Canon R5 Announced with 8k

Bassman2003 said:
I would be content with 10bit codecs, no 30 min limit and no crop up to 4k30p...
Click to expand...
It can't happen on R5 with its (presumed) 45 MPX sensor. There'd even be some crop for 8K. Now, a 6K-to-4K 20 MPX R6 might be the videocentric model in question or there'd be no reason to release it at all.

NorBro said:
It would be nice to forget about photography for a model or two. Just make a very specific video-oriented system in a stills body, even one that's modified a bit...
Click to expand...
Which probably will be R6, not R5. For $2,500, AF, 10-bit 4:2:2 H264 internal to the CFexpress cards. Low MP count for a video unit; high MP count for photo; some feature overlap.

Of course, Sony, Nikon and Panasonic have different pricing structure with A7III/A7RIV, Z6/Z7 and S1/S1R - almost exactly a 2/1 ratio. Panasonic has a pro-video S1H too ... but, as I had said, they have no higher end DSLR to protect.
 
This camera is going to be a big deal for photographers. The 5D series has been immensely popular and now that everybody knows Canon is going all out for this mirrorless model they are excited. So sales will not be an issue for photographers. Nor will Canon do anything to upset that apple cart. Can they split the difference for video/heat issues? Its the combination of high resolutions and higher frame rates that do the damage. Now that 'beyond 4k' is somewhat expected by the market, maybe all of those modes can have the asterisks! Canon has to know that if they do not produce a 10bit video capable 5R, video folks will not buy it. So if they are really targeting hybrid users, then 10bit and the 30 min limit will be the sign imho.

I hope to upgrade from my 5DMKIII and add video at the same time. Real video I want to use. We will see if that is a reality.
 
The EOS R with an RF lens, a point light source, and a decent shotgun makes a pretty excellent R&G/OMB video camera for YT/IG. For higher end work, 10-bit + real 4K (clean downsampled with no crop from FF) with less RS is all that's needed. More DR and better color is also helpful. So the EOS R5 will likely provide these features if Canon has truly put down the Cripple Hammer (or if the CamCartel has decided to let Canon release better products for whatever business reason. This could mean Sony further delays or never releases the A7S III). The FX9 is clearly better in IQ, DR, and AF vs. the C500 II (which also provides internal raw); perhaps that was part of the negotiation: let Sony have the edge for that tier / product space vs. mass market consumer.
 
Gweilo66 said:
"The FX9 is clearly better in IQ, DR, and AF vs. the C500 II"
Who says?
Click to expand...

I was perhaps the first here on DVX, met with a lot of challenges. However the subsequent tests, especially exposure ramps against many other cameras, including raw + log, the FX9 was right up near the Venice, which is just below the Alexa (that was Samuel H's ranking- I agree based on the evidence so far). Did you see the FX9 vs. C500 II thread?
 
(my ranking was done by looking at tests online, it's good enough for me but it just feels weird to see it quoted anywhere: I don't use those cameras, I'm still on the cheaper end of the market) (The C500II did look pretty bad compared with Arri, Sony and RED alternatives, though; link in case anybody hasn't seen it)
 
Samuel H said:
(my ranking was done by looking at tests online, it's good enough for me but it just feels weird to see it quoted anywhere: I don't use those cameras, I'm still on the cheaper end of the market) (The C500II did look pretty bad compared with Arri, Sony and RED alternatives, though; link in case anybody hasn't seen it)
Click to expand...

I don't know. At least the RedUser one I think is kind of a stupid test. Lot's of variability with exposure, camera settings, even shot shakiness. I'm not sure much can be determined from this at all. The only thing I think this shows is that all these cameras to a really good job, and quite frankly one could shoot with any of them. Maybe price, form factor, and feature set are the more important factor than image quality. And that's dependent on the type of production. A C500 or FX9(buy lots of batteries!) is going to be better for documentary style filming. An Arri, RED or Venice is going to be better for narrative filming.
 
Last edited:
I would add one little think. It is bit OT, but it is related..

People need to realize that which camera is better is also related to region. I mean it depends where you are coming from. For example Europe. There are not many Canon or RED cameras. So people are not used to them and often subjectively (even they do not realize that) thinks that Sony's are better. Based on posts here and Youtube videos, US people love Canon. So there are many post and videos where people are saying Canon is so much better.

I do not want to say Sony or Canon is better. People should realize it is often matter of preference and subjective feeling.
 
In terms of IQ, we can determine a winner using non-subjective tests. For example, pretty much everyone agrees that the ARRI Alexa (+mini) LF is the best camera for IQ, hands down. It's not the best overall camera for many other reasons (namely high price, power requirements, crew, no AF, etc.).

Some folks don't like that a particular camera has objectively testable IQ that's better than other cameras, especially for those that just bought a new camera (that isn't the top IQ camera in that segment). However the quality is so good now, there should be no purchase regret if the camera is working for one's needs.

Right now the best cameras for what I shoot (mostly simple talking heads and live/docu style) is the EOS R (location) and 1DX II (studio). Subjectively, I much prefer Canon's DLSR/mirrorless color (using my custom picture style AKA Filmic Skin) vs. Canon's Cinema EOS color (had a C300 II and tried to bring the color up to the stills color; got close but couldn't quite get there to my liking, so the C300 II was sold (+ wasn't a true 4K camera (need 6K sensor)).

The 1DX III looks amazing for IQ, better than the EOS R and 1DX II, however will probably wait until July (or so) when the EOS R5 is supposed to be released. Really prefer the smaller form factor and flip out screen + great for one-handed gimbal (so fun to shoot like that for rapid action!). Hope the R5's new sensor gets a bit more usable DR- that's one of the things I was looking for in the Sony A7S III (which has gone AWOL). The RF lenses are really amazing though, perhaps best in the biz for stills, and are much improved for video (still not as quite as silent as Sony, but a big improvement over prior L lenses).
 
NorBro said:
"According to a reputable report in the Japan Times, Sony has shelved new features planned for a 2020 mirrorless camera (thought to be the A7S III) due to a lack of DRAM memory supply (the A7 IV or A7S III was thought to have stacked DRAM sensor technology, inherited from the A9)."

https://www.eoshd.com/news/sony-scr...ritise-ps5-bill-of-materials-cost/#more-21298 ...
Click to expand...

Not quite debunked but - https://sonyreconsidered.com/dont-b...mirrorless-camera-features-story-d53e77775da9
 
At this point, maybe it's just better to wait.

Who knows what's going on with anything anymore.
 
I hung out at Sony LA all day a week for the FX9 training class and spoke with many different people there. I brought up the A7S III many times and there was never even a flicker of recognition.
Usually reps and others will at least give a wink and a nod that something exists or that "something big is coming". We're at the point where the only specs it would make sense for this camera to
have, I don't know if Sony will release because of possibly stepping on sales of an FX6 type camera? At least thats the feeling I get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top