on my A7III i checked out the sigma 24-105mm vs the sony 24-105mm at my local store and will agree that the native sony glass felt better and more confident plus the sigma is a fair amount bigger which for me defeats the smallness of my sony system. i also found that the sigma 24-105mm didnt do as well in lower light vs the sony version. i like sigma lenses and have a bunch on my canon systems but i think in general native glass usually seems to win.
Canon R5 Announced with 8k
- Thread starter Ken1212
- Start date
on my A7III i checked out the sigma 24-105mm vs the sony 24-105mm at my local store and will agree that the native sony glass felt better and more confident plus the sigma is a fair amount bigger which for me defeats the smallness of my sony system. i also found that the sigma 24-105mm didnt do as well in lower light vs the sony version. i like sigma lenses and have a bunch on my canon systems but i think in general native glass usually seems to win.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Gerald Undone's conclusion
NorBro
Major Contributor
Yeah, but that's what everyone has been saying for the last 10 years. TN said the same thing in the last video.
If it's soft, it's the first answer; it's "line-skipped" or "pixel-binned".
I want to hear someone talk about the technology and the process and any removal of information. (So I can learn.)
If it's soft, it's the first answer; it's "line-skipped" or "pixel-binned".
I want to hear someone talk about the technology and the process and any removal of information. (So I can learn.)
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I think he concluded it was line-skipped based on the increased noise
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Btw it looks like the A7SIII may also have some heat limitations in HFR, but not as much as the R5. And probably faster recovery times due to the heatsink:
"The sensor’s 12 MP resolution enables a full-pixel readout without pixel binning and without crop up to 4K / 60p. In this setting, the recording limit should be one hour without overheating – the EOS R5 only manages 30 minutes at 4K / 60p. The video recording of the Alpha 7S III in 4K / 120p mode is limited to this length – by the way, a slight crop is used (1.1x)"
"The sensor’s 12 MP resolution enables a full-pixel readout without pixel binning and without crop up to 4K / 60p. In this setting, the recording limit should be one hour without overheating – the EOS R5 only manages 30 minutes at 4K / 60p. The video recording of the Alpha 7S III in 4K / 120p mode is limited to this length – by the way, a slight crop is used (1.1x)"
If the oversampled APS-C 4K recording modes on the R5 end up looking decent, and since there is evidently no overheating when recording 4K 30p in APS-C, it's possible people should be looking at the camera a bit differently from a video perspective.
Even though it's being marketed as a full-frame 8K RAW camera, perhaps it's really more of a 4K APS-C video camera with a few time-limited specialty modes like for higher frame rates (60p, 120p) or maximum detail (8K). You can still record 10-bit 4:2:2 internally in this mode (in All-I or IPB). You could probably even use something like the EF to RF speed booster if you want to get an extra stop of light and more of the full frame look on the APS-C crop. The APS-C crop will likely have less rolling shutter than the full sensor readout modes as well.
Plenty of people still shoot Super 35 or APS-C, I mean Canon just released the C300 Mark III which has a 4K Super 35mm sensor without any oversampling. No IBIS either (obviously the C300 is a better camera in a various other ways though). Now of course the price of the R5 is a fair bit higher than APS-C mirrorless still cameras like the Sony a6600 or Fuji X-T4, but the video specs of the R5 are a bit better than those even in the APS-C recording modes. Not to mention that it is a very capable full-frame stills camera.
It would be nice if Canon added a 5.1K RAW video recording option in APS-C mode to the R5 though (this is already supported for RAW stills capture, so presumably it wouldn't be that hard to add for video). In addition to the lower recording rates of 5.1K compared to 8K, a 5.1K RAW mode likely wouldn't need to have heat-related recording time limits (at least up to 30p). And they could probably even do 5.1K RAW at up to 60fps which isn't possible with the full sensor RAW as the full sensor readout evidently isn't fast enough.
Even though it's being marketed as a full-frame 8K RAW camera, perhaps it's really more of a 4K APS-C video camera with a few time-limited specialty modes like for higher frame rates (60p, 120p) or maximum detail (8K). You can still record 10-bit 4:2:2 internally in this mode (in All-I or IPB). You could probably even use something like the EF to RF speed booster if you want to get an extra stop of light and more of the full frame look on the APS-C crop. The APS-C crop will likely have less rolling shutter than the full sensor readout modes as well.
Plenty of people still shoot Super 35 or APS-C, I mean Canon just released the C300 Mark III which has a 4K Super 35mm sensor without any oversampling. No IBIS either (obviously the C300 is a better camera in a various other ways though). Now of course the price of the R5 is a fair bit higher than APS-C mirrorless still cameras like the Sony a6600 or Fuji X-T4, but the video specs of the R5 are a bit better than those even in the APS-C recording modes. Not to mention that it is a very capable full-frame stills camera.
It would be nice if Canon added a 5.1K RAW video recording option in APS-C mode to the R5 though (this is already supported for RAW stills capture, so presumably it wouldn't be that hard to add for video). In addition to the lower recording rates of 5.1K compared to 8K, a 5.1K RAW mode likely wouldn't need to have heat-related recording time limits (at least up to 30p). And they could probably even do 5.1K RAW at up to 60fps which isn't possible with the full sensor RAW as the full sensor readout evidently isn't fast enough.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
It's not a terrible idea. You still benefit from the AF, the color and the codec. 4k60p cropped is heat-limited though.
My only issue using the crop is lenses. Part of the reason I want FF aside from low-light is that it matches up with all my lenses. Stills FF lenses are quite good. APS-C stills lenses are generally inferior. So you either use APS-C lenses on this camera, a speedbooster, or you crop your FF lenses. And none of those solutions is ideal
NorBro
Major Contributor
After some digging from Max and company, Canon's 4:2:2 HEVC is rare and the reason almost everything that currently exists will struggle with it in its native state.
A similar conversation took place here the other month about decoding HEVC 4:2:0 and 4:4:4 which is pretty much everything else.
A similar conversation took place here the other month about decoding HEVC 4:2:0 and 4:4:4 which is pretty much everything else.
This is exactly what Ive been trying to say a couple of times. R5 is an APS-C - or super35 - (video)camera to use with the metabones Ef RF Speedbooster, with some extra short-bursts of high end (video)features and great stills capabilities.
Those of us who use the R in this way can now enjoy IBIS and get rid of external recorders and still get 10bit 422.
But do we want to pay €4800 for it?
Those of us who use the R in this way can now enjoy IBIS and get rid of external recorders and still get 10bit 422.
But do we want to pay €4800 for it?
Last edited:
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Well, you can still record UHD from an APS-c crop on the R6. It should be a full readout and I bet the rolling shutter is much improved. Not a bad thought there either
Run&Gun
Veteran
RED scooped up a ton of them. They are including the basic EF/RF adapter with each Stormtrooper Komodo. So there went a few hundred of them at about the same time everyone started buying them with/for the R5.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
And soylent green is made from people. You're late to the pity party brother
rob norton
Veteran
Um are these ice packs lol!?
