EOS: Canon r5c in 2025?

[rob norton]

Thanks Jon! I'm going to try to rent an r5 mark ii and 24mm 1.4 and see what the deal is.

I've been watching AF tests on youtube, you start to go crazy after a while.

 

[Jon Roemer]

Thanks Jon! I'm going to try to rent an r5 mark ii and 24mm 1.4 and see what the deal is.

I've been watching AF tests on youtube, you start to go crazy after a while.

That's the way to do it and be sure! I have the 24 1.4 VCM now and in my tests it's very nice. IQ and AF. AF is super solid. The lens distortion correction for video on the Cinema EOS camera is under the hood and seamless. Like with the 35 VCM. I would assume that's the case with the R5MII as well.

 

[rob norton]

That's the way to do it and be sure! I have the 24 1.4 VCM now and in my tests it's very nice. IQ and AF. AF is super solid. The lens distortion correction for video on the Cinema EOS camera is under the hood and seamless. Like with the 35 VCM. I would assume that's the case with the R5MII as well.

OK I used the r52 with 15-35 2.8 lens on a gimbal. The image is great and AF worked perfectly, I can't share any images but should have a project coming up where I'll repeat and share the results. I was in a huge warehouse with blown out background and it stayed sharp on the subject. I also pushed in about 15-20 feet on someone and it stayed sharp the whole move. It's funny seeing the tiny box, barely visible, quickly get big as you move in.

I wish I had more time with it, it takes some getting used to the million icons on a stills camera screen. I know it's customisable and you can have a completely clear display, but I wanted to have everything on screen to be safe since I'm not used to it.

Re digital IS/lens IS, how do you approach gimbal work and these settings? I turned them both off to be safe but would still like to know the right combo.

The other thing is the 15-35 is such a nice range, but 24 would give you 1.4 and be slightly lighter.

This is all just part of a lengthy testing process. I had 5" monitor, 50wh gold mount battery, and wireless tx and the weight was just a bit much for a longer take. I've since moved the gimbal handles directly in line with the centre of gravity, which is night and day difference compared to being too armed out before. Long term, I'm still testing a pure hand held non-ready rig set up. I feel like the r52 is very close to an all day (on and off) or comfortable operating for long takes. From here, I'll see if a c400 is doable by testing with my c200. Imagine a longer cable running the c400 LCD to just above a hand grip, within thumb's reach. This stretch goal might be ambitious but either way, I'm pretty happy with what's going to be possible. Speaking of, do you ever use the phone app for making video changes? I was surprised with how responsive it's been but I was only using it in the stills mode.

 

[ahalpert]

Re digital IS/lens IS, how do you approach gimbal work and these settings? I turned them both off to be safe but would still like to know the right combo.

The other thing is the 15-35 is such a nice range, but 24 would give you 1.4 and be slightly lighter.

This is all just part of a lengthy testing process. I had 5" monitor, 50wh gold mount battery, and wireless tx and the weight was just a bit much for a longer take. I've since moved the gimbal handles directly in line with the centre of gravity, which is night and day difference compared to being too armed out before. Long term, I'm still testing a pure hand held non-ready rig set up. I feel like the r52 is very close to an all day (on and off) or comfortable operating for long takes. From here, I'll see if a c400 is doable by testing with my c200. Imagine a longer cable running the c400 LCD to just above a hand grip, within thumb's reach. This stretch goal might be ambitious but either way, I'm pretty happy with what's going to be possible. Speaking of, do you ever use the phone app for making video changes? I was surprised with how responsive it's been but I was only using it in the stills momode.

I can't speak to the R5mk2 but I always use IBIS or lens IS when shooting on gimbal. I don't mind using digital IS either, although it's not my preference. I don't think it interferes with the gimbal but I don't like it as much as physical IS. On my A9III, now that the IBIS is improved from the A7SIII, I never use digital IS.

Now, maybe if you're trying to execute a precise whip pan on gimbal then you wouldn't want to use IS. Maybe. But generally I find that IS and gimbal play well together.

I also use the phone app for camera control and even monitoring, at least on Sony.

Lately I've been using usb-c powerbanks to feed extra power to the camera. I have ones with a built-in rigid usb-c plug and I just plug them right into the side of the camera. They're super lightweight. Never have to access the in-camera battery. Their capacity is about two of the camera batteries.

I would lose the gold mount battery if I were you and just run the monitor off of small batteries. Personally I think the hassle of managing extra batteries is worth the weight savings. YMMV. Of course, I stopped using dual handle rigs when I started doing tap to focus on my wrist phone. So I have to support the rig with one arm, which is an added constraint.

 

[rob norton]

I can't speak to the R5mk2 but I always use IBIS or lens IS when shooting on gimbal. I don't mind using digital IS either, although it's not my preference. I don't think it interferes with the gimbal but I don't like it as much as physical IS. On my A9III, now that the IBIS is improved from the A7SIII, I never use digital IS.

Now, maybe if you're trying to execute a precise whip pan on gimbal then you wouldn't want to use IS. Maybe. But generally I find that IS and gimbal play well together.

I also use the phone app for camera control and even monitoring, at least on Sony.

Lately I've been using usb-c powerbanks to feed extra power to the camera. I have ones with a built-in rigid usb-c plug and I just plug them right into the side of the camera. They're super lightweight. Never have to access the in-camera battery. Their capacity is about two of the camera batteries.

I would lose the gold mount battery if I were you and just run the monitor off of small batteries. Personally I think the hassle of managing extra batteries is worth the weight savings. YMMV. Of course, I stopped using dual handle rigs when I started doing tap to focus on my wrist phone. So I have to support the rig with one arm, which is an added constraint.

Thanks Abe, I'll try some of the combos soon hopefully.

That's great about the powerbank. I don't think I'd go that route but that's good to know. Which powerbank do you use?

I'm using the core swx nano micro 50. At 315g, it's pretty close to a larger sony battery and not too far off a smaller sony battery. I really don't like NP/L style sony batteries and the core powers the gimbal, with options for tx and monitor, so I'm pretty happy with the weight and haven't crunched the numbers to see if it's even a weight penalty compared with removing tx and monitor batteries. I'm using the tilta power base so while I've added weight I've also ditched the DJI battery/handle.

That's cool to hear your monitor use. If using dual handles, do you think you could ever get it to a place where you could access the phone with your thumb while still holding a handle? I guess it'd have to be at the top of a short handle. This may be overcomplicating things - I was pretty happy to touch the camera's LCD screen since the rig wasn't too heavy, but it'd be nice to reset focus if needed during a shot.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

Can the R5c output 4K 10 bit 4:2:2 to HDMI while showing the LCD screen, recording internally, and recording externally with unlimited record time?

 

[rob norton]

Can the R5c output 4K 10 bit 4:2:2 to HDMI while showing the LCD screen, recording internally, and recording externally with unlimited record time?

I don’t know but the r5ii can do the first part, it’d be weird if the r5c couldn’t.

 

[ahalpert]

Thanks Abe, I'll try some of the combos soon hopefully.

That's great about the powerbank. I don't think I'd go that route but that's good to know. Which powerbank do you use?

I'm using the core swx nano micro 50. At 315g, it's pretty close to a larger sony battery and not too far off a smaller sony battery. I really don't like NP/L style sony batteries and the core powers the gimbal, with options for tx and monitor, so I'm pretty happy with the weight and haven't crunched the numbers to see if it's even a weight penalty compared with removing tx and monitor batteries. I'm using the tilta power base so while I've added weight I've also ditched the DJI battery/handle.

That's cool to hear your monitor use. If using dual handles, do you think you could ever get it to a place where you could access the phone with your thumb while still holding a handle? I guess it'd have to be at the top of a short handle. This may be overcomplicating things - I was pretty happy to touch the camera's LCD screen since the rig wasn't too heavy, but it'd be nice to reset focus if needed during a shot.

I use this powerbank, chosen mostly for rigging simplicity. About 100g: https://a.co/d/2W17Ok9

Thumbing the phone while holding the handle -- that was my first choice. But not possible. Too much reach required across the screen. Plus I do more complicated things mid-shot sometimes like adjusting exposure settings or checking false color.

Of course, if you can get a 2nd operator then you can rock two handles and they can fuss with focus and camera control. Then get a 3rd op and give them a Playstation controller and they can do pan-tilt if you're doing something complicated or a jib-type move on a monopod.

I just remembered that on my ronin-s I used a 2nd handle that was off-set and then had my right hand on the gimbal grip. So I could use dual handles, albeit not spread as wide as with two off-set handles, but then I could take my left hand off the handle to spin the zoom wheel or tap for focus. But I later decided to minimize weight for the sake of endurance. So now I use no 2nd handle, no zoom motor. Rs4 instead of rs4 pro. Dinky wireless tx (cineview nano). Strapping my phone monitor to my wrist is the best thing I've ever done for myself.

 

[rob norton]

I use this powerbank, chosen mostly for rigging simplicity. About 100g: https://a.co/d/2W17Ok9

Thumbing the phone while holding the handle -- that was my first choice. But not possible. Too much reach required across the screen. Plus I do more complicated things mid-shot sometimes like adjusting exposure settings or checking false color.

Of course, if you can get a 2nd operator then you can rock two handles and they can fuss with focus and camera control. Then get a 3rd op and give them a Playstation controller and they can do pan-tilt if you're doing something complicated or a jib-type move on a monopod.

I just remembered that on my ronin-s I used a 2nd handle that was off-set and then had my right hand on the gimbal grip. So I could use dual handles, albeit not spread as wide as with two off-set handles, but then I could take my left hand off the handle to spin the zoom wheel or tap for focus. But I later decided to minimize weight for the sake of endurance. So now I use no 2nd handle, no zoom motor. Rs4 instead of rs4 pro. Dinky wireless tx (cineview nano). Strapping my phone monitor to my wrist is the best thing I've ever done for myself.

I've been using the phone on its own tripod head for remote control. The playstation controller would be cool but maybe more of a novelty, I just can't think of any situations where it'd be better, unless I'm missing something.

Sounds like you have a great set up, I just need to keep experimenting. I'll be updating the gimbal thread soon.

 

[Jon Roemer]

Re digital IS/lens IS, how do you approach gimbal work and these settings? I turned them both off to be safe but would still like to know the right combo.

I last tested that about 6 years ago with a Ronin-S and Canon EOS R so will not be applicable. The newer Canon bodies interact with the lens IS better especially if it's a newer RF lens. You'll need to run some tests.

I tend to leave the lens IS off if using the gimbal.

For handheld, no gimbal, lens IS + the body's digital IS, can work well but how well depends on the body and lens used.

The other thing is the 15-35 is such a nice range, but 24 would give you 1.4 and be slightly lighter.

This is all just part of a lengthy testing process. I had 5" monitor, 50wh gold mount battery, and wireless tx and the weight was just a bit much for a longer take.

I tend to use the Canon batteries and work off of the camera's screen to keep things light and simple. If I need longer battery life I use the camera's battery grip or if needed I'd go to an ext. battery.

I have DJI's extra side handle that has all of the controls and I often use that setup. Having two grips just shy of shoulder length apart allows for a lot more finesse and control of the gimbal, like an old school MOVI rig. It also means no bounce to the setup when starting or stopping recording which is nice.

Speaking of, do you ever use the phone app for making video changes? I was surprised with how responsive it's been but I was only using it in the stills mode.

The Canon app or the DJI app? I've used the DJI app to control the camera during time-lapses but it had mixed results. Mounting the DJI grip to a tripod head via the screw mount in the base of the handle makes the center of gravity very high. So doing a time-lapse with movement can be shakier than expected even with a sturdy tripod.

I have tried the DJI control via the app, pan/tilt etc, but haven't needed it on a job.

I have not used the Canon app in a while. It does not work with the R5C when it's in Cinema Mode. Now with the C80 I do want to give it another go.

 

[rob norton]

Thanks @Jon Roemer,

Does the DJI control handle have just a single male screw underneath? My tilta grip was awkward to adapt with a nato rail vertically but at least feels strong enough. I hate when we're only given a single thread for applications that would benefit from as much anti twist design as possible.

I was talking about CameraConnect. I recently used it with the EOS R taking stills and was really impressed. No idea if it offers a functioning monitor for r5ii in video mode, but I'll try it out later this week on another shoot. I doubt I'll end up relying on the app but will keep finding out what it can do.

It's funny, the height of the camera on top of the gimbal is part of the reason I like it on the dana dolly, because it acts like a built in riser and is pretty easy to get rid of the track in shot, where as non gimbal cam I was using apple boxes and looking into dedicated risers.

 

[Jon Roemer]

Does the DJI control handle have just a single male screw underneath? My tilta grip was awkward to adapt with a nato rail vertically but at least feels strong enough. I hate when we're only given a single thread for applications that would benefit from as much anti twist design as possible.

Single female underneath the DJI control handle. I attached an Arca Swiss plate to it and then attached that to a tripod via a Kessler Kwik Release Receiver. I didn't use a fluid head but used a half-ball instead to make it sturdier. Worked fine in tests but then got a bit of shakiness to the time-lapses that I would preferred not have.

Mind you this is the camera on the gimbal locked to a tripod, doing some programmed pan/tilt combinations during a time-lapse. There is z-axis movement.

It is possible that some of the shakiness was due to wind. The time-lapses were at least 40 minutes in length. So that might be more of an issue with the gimbal than how it was attached.

I was talking about CameraConnect. I recently used it with the EOS R taking stills and was really impressed. No idea if it offers a functioning monitor for r5ii in video mode, but I'll try it out later this week on another shoot. I doubt I'll end up relying on the app but will keep finding out what it can do.

I've used it on a couple of occasions for stills. It's possible it plays nice with R5M2 video as it works with the C80.

Seems like it would be very useful if the camera is out of reach.

It's funny, the height of the camera on top of the gimbal is part of the reason I like it on the dana dolly, because it acts like a built in riser and is pretty easy to get rid of the track in shot, where as non gimbal cam I was using apple boxes and looking into dedicated risers.

I agree, I had some projects where I used a high hat to get the camera up a bit from the level of the dolly track. Very helpful when doing a push-in or pull-out.

If you can get it sturdy enough with a gimbal on the dolly carriage that's great.

 

[ahalpert]

I've been using the phone on its own tripod head for remote control. The playstation controller would be cool but maybe more of a novelty, I just can't think of any situations where it'd be better, unless I'm missing something.

Sounds like you have a great set up, I just need to keep experimenting. I'll be updating the gimbal thread soon.

I think the phone force mobile or whatever it's called is very cool. It's just never worked properly/reliably for me. Perhaps because of issues with orienting the camera. I can't quite remember because it's been a long time since I've tried it, but I think when I activate the mode the camera resets its orientation. And if I have the gimbal at an odd angle or something it caused issues... My memory is foggy, I just know that it didn't work for me when I needed it to. The playstation controller works just as well as the onboard joystick. The encoders or whatever are pretty smooth. If I need to remotely operate the gimbal then that's how I do it, although I don't do it often because I need a second operator and it takes a little time to set it up.

 

[rob norton]

I think the phone force mobile or whatever it's called is very cool. It's just never worked properly/reliably for me. Perhaps because of issues with orienting the camera. I can't quite remember because it's been a long time since I've tried it, but I think when I activate the mode the camera resets its orientation. And if I have the gimbal at an odd angle or something it caused issues... My memory is foggy, I just know that it didn't work for me when I needed it to. The playstation controller works just as well as the onboard joystick. The encoders or whatever are pretty smooth. If I need to remotely operate the gimbal then that's how I do it, although I don't do it often because I need a second operator and it takes a little time to set it up.

Maybe you had a separate issue, but the tripod (really the phone) and gimbal don’t have a 1:1 movement ratio so the tripod head ends up in more extreme positions, then when you reset the fluid head the gimbal won’t be back where it started. In the app there’s a disable button, which I pressed after each take, then I’d reset the fluid head, enable control again and reset the gimbal.

The first few times I forgot to disable when moving the entire tripod/phone rig to a new location and the gimbal was going crazy.

 

[rob norton]

I *might* have a C400 on loan to test for a week or so. I'll also be able to share the latest project that used the r5 mark II, so much closer to evaluating the big picture.

I saw the c400 and c80 in person. The c400 is tiny, makes the c80 feel like it's in no-cam's land and IMO only reason to buy one is if price. Who knows, maybe after using one this view would change, but at the moment I'm interested in c400/r5ii.

 

[ahalpert]

Maybe you had a separate issue, but the tripod (really the phone) and gimbal don’t have a 1:1 movement ratio so the tripod head ends up in more extreme positions, then when you reset the fluid head the gimbal won’t be back where it started. In the app there’s a disable button, which I pressed after each take, then I’d reset the fluid head, enable control again and reset the gimbal.

The first few times I forgot to disable when moving the entire tripod/phone rig to a new location and the gimbal was going crazy.

The issue i had is more when I initiate force mobile. Usually because the gimbal's at a weird angle and position which is why I was using remote control. But if it works for you then all's well. Maybe i should try it again because it would be much more convenient than connecting the game controller. But 99% of the time I just operate from the handle.

 

[Jon Roemer]

I *might* have a C400 on loan to test for a week or so. I'll also be able to share the latest project that used the r5 mark II, so much closer to evaluating the big picture.

I saw the c400 and c80 in person. The c400 is tiny, makes the c80 feel like it's in no-cam's land and IMO only reason to buy one is if price. Who knows, maybe after using one this view would change, but at the moment I'm interested in c400/r5ii.

Since the C400 is smaller than the prior C300/C500 series and the C80 is slightly larger than the C70 it does present an interesting choice. The C80 and C400 in terms of bodies are slightly different shapes but pretty much the same volume.

For me, the C70 worked out really well for the four years that I owned them. I did own and use C300s MK1 and Mk2 and also C500M2 before then. Prior to the pandemic I was doing more work for production houses where the C300/500 series fit better. During and after the pandemic my work became more in-house produced, pre through post, and the C70 was a perfect fit. I didn't really need the extra features of the bigger cameras and I appreciated how compact the C70 was and that it delivered the same image quality as the larger cameras. When I have worked as hired crew more recently budgets are lower, crew sizes smaller, and outside producers have been relieved that I am not showing up with mirrorless bodies which don't have video centric features. They don't seem to care that for interviews that it's a C70/C80 vs something else. So, I gravitated to the C80 knowing how well the C70 worked for me and that I don't need much of what the C400 adds.

Once you build the C400 it is less compact than the C80 and it weighs ~twice as much to start. It also uses twice as much energy. So more batteries or bigger batteries. But, as we know, the C400 has additional features and flexibility and CFexpress.

 

[rob norton]

When I have worked as hired crew more recently budgets are lower, crew sizes smaller, and outside producers have been relieved that I am not showing up with mirrorless bodies which don't have video centric features. They don't seem to care that for interviews that it's a C70/C80 vs something else. So, I gravitated to the C80 knowing how well the C70 worked for me and that I don't need much of what the C400 adds.

Once you build the C400 it is less compact than the C80 and it weighs ~twice as much to start. It also uses twice as much energy. So more batteries or bigger batteries. But, as we know, the C400 has additional features and flexibility and CFexpress.

Yeah, there are so many moving pieces, it's a tough choice.

The C400's movable LCD screen could be considered helpful or hurtful depending on what you're shooting, just like the C80's stationary screen will sometimes be a plus and sometimes a minus!

I really enjoy shooting from the shoulder, which is where the c80 would be a non-starter, but at the same time I wonder if in the corporate space I have a bit of tunnel vision, acting like shoulder mounting is even necessary, when cradling the c80 (maybe with a monopod on hand just in case for extended shoulder cam height shots) will get you there with a smaller rig (again, the monopod could be a hindrance too!) To this end, the 24-105 f/2.8 feels slightly awkward in the hands. Extremely light for what it is and not necessarily unbalanced, but still awkward in that it's a decent forward protrusion, as well as a significant extension at the rear if using a BP-A60 battery. I also wish the BP-A30 was completely flush rather than sticking out - no big deal but is a cleaner design.

In terms of rigging the c400, I'm not sold on any of the bright tangerine/wooden camera/mid49 solutions. They make sense if building up more of a production cam, but you're really making your bed with the various top plates. Meaning, a transition to a gimbal is time de-rigging before heading to the gimbal, or leaving it on the gimbal with top plate attached. This might not be a complete deal breaker but it's best to have zero uneccesary hardware so you're not impacting weight and balance. The tool-less top handle is fantastic, and I'd be more inclined to not purchase any cages/kits and see how bare bones you could leave the camera if quickly changing to a gimbal is important. I know a dedicated gimbal cam is ideal, but realistically a single camera would be wearing many hats until enough work came in and a new camera body became undeniable.

Speaking of, I hope canon does a longer monitor cable rather than adding an intermediate extension cable between the USB C connections. This way you'd have the pair of locks, without having cables that don't lock or a clunky additional locks at either end of the extension cable. The r52 screen is great, in a similar way the c80 would be. I could tilt the monitor completely up in the sidways position without affecting gimbal balance at all. So I'm still thinking about how the c400 screen would work on a gimbal, if you mount it to the rear of the body, or do a cable run and rig it somewhere off the gimbal - not something you need to worry about with c80/r52.

As a non scientific gut feeling, it seems like c400 is on par with r52 in terms of autofocus. I only have access to the 24-105 and like you say the combinations are important, but it's been pretty impressive so far. In the big picture, AF seems like it's most beneficial on a gimbal, where you likely don't have the same instant access as you would on tripod/shoulder/handheld, so I'm not losing sight of where it's most important. I think I'd rather my pair of c200s (one huge rig tripod/shoulder, one bare bones in the hand or interview b cam) and a dedicated gimbal cam, than a single c400. BUT, if I can satisfy myself that transitioning between many different set ups can happen fast enough (which would also mean a smaller volume of gear), then that may be the stronger set up. I'm still experimenting and still open!

This post isn't really addressing anything in particular Jon, more just some initial thoughts.

Also, mini XLR will take some getting used to. They sort of feel cheap, but I'm sure they still will lock without being a larger connection so maybe overall fine, but it seems like mini XLR is here to stay so who cares?

 

[morgan_moore]

Rob
In not quite following. But there seem to be flashes of things that 'make sense'

We 'love' shoulder cams because we can do a 5min chat without getting sewing machine arms. But in todays world.. does anyone need a five min chat recorded ? (Id say yes as we dont know which of the five mins will be the 10s of 'gold')

In terms of top handles/gimbals I ll tell you my build...

All of my larger cameras (fs7 C200) I have an arca plate on top. I then have a handle built to an arca 'receiver'

This enables me to build a 'top bit' .. being handle and maybe a shotgun.

If I am moving to gimbal it is a single screw to remove this 'top bit'

Im on the fense acout the 5c/c80/c400 game. for my future as Im often struggling to choose r6 or C200 today

S

 

[Jon Roemer]

Yeah, there are so many moving pieces, it's a tough choice.

If you know you need the extra codec/frame rate options, genlock, etc., on the C400 it makes it easier.

I really enjoy shooting from the shoulder, which is where the c80 would be a non-starter, but at the same time I wonder if in the corporate space I have a bit of tunnel vision, acting like shoulder mounting is even necessary, when cradling the c80 (maybe with a monopod on hand just in case for extended shoulder cam height shots) will get you there with a smaller rig (again, the monopod could be a hindrance too!) To this end, the 24-105 f/2.8 feels slightly awkward in the hands. Extremely light for what it is and not necessarily unbalanced, but still awkward in that it's a decent forward protrusion, as well as a significant extension at the rear if using a BP-A60 battery. I also wish the BP-A30 was completely flush rather than sticking out - no big deal but is a cleaner design.

When I moved to the C70 from the C300/500 series I thought the uncovered protruding battery might be an issue. It never has been.

The C400 is the better way to go if you want to shoulder mount. I film with the C70/C80 handheld a lot relying on lens IS and sometimes adding the body's EIS to smooth things out. It works well and in certain situations can be more discreet than a shoulder rig or an EZ-rig. I do use a monopod on occasion but make that call dependent upon the type of job.

With the C70/80 I tend to use a BP-A60 sized battery only when on sticks. If off sticks it's lighter & more compact to go with the A30 size and it's plenty of power. ~180 minutes.

The C400 does use a bit more than twice as much power as a C70/80. So, that might be a camera where one tends to use the BA-A60 a lot more or a v-mount setup.

In terms of rigging the c400, I'm not sold on any of the bright tangerine/wooden camera/mid49 solutions. They make sense if building up more of a production cam, but you're really making your bed with the various top plates. Meaning, a transition to a gimbal is time de-rigging before heading to the gimbal, or leaving it on the gimbal with top plate attached. This might not be a complete deal breaker but it's best to have zero uneccesary hardware so you're not impacting weight and balance. The tool-less top handle is fantastic, and I'd be more inclined to not purchase any cages/kits and see how bare bones you could leave the camera if quickly changing to a gimbal is important. I know a dedicated gimbal cam is ideal, but realistically a single camera would be wearing many hats until enough work came in and a new camera body became undeniable.

Makes sense - I agree, go with what Canon gives you out of the box and see first if that works.

I have all of my tripods, slider, etc. setup with Kessler Kwik Releases so I like having an Arca Swiss compatible base plate or rail on the bottom so I can pop the cameras on and off. On the top, the more recent Canon handles are the best they've been but it's still personal preference. I like to having a nato rail based handle as it's more compact and quicker to setup. A top plate with a C70/80 does give one a bit more real estate if mounting a top monitor, wireless audio receiver, and more options if mounting a boom mic. But it's not that any of that is not doable with what Canon gives you with the camera.

As a non scientific gut feeling, it seems like c400 is on par with r52 in terms of autofocus.

My experience so far is that the C80's AF is better than the C70 but it's incremental. It's not mind-blowingly better. I think the C80 and C400 have the same AF.

Also, mini XLR will take some getting used to. They sort of feel cheap, but I'm sure they still will lock without being a larger connection so maybe overall fine, but it seems like mini XLR is here to stay so who cares?

I took to mini-XLR and actually quite prefer it on a smaller camera. It has not be an issue at all and to me it does not feel any cheaper than a regular XLR. I use and really like Cable Techniques mini-XLR adapters. I've got pigtails to convert to my stash of XLR cables and I also got some of the leads to run from wireless receivers. They're very well made and I've never had an issue. They're also less bulky than most other mini-XLR connectors.

Mini-XLR to XLR adapter:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1619811-REG/cable_techniques_ct_ax3fc70_15_low_profile_xlr_3f_to_ta3m.html

Sennheiser Wireless Receiver to Mini-XLR adapter:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1619155-REG/cable_techniques_ct_min_g4c70_15_15_3_5mm_trs_locking_ra.html