Canon R5 Announced with 8k

Some of the wedding people I shoot for specifically mandate 24p for the "cinematic" look and don't want any 60p footage.

The corporate and wedding people who want 60p is not for 60p playback/future-proofing, it's for the option to do slow-motion whenever they want. But yes - it makes the whole thing look more "videoy" (except interviews/formalities which they know will be real-time and thus are shot at 24p)
 
Segueing...

Overall, IMO, rolling shutter difference or not, I think the extra $1400 is worth it for the R5 over the R6.

I was afraid that there was going to be something drastic that separated them like with the GH5 and GH5S (and RS may just be that for some people), but the watered-down codecs just don't make it that much better than their other higher-quality 8-bit 422 Motion JPEG or ALL-I cameras, even with a crop.

I think getting the 8K RAW (even if you only use it when the moon is blue), 4K/120p, ALL-I and better EVF is worth it.
 
It is a tough choice at this point. Maybe it will become easier as reviews pop up. I wish the FHD240fps spec that the Sony has rumored was part of the R5. That would help me. I do not like Sony ergonomics for stills, so sadly the A7SIII is not for me. The R5 & R6 bodies look perfect. But maybe I should keep an open mind.
 
I do not use or own Reds, so that narrows the list down! Terrible or fewer frames per second, those are my choices. The 4k120 looks quite nice on the R5. 240fps would probably look nice. Not the end of the world. Maybe 4k120fps with a fast shutter and optical flow can match the RX10 II in ~HD240fps...
 
UMP G2 does 300fps HD.

But yeah most cameras can't pull it off. You need proper readout speed, processing, and bitrate. If you're line-skipping and cramming it into a tiny file...no thanks
 
I don't use it a lot, so nothing to go crazy over. I think 1" sensors are the sweet spot for higher frame rates. FF is not the best choice. Maybe the upcoming GH6 will have it but Panny's have not had the best HFR over the years. I have been reading some on the overheating with the R5. This will become the entire conversation if the production versions have this issue.
 
Bassman2003 said:
I don't use it a lot, so nothing to go crazy over. I think 1" sensors are the sweet spot for higher frame rates. FF is not the best choice. Maybe the upcoming GH6 will have it but Panny's have not had the best HFR over the years. I have been reading some on the overheating with the R5. This will become the entire conversation if the production versions have this issue.
Click to expand...

Well, the A7SIII could crop down to get its 240p and be like a 1" sensor. You wouldn't benefit from oversampling but you might get a clean processing. Then you just need 10x the bitrate that you use for HD 24p.

The production R5s will overheat. The information is official and Canon has sent out the time limits.
 
Also in a different world as that was almost unheard of in 2016 from a cinema camera, and the 4.6K sensor barely existed. (Was heavily delayed after its 2015 NAB announcement.)
 
NorBro said:
Don't you find 240fps in every non-high speed camera besides a RED terrible?
Click to expand...

The fs5 paired with the Odyssey 7q has given me some of the best high speed options I've experienced in my opinion. Honestly wish we could get 480 fps out of a camera at HD other than the phantoms but oh well
 
If you add a recorder, there are probably some more options out there. What's the 7Q capture it in? CDNG?
 
ahalpert said:
The LT launched at $16500 so it began life in another price category
Click to expand...

Run&Gun said:
Not that long ago(less than 10 yrs), $16,500 was still the bargain price category.
Click to expand...

When the original C300 hit the streets in 2012 at ~$16K, people were buying ‘em like it was a bucket of chicken from KFC. Lotsa guys were buying two at a time. Honestly, a lot of guys considered them throw away camera prices back then. Everyone has gotten spoiled and forgotten not that long ago $25K-$40K was kind of the minimum to get in the door with a good camera.
 
It's probably a combination of a poorly designed body and/or the layout and/or an obsolete/outdated processor. The camera shuts down to prevent forest fires and the battery explosions. Canon should withdraw it. It's a defective product.
 
Canon has turned in to Sony! Canon has never toyed with the more professional user experience in the past. They were viewed as conservative because of it but the cameras were always rock solid, no question marks. This R5 camera seems like a mess due to the 8k foundation. Saying out loud that the camera is "building up heat just because it is on" is pretty scary. I guess one would need to transport the camera in an ice chest to get the stated numbers from Canon?

We all knew 8k was going to be a challenge but I never expected it to effect the rest of the camera so much. I guess the R5 is to be considered a pixel binned camera unless you are shooting very short clips in a slow, relaxed environment. Who knows about the R6 which I did not expect to have a heat conversation.
 
I would agree, EOSHD (one of the top video blogs) wrote several articles how both the huge data rate and the overheating issue make it actually impossible to use 8k! He detailed various usage scenarios; documentaries, weddings, live multicam etc Keeping in mind this is coming from a renown experienced film maker with a plethora of work under his belt, who's run a top rated website for several years - my sad realization is that 8k is indeed just a nominal feature which is of no use at all to professionals. Here are the links, all with detailed, practical, eye opening info!

https://www.eoshd.com/news/the-canon-eos-r5-overheating-impact-on-different-types-of-filmmaking/

https://www.eoshd.com/news/canon-eos-r5-has-serious-overheating-issues-in-both-4k-and-8k/

https://www.eoshd.com/news/my-thoug...r5-8k-monstrosity-1tb-footage-per-50-minutes/
 
My guess is that the Canon lady didn’t realize that the question was about the R6. It’s the first and only mentioning of R6 overheating I heard so far. We probably would have heard that from other sources.

The 8K promotion was boon and bane. It brought a lot of attention to Canon but a lot of people focused on high res video. It’s a high res stills camera first and an overdue successor of the 5D line. Canon was way behind the competitors with low noise in high iso, with ibis and usable high megapixel resolution. The R5 delivers more that I expected. It will sell like crazy for photographers. The direct competitors are Sony A7R4 , Nikon Z7, Panasonic S1R not the S1H or the expected A7S3. And compared to the competitors the R5 has far superior features.
Did you expect the R5 to be one camera that hits the needs of photographers, wedding shooters, event videographers, cinematographers all together? Then you might be disappointed. But with a more objective look: how realistic would a sub 4,000$ camera supply that all?

For sure we would like to have a efficient codec like RED raw. If you need that regularly buy a C500ii or a RED. For occasional usage it might be okay like 35mm film. Know what you want in advance and get along with 20min recording :smile:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top