General Canon - an oddity

M

morgan_moore

Major Contributor
As my thinking moves towards dumping 25 years of nikon lenses to hook up with a brand that makes cine cameras I noticed an oddity.

The canon C70 is S35 rmount but there are no S35 r mount lenses nor even roumours of such.

Im aware of the adapters available but I guess Id be after an r 17-100 or something

So if im investing in lenses R seems sensible not 'legacy' ef.. but here there seems to be a hole. Maybe the 'C90' will be full frame
 
Are you averse to using adapters because of wiggle in the mount? It seems to me that the C70 is designed to take advantage of speedbooster/EF lens combo or regular adapter/S35 in PL or EF mount. Which is a nice suite of options, if you're happy with how the adapters mount.

I'm sure there will be a full-frame version of the C70 at some point. But who knows when? Maybe it will be the "R5c" that's rumored. That would be sweet.

I mean, if you don't NEED a camera now, it makes sense to wait, no? And if you do need it now, then maybe just worry about the set-up you're buying now?

Full-frame EF mount lenses seem like the best investment to me because you can use them on the C70 with a speedbooster or on an R5c with a regular adapter. Assuming you don't mind using an adapter.

The 18-80 is pretty sweet and probably the lens you want, right? But can't cover a full-frame sensor.....but if you can get a 4K crop from the R5c, then maybe it would still be usable....decisions, decisions....
 
Well - Im trying to 'see' the big picture and decide a lens system. Ill list some 'facts' - they oppose each other! :)

-there are lenses like ef(s) 18-135 and fifty 1.8 that will be bought and if desposed of or broken in two years that is no problem to fill a hole.

Now moving to lenses of the $2k+ price class one wants to back the right horse both RF/Ef and sensor coverage (see 18-18 4.4 not covering FF) . These lenses may outlive me - Im not planning on buying more.

-in the five year+ picture RF glass will probably have better AF than EF and more spares
-RF is smaller tidier lighter

-RF is therefore preferable

BUT

-RF doesnt do any ranges (18-xx, 15-xx) that fits doco shooting

-Ef are cheap, plentiful and fit 'anything'.

-Ef deep flange distance have space for 'speedboosters' and behind the lens ND on R mount mirrorless cams


====
A quik thought.. Im not a camera geek Im a grip geek (Im also not averse to the odd camera scratching riot). The last hi pay job I did was two Reds and anamorphic glass - not mine - I should probably cludge something together with used EF and then will probably be given a rental camera on bigger shoots. EF will defalate even more as RF becomes prominent.
 
Last edited:
So maybe some 'rules' like

-never spend more than $450 on EFs glass
-never spend more that $1000 on EF glass

really the 18-80 is the b_stard child because it dont cover future FF RF camera or have the tech advantages that RF may bring and its costy... and how much better is it than the 18-135

(I have a theory that small light 'crap' glass tends to have really fast AF)
 
ahalpert said:
Are you averse to using adapters because of wiggle in the mount?
Click to expand...

Sorry it looks like im not reading your response!

I dont mind mounts especially same brand ones from canon. I think my 'feeling' is that RF glass will be smaller and faster AF than EF and is therefore preferable where a suitable option exists (in a perfect world!)

If there was an S35 17-100 RF t4 - that would just sell the C70 to me instantly and everything would become clear.

As for 'needing a camera now' well time ticks on and decent AF would help me develop my personal projects (car mount, MoCo) I could wait if we knew the C90 was a FF C70 with price and release date.

Ive talked before that lenses should lead the body choice. So maybe I should be checking the FF cams be that the unaffordable C500 or the RF dslrs. Then expecially for RF) you have the 24-105 and all is good in the midrange zoom world .. the EF one is quite ropey but the RF one looks good.. three rings even https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/lenses/24-105mm.htm

.. and that three rigns makes up for (maybe) the paucity of controls on some of the bodies - I can see that as an underated feature (if it works) - My three ring nikkors make my FS7 usable - when you have to diddle the iris with some non responsive wheel on the body the experience just breaks.
 
Last edited:
There are some rumors about an APS-C R-mount lenses. The problem is that Canon already has a $1,000 full frame RP, so an APS-C model would have to be priced lower and its lens lineup is unlikely to be of "pro" (aka higher end EF) quality and specifications.

C70, by borrowing the C300MKIII sensor, seems to be an interim model that bridges the gap between their full frame projects of the current/future and the legacy APS-C Cinema line. There are rumored C50 and C90 pro video cameras too. C50 is likely to be APS-C and C-90, if it borrows its sensor from C500 MKII, will be full frame.

But the best-bang-for-the-buck might be R5c, an updated R5 with a larger body and a cooling fan. If that can deliver the same image quality as R5 - gorgeous up to a certain ISO - for around $5,000, it will be a huge hit and a likely market setter for quite a while.
 
morgan_moore said:
So maybe some 'rules' like

-never spend more than $450 on EFs glass
-never spend more that $1000 on EF glass

really the 18-80 is the b_stard child because it dont cover future FF RF camera or have the tech advantages that RF may bring and its costy... and how much better is it than the 18-135
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that the 18-80 is better in absolutely every way except for telephoto range. Does the 18-135 have better AF? I dunno, but i'd be sort of surprised.

Also, the PZ-E1 servo zoom adapter for the 18-135 has been discontinued - was that part of the calculus?

And supposedly Canon is coming out with a new servo zoom that will have a rear element accessory that converts it to full-frame. So you can use it on either S35 or FF cameras. Angenieux has the same thing.

But I'm guessing that that zoom will be even more expensive than the 18-80, especially considering that the 18-80 has come down in price and can also be bought used.

I would definitely consider sigma/samyang/tamron. I only had a cursory look at their offerings for RF, but I think that they autofocus well.

morgan_moore said:
I think my 'feeling' is that RF glass will be smaller and faster AF than EF and is therefore preferable where a suitable option exists (in a perfect world!)

If there was an S35 17-100 RF t4 - that would just sell the C70 to me instantly and everything would become clear.

As for 'needing a camera now' well time ticks on and decent AF would help me develop my personal projects (car mount, MoCo) I could wait if we knew the C90 was a FF C70 with price and release date.

Ive talked before that lenses should lead the body choice. So maybe I should be checking the FF cams be that the unaffordable C500 or the RF dslrs. Then expecially for RF) you have the 24-105 and all is good in the midrange zoom world .. the EF one is quite ropey but the RF one looks good.. three rings even https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/lenses/24-105mm.htm
Click to expand...

The only thing is - you'll probably save a bundle buying EF lenses because they've already come down in price and have great availability used, plus the whole dying of the mount thing. And they have the massive, massive virtue of being usable with full FOV on either FF or S35 cameras (with the use of a speedbooster). As well as the vari ND mount adapter if you like. As per your rule, I wouldn't want to drop serious coin on those lenses if what you really want is the latest design in the most compact package. But there should be awesome EF lenses available for a song. If you don't like the Canon EF 24-105, then there is probably a better version from sigma or tamron.

An S35 17-100 RF T4 would be probably $10k+, I'm guessing. So, I'm not sure that such a lens would really clarify your position after all unless you really wanted to invest that much in a zoom.

Lens leading to body choice brings me to the Sony 28-135 because while it's not as good as the Canon 18-80 optically or mechanically, it gets the job done. I got one for like $1400 used. It has a pretty good range. The servo zoom is smooth and lets me zoom the full range without a hitch. Optically, it's totally acceptable. I don't think the AF is as fast and snappy as my newer, smaller lenses, but it works well enough.

Of course, if you don't need to pull off servo zooms and just need to reframe remotely, you can just strap a gear to your zoom ring. I do that with my Sigma 24-70 FE (fantastic lens) on the ronin-s, and if I could rotate my wrist infinitely then I could probably pull off good, long zooms. I've considered hooking up a playstation controller to the rig because it's the only way to map a joystick (ie rocker) to the ronin-s focus wheel. You could probably buy a remote motor set-up with a rocker. I mean, if you're considering the 18-135... You could get a Tamron 16-300 aps-c and a FF 24-105 and just strap gears to them. Sigma or Samyang f/1.4 primes if you need 'em

But even just for maintaining balance on a gimbal, I'd think you'd want a lens with internal zoom. And even then, my 28-135 becomes slightly back-heavy after I zoom past 100mm. but much more constant center of gravity than a tromboning lens
 
Last edited:
I'm guessing that the 18-80 is better in absolutely every way except for telephoto range. Does the 18-135 have better AF? I dunno, but i'd be sort of surprised.

My 'theory is that the small light lenses often have fast AF due to the (lack of) mass of the elements. I was not thinking about the servo.

One place this lens wins really big is depreciation. I think S35 cine zooms are in for a whipping with the amount of full frame. Speed reducer anyone?

====

This feels like a pointless chat. There is no way out we have not missed a golden nugget. There is no failure in logic. It is all a set of bad choices. C70+3 ring rf17-100 would be a clear offer. C70 and 3ring 24-105 would be a clear offer. No grown up system for $6g.

We have.. (assuming gimbal mount and no handle).

FX6 and 28-135 - not really wide enough and no audio.

C70 and 15-85 - reliant on a slow dated consumer lens

C70 and 18-80 reliant on depreciation monster (and not really wide enough)

C70 and booster and 24-105 (getting costy but not an actual fail)

FX6 and sony 24-105 - nice? but no audio

R5 A7s3 - no ND.

So..

Canon R mount with behind lens ND and old skool 24-105 or C70 and some EF, EFs.???

Obvisouly none of this $6k 'investmtent' (**** phrase) will get an SDI apart from this no audio fX6.

====

So the C200/300/500 people have it - a functional system today with tech that is known to be end of line.
 
What are your non-negotiables and what are merely your nice-to-haves, Sam?

The only thing about the C200 is that I don't think that the AF is on par with more recent releases. Otherwise, I'd say buy it and the lens used and then you won't lose much money reselling either. But the other downside of the C200 is that you can't use a 24-105. the aps-c options are either crappier, more limited range/no as wide angle, or really expensive

If you're considering an HDMI-only camera and HDMI adapters, I'd say again - why not consider the FX6 with an Atomos that can take an audio input? Then you can lose the FX6 top handle and strap the atomos wherever you need it, record prores or prores raw from the hdmi on the camera synced with audio from the mixer. Backup recording in the camera. Most of the time you won't need the atomos and can just use timecode anyway. Get a 24-105.

Separately, I'm a little confused about your ND requirements because it sounds like you're centered around a single-zoom-on-gimbal package, so why not strap a vari-ND to the front? if you're willing to use the ef-rf nd adapter, that's vari nd anyway. You could get an FX3 with 24-105 + vari-ND and monitor/control it remotely using imaging edge mobile on a smartphone. then you get tap-to-focus subject tracking, which you don't have on the fx6 (or maybe the canon cine cams either?) the wifi monitor/control works really well on my a7siii and the only problem is that it overheats the camera after a couple hours. but the fx3 has that fan. and it has ibis which may be a bonus

one note about lens AF is that I think you're generally right about lighter lenses having faster AF. but the motor design and number really matters. the tamron 70-180 fe has fantastic autofocus due to using 2 of tamron's top shelf motors that push and pull the focusing elements from both sides. the new sony 50 1.2 has FOUR motors and the AF looks pretty darn good. whereas the sigma 35 1.2 has only one motor and you can see the autofocus stepping through its range at intervals. useless for video.
 
Last edited:
actually, the c200 autofocus isn't as bad as I thought


if the 15-85 is good enough optically and for autofocus, then maybe you should just get that camera/lens combo, not invest further in aps-c canon gear, and plan to resell the whole thing in 2 years when the full-frame sony/canon camera of your dreams is available
 
Thanks for your input. I get you now on Sony sound.

Too much faff I think for dynamic situations.

Overall my must have is robustness.

The c200+15-85 seems cheap and cheerful.

But there is a nagging feeling that the c70 will be more modern (!)

For example the minotor has 1m more dots

I hope to do a side to side at cvp soon
 
The thing is - running HDMI out to monitor doesn't sound robust to me, which is the problem of the C70. Whereas if your fx6/atomos lives on gimbal, will you need to rearrange that rigging even in dynamic circumstances? And if you're not on gimbal, you can just use the top handle sound? C200 has EVF, an advantage over C70, no? And CRL
 
In case it helps - c200 HDMI is in a really good position.

And if you haven't seen these, they're amazing HDMI connectors by Australian company ZILR:

- https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1488896-REG/zilr_zrhaa01_4kp60_hyper_thin_high.html
- https://www.newsshooter.com/2019/06/25/zilr-pro-hdmi-cables-reviewed/

Where other HDMI cables pretty much fall out with gravity, the ZILRs are ridiculously strong. There's still only so much you can do if the connection is in a terrible place to begin with.
 
I didn’t design the c70.

Clearly it’s more modern than the c200 and probably preferable in terms of software codec onboard monitor et al.
The fx6 too.

Tragic that both cams are basically ruined by the omission of a $5 plug.

Or is that a dumb obsession by me - that’s the question?
 
morgan_moore said:
I didn’t design the c70.

Clearly it’s more modern than the c200 and probably preferable in terms of software codec onboard monitor et al.
The fx6 too.

Tragic that both cams are basically ruined by the omission of a $5 plug.

Or is that a dumb obsession by me - that’s the question?
Click to expand...

Sounds like a smart obsession considering the fact that the natural conclusion is you must double your budget to buy the canon/sony camera that actually offers all the goods that pros want

but how do you feel about a blackmagic hdmi-to-sdi converter: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...converter_bidirectional_sdi_hdmi.html/reviews

it's got good reviews. then you could make your c70 complete. speedbooster + 24-105
 
morgan_moore said:
I didn’t design the c70.

Clearly it’s more modern than the c200 and probably preferable in terms of software codec onboard monitor et al.
The fx6 too.

Tragic that both cams are basically ruined by the omission of a $5 plug.

Or is that a dumb obsession by me - that’s the question?
Click to expand...

If part of your service is being able to say yes to every client request then the c200 doesn't let you be that yes man vs. other cameras.

My C200 has done a large variety of stuff but perhaps in tandem with your movi pro you should be more aligned with a "yes to everything" philosophy, which could more often be the expectations of those looking to use gimbals.

Compare this to a director who's happy to be pushed in a wheelchair for the dolly shot, they may be more inclined to take whatever files they're given.

If type of file isn't an issue, a used, PL mount C200 without viewfinder would be pretty cool though!

I've softened a little on HDMI, I think it's more guilty by association by having the point of connection in terrible positions more often than not. SDI doesn't make it to prosumer gear, therefore there are fewer complaints in total, but you rarely hear of poor connector positioning on pro equipment either.
 
Here is the gag - I actually use hdmi 90% of the time- but sdi gives a backup

I have an animon transmitter- but when it fails (like underground) you can’t beat a long SDI to get you out of jail. And I never ever want to be in jail. Ever.

The c70 hdmi is badly placed like all photo cams and not like the c200/300/500 or fx6
So it’s double bad
Hence the search for L joins :)


The other day I was feeding long hdmi to my shogun for director and it was wonky at the director end - and I’m looking like a cock because the director cant see and I keep having to walk up set to wingle the connection- oh just to go to Sdi
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top