The Canon R5C Owners Club

Who knows, IDK, it's probably because of no C-Log2 as noted, which sounds more plausible. But I remembered Mitch once saying how this one specific camera had a super clean sensor or something (when he was working at C-D) and I just thought of engineers, in general, inspecting everything in the pipeline...but then when also critically-thinking about it there are lesser cameras on the list so how bad could the R5 C really be compared to those.
 
One reason could be because the R5C Time Code isn't to SMPTE spec. It drifts way too much. So you can't 'stab' an R5C and expect it to be somewhat in sync in a few hours, like you can with broadcast quality cameras, it drifts by seconds over the course of a day, not just a frame or two. So you have to hook it up to a TC-jam box permanently. Very doable, and that's how productions are normally done anyways, but meeting SMPTE specs for Time Code might be a must have for Netflix original docs. Netflix has disapproved other cameras in the past that had more than enough image quality, but not good time code. Netflix wants the time code to be accurate so they can go back and remaster later when new standards emerge.
 
That makes sense. The fx3 also has timecode drift but got approved. But it might be one frame per hour or something
 
I have been in and out of videography for the past 25 years, while consistently involved with stills for the past roughly 60 years. That said, I have always preferred the form factor of a dedicated video camera and am now considering selling my R5c—which I had purchased for its perceived portability, rather than its 8k capability—partially due to Canon's apparent reticence in fixing the internal microphone issue, as well as my tendency to gravitate towards my Canon C300 Mk III when the need for video arises. Furthermore, I have been experimenting with the video capability of my Fuji GFX cameras, specifically, the GFX100s, whose internal mic, BTW, can be turned off, and the results are impressive, given the presence of the active IBIS and its 102 MP sensor. Just wondering if any other R5c users have been faced with a similar predicament?
 
Last edited:
Ron777 said:
I have been in and out of videography for the past 25 years, while consistently involved with stills for the past roughly 60 years. That said, I have always preferred the form factor of a dedicated video camera and am now considering selling my R5c—which I had purchased for its perceived portability, rather than its 8k capability—partially due to Canon's apparent reticence in fixing the internal microphone issue, as well as my tendency to gravitate towards my Canon C300 Mk III when the need for video arises. Furthermore, I have been experimenting with the video capability of my Fuji GFX cameras, specifically, the GFX100s, whose internal mic, BTW, can be turned off, and the results are impressive, given the presence of the active IBIS and its 102 MP sensor. Just wondering if any other R5c users have been faced with a similar predicament?
Click to expand...

I've been shopping mine around for a few weeks. Canon is so slow to fix such obvious problems, like the mic issue, or the horrendous battery life, along with several other pet peeves. Generally love the camera, but there are quite a few gotchas that make using it very frustrating day-to-day. The problem is, people just aren't biting. People don't spend money like they used to, understandably. It's been hard to get rid of it, even at a very reasonable price. *Shrug* Guess I'll just stick with it. Honestly, I'd rather have an FX3 at this point. Not being able to have custom profiles to switch between on the video side is so incredibly annoying! :2vrolijk_08:​​​​​​​Argh.
 
Yeah, it used to be SOOO much easier to sell stuff, people definitely don't spend money like they used to.

I'm surprised the R5 C is a tough sale though, but I get it.

I put up two Canon C200Bs for sale here and the first one was actually purchased by someone who wanted more of a video camera with ND filters and I/O, etc (he was going to replace the R5).

But the second one has been impossible to move. Maybe someone who sees this post will bite. lol
 
NorBro said:
Yeah, it used to be SOOO much easier to sell stuff, people definitely don't spend money like they used to.

I'm surprised the R5 C is a tough sale though, but I get it.

I put up two Canon C200Bs for sale here and the first one was actually purchased by someone who wanted more of a video camera with ND filters and I/O, etc (he was going to replace the R5).

But the second one has been impossible to move. Maybe someone who sees this post will bite. lol
Click to expand...

I hope you get a taker for the other C200 soon. I think the problem with the R5 C is that Canon made the regular R5 much more usable by fixing the overheating issues. Why upgrade to an R5 C when you can more or less get the same recording time? Also, the regular R5 has Browser Remote support for the video out of the box, and doesn't need a $1000 overpriced add-on just to have network access on the video side. Such a dumb move by Canon. If I'm choosing today, I pick the regular R5 over the R5 C 10 out of 10 times unless I absolutely NEED 8K60p.
 
Thanks, you too. The only thing I'll add tho is that with Canon I think the cinema cameras always seemed to have a more pleasing look to me.

Like I prefer my C200B's look to the R5's look but that's really about it (and ND filters but that's unfair).

Now I think 99% of normal people wouldn't notice the difference but whenever I [used to] watch comparison videos between the cinema cameras and the DSLRs/mirrorless', I always found cameras like the C70 and the C200 and C300 Mark II/III winning over the 1DXs and the R#s, etc. etc.

Not sure how the R5 and R5 C compare, but I'm assuming they are similar even with the R5 C's special badge.
 
NorBro said:
Thanks, you too. The only thing I'll add tho is that with Canon I think the cinema cameras always seemed to have a more pleasing look to me.

Like I prefer my C200B's look to the R5's look but that's really about it (and ND filters but that's unfair).

Now I think 99% of normal people wouldn't notice the difference but whenever I [used to] watch comparison videos between the cinema cameras and the DSLRs/mirrorless', I always found cameras like the C70 and the C200 and C300 Mark II/III winning over the 1DXs and the R#s, etc. etc.

Not sure how the R5 and R5 C compare, but I'm assuming they are similar even with the R5 C's special badge.
Click to expand...

As a former C200 and C500 MK2 owner, I agree. To me, it's the highlight roll-off that makes the difference. It's more pleasing on the real C lineup. That being said, the R5 C isn't bad.
 
Jeffy2k said:
I've been shopping mine around for a few weeks. Canon is so slow to fix such obvious problems, like the mic issue, or the horrendous battery life, along with several other pet peeves. Generally love the camera, but there are quite a few gotchas that make using it very frustrating day-to-day. The problem is, people just aren't biting. People don't spend money like they used to, understandably. It's been hard to get rid of it, even at a very reasonable price. *Shrug* Guess I'll just stick with it. Honestly, I'd rather have an FX3 at this point. Not being able to have custom profiles to switch between on the video side is so incredibly annoying! :2vrolijk_08:​​​​​​​Argh.
Click to expand...

I guess the economy is keeping potential buyers at bay, so with the market being soft I will most likely write the R5c purchase off to a bad decision ... not my first by a long shot.
 
The R5c has 10bit in all codecs while the R5 has 10bit only in Clog/clog3. If you need ready to edit footage with headroom in post with BT709 either as WideDR or standard you have a great option. Also the more distant screen by the implemented fan gives full flexibility of the display. I was disappointed first when the R5c had no IBIS but now it’s the camera I use most over the C300iii and the R5. I wish it had just an ND filter.
 
Last edited:
I've had the R5C for a few months now and so far I'd have to say that the battery life and unnecessarily finnicky AF are my biggest gripes. The AF I can live with mind you - but it would be hugely disappointing if Canon didn't offer some battery management options in a firmware update. Even if it meant not having access to some advanced cinema recording features. And the audio misstep is another one they need to fix. But if they included those two other things in a firmware update I would have no more complaints!
 
Ty Harper said:
I've had the R5C for a few months now and so far I'd have to say that the battery life and unnecessarily finnicky AF are my biggest gripes. The AF I can live with mind you - but it would be hugely disappointing if Canon didn't offer some battery management options in a firmware update. Even if it meant not having access to some advanced cinema recording features. And the audio misstep is another one they need to fix. But if they included those two other things in a firmware update I would have no more complaints!
Click to expand...

you won't get enough power of an E-6 battery for the R5c with AF, display and also fan. What you can do: set the camera on playback when you don't need it. This saves a lot of energy as there is no constant sensor read out on playback. Also there are plenty of solutions with fake battery adapter / d-tap and powerbank USB-C. Consider the E6 for stills mode and for cine mode you need a power solution like on almost every other cinema camera.
here's some helpful advise for AF settings:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S75hjt9sWA

 
Last edited:
Clermond said:
you won't get enough power of an E-6 battery for the R5c with AF, display and also fan. What you can do: set the camera on playback when you don't need it. This saves a lot of energy as there is no constant sensor read out on playback. Also there are plenty of solutions with fake battery adapter / d-tap and powerbank USB-C. Consider the E6 for stills mode and for cine mode you need a power solution like on almost every other cinema camera.
here's some helpful for AF settings:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S75hjt9sWA

Click to expand...


Oh yes I'm familiar with all the workarounds and have an FX-Lion Nano One + an Anker Powercore+ but part of the reason I bought the R5C vs say a C300 or a 1DX was the smaller form factor. Right now the most stripped down I can go is with the grip - and that essentially puts it into 1DX MKIII territory. So I'd appreciate a formal battery power saving option that gives me the choice to disable something like sensor read out on playback or other functions in exchange for a longer battery life. It just seems like the type of thing they could offer with a firmware update.
 
cpreston said:
The only thing that has changed is a selection for monoaural mic on/off.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that option had been conspicuously missing since the time of release. And if they can address the battery consumption down the road it would be appreciated as well, but truth be told, I would be happy to sell my R5c if I could find a buyer offering a reasonable price.
 
Ty Harper said:
I'm not actually versed on the audio issues being described by other R5C owners. Do you know whether this update completely addressed those issues?
Click to expand...

This update addresses the issue of being able to entirely turn off audio recording. Some people were unhappy that you couldn't disable the scratch mic on the camera and now you can. It is not something I would ever turn off, but I could imagine it might cause issues with a certain type of client work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top