Cinema EOS Announcement on 19th Jan - EOS R5C

I think all of these cameras would benefit from more post-production development.

It's something that's not talked about a lot but if these companies could work more on their transformations and creative LUTs to get more out of the images I think that would be great.

S-Cinetone and company in the camera is awesome, but more assistance in post; even plugins for the major NLEs (like REDCODE RAW) that can help you with your C-Logs and S-Logs and get the most out of the flat images.

But maybe it's also good that color grading is still a skill and they shouldn't make it any easier, but at the same time and very ironically the most expensive cameras - ARRI and RED - make it easier for you based on how nicely their images respond to what they offer in post.
 
NorBro said:
I think all of these cameras would benefit from more post-production development.

It's something that's not talked about a lot but if these companies could work more on their transformations and creative LUTs to get more out of the images I think that would be great.

S-Cinetone and company in the camera is awesome, but more assistance in post; even plugins for the major NLEs (like REDCODE RAW) that can help you with your C-Logs and S-Logs and get the most out of the flat images.

But maybe it's also good that color grading is still a skill and they shouldn't make it any easier, but at the same time and very ironically the most expensive cameras - ARRI and RED - make it easier for you based on how nicely their images respond to what they offer in post.
Click to expand...

Interesting thoughts.


All of this reminds me how far digital cinema cameras have to go, and how much priority Canikony puts on the cripple hammer, it is just lazy money for them.

I think you are correct, and the whole idea of computational video cameras doing more processing and a better post work flow would give digital a more organic edge.
 
One thing that I am really interested to see with the R5 C is how CRL responds (and the C70 after FW).

The C200 was the only Canon camera in my own camera life history in which grading satisfied me.

Before the R5 C (and C70), all of the mirrorless' (1DX Mark III - R5 - R3) had a different version of Canon RAW that was not technically CRL, and I personally could not obtain the same experience out of the format.
 
Yeah, the C300mk3 was up there in dynamic range and colour, but still on the high end video side of things. But the DGO gave some guts to the shadows that was welcome. The highlights went a bit desaturated and gave up just a little too early. (i don’t have enough interest or desire to work with it enough to know how much colour can be brought back in raw, but if i had to buy a camera for video work, the price and functionality and image quality are such that in good hands, great images can be made)


I was choosing a camera for some football camp related cine-docu thing, and I ended up recommending Red Gemini, because it helped in rendering white and shiny surfaces of the football uniforms, and allowed a slightly more high end look, but if i was shooting in controlled lighting, the Canon C300mk3 is robust for a broadcast camera.

The funny thing about that whole test for that docu series was how much better thenA7s3 looked above iso3200 than the Gemini. In LL Mode the Gemini lost its dynamic range advantage and introduced noise, so it really didn’t offer much in fidelity over the A7s3 for streaming content. perhaps if it were for cinema or blue ray i might feel different, as the macro blocking on the A7s3 showed up when pushed, so it is a very delicate type of shooting to avoid breaking the illusion.


The R5C and C70 will give that 12bit look and should look good under soft light. but metallic or bright speculative surfaces will be the main give away that they are lower end video cameras.


For me, there is little difference between a video camera with 9stops DR and 13stops DR, because they both end up showing their video skin at some point unless operating in soft or controlled lighting.


11-13stops DR is the uncanny valley, where it looks so good, but gives up at the last second and ends up looking more weird than the lo-fi video ever did.
 
Last edited:
NorBro said:
Before the R5 C (and C70), all of the mirrorless' (1DX Mark III - R5 - R3) had a different version of Canon RAW that was not technically CRL, and I personally could not obtain the same experience out of the format.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that is? I haven’t liked Canon ever, so I do only the base level tests on image quality and if they don’t beat the other cameras, then i don’t get into the finer details. But it is odd that raw on any camera would be that much worse/better, unless something was intentionally or pooorly integrated.
 
I don't think any RAW is equal...some companies do it better than others like naturally with many technologies in life.

The quality was always there with Canon cameras, resolution and colors crisp as ever with each passing year, but I always called most of their releases (and other Japanese cameras) very-high quality video cameras.

Because that's what they are/were to me (most of them) and that fine balance between contrast, saturation and softness/sharpening that you see in other cinema cameras is very difficult to create (at least for me).
 
NorBro said:
I don't think any RAW is equal...some companies do it better than others like naturally with many technologies in life.

The quality was always there with Canon cameras, resolution and colors crisp as ever with each passing year, but I always called most of their releases (and other Japanese cameras) very-high quality video cameras.

Because that's what they are/were to me (most of them) and that fine balance between contrast, saturation and softness/sharpening that you see in other cinema cameras is very difficult to create (at least for me).
Click to expand...

The DR limits of Canon sort of forces the hand towards a more video contrast.


As far as raw, it can obviously be poorly integrated and/or held back, but what i meant is, that with 12bit logarithmic raw, one should be able to bend it in post.

Unless you are talking about slapping a LUT and calling it a day?
 
In anycase, for those getting the D5C as their main camera, it will likely be the best thing they have ever seen. For those that don’t get one as their main camera, they’ll have a nice multi format action/remote/alt cam

despite all the issues and draw backs, there isn’t a camera made today that can’t be used to make good content. The problem is becoming the content. haha.
 
Overall, it's an interesting conversation because as much as I have chased resolution my entire life, I think more resolution has actually created a problem for some of these cameras.

Because even with the dynamic range limits, there have been some pretty cinematic-looking images (although clearly much softer) shot with the C300, which has like barely 12 stops:

Famous example everyone uses...


And then there's everything from Blackmagic when they first started which was between 11-13 and those are also special.

With these very high-quality modern mirrorless', I think in some way that because they are so focused on producing these incredible stills from their high MP sensors that it's affecting the video output. So even with any RAW formats inside them, which you know as much as anyone that they should still be limited in some way because of RED, the cameras are still producing a very polished look.

You can try to bend them in post but that doesn't always help.
 
Sorry to hi-jack this thread, but dvxuser is fairly sparse these days, and i’ve been snowed in twice in a row this month. So, wishing you all a wonderful 2022!!!
 
Back in the 1980's, a great NFL coach/general manager Bill Walsh opined on the draft, "You take a player based on what he can do for you, not on what he can't". That's how it is with the cameras too. You apportion the budget later.
 
DLD said:
Back in the 1980's, a great NFL coach/general manager Bill Walsh opined on the draft, "You take a player based on what he can do for you, not on what he can't". That's how it is with the cameras too. You apportion the budget later.
Click to expand...

I wish Canon had a Bill Walsh in their marketing department.

The R5C seems great for a lot of things, but doesn’t stand out for hybrid shooters and film makers.

People setting up 1,000 outfits to shoot for a clothing website would love the in-built Canon colour and the fans to keep the camera up and running through the long long long and fast fast fast days.




But will Canon marketing ever truly recognize what they have?


The Cine D interview was a good indication of Canon’s attitude:

Cine-D: Based on my film making work, it is not the camera we wanted

Canon marketing rep: no, you’re wrong, it is the camera you wanted.

Film makers in the comments section: wtf

Canon fanboys in the comments section: wow, that rep wasn’t a complete idiot, had predefined spins on the short comings they already knew about! I’ll buy two Brand Logos please.
 
You could probably circumvent the macro blocking of the a7s3 by shooting raw, James. Not that that's a painless switch to make. Haven't tested it myself. Don't have a ninja

or just prores from the raw out
 
Last edited:
ahalpert said:
You could probably circumvent the macro blocking of the a7s3 by shooting raw, James. Not that that's a painless switch to make. Haven't tested it myself. Don't have a ninja
Click to expand...

I’d have been happy with 10bit 480mbps at 24p. Sadly XAVC @ 24p maxes out at 240mbps, from what i recall?

Some cameras have the looked dialed in and can do lower data rates because there ends up being less pushing, but i know i’d want to wrestle the A7s3, and 240mbps was a bit lean.

I saw a few reviews from trusted people that claim the raw did not give DR advantages, due to the fact that Sony applies a good amount of NR in camera, and S-log does a good job overall at retaining the latitude. So, the hazard of rigging and worrying about going raw external via micro hdmi was sort of a none starter for me, but naturally, it was discussed.

I had assumed i would eventually test the raw, as the FX6, FX3, A7s3 doing raw is a significant thing, because that sensor has some seriously nice big pixels. But to this day, i have not. If any of the Sony A7 series should have gotten a hefty codec or raw internal, it should have the been the S model. maybe in 4years? Sort of painful to think the R5C is the first and it will take a few years before everyone else’s product cycles catch up.
 
it's full HDMI out but yeah still not ideal. I'm not sure if and when sony would get around to adding raw internal... but shouldn't the NR really be bypassed if it's sending raw out?
 
ahalpert said:
it's full HDMI out but yeah still not ideal. I'm not sure if and when sony would get around to adding raw internal... but shouldn't the NR really be bypassed if it's sending raw out?
Click to expand...

I meant that the compressed internal had NR applied and this allowed it to have very similar DR to raw.


The Sony A7S3 even all compressed was really scary close to the Red. At a certain point, one has to realize most of the time things will be watched with some heavy H.264 or 5 applied, and all the extra nuance stuff gets thrown out the window. It can shine through, but it can also get lost, so i think it can be a juggling act.


Inwas thinking today if i would buy a Red Epic MX or an R5C, now that a used Epic can be found for a similar price, and i feel i’d likely go with the R5C. So, that is a good thing, and perhaps a sort of mark in the sand, where the low end is beginning to surpass the high end from a decade ago, at least in some respects. Can’t really say the MX was ever all that great, but it was one of the first.
 
idk if this will show up, but depending on what you are doing, 10bit 240mbps xavc can be amazing. I think it does a good job, really.

but if you are looking for texture in the shadows, between Sony’s NR and compression, the shadows can leave a little to be desired. Not a complaint though, not really. I mean, the A7S3 was keeping up with the C300mk3 in DR, which is a little freaky.
 

Attachments

  • E101184A-1B43-4DB3-A723-F74C625460B8.jpeg
    E101184A-1B43-4DB3-A723-F74C625460B8.jpeg
    96.6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
ahalpert perhaps this will spur you to try raw on the Sony?

And yes, full size HDMI, i lapsed, recalling the ole A7s2. Thank you for catching that.
 
The application of data rates is interesting.

Definitely not created equally, IMO.

You'll have a camera like the FX6 - which is a gorgeous machine but probably the most frustrating camera I've ever used in terms of IQ - that's maxing out at 75 MB/s (lower @24p) and seems like it really needs 3x as much data, but then there's the Komodo, which is getting away with much more in post @ 110 MB/s [LQ].
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top