Changing Full Frame World

G

ggrantly

Veteran
Hello Listers

My Canon DSLRs are working great but are getting a bit older, so I am beginning to imagine a new cam of some sort. I shoots some video along with stills, maybe now approaching 50/50. I have a nice collection of L-glass. Going to an R series would be a real leap of faith fo me as I can't really imagine shooting stills with a EVF. I probably wouldn't go with new lenses and would stick mostly with what I have. Be that as it is, I am soliciting opinions about whether to consider the R or go with a new mk4.

In order of importance, my considerations are:

Which cam shoots better video and why
What are your experiences using the EVF on the R series
Will be using EF lenses not the new R series
Not worried about resale or status
Any other considerations worth mentioning

TIA, Grant
 
My main camera for stills+video is the 1DX II. Currently putting the EOS R + RF 24-105 through Sea Trials.

The EVF is excellent, and being able to shoot with face+eye detection and not having to focus+recompose+shoot for stills really speeds up and gets better shots faster (portraits etc.).

The 1DX II has much better (lower) RS vs. the EOS R, however if you use Digital IS and move slowly, even walking/selfie/vlogger style shots are pretty good. 1DX II video is better overall, including providing 4K 60 and 1080 120, however the files sizes are a bit bigger too. The EOS R offers really small IPB files (120Mbps in 4K) if you want lighter files vs. the much bigger ALL-I version (480Mbps in 4K). Note the ALL-I is H.264 vs. MPEG so it's both more efficient and less heavy for editing vs. the 1DX II MJPEG.

The color science is a bit different on the EOS R vs. the 1DX II and 80D (made a new version of Filmic Skin to better match the new color science). For video, unless you need auto-ISO or no-grading ready to use footage, Canon Log is the way to go for video (no auto ISO in Canon Log... No obvious technical reason this was done; some kind of marketing/business decision for a future camera that won't have this limitation). Since the 5D III I haven't liked any of the default color profiles for video/JPG (Neutral & Faithful are least bad and still need tweaking).

Using a Sharpen of 1 in-camera can help deal with softness (along with more sharpening in post). Sharpen level 2 or higher is too much.

With a stable platform the EOS R can be used for professional shots in 4K (will need some wide lenses for the ~1.8 crop), especially if using Canon Log. Full frame is soft and aliased; not pro quality but good enough for YT/IG (which is what we do). Full frame for medium/close shots looks decent on YT scaled to 4K and sharpened (played back on YT in 4K). For wide shots needing detail, need 16mm or wider and 4K mode (which is good enough, but not as detailed as A7 III / X-T3 4K) (6K => 4K sensors)). Canon probably has the best AF and easier to use color for skin tones, and if you've got Canon lenses, it's a good choice vs. Sony/Fuji (re: AF- said probably because Sony's new FW update improved AF for the A7 III- not clear if they have matched/pass Canon yet. Fuji's AF went backwards with recent FW update).

Recommend at least trying/renting the RF 24-105 (with IS). It's a fantastic all-around lens for stills and video, and it's quiet enough to use for vlogging with the internal mics. You can also use EF-S lenses with the adapters (in addition to L etc.): it will autocrop to APS-C. You can also manually crop "Movie Crop" full frame lenses for extra reach.

If you poke around YT, you'll find old videos saying "EOS R bad!!", however recent videos say "EOS R actually pretty good!!!" now that people have used it more, especially comparing to Sony/Fuji etc. For someone needing outdoor / wide shots (FF) with max DR (video), the A7 III with SLog2 and native wide lenses with 6K => 4K is still a good option. The A7 III is also better on low light vs. the EOS R (again, for YT/IG/vlogging, EOS R + ISO 12800 is usable (but not as good as even the 'old' A7S II)).

For those in the Canon ecosystem, the EOS R is the best bang for buck, and for stills and video, the flip-swivel screen is a must have for all future cameras: so useful!
 
Last edited:
jcs provided a great breakdown and the only thing I'd add is, (1) the higher-quality bitrate is 480mbps in 4K, and (2) I'd hold tight just a little longer if you can.

Canon will be releasing some interesting options in the next 6 months. If you can't wait and 4K/60p isn't necessary, the 5D Mark IV is an amazing camera as well, but it doesn't have the 10-bit external the EOS R has if needed (and the video eye-AF).
 
Yeah just heard a rumor (with no detail lol) at Samy's Pro division re: new gear coming from Canon. A pro RF camera is possible (likely?), with at least 10-bit so maybe we won't need the A7S III after all ;)

Just taking the 'old' 1DX II sensor and providing higher bit depth in a pro RF format is totally possible; a 6K => 4K sensor for video would be even better (e.g. from the C700 FF- since no one bought one perhaps they need a way to unload all those sensors stacked up at the warehouse lol!).
 
I'd love that. A 1DX Mark III for the Olympics is supposedly being tested now too.

Either way, we're getting something. Even a new 90D or M6 Mark II next month.

Hopefully as more time passes, they ease up on their limitations.
 
jcs said:
Yeah just heard a rumor (with no detail lol) at Samy's Pro division re: new gear coming from Canon. A pro RF camera is possible (likely?), with at least 10-bit so maybe we won't need the A7S III after all ;) ...
Click to expand...
Samy's Pro Division reads Canon Rumors too?
 
Thanks for the speedy responses all.

I wouldn't be considering a 1DX series, only the Mk4
Internal 4K recording is all I need. No external necessary. I have other options for long form.
I am not interested in new glass that wouldn't be compatable with my 7D2 and 5D3. I don't believe the R-glass is backwards compatible??
For most video uses, unless just a quick clip, I use an external monitor and or have it fully rigged.
I would never record audio to a DSLR, except for a scratch track for sync.

If the R was the equivalent to or better than the 5d4 for IQ, I would consider it. But dang, for stills, I've been looking directly through the glass for over 50 years so I will need some convincing to switch to an EVF.

Regards, Grant

Edit: Having said that, it really boils down to IQ or some important video feature between the two.
 
I think jcs and I would both agree the 1DX Mark II's and 5D Mark IV's Motion JPEG (video IQ) is slightly nicer than the EOS R's options.

But if I used a monitor 99% of the time, I'd use the EOS R for the 10-bit out to an Atomos (they are super cheap now).

And as mentioned above, the R's video eye-AF is really nice, but the 5D Mark IV would of course do a great job with regular face-tracking as well.

Also - for what it's worth - you need to shoot 4K for the best quality otherwise the difference is dramatic and it doesn't matter which one you buy if you're only interested in HD. And consider that the 5D Mark IV is very picky with SDXC cards for its M-JPEG. Back when I used to use it almost nothing worked besides premium SanDisk cards. (I'm sure other "high-end" options would work now, but just saying.)

You really can't go wrong with either one.
 
DLD said:
Samy's Pro Division reads Canon Rumors too?
Click to expand...

I dunno, maybe they write them? ;)

Memory cards: most of the time my old-ish PNY Elite Performance "90MB/s" cards work find, however today shooting at the beach, got a bunch of recording stops due to memory card speed. The (included "free" with camera SanDisk "170MB/s") 127GB never had an issue (ordering a couple more).

I shot some pickup basketball in Venice with EOS R + RF 24-105 + a cheap Zomei variable ND filter (low profile and really tiny vs. the giant Tiffen) and got decent tracking shots (some with zoom). Had the viewfinder up to the eye and used two hands (3 points contact). Was some of the most stable handheld stuff I've shot vs. the really good OIS on camcorders.

While the 1DX II has better quality (+4K 60, HD 120, less crop, less RS), Canon Log is super useful as is the flip out screen and (digital + RF) IS works really well (vs. e.g. Sony's IBIS, which still needs a bit of work).

If one must have an optical direct view, at the price point it's the 5DIV. Otherwise the EOS R + RF lenses is a whole new experience (quality & usability).
 
jcs said:
I dunno, maybe they write them? ;) ...
Click to expand...

Bada-bing.

PS. The R-mount come with "free", i.e., included in the cost, EFR (or the EF-to-R) adapters, so most EF lenses should have no problems working with the PDAF.

Also, EOS R and 5D MKIV have the same sensor but R should have a better video processor in Digic8 vs. Digic6+. And R is $800 less (at reputable retailers nationwide) to boot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top