Canon R5 Announced with 8k

[Run&Gun]

I don’t own a filter set. It’s on my list of things to buy, but it’s never really been that important to me.. A polarizer would certainly be useful, and I’m probably past due for getting one. My corporate clients never really ask for filters, and since that’s my bread-and-butter, buying a set for my narrative work has been lower priority. Outside of polarizers, things like promist filters, I’m not really a fan of. To give the cliché name drop, Deakins is not a fan of filters as well.. And all my cameras have internal ND’s which have been sufficient for me, particularly since I’m not religious with native ISOs so I can adjust it accordingly if the built in ND’s do not get me exactly where I want.

I'm guessing they don't ask for batteries or a tripod either. Not trying to be a smart @ss, but they don't need to(outside of when they do...). It's your job to know if some filters would help or are necessary. I'm not a big filter guy, either, but you definitely should at least have a polarizer and a few ND's to supplement the camera's internal ND's so you can fine tune or just when you need more. I generally carry a polarizer and 1, 2 and 3 stops of ND which lets me go from zero to 11 stops in single stop increments. I've never shot with 11 stops in, but a lot of times 6 stops just isn't enough when it's really sunny outside. You could just get 1 & 2 stops and go from zero to 10 with your Amira in single stop increments with just those two to supplement the internals.

 

[laverdir]

I think aside from artistic passion, there's also a passion in being able to work with the best technical tools possible.

There's nothing wrong with having technical passion in addition to artistic passion.

Greek word technê is translated as either art or craft.

In The Republic Plato opposes the knowledge of reality and truth to the representational status of literature and by extension to arts in general.

So, The Dream Society in which we live began when we started to value disinterested understanding more then knowledge of reality and truth.

 

[ahalpert]

Does anyone else feel like the R5 will have limited DR if it can only shoot c-log?

 

[NorBro]

Most conservatives (the same people who'd rate ARRIs higher) would agree Canon's cinema cameras have always been/are between 12-13 stops and their DSLR/mirrorless cameras with C-Log (1DC - 5D Mark IV - EOS R - 1DX Mark III) are between 11-12.

IMO, Canon's specialty was never DR, but they of course build amazing cameras.

 

[ahalpert]

Advantage - Sony

 

[NorBro]

Have you been watching every 1DX Mark III 5.5K RAW video you can find?

That's what I would be doing if I was considering the R5.

Because there's a 99% chance it's going to look 99% the same.

 

[ahalpert]

To evaluate dynamic range, you're probably right. But 2 things -

The R5 will probably have even worse rolling shutter than the 1DXmk3 in 8K mode. In 4K 120p it will be fine. Who knows about 4K 30p and below.

And the other thing is that if you pitch your DSLM as a matching B cam for your cinema camera (be that a C300III, C300II, C500II, FS7 or FX9), it would be good if you could match the gamma of the A camera. Sure, the camera won't match that closely anyway. But it's good to say that the settings are the same, which was always nice about Sony DSLMs offering every flavor of s-log even though it was 8-bit.

 

[NorBro]

Newer Sony mirrorless' eventually dropped S-Log but same difference since most would probably shoot in 2 or 3.

Another consideration about the pitching is that if you aren't doing the editing, it should be made pretty clear what exactly you'd be handing over from the Canons.

 

[AndreeOnline]

Does anyone else feel like the R5 will have limited DR if it can only shoot c-log?

Canon Log is only used for the compressed moded. When you shoot .crm you get Canon Log 2.

 

[ahalpert]

Canon Log is only used for the compressed moded. When you shoot .crm you get Canon Log 2.

Where do you read that? It's not clear to me from the white paper

In any case, that would only help you when shooting RAW

 

[NorBro]

Just changing the metadata in post in the RAW file.

Inside the camera, Canon Log is the only option.

IMO, there is very little difference. One is a bit flatter and less saturated. With REDs, you receive a variety of options (regarding gamma and color space) to dial-in a look (at least immediately).

 

[AndreeOnline]

Where do you read that? It's not clear to me from the white paper

In any case, that would only help you when shooting RAW

It's implied in the raw format. Check out a .crm from the 1Dx mk3 for instance.

In Resolve you then have options via LUTs or Color Space Transform to take it from there. Unfortunately, at least for the moment, the raw tab for crm isn't as powerful as other formats in the 'workflow' department, but it terms of IQ you're not losing out.

But yes, only for raw. In camera it's Canon Log only.

EDIT: by the way, shooting compressed, Canon Log is a good option. It will use more of the code values. And since you're baking data into the 10bit file, I'd say it's a better starting point than Canon Log 2. That said, I probably would have chosen Canon Log 3 as the 'Goldilocks' Log for compressed, but I'm not 100% sure about that...

 

[ahalpert]

It's implied in the raw format.

EDIT: by the way, shooting compressed, Canon Log is a good option. It will use more of the code values. And since you're baking data into the 10bit file, I'd say it's a better starting point than Canon Log 2. That said, I probably would have chosen Canon Log 3 as the 'Goldilocks' Log for compressed, but I'm not 100% sure about that...

Ah yes, mine was a dumb question.

I agree with you re: baking in more contrast, except that if you're shooting a scene with more than 12 stops of dynamic range, you may end up using all those canon log 2 code values. And also, as far as matching a cinema camera with a different gamma, it would be great to use the same log curve (regardless of what that does to IQ on the R5 since matching DR may be important in that instance than maximizing your color and gradient info)

 

[AndreeOnline]

And also, as far as matching a cinema camera with a different gamma, it would be great to use the same log curve (regardless of what that does to IQ on the R5 since matching DR may be important in that instance than maximizing your color and gradient info)

Exactly. This is the main benefit of having all the options: so that you can configure a multi camera workflow to use similar/identical settings.

Comparing graded images on the 1Dx mk3 or R5, I think there would be very small differences between Canon Log and Canon Log 2 capture. I personally wouldn't factor in the lacking Log 2 option for compressed footage as a major disadvantage.

And this is subjective, but I don't think 12 stops impose any real restriction. If you're stopping down to save highlights in huge DR scenes, I don't think you're (general 'you', not directed at anyone) doing it right. It's just my opinion, but I feel it's a consequence of how light works when captured linearly.

 

[Guest]

Exactly. This is the main benefit of having all the options: so that you can configure a multi camera workflow to use similar/identical settings.

Comparing graded images on the 1Dx mk3 or R5, I think there would be very small differences between Canon Log and Canon Log 2 capture. I personally wouldn't factor in the lacking Log 2 option for compressed footage as a major disadvantage.

And this is subjective, but I don't think 12 stops impose any real restriction. If you're stopping down to save highlights in huge DR scenes, I don't think you're (general 'you', not directed at anyone) doing it right. It's just my opinion, but I feel it's a consequence of how light works when captured linearly.

What is the benefit of lower DR numbers? Just curious. There are already a few cameras that blow past that number, and plenty of low cost ones that seem in the ball park already. Would assume that higher DR would be a part of an upgrade purchase for those that shoot raw or Log, since raw and log shooters tend to grade and not rely on the in-camera look. So, the colour filter and increase of DR seem like some of the more compelling reasons to upgrade. Especially since Digital video still doesn't have the reach and colour that analogue film has according to many experts and film makers.

 

[NorBro]

That said, I probably would have chosen Canon Log 3 as the 'Goldilocks' Log for compressed, but I'm not 100% sure about that...

I would agree with you in the sense of it just looking better, IMO. You could spend some time matching them, but I think 3 is easier to work with.

Even with my many 'copy&paste' personal creations/looks I've used on all kinds of cameras over the years, this instant 'copy&paste' on the C-Log2 and 3 of that sample footage from the other thread looks better to me on C-Log3.

I've always been an aggressive grader though...spent years studying people's reactions and everyone was ultimately always moved more by moodier images with contrast and color/saturation, even if the images were technically underexposed or crushed. Milky blacks are my worst nightmare, ha.

 

[ahalpert]

Exactly. This is the main benefit of having all the options: so that you can configure a multi camera workflow to use similar/identical settings.

Comparing graded images on the 1Dx mk3 or R5, I think there would be very small differences between Canon Log and Canon Log 2 capture. I personally wouldn't factor in the lacking Log 2 option for compressed footage as a major disadvantage.

And this is subjective, but I don't think 12 stops impose any real restriction. If you're stopping down to save highlights in huge DR scenes, I don't think you're (general 'you', not directed at anyone) doing it right. It's just my opinion, but I feel it's a consequence of how light works when captured linearly.

The C series offers log 2 and 3 in compressed 10-bit.

I disagree with you re: 12 stops of dynamic range. True, the matter is subjective. But I believe one of the reasons people like the Alexa is the high dynamic range. And especially doc filmmakers I've heard from love it because they run into high contrast situations they can't balance by lighting. Or with the C200 - I've heard from people who shoot longform interviews with it in compressed 8-bit. Then they bust out RAW for the b-roll since the contrast will be less controlled.

Personally, I look for a camera that can retain blue color in the sky at midday with a gradual rolloff into the sun, but keep adequate detail on the unlit people in the foreground. Similarly, at sunset. These are situations I run into all the time that I only sometimes want to silhouette.

Looking at Pocket 4K footage, it looks like it can not quite handle that degree of contrast. Pocket 6K is maybe barely there. And the UMP G2 can handle it, no problem.

 

[AndreeOnline]

What is the benefit of lower DR numbers?

No benefit at all. And just to be clear: it didn't say lower DR was better in any way. My statement that 12 stops isn't a huge limitation is quite different.

I disagree with you re: 12 stops of dynamic range. True, the matter is subjective. But I believe one of the reasons people like the Alexa is the high dynamic range.

It wasn't so long ago that I wrote in another post: the more DR the better. I'm all for it. But with great power comes great responsibility. Each additional stop of highlight information that you protect will send all previously captured image data below 50% in linear. This means you will be compressing what will eventually be the meat of the image more and more.

If you know what your doing—great! Many tried and failed. Miserably.

In photography we have a saying: every photo is a close-up. You can have a photo that's a close-up of an eye's iris, or you can have a photo that is a close-up of an Italian village nestled in the foggy mountains. It just means, be intentional with what your frame contains. Same goes for exposure: what is the actual subject? If you want your light beautifully draped on a face, make sure you expose for that, and don't try to hold some sliver of a highlight so that you send that face into the murkiest part of the sensor.

Personally, I look for a camera that can retain blue color in the sky at midday with a gradual rolloff into the sun, but keep adequate detail on the unlit people in the foreground. Similarly, at sunset. These are situations I run into all the time that I only sometimes want to silhouette.

Looking at Pocket 4K footage, it looks like it can not quite handle that degree of contrast. Pocket 6K is maybe barely there. And the UMP G2 can handle it, no problem.

I don't remember having any issues at all with footage like this for many years. You are essentially describing the open outdoors? I will get back to this thread with some footage (most likely just frames) and we can take it from there. It might very well be that we have different opinions about what is reasonable or what we expect, and that's fine.

The C series offers log 2 and 3 in compressed 10-bit.

Yes, it's a feature of the Cinema EOS line. Canon has never had anything other than Canon Log in any camera not in that line though. I didn't mean to imply it's a technical limitation, it's just that Canon reserves those curves for the Cinema EOS cameras, or by "accident" let's say, for any camera that gets raw capability.

 

[AndreeOnline]

I've always been an aggressive grader though...spent years studying people's reactions and everyone was ultimately always moved more by moodier images with contrast and color/saturation, even if the images were technically underexposed or crushed. Milky blacks are my worst nightmare, ha.

Your footage, your choice—that's the beauty of it!

 

[ahalpert]

It wasn't so long ago that I wrote in another post: the more DR the better. I'm all for it. But with great power comes great responsibility. Each additional stop of highlight information that you protect will send all previously captured image data below 50% in linear. This means you will be compressing what will eventually be the meat of the image more and more.

I don't remember having any issues at all with footage like this for many years. You are essentially describing the open outdoors?

Yes, for this reason I try to avoid shooting log profiles in 8-bit (though I know many do with good results).

And Haha yes - I'm describing shooting in the great outdoors, but specifically into the sun or backlit clouds. I'm happy with the results I get (with a bit of bracketing sometimes) but I can't always get the results I want.

It would be cool to have this much DR or more:

https://youtu.be/ruQAR44DvW0