Canon R5 Announced with 8k

That's nice...after I uploaded mine I increased the color temperature and it looks more like yours, which is nicer.

___

I really love FCP X...converted all of those files available for download to proxies in a few minutes and now editing them like 720p. Would prefer the 'optimized' ProRes, which I usually use - but this is just so much faster.
 
I had an issue with Davinci Resolve randomly not seeing the files and giving the "media offline" message every time I tried to scrub the timeline. I'm on the latest version of Davinci Resolve, so not sure if an update is coming soon or if it was an issue on my end. I ended up transcoding the files to ProRes with Media Encoder before I could play around with colorgrading them in Davinci Resolve.
 
Teddy_Dem said:
I had an issue with Davinci Resolve randomly not seeing the files and giving the "media offline" message every time I tried to scrub the timeline. I'm on the latest version of Davinci Resolve, so not sure if an update is coming soon or if it was an issue on my end. I ended up transcoding the files to ProRes with Media Encoder before I could play around with colorgrading them in Davinci Resolve.
Click to expand...

Exactly my issue with 1DX III files .... however Canon Raw Developer 2.5.0 fails to render the files that fall out in DR ... so I assume that there is a problem with individual frames in the timeline.

Does Media Encoder allow you to treat the files as CLog 2 and gain more dynamic range?

NorBro pointed out that you can turn off error fail in rendering

Here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-files&p=1986830876&viewfull=1#post1986830876
 
Canon's LUTs from their support section appear to work nicely with this footage (I never liked them too much on the 5D Mark IV).

bXDuy9F.jpg


WEfSUJC.jpg


CrDDXnR.jpg
 
Last edited:
docmoore said:
Exactly my issue with 1DX III files .... however Canon Raw Developer 2.5.0 fails to render the files that fall out in DR ... so I assume that there is a problem with individual frames in the timeline.

Does Media Encoder allow you to treat the files as CLog 2 and gain more dynamic range?

NorBro pointed out that you can turn off error fail in rendering

Here:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...-files&p=1986830876&viewfull=1#post1986830876
Click to expand...

These particular files are 4K HEVC, not RAW.
 
Multiple persons complaining about DR 16.2.3 with similar issues ... varied codecs.

Not good ... makes it a bit hard to discern wherein the problem lies.

Nice footage ...

And I agree that the new Canon LUTs are the first time I have found a valid close to correct canned step for my color
workflow.
 
I meant that you wouldn't be able to change the LOG in non-RAW files...like to C-Log2. That's only for RAW (if applicable).

___

By the way, I don't remember who it was but someone recently said 4K/120p AF didn't perform too well, and they weren't kidding.

Brutal results in the clips above.

But very lucky Canon provided it to us - something they/everyone usually disables for that HFR - because even 2 seconds of real-time in focus is a few seconds of 120p slow-motion and enough for a clip in an edit.
 
Makes sense...buzzing focus lasts 5x as long but you can only calculate it at the same speed as 24p, or even slower if shooting 120p is more computationally demanding
 
There goes my theory. Maybe 60p used a lower bit-depth readout that aided AF speed. Maybe 120p uses the same bit-depth as 60p so it has a tougher job with no speed boost. No idea
 
NorBro said:
Downloaded one file so far...waiting for others to finish.

Random LUT. The face appears to be slightly out of focus.

aGEWR6A.jpg


Credit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UskTIP40HTQ
Click to expand...

NorBro said:
OjGfhCo.jpg
Click to expand...

Teddy_Dem said:
Downloaded the Canon R5 footage from the link Norbro posted and played around with a quick color grade. Liking what I'm seeing so far from the pre-production camera.

50113120918_8db8395119_o.jpg
[/url]MocNguyenCanonR5Frames_1.11.1 by Teddy Dem, on Flickr[/IMG]

50113921472_bf69b0871a_o.jpg
[/url]MocNguyenCanonR5Frames_1.12.1 by Teddy Dem, on Flickr[/IMG]
Click to expand...

Like what I'm seeing. Most of these could be glossy ads.

NorBro said:
Canon's LUTs from their support section appear to work nicely with this footage (I never liked them too much on the 5D Mark IV).

bXDuy9F.jpg


WEfSUJC.jpg


CrDDXnR.jpg
Click to expand...

Whoa. Those Canon LUT's, at least on my MBP screen... 1) Cartoonish saturation, 2) Green, 3) Yellow

Everybody's work was better than Canon's in this regard.
 
I don't think they are that bad...but it's easier to see what you like/don't like when they are all lined up next to each other.

If you saw a quick commercial with one of Canon's looks above, you probably wouldn't think much of it.
 
Yes, we're much better at spotting differences/comparing when things are right next to each. We don't do well when we have to "remember" and compare.

But if I saw that middle one by itself, I still probably wouldn't like it.
 
I just had a quick look at the download in my editor and I also like what I am seeing. Whatever the look is, it does not look very much like "video". :) These clips can make folks put up with some heat issues!

Way to go Canon!
 
Nice color job. It's actually pretty impressive IQ considering this is 4K120 - basically the lowest quality readout and encoding on the camera. But maybe you added some grain which is not only pleasing but might cover up for a weaker codec.

It's also impressive that none of the marketing videos sold me as hard as this one tfp fashion vid with y'alls various grades. But it's still not the camera I need
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top