padam

The A7s was the camera I've used to most, mainly because it was a revelation for low light and street photography with the silent mode, no other FF camera could do it. The A7sII looked good, but the cost of upgrade was too much for me to buy it. But 12MP is not enough for me anymore when there are 24MP cameras that do the same thing. I also had the 5D Mark 1 that camera is dirt cheap and also 12MP bad dynamic range but it is quite a bit sharper than the A7s and also much nicer colours. No video so the AA filter is almost nonexistent. I guess they got the colour part sorted out on the A7sIII and silent mode works seamlessly so it has is uses. But you've got to wonder if they could have just taken a new version of the 24MP A9 series sensor and not limit it for video at all. That would have been the clear and big upgrade over the big hit, the A7III that people would want, not just a 'facelift'. For BOTH stills and video. But no. Instead, they have the A9II the future A7IV and A7SIII, three models instead of one, all with different strengths and drawbacks (and with regular updates). Sony and Canon both being equally smart in 2020.

Even the 1.33x crop Cinema 4k60p RAW with AF would be nice - to dream about... The most I expect is that they will have the R5 recording menu instead of the huge array of recording options, but I wouldn't even hope for that. They didn't even bother to add touch functions to the 1DX II...

My guess is as good as anyone's, but I think they won't - or at least they would say something about it. They've only promised to add 23.98p, which they did with firmware 1.1 Because they offer 12-bit 5.5K Cinema RAW recording, as opposed to "just" 5.1K UHD 10-bit 4:2:2 IPB in the R6, I don't think they are going to offer it. Only they know, but they really like to segment all their cameras - as we know only too well...

Hi John, I think this is for EU only and the dealers are not allowed to ship to the US. You can still try to e-mail each of them to see if this is the case. Or if there is no other solution, you need to ask someone nicely who is located in the EU to ship them to you 😉

They should be pretty close in terms of sharpness since they are both using nearly the same 5.1K readout, 1.6x crop area on the R5 versus the FF on the R6 So the R6 should be slightly sharper, since it is not as magnified and also about a stop better in ISO and maybe dynamic range. However, the R5 has a faster sensor so in crop mode the rolling shutter should be better. (how much better? we'll need to see that measured) The reason why I would choose the R5 is because I can still go FF as well as APS-C, I would not use it sorely as an APS-C crop camera for video, I would have both options at all times at my disposal. And of course, the R5 is Cinema 4K aspect ratio or 16:9 UHD aspect ratio, while the R6 is always 16:9 UHD aspect ratio. So, on the other hand, the R6 limitations make it a lot more straightforward to use, no need to choose from a dozen of recording options.

Me too, because it just feels like a newer generation sensor that is able to read out faster than the 1DX III or R6 And it looks to be a fully fledged FF as well as an APS-C 4k60p camera in one package, it will be interesting to see rolling shutter measurements.

No such promises, I guess it is not classified as "high-end" like the r5...

After assessing all the specs and looking at R6 sample images... I just don't want to deal with the severe rolling shutter in the 1.07x crop 4K video on the R6. I think When I do upgrade (which probably will not be any time soon, but I do plan to slowly expand my RF lens collection and just keep using the EOS R) it will be the: The EOS R5 All things considered, it just looks like a better, faster sensor than the 1DX III or R6 sensor, which is interesting, considering it is not supposed to be as high-end as the 1DX III. I probably won't even touch the 8K and 4K-HQ modes (maybe the latter in low light if I need the best ISO, but I think it will perform well enough without it) And for the most part I can just use the same "crippled" IPB codecs and UHS-II cards that I will get for the EOS R, I won't need a lot of CFExpress cards. But I will have a FF4k60p camera with low rolling shutter and also a crop sensor 4k60p camera with great quality. Essentially two in one and with 4k120p as a special bonus. And of course I get the higher quality screen EVF and build quality. It will be easier to manual focus for sure, whatever camera I use, I will have vintage glass to go with any of them. 45MP is definitely more than I need for stills, but I need to upgrade for coping with 4k60p anyway, so it is not that big of a drawback. -6.5EV on the R6 vs -6EV on the R5, again, not a biggie. I am looking forward to actual reviews (I want to see rolling shutter measurements for all modes), but it seems quite clear to me what makes the most sense from an upgrade standpoint. Of course this can change depending on one-time deals and stuff, I will try to be ready for that. The opposite approach to this is to have something like an A7SIII Where the 4.8K Prores RAW output makes a ton of sense and produces beautiful video, no overheating, 8K RAW is just too much and also impractical for most people (great for those who need it). But may not be enough as a stills camera, the R5 can tackle both at a very high level and it has a great IBIS system in it, better ergonomics, Canon colors, lens ecosystem, etc. Despite all the 'heat' the R5 receives from various directions (sorry, couldn't resist) it just looks to be very strong as-is for the next few years. Right now, the closest relative to this R5 is probably the Leica SL2. More "premium", but more expensive, bulkier, less features and it also misses out on the AF front or lens ecosystem (and it also suffers from overheating)

Yes it definitely is. On the M6 Mark II is slightly upscaled 4K, so not surprising, although the 90D also has a slightly cropped supersampled 4K mode that is very sharp.

The A7SII was 3000$, pretty sure that with the stacked sensor and huge jump up in video specs, it will be more, maybe 3500$ like the A7RIV (and the A7IV will be around 2500$ when it comes out probably next year)

Besides no DPAF in 4K, the RP has the worst rolling shutter after the Sony A6300 and the dynamic range not great, so yes, not good for serious video (still not too bad for 1080p considering it's still cheap). I have used it as a second camera on a tripod in 4K and manual focus, and it worked fine for that, actually the battery held up better than I expected and no signs of overheating (I guess disabling DPAF does have its advantages there). That 20MP sensor is very well balanced for video and stills, they have been using one in the 1DX II and III which people were forced to buy if they've found 5D IV to be too weak, they've just crippled it too much after bringing it down to this low price point. One pretty much has to shoot it in FF (1.07x crop) and deal with the severe rolling shutter and take advantage of the superb IBIS and because it is oversampled, the digital IS can be utilised as well without degrading quality at a noticeable level, great ISO and dynamic range as well. So I guess despite all of this crap, it will still look good. Or it can shoot in 1080p, which is still fine, just like on the EOS R, but it starts to look like quite bad value, double the price to have IBIS and 1080p 120fps, joystick (that's actually very good for pulling focus when shooting with the screen flipped out, so it can't be touched) dual card slots, fast shooting rate, but also less megapixels for stills, inferior screen, no top LCD, etc. I wonder if they consider adding in the 1:1 crop mode in firmware if enough people complain about it, but it's not like taking away 24p so I don't think they will, it would be too good for the price amongst Canon cameras...

Yes and with 12MP, it will be the most limited camera for taking stills. 🙂 Might as well buy a cinema camera, if there has to be a separate stills camera next to it.

Yikes indeed. Unfortunately you are probably right with this one, as I tried to look it up everywhere, and Canon Europe says it is a "62% crop of the horizontal area", which is right around 1.6x I understood the IPB compression with the UHS-II cards apart from 4k60p it is an artificial limitation, but whatever. But a 1:1 crop would have required less processing and much better quality and much more like their APS-C cinema cameras, so not happy about it at all.

That would be upscaled 4K on the R6 with 1.6x crop as there aren't enough pixels (unlike on the EOS RP) it does not make sense to me, and it would be quite bad indeed And it would really push the R5 being the better 4K video camera with the better rolling shutter in the binned 4K mode, and full-fledged FF and APS-C options with great quality. All the rest matches what I expect, only this one seems to be the weird one and I am not 100% that it was correctly told and I don't see it in the spec list either to confirm or deny it. Maybe it only forces it with EF-S lenses (that would be bad, too but understandable) and let FF lenses to be punched into 1:1 crop? The 1DX II and 1DX III both recorded in that mode. As soon as somebody shows what happens with the movie cropping enabled, we'll see it anyways, and we'll see some rolling shutter measurements, too. There is plenty of time to get one anyway 🙂

Yes, there are always different needs and different solutions. It is easy enough to rent or buy and potentially return it. Most people here don't even want to pay for the extra quality for 4K I looked at 1DX III 1080p footage and it seems good enough for me (Even the EOS R was good enough and it is a bit better that that) So the R6 is probably also stellar as a 1080p camera as well with zero issues and minimal file sizes. It is crazy to think that quite a few people got the 1DX II, deal with its many foibles, and they didn't even shoot in 4K because of the crazy file sizes (and some of the R5 recording modes make those small, lol), they just wanted that 1080p 120fps with AF which looks soo good. And now here we are with a camera that is cheaper and has almost none of those issues, a few cost cutting and crippling here and there, but it's perfectly acceptable considering what others do at this price point.

The only camera I ever managed to get to overheat was the A6500 indoors after 15 minutes, and that is a 6K readout, so I don't think a 4K readout without any oversampling is that bad. If I was shooting longer events, I would probably invest in the Atomos recorder, it lifts the 30-minute limit, it is cheaper to record to SSD anyway, Prores is better for editing and it's definitely nice to have a bigger screen. The micro-HDMI is annoying though. To be honest, even the EOS R would do well for that specific usage and it costs almost half as much. But for running around, taking shorter clips, high frame rates with the most minimalist package, the R6 looks to be amazing in comparison. If overheating is the most important thing ever, then the A7SIII is looking pretty good (for quite a bit more money probably) But most people want a camera, that is equally capable at capturing still images. Right now, there isn't anything out that there, that just "hits the balance" the way the R6 does (photo/video capabilities at the right price point) If it delivers in practise as well, it looks to be a huge hit, just like the A7III was two years ago.

Yes I know, I am annoyed that it looks so good on paper that it is hard to resist. Although I will build up my lens kit first and keep using the R for now, that is always better. But if I see a deal that gives some discount over the MSRP, I will jump on it. The 1DX III has a 1.33x crop mode, and it is cinema 4K, so I guess the 1.4x UHD crop on the R6 is pretty accurate. I have some really great compact Leica lenses with a nasty magenta cast towards the edges and heavy vignetting. They are getting completely cropped out for video, so it's a dream scenario for me, if the IBIS continues to function well with these, it's a huge improvement over 1.75x crop and no IBIS even if I ignore the frame rates. But I actually shoot the 720p 120p sometimes, so I won't, it is a really great feature to have. The Sigma 18-35/1.8 is also downright perfect for covering this image circle, so I sincerely hope it won't force the camera into a 1.6x crop mode or something when mounting it, with the latest firmware it does that on the EOS R, no option to shoot FF. The Canon EF-S 10-18/4.5-5.6 IS STM also covers this crop through almost the whole zoom range. Both should work, but whether Canon will allow them to work, we don't know, it would be pretty stupid to restrict these, but we know how Canon does things.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPzuwTW78jQTaLmfKDs9rFQ Some footage here, the pixel binned 4K looks perfectly fine to me and it won't have serious overheating issues. At this point the S1H does not offer any kind of 4k120p, so it got completely outclassed by the R5 and the A7sIII as well, both are superb cameras with different advantages and drawbacks regarding stills or video. Far more people have issues with the S1H size and AF problems than overheating and just the lack of lenses is not great for anyone wanting to get into the system even though it is an alliance, so it has room to expand and improve, we'll see what happens. The sales numbers will prove that, some people won't even use the R5 for video, but they definitely won't use the S1H for stills, there are far better and cheaper options out there. As far as see, most people's hate for the R5 comes from its expected popularity which might devaluate their own equipment even further. Everything is getting cheaper because of these cameras, people should be happy that they exist instead of trying to find what's wrong about them. The smart people will embrace the new opportunities that are present with cameras getting older or investing in new technology, why others just continue to be keyboard warriors.

One can use the 1.4x crop mode on the R6, that's still a lot better than the 1.75x crop on the R and a lot less rolling shutter (probably around 16ms, same as a C300 Mark III) Or with the full sensor, the ISO is a huge improvement. And there is room to engage the digital IS on top of the IBIS without really degrading the quality. With the speed booster + EOS R basically looses all access to any other frame rates It practically becomes a 1.24x crop 4k30p EF-mount-only camera, with quite a bit of rolling shutter, e.g. quite limited. And of course there is that 1080p 120fps which is the other Achilles heel of the EOS R. Overall, the R6 is miles ahead of the R for video, it is a baby 1DX III (with 10-bit and Canon Log, it kills the 1DX II as well, less compressed, but 8-bit 4:2:2 no Log or FF 4K) The only question is will it receive a price drop after the early months, because if it does not, then it is probably better to get one as soon as possible. It does not seem overpriced at 2500$ compared to 2300$ original MSRP the EOS R, which is worth almost half as much now. The Metabones Speed Booster makes them even closer in terms of pricing, so it is does not look like something worth spending for.

What if one is recording with the 1:1 1.4x UHD crop mode on the R6 instead of oversampling? That should help with heat and the rolling shutter. Maybe even they forgot that it exists 🙂

Higher frame rates, lower rolling shutter I guess the improvement in technology means that it will be clearly better DR than the A7SII despite the stacked sensor penalty.

Outstanding for video, bad for stills. It makes sense for Sony, with 12MP BSI stacked sensor is not "threatening" to the A9II and they are sticking to the formula of four different FF model lines. A7IV A7RIV A7SIII A9II I expect to be around A7RIV pricing, not sure if the stacked sensor means it will cost a bit more or a bit less than that, but it won't be at the A9II level.

It has been rumoured several times, but nothing has been confirmed yet, and no recent talk. But I am quite sure they are working on something like that, they have fully sorted out their EF-mount Cinema line, I can't see them coming out with even more EF-mount cameras, they seem to be fully complete now. So the next step is to begin the Cinema line for the RF-mount and also at the lower-end, not the higher-end.

Canon's way is to release a separate video-centric camera with active cooling and a dedicated sensor that will run for many hours without issues. It won't be a usable stills camera. We just don't know when and for how much but looking at the XC15, it is certainly possible to design something like that with a bigger sensor and an RF-mount.

I don't think it is anywhere the same thing. That is an APS-C sensor, no IBIS, no 10-bit, no 4k60p, no 4k120p and it overheats quicker than what they are quoting for the R5 I would like to see the exact same feature set to compare against (and not just evaluated as a video camera, but also as a stills camera)