Oliver Daniel

Yep, I figured that (this forum being mostly mirrorless and DSLR users). I've not completely conceded that the FS5 is on it's way out. It's something that I'd take very seriously and patiently. I'm editing an FS5 / A6500 music video right now - the A6500 image stands proud with the high bitrate 4k FS5 footage - however the 4k 100fps from the Inferno is indeed excellent and unique at the moment. Trouble is...I'm not enjoying my shooting with the FS5, but I do smile when I use the A6500. I've got a friend with a GH5 and we're going to do a camera swap for a couple of shoots. See what tickles. p.s I do agree that the EVA1 sounds much better, but then we're due an FS5 II soon.... (it goes on and on and on and on)....

As a small body is a must and also HFR..... I'm heavily leaning towards the GH5. I was a GH3 owner and had a great time with that camera. Couldn't believe how much better the 1080p was compared to the Canons! 1DC is far too limited as a main video tool. A99II seems ok but A-mount...... I'm looking forward to the A7SIII. All the reasons you list is why I favour the GH5. A lot of my work is actually highly controlled, but even then, as I'm very handheld, by the end of the shoot my arms and back are absolutely screwed! Plus I much prefer using portable style sliders and gimbals rather than big boxes of chunk. I shot an entire paid music video just on an A6500 and the 18-105mm. The shoot succeeded due to this choice, loved it. The annoying part was that the screen dims a lot and the rolling shutter is absolute shit. Got round it though. I think I'll keep hold of the A6500 if I sell the FS5 - great on a gimbal, stunning 4k and awesome autofocus. Nice and small.

Sometimes it seems like other filmmakers online have an infinite pot of money to freely buy whatever bit of gear they want, when they please. Because of social media, we are bombarded with the "new toy" posts daily, so it gives this exaggerated impression that you're being left behind on the tech trail. The Philip Blooms of this world do purchase every camera, lens and innovative new product ever made, but that's because he's got sponsors, and his business model needs him to stay very current with this week's hottest gadget. He knows exactly what he's doing. Andrew runs a blog, has a clear passion and has a very clever way of making his dosh for new gizmos. Probably. Myself? I'm like the rest of you. I have to work bloody hard to get anything new. The video industry is massively competitive in the UK. Gets harder as each week passes. That's just the way it is.

It has 4K 100fps, HD 200fps, electronic vari-ND, CDNG, ProRes, HDR screen, a modular body.... ....but.... there's also a certain artistic dissatisfaction with using the FS5 and Inferno as my main weapon of choice. There's another thread all about the liberation small cameras give you. I'm a complete advocate of the premise. I dislike the fact that I've found the external 4K ProRes is barely better than the internal HD. Also that the FS5 doesn't go on a gimbal or a slider (where smaller cameras do), seems a bit wasteful. Also my Sigma ART lenses are non-IS - so handheld micro jitter is apparent. The GH5 has a number of benefits at a creative level. It's smaller and well featured - there's no need to list these here. So im thinking of selling my FS5 setup, going GH5 and putting more into the lenses and support equipment. You know, things that actually have a really dramatic impact on the image. If I did sell up, I'd miss that continuous high quality HFR. However I'm not really enjoying my beastly FS5 spec-monster package. I feel it holds me back in a lot of ways. Sometimes I'm not enjoying the shooting experience at all. My clients like the FS5, but then again, there's never been a problem shooting with something less spectacular looking. This is an emotional thing really. I'm a firm believer in the "person behind the camera matters" thing, however I think I can perform better artistic choices and results by making a smaller camera, like the GH5, the A-cam. Am I going crazy? £8k + setup for a £2k one? Sounds crazy.

Wow, stinging article. Sadly the money wagon does take over in every genre of publication ever. It's great that EOSHD is still impartial, brutal, sometimes funny, insightful and on a few occasions, off the rails! But I like that. It's genuine and human. I cant give an opinion on DPReview, I've barely read it as I find the site design frustrating. Oh, and Ebrahim is a video genius, obviously. His knowledge is the greatest thing on Earth

I think it's very hard to judge the image quality of the GH5 going off the user videos on Youtube and Vimeo. The majority of footage is exceptionally poor, and this is down to bad exposure, poor lighting, missed focus, crap compositions and pretty awful grading. It's understandable as I guess many beginners have picked up the camera and are giving it a go. With the GH2, it's more "seasoned" and therefore has a history of better skilled hands on the camera. I don't think there's any excuse for the 6D II video quality - other than the fact Canon certainly and absolutely want video shooters using their C-series cameras. I think everyone has to finally concede that Canon will never be a serious option for DSLR video anymore. Never.

Well I've just made my own discovery regarding the FS5. Did a shoot this week with very aggressive lighting... captured in 4k CDNG, 4k ProRes 442 HQ and "bog standard" internal 50 Mbps HD. As expected the CDNG can be pushed around massively. But the data rate is heart wrenching. The interesting thing is that the 4k ProRes and internal HD seems almost like a draw. When pushed around, it's practically the same. When finally graded and exported, the quality seems almost exactly the same too. The 4k image is very, very, very slightly better. The only benefit I see of the FS5 + recorder is continuous 2k slow motion with more data to play with. This bit works for sure. Other than that, I'm thinking of selling up.

My wife started photography 6 months ago on a 700d and a "nifty 50" - she's absolutely smashing it and has the 6d II on her shopping list. I think a lot of people get upset about Canon because we all love the quality of their products and the images they are capable of producing, but for some business reason, they won't give video shooters what they want. I love the video images coming out the 1DX II. It is a sports journalists camera, however the omission of CLOG is rather ignorant, since the inferior 5D IV gets it. Even the Cinema EOS line is riddled with frustrating choices, such as no 4k 60p in the C300 II and a pretty bad 120fps mode. That's not saying Canon don't know what they're doing, or make bad products... if they just gave a teeny weeny bit more on their releases, the competition would barely stand a chance right across the board.

It will take pretty pictures, but.... How relevant will this camera be by 2022? I like Canon products and their lovely colours, and this has NEVER been said,but I find them extremely frustrating at the same time. They purposefully leave stuff out like it's funny or something. No CLOG n the 1DX II, but it's in the 5D IV. Hilarious.

1. Think about the light before anything else. 2. Change that lens, it may look way better on different glass. 3. When the talent is in thought, or simply just waiting for a direction, roll the camera without their knowledge. You can get some really useful, very natural moments. 4. Don't do the shot once. You may pull off the technique better on repeat. 5. Bring 634 lens cloths to a shoot, because you will lose 633 of them. 6. Never settle on a grade straight away. Look at it again tomorrow. Those skin tones might be green and you had no idea. 7. If you're not sure if it's right, it's definitely not. Trust yourself. It's got to feel right, always. 8. Adjust the light again. It will look better. 9. Eye lights. Make the effort. 10. Buy a RED cam. Send it back. Read EOSHD and get confused. Get a GH5.

Nah, it's a good camera but I need way more video features than the 1DC provides. The FS5 covers everything however once you add a lens and decent battery - it's not so lightweight anymore. With the Shogun Inferno, it's beastly and I do get to feel restricted. I've had weird little thoughts about selling up and going GH5 with a better set of lenses....... Wow that's a big decision. I've planned a one-off camera swap with a friend who owns a GH5, see if it tickles.

Funny to see this prop up again as I'm thinking the same thing again today after a shoot. This time - I was using my FS5 again with the Shogun Inferno. I've not been enjoying the experience very much to be honest - much preferring to use my A6500 (which I also feel has a better overall "pleasing" image in 4k). It's got great features like 4k 100fps, raw, electronic ND and all that, however I wouldn't say it's helping that much. I'm wondering whether I'm on a creative stump at the moment, taking it out on the FS5. Maybe I do like it. We'll see.

Spot on..... I've filmed entire paid music videos on a GoPro because that was the vibe, attaching a small camera to everything POV style. In a studio, I've used the FS7 only because it was a tripod and I need chromakey slow motion at an affordable rate. I filmed my biggest ever project... on an A7S II. There was no chance to do lighting, we had to run around all sorts of locations and grab shots on the spot. I used the old C300, even though I had three other Sony cameras. The interviewer was adamant about "natural, organic, really good looking skin" in the interview. The video above, I used the A6500 with one lens to stay very discreet on the streets and still get a high IQ with a minimum fuss. Yesterday I used the FS5 and Inferno in ProRes as we set up 4 scenes in a very controlled space and needed very high resolution, high bit rate compositions as the colour management was very difficult with all the multi-colour neon signs knocking around. That said, the EOSHD vibe is certainly favoured to small mirrorless, and most of the work we show here is very "street", minimal kit and run n gun. I find it a much more enjoyable experience shooting like this, because it's very liberating. Creativity is the quality of the idea. Choose the best way to get the best out of the idea. In Hollywood, it's a huge crew behind 3 Arri Alexas. For a lot of us, it's a GH5 with a Zhiyun Crane and a GoPro with no permits. Whatever works best given the material.

When you shoot a lot of music video stuff, or hire a sound guy for the commercial stuff, audio gets naturally shifted to the side. Now, I need audio without having a sound guy - but in a very specific way. I'm going to be releasing a weekly web series about exactly what me and my team are doing on a project from start to end. It will be informal, fun, fly on the wall and pretty zippy. There are two types of scenario: Scenario 1 There will be moments where we as individuals we need to discreetly record decent audio of what we're blabbering on about, while being followed by a camera or recording ourselves - this could be anywhere. In the car, whilst buying a coffee, climbing up some ladders, in a cave, wherever and whenever. Recordings will be done on Sony Alpha and RX cameras. My understanding is that a lavalier would be most suitable, but I'm not sure which setup, looking at Sennheiser, Saramonic, RODE etc? Scenario 2 There will be kind of news TV style, talk to people with a radio mic on hand kinda thing. So we'll ask the client, or any other contributor on the shoot, ask them some questions for an informative reply. So we're going for a radio mic vibe with our company logo attached onto it. Needs to be wireless. Anybody who knows better than me, like @IronFilm, what would be a nice, cost effective package to cover this strategy? Thank you

Nice vids from the archive! I'm the same, I don't like rigging up my cameras. I want them as bare bones a possible. Some of the FS5/7Q rigs I've seen are like houses, not my kettle of fish. Yes, I have an Inferno but I can't find an ergonomic way of mounting it on the camera. So I just run it off the SDI and let the other guy hold it for monitoring. Recently, I shot a music video on the A6500 with this criteria, to see what would happen: Completely handheld. Only A6500, 18-105mm gear used. No lights, No grip. Nothing. Autofocus only. Mostly 4k, and some 100fps. At the time, I had an FS5 in the bag too with a bunch of Sigma lenses. Didn't use them. A6500's dim screen and rolling shutter was annoying, but I got round it.

The HD slow motion is a big deal for me - I'm "expected" to provide this for my clients, hence my Sony camera domination. Even the A6500 has a very good 120fps mode. It might sharpen to up really nicely like FS700/FS5 slow motion does.

Andrew, I'm with you on this as I'm having a similarly "off" experience shooting on my FS5. It has everything I need in a very versatile package and shoots some great stuff for me, but..... I much, much prefer shooting on small mirrorless, certainly at a creativity angle. I do t own a GH5, but on yesterday's FS5/Inferno heavy pop music video shoot - I held the BYS guys GH5 w/ Speedbooster Ultra and my Sigma 18-35mm. It felt really cool, very exciting in fact. Today I got some pickups shots, and ditched the FS5 in favour of the A6500. The 4K XAVC-S (minus RS), is just fantastic. It felt very good. The bigger cameras are there for covering all bells and whistles, and being a reliable workhorse. To get creative with them, you need a team around the camera to pull off the shots (grip / lights etc) as they are much more stationary. The FS5 / Inferno covers this heavy production need, but for smaller projects, it wouldn't be my first choice. In the pro world, clients do get very excited about seeing the Kit being used, and do feel more value is being attained by a bigger camera, even if that bigger camera is actually shit. I've had weird thoughts about selling it all and just going GH5, as this method is just fun. At the same time, I could sacrifice the "expectation" I've built by selling up, or it could be a case of finding a new lease of life by using what I find most fun and enjoyable (small powerful mirrorless). I guess you could relate to that?

All true, but this isn't the setup I've described on this thread. In your situation I would do the same as it makes the most practical sense. Yes, I'd be very poor if I bought all the C series cameras. Seems logical.

They are not a match made in heaven, and this is because I don't "love" the Sony cameras. The image isn't there yet, however features-wise - they tick the boxes. If I had the budget I'd buy everything for a laugh. I, like many others, will purchase a feature packed main camera, and also buy smaller cameras to grab other bits of content. I wouldn't buy 2 or more of the "main" cameras, unless the majority of my shoots really needed it. I don't think there's anything wrong in saying that I'd struggle to change to a Canon setup, because their lower end doesn't match my needs, to support a C200 purchase. For all I know, I could have this weird epiphany and make an indie blockbuster using a 5D mk IV mixed with a GoPro and Olympus EM1 II using a Helios 58mm as the only lens. Whatever works. The Sony setup works for me and my shooting strategy, but I'm not connected emotionally to the "feel" of the imagery, hence my greater liking to Canon.

No I don't think it would be - I've matched together four or five different brands before. Today I graded some footage from the FS5 in 4k ProRes from the Inferno, and it looks great. I don't see a great need to switch to a C200, it's just a bit of geeky curiosity. When you have a business to run, and time is of the essence - having a perfectly streamlined range of cameras makes things a lot easier. Not essential, but purposefully done to save time and get consistent results. If you want to mix different brands together and it works - go for it. I still do it when necessary.

I was meant for this to come across from the needs of a sole videographer / two man band kinda thing. I'm looking at this as a hierarchy of cameras that serve a different purpose, but can also be cut between seamlessly in post. For instance - the FS5 kitted out does pretty much everything, it's the highest quality and therefore is the A-cam. The A6500 sits on a gimbal due to it's small size, autofocus and HFR. The A7SII grabs a different angle where the light isn't quite a good (lowlight) and shot handheld (IBIS). The RX100 is mounted into a tight space to grab a difficult angle I'd struggle with using the FS5, or be slipped out the pocket when a shot opportunity suddenly arrives. This is how myself, and many others I know set up their cameras and shoot. So with any major camera purchase, I have to think about the others too. I'm flirting around the C200 vibe as I'm a fan of Canon imagery. But I'm fine with Sony, and I'll stick with it.

I can see what you're thinking, however Arri Alexas and Mini's are not the same target market as the C300, C200 etc. Also Canon have a huge line of DSLR, mirrorless and compact cameras that shoot video, where Arri do not. I own an FS5, and the B-camera (for a videographer) to the FS5 is not an FS5. Sony have made a bunch of smaller mirrorless cameras that exclusively do a few things brilliantly (low light, IBIS, autofocus, compact and powerful) and it's likely the FS5 user will buy 1, 2 or even 3 of these to make up the pack. The C200 is in a similar ballpark. So when someone like myself is intrigued by the prospect of going to the C200... I start to think about my other camera bodies too. That's where the intrigue hits a wall. Maybe a 5D Mk IV and XC10/15 will do, but we're missing a lot of features here now that we had before with Sony. It really depends on what's most important.

I think it's important to clarify that this is not a Canon bashing thread. I started it by attempting to find out if using the C200 was viable as an A-cam when considering other smaller, well featured cameras getting the rest of the shots as B and C. Like the FS5 with Sony Alpha cameras. This also only relates to professional video production where a streamlined workflow is very important to save time and have all bass covered. My concluding thoughts are that you could use the C200 with the 5D Mk IV and XC10/15 - if you're willing to sacrifice higher frame rates, use heavily cropped sensors and work with data hungry file sizes. What you gain is fantastic colour and reliability, amongst other strong workhorse needs such as awesome build quality. It could be a mouth watering package for some shooters. With Sony for instance, you get the HFR, high dynamic range and all those other innovative goodies such as electronic vari-ND on the FS5 and IBIS - plus far more bodies to choose from. However the picture needs more work, and lacks in that beautiful motion "feel" which Canon gets right. For some, that could be the deciding factor. I wish I had it sometimes. It's Sony's move next. They could put the A9 autofocus in the FS5 II or the A7S III may have 4K 60p. I bet the colour will be further improved. It's worth waiting. As much as I adore the Canon image, I can't help think that Sony may not be far behind in the near future.

(Thanks to Andrew for making this point an article). I do see your point in regarding the C200 as a B-cam, however in some ways it's better than it's bigger brother, and also for a lot of people, the investment in a C200 is certainly an A-cam. My A-cam is a Sony FS5, and with the FS7, F5 & F55 sitting above it, it can be both A and B as Sony have more cameras in their mirrorless range to take up the mantle. They've clearly thought about this as all their cameras have Slog2! Andrew makes some good points about the Sony range having much better suited videography features - IBIS, HFR, EVFs, Tilting Screens, smaller file sizes... these are the things Canon are missing with a supporting range of cameras in the lower end. I think a 2018 updated C200, with 5D MK IV and XC15 is certainly workable - yet has much more of a headache about it. The Canon advantages - colour science & DPAF will be challenged by Sony in the near furute. The A6500 has vastly improved colour and the autofocus as seen in the A9 is catching up. I wouldn't bet against seeing this system in a future FS camera to challenge Canon's DPAF stronghold. Panasonic have a monster of a duo on its hands with the EVA1 and GH5, which just lacks that DPAF like feature. As I did mention, it's an emotional thing. I smile in delight using my wife's budget Canon DSLR, a feeling that's vacantcwhen snapping with the A6500. Same goes for the video too (Blackmagic has that thrilling feel too). We're talking professional, and professional is business. I'm covered with Sony, almost completely. I don't think I'd see much difference in my income going Canon, if any. But I do want to be covered by Canon (for emotional reasons) hence my post. Their lack of better smaller cameras for video makes the prospect difficult to consider. EOS-M? I certainly hope to see an absolute corker here. But not expecting to. By that time, they'll be an FS5 II, A7S III, A6700 etc that may fix the issues we have with Sony. It's certainly worth being patient.

Good replies. For my clarification, with my FS5 i also shoot with a 2nd and sometimes 3rd camera in the bag. They all have different purposes for various scenarios, and dependent on the job, switch between the A7S II, A6500 or one of the RX cameras. So while the FS5 will grab many of the key shots in super duper quality - the A6500 for instance will live on the Zhiyun crane, with the RX in the pocket for a quick shot, and the A7S II to shoot at a different angle, or grab something in low light. So it's a differentiation of size and features to cover all predicted scenarios. The beauty with the Sony's is that they all have Slog2. I'll dial in the modified picture profile to all the cameras, use the same LUT and do some little tweaks. Smooth! The Canon is emotionally desirable due to it's lovely imaging. Prefer it to Sony no doubt, however the versatility I can get with Sony just isn't there with the C200 as A-cam. While this is not trivial for many users, when you depend on multiple cameras - the C200 and it's smaller family don't cut it as a working family. Pretty frustrating. But whatever, the Sony's will do fine!