Canon R5 Announced with 8k

Looking for a favor -

Hello,

I was wondering if anybody who owns the camera could help me out?

I would like to test playback and editing of 4kHQ30p, 4KLQ30p and 4k120 in C-LOG. All with IPB compression.

1 - 30 second clip of each of any subject would be great. Something like a backyard etc... No movement is needed. I just want to work with the files in the video editor to see how well they are handled.

Thank you!
 
Clermond said:
why not the 24-70/f2?
https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/...s/lenses/ef/standard-zoom/rf-28-70mm-f-2l-usm
Click to expand...

You mean 28-70 f/2?

Lens design is compromise by itself, and then zoom...

We are running short of car analogies these days, so here is one.

Most lens designs today are about scoring as high as possible on standardized tests, as cars are tuned to be fast on the track.

Goal just to be the look itself, as was the ride feeling.

Do you think that contemporary design would beat the look of 'prime' zoom?

I would love to see them in direct stress test at f/2.8.
 
ahalpert said:
Either way, I'm happy if people are jumping on board the anti-high res bandwagon. First by forsaking the 4KHQ of the R5 for binned 4K, and now apparently ditching 4K altogether
Click to expand...

No not a bandwagon at all. And I'm not telling anyone else how to think or shoot. In my personal opinion, all things being equal (same camera, lens, sensor, FOV, etc) good 1080p often is hard to tell apart from good 4k in direct comparisons, and basically impossible for a normal person to tell apart in actual edited, non-comparison videos. And I often find the extra hassle not worth it. I'm glad to know with the R6, I can shoot 4K as long as it will let me (if I want to), and then I can switch right over 1080p and the quality difference will be extremely negligible, and even impossible to see to the average viewer.
 
drummondb said:
No not a bandwagon at all. And I'm not telling anyone else how to think or shoot. In my personal opinion, all things being equal (same camera, lens, sensor, FOV, etc) good 1080p often is hard to tell apart from good 4k in direct comparisons, and basically impossible for a normal person to tell apart in actual edited, non-comparison videos. And I often find the extra hassle not worth it. I'm glad to know with the R6, I can shoot 4K as long as it will let me (if I want to), and then I can switch right over 1080p and the quality difference will be extremely negligible, and even impossible to see to the average viewer.
Click to expand...

Both of my “TV’s” are UHD/4K(55” OLED & 120” projection) and and on Netflix with high quality content/acquisition, I can’t really tell a difference between the 1080p stream and 2160p stream. But I have spotted the difference on some series/shows that have switched from HD/2K to 4K acquisition and distribution.
 
laverdir said:
You mean 28-70 f/2?

Lens design is compromise by itself, and then zoom...

We are running short of car analogies these days, so here is one.

Most lens designs today are about scoring as high as possible on standardized tests, as cars are tuned to be fast on the track.

Goal just to be the look itself, as was the ride feeling.

Do you think that contemporary design would beat the look of 'prime' zoom?

I would love to see them in direct stress test at f/2.8.
Click to expand...

I don't think anything :)
I was just replying to Abe who was asking for a 35-70mm f2.0 Zoom
I corrected my typo. 28-70 of course
 
He would like an E-mount version.

___

I think resolution discussions will always unfold like the color science ones...all of our different noggins and their gears.

I saw a comment on here the other day about someone's video mentioning the 720p camera that was used looked great, and as I was watching this video and all of its detail being presented to me in blocks of smudges, I appreciated the other viewer for seeing something I didn't (besides invigorating nostalgia), but at the same time I felt like I already knew what his/her opinions may be on higher-resolutions.
 
NorBro said:
He would like an E-mount version.
Click to expand...

Yes, I would want it in E-mount. And a 35-70 might compromise even less or cost less/be smaller. But a 28-70 f/2 would certainly foot the bill.

----

Today, I'm oscillating again and considering that the Sigma 24-70 would look prettier enough than the tamron 28-200 and cover enough of the range to merit buying it first instead. I might be able to find parts of the zoom range that handle macro-style shots decently. Flare resistance requires further investigation on my part.

Part of my mental war games when considering what lens I would buy first is reliving my last wedding shoot, where I was covering an interior scene on GH5 + .71 speedbooster + 24-70, so a 34-99mm equivalent.

The wide end was sufficiently wide but I would have needed to go to at least 150mm to get the punch-ins I missed.

Then I thought - the tamron 35-150 that NorBro mentioned! What an ingenious range for beauty b-roll, and a modest 4x-ish zoom.

But for general use or documentary, i really need to go to 24mm.

So maybe I'm returning to a set-up I've frequently considered: start with sigma 24-70. Then consider adding sigma 50, and either sigma 70-100 or 100-400. Additional primes could be added later.

The Sigmas are a really nice blend of price and performance. They have their rough edges and can be a bit clinical, but they offer very even performance across the frame wide open, which is critical.
 
Last edited:
September 2014...I was working in Manhattan and I'm in an office building downtown waiting for a package.

I had just purchased my first cinema camera - the big URSA. A seasoned Blackmagic vet by that point, but I didn't consider the BMCC/BMPC or Pocket to be true cinema cameras without 60p.

Package arrives. It's the Sigma 35mm ART, the first of many that would go on to revolutionize the lens game.

Set everything up and started filming. ProRes UHD 444XQ. Checked footage.

It was the first time in my life I saw such resolution in video. I swear I remember that day like it was yesterday and it felt like the footage was literally sparkling...it was so sharp and detailed and just ALIVE, if you will.

I was so pumped. I looked at the same footage a year or so ago and I don't see it anymore. I guess the brain has been trained.

Kind of like the mental progress with video game graphics from the 90s to the 2000s to now.
 
ahalpert said:
This is true, but the behavior described by the theoretical MTF chart (ie center vs corner sharpness, meridional vs sagittal resolution) seems to align with the measured performance, even if the lens is overall softer in reality. Here's the tamron 28-75 tested by cicala vs manufacturer chart (he hasn't done the 28-200):

View attachment 140311
View attachment 140312
View attachment 140313
Click to expand...

In this example, the thing you are looking at in the theoretical curves (sharpness in center vs corners) holds true in the real world measurements. But there's also stuff that doesn't hold true: in the theoretical curves, the center is just as sharp at both focal lengths (MTF30 is around 90), but in the real world measurements 28mm is visibly sharper than 75mm (MTF30 goes from 85 to 70). Obviously it had to be lower than the theoretical number, but sometimes it will be by just a little and sometimes by a lot.

It may or may not be important for what you want. They do provide useful information, but beware that theoretical MTF graphs don't always translate to real world performance.
 
Just did an overheating test with firmware 1.1.0 (It came pre-installed): https://youtu.be/ErR3Tq4afpU


My conclusion is that, after the initial overheating shutdown (on my test it was 50 mins in) it MIGHT be possible to continue shooting in 4K60 in 3 to 8 minute chunks. Between some of these shorter takes, I had to wait a minute or 2. SOmetimes I didn't notice the camera had s*%t down, so not sure if it will always require a brief rest between takes. Here are my record times (all took place within about 2 hours)

FILE 1: 30 mins auto-stop time limit
FILE 2: 20 mins overheated
FILE 3: 7:38 overheated
FILE 4: 4:55 overheat
FILE 5: 6:10 overheat
FILE 6: 3:58 overheat
FILE 7: 8:26 overheat
FILE 8: 5:10 overheat
FILE 9: 4:21 battery died
FILE 10: 8:23 overheat
FILE 11: 7:18 quit test

When I quit the test, I was able to keep recording.

Test conducted with a fresh 512GB sandisk card and a fresh battery.
 
Last edited:
drummondb said:
Just did an overheating test with firmware 1.1.0 (It came pre-installed): https://youtu.be/ErR3Tq4afpU


My conclusion is that, after the initial overheating shutdown (on my test it was 50 mins in) it MIGHT be possible to continue shooting in 4K60 in 3 to 8 minute chunks. Between some of these shorter takes, I had to wait a minute or 2. SOmetimes I didn't notice the camera had s*%t down, so not sure if it will always require a brief rest between takes. Here are my record times (all took place within about 2 hours)

FILE 1: 30 mins auto-stop time limit
FILE 2: 20 mins overheated
FILE 3: 7:38 overheated
FILE 4: 4:55 overheat
FILE 5: 6:10 overheat
FILE 6: 3:58 overheat
FILE 7: 8:26 overheat
FILE 8: 5:10 overheat
FILE 9: 4:21 battery died
FILE 10: 8:23 overheat
FILE 11: 7:18 quit test

When I quit the test, I was able to keep recording.

Test conducted with a fresh 512GB sandisk card and a fresh battery.
Click to expand...

Hey Bob, can the R6 record 24p full-frame without overheating?

If it shuts off from overheating in 4k60p can you turn it back on and roll HD60p immediately?
 
I watched this video that used an R6 to film and the author was nice enough to make a few 4k30 C-LOG clips available for download in the description. I put them in Edius and they edited very easily. Smooth playback and the image looked great with just adjustments, no LUT. This camera & R5 just have a very pleasing image to me. I have been watching a lot of A7SIII reviews and working with some downloaded footage and I just come back to the Canons for some reason. The Sony is looking very nice but I get the footage in and it seems I very often want to bend it. too yellow, greens look off, too video-y etc... I put that R6 footage on the timeline and it just does not cry out for much.

This is frustrating as the R-series has some baggage, but who wants to own a camera that you are always wanting to "fix" in post? "Canon, I can't quit ya"... We will see how it all shakes out. I can't get any of the three anyway, but still trying to solve this puzzle.
 
Bassman2003 said:
I watched this video that used an R6 to film and the author was nice enough to make a few 4k30 C-LOG clips available for download in the description. I put them in Edius and they edited very easily. Smooth playback and the image looked great with just adjustments, no LUT. This camera & R5 just have a very pleasing image to me. I have been watching a lot of A7SIII reviews and working with some downloaded footage and I just come back to the Canons for some reason. The Sony is looking very nice but I get the footage in and it seems I very often want to bend it. too yellow, greens look off, too video-y etc... I put that R6 footage on the timeline and it just does not cry out for much.

This is frustrating as the R-series has some baggage, but who wants to own a camera that you are always wanting to "fix" in post? "Canon, I can't quit ya"... We will see how it all shakes out. I can't get any of the three anyway, but still trying to solve this puzzle.
Click to expand...

Personally I wouldn't mind buying an R6 and putting the savings into a 28-70 f/2. Rockin!

But the R5/R6 can't reliably record 4K60p so it's all moot...
 
My research continues but I am giving myself at least until the end of September to make a decision. Hopefully Canon will release some firmware before Sony's official launch and the R-series will be improved.
 
They’re waiting the C70 release on 24th of September....then...and only after selling some of these, they will eventually unlock the R5/R6...
 
dia3olik said:
They’re waiting the C70 release on 24th of September....then...and only after selling some of these, they will eventually unlock the R5/R6...
Click to expand...

I do not share your optimism nor do I think that would be a wise business move.

The R5/R6 are already selling well. Canon will be happy to move some buyers to the higher-margin C70.

Meanwhile, Sony and Canon are executing their checkerboard product strategy. If you have Canon lenses, like canon color, need the best IBIS, need high-res stills, etc, you may settle for the R5. If you need a fully-functional video mirrorless camera, it's the A7SIII for you.

All this talk of Canon fixing the R5 reminds me of the excitement for the S5 AF. Wishful thinking. But I'd be glad to be proven wrong
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top