padam

First, the basher group needs to provide counter-examples to prove that Canon's engineers are "being lazy". We can all agree that keeping a powerful IBIS and DPAF system fully operating, while decoding masses of data to memory cards means the camera's processing really takes a beating. Yes, we have the FF S1 series that cope well with heat. But they are a lot bigger and heavier and they stick to using contrast-detect AF, that probably helps with the processing power. They rely more on using external recorders to unlock all features. There is also a crop on the 4k60p video, too and a 24MP stills camera is not the same as a 45MP stills camera with a much more powerful AF system. Once we see more cameras that do provide what the R5 and R6 are capable of (for both photo as well as video), we will probably see the overheating rear its ugly head as well. That's probably the reality of it. In the past Canon has designed their cameras for a longer product cycle. That means they are confident that they won't suddenly get left behind by other future cameras and they might employ other tricks to help with these issues, look at this one for instance: https://www.canonnews.com/canon-patent-application-canon-ef-to-rf-sensor-cooling-adapter (although I think this is probably more for astrophotography rather than recording high-res video)

I don't see it here or on the full spec list, only for time-lapse movie mode, or the separate 1080p120fps slow-motion recording mode.

It is not ALL-I, it is IPB (it uses ALL-I for timelapse and 120fps) See it here, I would bet it is very very similar between the 1DX III and the R6 except more compression. Definitely not 4K quality, but pretty decent for 1080p line-skipped, better than the EOS R (which is pretty decent imho) almost no rolling shutter and no overheating. If I get this camera, I probably will utilise this mode.

To be fair, the A7sIII or a Z6s could very well have similar problems in a smaller body, some said the Z6 can overheat in 10-bit 4:2:2 with an external recorder, its using the full sensor in that mode unlike Prores RAW with the line-skipping. The S1 series cameras are a lot bigger and heavier and they are skipping phase-detect AF for this same reason, more processing, more heat, noisier signal. So far, Sony hasn't enabled 4k60p in their cameras even though some sensors are capable of doing it, exactly for this reason. Now they suddenly have 4k120p coming, probably external recording only, we'll see how it does.

Is there such a document on the EOS R6, that shows the estimated overheating times? Or was that document by CVP released only for the R5, and this camera is not as susceptible to that? Yeah IPB and micro-HDMI port are both annoying (maybe the 1.07x UHD crop is a little annoying, too) But on the other hand, it costs almost three times less than the 1DX III with a similar sensor and processor the IBIS EVF and a flip screen, it can write to cheap media, and it does have AF enabled at all times and they did not take away things like joystick and dual card slots like they did with past 6D-series cameras. Canon should be applauded that. Looking the recording abilities of the R5, ALL-I wouldn't work continuously with 4k60p to UHS-II SD card in Canon cameras anyway, (needing CFExpress or it would work with CFast 2.0 as well) But all the rest should have no limitations to use ALL-I, there is where the Cripple Hammer decided to hit.

Not sure this was discussed, but: "Ok, now onto the sensor, a 20 Megapixel full-framer that’s based on the one in the 1Dx Mark III DSLR but now with a different low pass filter and able to support dual pixel autofocus on uncropped 4k 60p video – remember the 1Dx III made you choose between a crop or manual focus when filming 4k 60" I wonder if it also means that the rolling shutter is not improved in 60p unlike the 1DX III

That's just not true, for stills, the S1H is much weaker than the EOS R5, the lenses aren't nearly as good, and it's a lot bigger. It's just not the right camera (or rather the right system) for most people, that's why it's depreciating so much. Canon has never said anywhere that they are going to design this camera for long record times, they are not shy to admit that it will have some limitations. They've put in the technology with the IBIS etc. and they've kept it as small (and believe it or not, as cheap) as possible. Could they have added cropped internal RAW recording modes among other things to make it more compelling for video then it already is or equip it with a more useful HDMI port? Yes, absolutely. Each have it's own uses and there is no perfect camera, whatever anyone says. So the bashing will continue until the end of time, especially from people who are using other cameras. But some people indicating this camera being "utter garbage" is still kind of funny. The ambassadors are fully on the hype train, no doubt, but for the most part, it seems quite justified.

It is (apart from the internal recording limit), just invest in a lot of very expensive memory cards (which were similarly outrageously priced, when the 1DC came out) shoot in RAW and you have access to Canon Log 2 (but no 4k60p AF since it is FF only) The 1DC could only record in MJPEG, no peaking, no AF, it was never a true 'C' camera to being with, just a 1DX with heatsinks, 4k, Log and a crop 1080p mode (a useless 1080p60p 720p upscaled mode) and that's it, the 1DX III has similar improvements in comparison to the 1DX II (more recording options, 10-bit with Log or RAW) They will never do a stills camera with the same processing and codec options as their video cameras. Of course if they do a mirrorless flagship equivalent with IBIS, it may kill the 1DX III for video, but it's Canon, so they will figure something out to differentiate the two models.

Even before release on the specs sheet it was 100% clear that the 5.5K raw can only be a full sensor readout as well, so it was never in question like the Nikon Z6 or the Sigma fp. Furthermore, most of what one needs to know about the 1DX III image has been put out there on the internet for months, so it's not like one is forced to spend that much money to find that out. Unless the intention is to dissect every new stills camera via an article, and it is not so difficult, because it is crystal clear that there won't ever be a perfect one, each one will have some sort of issue or compromised feature. Despite the amazing feature set it is also quite clear that compared to their Cinema cameras, the stills cameras with different processors won't have the same rolling shutter and editor-friendly codecs and file sizes in less compressed formats. (And with the C300 III we can add dynamic range to that list as well) that's because it's a Canon camera, other brands can be associated with other quirks/issues. For using them as a B-cam (and taking some stills), they look mighty good. The main line is that can be used for video with amazing results, and people made amazing stuff with cameras that have even worse rolling shutter, but if that's a concern there are other options. Could they have enabled an AF-disabled FF mode to reduce the 4k24p rolling shutter? That remains a mystery but the AF seems to be a headline feature anyway. I do wonder though, if people love to complain about the 1DX III being inadequate, what's the EOS R6 going to get with an cut-price sensor and processor, probably worse rolling shutter, dynamic range and much more limited video features? Will people going to forgive considering it will be the cheapest camera they make with dual card slots and 4k60p with a great IBIS and AF systems, which are well integrated with their lens lineup and it's going to be easy to get a decent image without much care (e.g. vloggers)? (Sorry if this review was posted already)

It's the same, except the IBIS filters it a little. This has them in order, the EOS RP is the 'leader' in terms of sensor speed, but because it is not sampling more pixels, it still cannot beat the Sony to be a rolling shutter champion (comes close though) Can the R5 beat the A6300 and its relatives? The 8K vs 6K readout is certainly promising. But thanks to many years of evolution, I fear that it may not beat it and we will struggle to see as much rolling shutter again.

Because the FF 4K is 5.5K oversampled, the electronic IS won't degrade the image in a significant manner, if you look at the linked slashcam tests, it just crops in slightly. It seems to work quite well from other YT tests.

Before we conclude how bad the 1DX III is, at the moment no other FF camera offers 5.5k 60p to start with. None. And the R5 will not sample 5.5k at 60p, so AF will be enabled in all 8K or 4K recording modes as stated. It is likely to be more like a Panasonic S1R or Leica SL2, e.g. not the most detailed, but very good rolling shutter in 60p (30p is still in question). There will be a mountain of recording options to reduce the file sizes, and external 4K Prores recording will be supported as well.

The R5 will have zebra included, it was shown in a product video (probably not the other two) so in theory they could add that to the 1DX III with a firmware update as well.

It is only true for full sensor 4k30p, full sensor 4k60p (when the AF is disabled) has half as much rolling shutter, big difference https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Canon-EOS-1D-X-Mark-III---Beste-4K-EOS-ohne-Cinema-Logo--FullHD--25-100fps---Rolling-Shutter---Fazit-Signalver.html

What I meant that if you are happy to use those, maybe the R5 is not really needed right away, if we look at how much cheaper it is going to became after a year or so, while the Panasonic S1 will become even cheaper right now (it will cost less than half as much slightly used) as it will loose some of its appeal and from what I've seen, the IBIS works really well even with vintage lenses. And of course there is also the R6, but that will probably not offer enough unfortunately, it it targeted even more at EF or RF users as the AF will be one of its big strengths. Yes, it is in terms of how the 28-70/2 looks, although it is still different so use in practice compared to prime lenses and since I am not selling most of those, it is probably the one that has to go in the end. And the balanced handling, wider range, silent AF and stabilisation of the 24-105mm f4 IS makes it pretty compelling for video. And there is the "happy medium" 24-70mm f2.8 IS, which is offers a bit of both. Sure, the lenses are expensive, but they are also well thought-out compared to the competition (especially the zooms, dual IS will work really well with the option of electronic stabilisation added in as well).

This camera is probably overkill for using manual lenses and the IBIS might not work as effectively without electronic contacts. (The Panasonic S1 series/Leica SL2 are the only ones which are 5-axis with every lens so they are best suited to manual lenses, Nikon/Sony is only 3-axis and I guess Canon will behave similarly) I mean, it will still work just fine, but the whole point of this camera is to have full compatibility with EF and RF lenses with full Dual-Pixel Af support (and of course Canon colours), while also offering full feature set that the internet was complaining about until now. I am using manual lenses on the EOS R as well, but not many people do. In my experience, RF lenses are the way forward for both photo and video (but the EF lenses are still quite good, too).

It won't have any compromise regarding low light or dynamic range as long as the 4k30p is downsampled from the 8k, which it probably will, while the 4k60p and 4k120p are going to be line-skipped. The rest is impossible to make without some sort of compromise, the EOS R battery life is really good but it has no IBIS and full sensor video, although the new battery is higher capacity which should offset it a little bit. 30-minute limit is a given, but it should be fine until that time, or it should be better with an external recorder (which also records is a less demanding codec) Rolling shutter will be interesting, as the sensor has to have a fairly decent speed to have 8k30p mode in the first place. It is not aimed at the professional video market and it is not going to cannibalise the EOS R5. Yes, it will do 4k60p and 1080p120p, but I don't expect the cheap sensor to have great dynamic range to start with, so it will be restricted to 8-bit 4:2:0 H.264 IPB codec and no Canon Log. Of course people have been shooting on the 1DXII without Log for ages, so it's not like one can't produce great video with it. But it will be a big step down form the R5, as it should be for almost half the cost and the EOS R will remain relevant as the 'cheap' option to have access to Canon Log, but no IBIS.

https://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-rf-mount-modular-cine-camera-appears-in-drawings/ https://www.canonrumors.com/rf-mount-cinema-camera-in-the-works-cr2/ Ok, it may not be that cheap, but it will be cheaper than a Komodo.

It is more likely that they will make the long-rumoured XC-series 'comeback' camera with a sensor and processor similar to the C300 Mark III (maybe no DGO) and the RF-mount to accept the V-ND EF adapter. That could become much more popular despite not being a hybrid camera. To have a cheap FF stills camera from Canon with 10-bit C-Log internal recording just sounds way too good to be true, the base point should be the 6D Mark II or EOS RP, and this camera will be a huge upgrade already over them (for more money of course, like the R5 is over an EOS R). They will probably save costs on the processor as well, and I can see them starting the limitation right from the sensor itself. But if I am wrong trying to be realistic, and they make a camera, which makes many of their other much more expensive models less attractive, I am happy about it.

With the cost cutting on the displays and build quality, it can be seen as a much cheaper 6D-class camera with IBIS, 4k60p and 1080p120p 8-bit 4:2:0 IPB compression (8-bit 4:2:2 external) and no Canon Log (crop, no AF in some modes) would be the most logical to expect from Canon., capable as a consumer camera, but not a pro-level camera either for stills or video. Which would mean that for better dynamic range, 10-bit or RAW codecs (to CFExpress cards) one needs to step up. But we'll see. And yes lower-res 4k RAW would be useful, except that's exactly what their Cinema cameras provide, so I can't see them putting anything similar in a stills camera. Or next year, the 1DX III 5.5k60p RAW recording capability with IBIS will be put in a mirrorless camera (for about the same price).

They are going up in value because of their status and it is difficult to find one with minty glass. The 50/1.2 LTM is also great and much smaller, but the 50/1.4 LTM (v2) that performs the best, it seems underrated in comparison, easier to find, I use it on the EOS R and it makes great video.

It was a simple design decision on the C300 Mark III. They've kept the EF mount because of compatibility, all the glass obtained and used for any Canon cinema camera fits on these new models from the get go and it can be swapped out for PL as well. They also don't have to re-engineer anything on the camera for the new RF platform, it saves costs, enables them to improve other areas. In their first cinema-related RF mount camera, they will probably make something smaller and more modular, to sell their V-ND EF RF adapter instead of having internal ND at a higher price. That could wait until the next generation, maybe then they will switch to the electronic variable ND as well, since they do have a patent for it.

While I agree about the rolling shutter, there is too much moaning here about other things. It is the first 8K non-cinema camera, which is also an up-to-date mirrorless camera, with plenty of great features, full stop. And there will be no extreme price premium, like it was with a 1DC (and think of it what else it could do, besides being a 1DX shooting MJPEG 4k25p with a crop and no AF or a sharp 1080p mode in S35mm crop mode, a 'fake' upscaled 1080p 60p, and all this without a time limit...not much) (Yes in the future it might be usable as a B-cam next to an 8K cinema camera costing many times more.) Let's just see when there is going to be another one, they will be facing the exact same challenges. It a stills camera that has some serious video capabilities allowed by today's technological advancements, but it's never going to be perfect. Do most of the potential buyers of this camera want a huge body at all times (instead of an optional battery grip) with an active fan to continuously cool down the sensor and kill the battery life? I really don't think so. Could they do a camera more focused on video? Yes, probably, and it won't be a full-fledged stills camera anymore and it would cost even more money. They have obviously considered heat when designing this camera, which is clearly bigger in dimensions than a Sony, so it has more room for things like a heatsink, and it is likely that the LP-E6NH will have less heat build-up as well, new processor, etc. This camera was not designed for long recording times in the first place. But the option is probably there to use the external recorder and bypass that limit up to 4k60p. I am more interested in the R6, since I do think they could cripple that camera much harder if they are pricing it more aggressively. Oh, one important thing I forgot: codecs. Yes it is not a RED with variable compression RAW, but it gives a lot of options: You can shoot highly compressed onto SD cards (yes, processor intensive, but it still still superb to have that option) But also, you can also shoot higher bitrates and RAW to CFExpress. And this is all 10-bit internal (the Panasonic S1 or Nikon Z6 for instance, do not utilise the power of CFExpress) So other cameras don't offer the same level of flexibility (it is either this, or that), the 1DX Mark II in particular, a popular stills camera for video, has just been outclassed in this regard.

It's not just that, it is a lot smaller and cheaper (the kit lens, too), the S1 price hasn't dropped that much yet (I expect it this year)

Yes, I have. Although I can get even better prices if I buy slightly used from ebay.