced like now (doubt it). And we'll see what the Z9 looks like and how it behaves with AF.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Right, which is why I'm happy with 4K 120fps right now. I don't actually have anyone who requests 120fps, I've just found it useful. 60 is the limit of requests I get. That's why I'm still using the FS7. It still gets work because the maximum requirements haven't increased. I'd much prefer an FX6, but I don't feel the burning need to make that move. 8K 60fps is almost certainly more future-proof, but the reality is that I doubt I'll need it any time soon. There should be a decent amount of future left with 4K 60fps.
NorBro
Major Contributor
You could also create your own future...
I read one time you used to say which camera you had (even if you didn't) when applying for work or something like that, and I used to engage in all kinds of psychological tactics like that my entire career to learn more about the business and people.
I wanted to see how people thought and reacted and if they bought what I was selling, so to speak...
Sometimes people don't care, but I would surely be doing more marketing for myself with 8K then probably even using it.
So a part of the investment is not if you'll need it right now or if anyone's asking for it, but what you can create and get from it in the future, the near future.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Haha possibly. Let me know what you find out! I sort of assume that Sony will have an answer to this camera sooner or later. 8K 60fps LOG is probably more important to me than internal RAW... The A1 already shoots 8K, albeit only up to 30 fps.
At any rate, i'm not in the game anymore of buying things with an expectation that they'll market well. If it's not a surefire bet, I'm not taking it. And I only know if it's a surefire bet if people have already expressed demand
One last thing I'd note is that a lot of my clients are computationally challenged. They'd probably balk at me handing them 8K footage. So it'd be more for things I was editing myself
NorBro
Major Contributor
I think the only surefire bet that's left is anything on the Netflix list because anything else will vary depending on the industry you're working in, knowledge of the hiring individuals, location/city, any biases, etc.
FS7, C300 Mark II, etc. might still be in demand because some folk take forever to learn.
At the same time, if it ain't broken...
FS7, C300 Mark II, etc. might still be in demand because some folk take forever to learn.
At the same time, if it ain't broken...
G
Guest
Guest
that sounds like all kinds of wrong
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Right, but if it's a surefire bet, it means they're willing to hire YOU with that camera. I could buy an Alexa MILF, but that doesn't mean I have a clientele that's willing to pay for me to use it, or that I have the work samples and history + connections to get new clients with a MILF budget and needs.
So, the surefire bet is when people are hiring you repeatedly with a camera that you're renting. You know that if you buy that camera, they'll end up renting it from you. One of the reasons I went Sony is that my biggest client has an FS7 and A7SII in-house, so I thought that I might get to rent mine to them when they needed an additional camera, which turned out to be true
ahalpert
Major Contributor
wasn't that kind of the argument in rating the REDs a stop higher so you could get ARRI latitude in the highlights?
G
Guest
Guest
Can we wait until the official announcement before we start talking ROI? haha
G
Guest
Guest
DXOmark claims 14.6stops DR at iso50, and between iso400 and iso800 it claims 12+
Jump over to CineD and Clog3 at iso800 is getting 12+ stops
I’m not saying this coincidence is anything more than a coincidence, i’m saying if i had the R5 in my hands i’d test this out asap.
G
Guest
Guest
just to be clear, we are talking about gain iso, not metadata iso.
Red uses metadata.
Mirrorless Cameras often add some gain.
If the DXO standard for DR is anything close to the standard at CineD, they should be within a stop different, but we are talking two stops difference.
But one thing we know, you can’t push 4stops without some insane amount of noise.
in most cases you can push 2stops with little noise and then maybe 3stops with NR, but 4stops is typically noticeable.
So if Canon is using the iso50 to push to iso800, that is some very very good noise reduction.
Chances are it is iso400 pushing to iso800, maybe iso200.
DXOmark has a DR/latitude bump around iso250, for whatever reason. Put there for C-Log optimizing?
What i think is more reasonable, is that most cinema cameras are rated at iso800 and Canon decided they would too. DR numbers be darned. haha. but again pure internet speculation. I might be making sense with the available 3rd party tests available, but i am not basing these thoughts on anything truly reliable.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
Those people likely hire you with that camera because that's probably only what they know or want.
So that makes sense, but if there was an emergency production one day and you happen to only have a FX6 or a C300 Mark III or even something older and you did the job for them, they would probably like it just as much and maybe even like it more based on your own cam op skills. Then they might want to rent that one.
Surely the FS7 is not that great anymore compared to other cameras; it just does the job well, especially if you know it well.
Sometimes people don't know any better or are afraid of change...I think I said that to someone last week. lol
G
Guest
Guest
i’m thinking of starting a go fund me so that i can fly to Japan and knock on the door at Sony, Canon, and Panasonic and talk to the engineers and marketers, and possible division leads, and tell them what people want and what they are doing wrong, and possbly find out information about things we don’t normally have access to.
Every one will love me for that
Every one will love me for that
Last edited:
ahalpert
Major Contributor
But every stills camera has a base iso of around 100 for stills and a LOG base iso of 800 for video. And gets more DR from the raw stills. No?
G
Guest
Guest
before we go off on a tangent.
According to DXOmark, the Canon R5 dynamic range reaches to 14.6 stops, while they rate the Sony A1 to 14.5 stops and the A7s3 at 13.9.
Yet the Sony cameras have more DR in most video tests, that implies some Canon compromise going on. I jokingly referred to the cripple hammer, but could just be that they chose to conform to the iso800 that most vídeo and cinema cameras tend to shoot for.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Dunno. But they measure 13.9Evs for the a7siii. Let's assume the methodology is pretty different...
.
I think that the bump in DR is the high base ISO. Many cameras have it, often 2 stops above low base. So, the a7iv has a low base ISO (in LOG) of 800 and gets a boost (or at least a minor reprieve from the downward DR march) at 3200. The a7siii has it just over 4 stops above low base, at the expense of getting very noisy indeed befor you reach that high
Keep in mind that iso 250 is dxomark's measured iso, which corresponds to Canon's iso 400 setting.
https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Canon/EOS-R5---Measurements
Cined measures the highest DR from R5 8k raw at iso 400 rather than iso 800. So, that checks out. But I think the question you asked is a good one. Why can't you record raw from low base iso? Or can you?
https://www.cined.com/canon-eos-r5-lab-test-to-film-in-raw-or-not/
R5 would have destroyed the competition, had it not been overheating and shutting down. (or is it shutting down and overheating) As it is, it pretty much destroyed its competition anyway, despite the overheating. Glenn Fry would have been proud.
Sony then responded with A1 and Nikon with Z9. Canon, obviously, has been mulling over R5c for a while but the timing of the announcement throws it smack into the battle against Z9 and A1, whereas the original had room all for itself.
Of course, Nikon could update Z7 and Sony is rumored to update a 2 1/2 year old A7R IV (into V).
PS. And the cartel executives know darn well what people want. It's just that they ain't gonna give it to you in a single body or even a single brand.