ade towell

I think these are overpriced and under spec'd for video, the crops in 4k 50p are indeed lame in 2022, the Fuji XT3 has been out many years and offers more. I am being asked for 4k 50p footage a lot these days so that it can be used as slow mo if needs be. These cameras are no good for this. Also a bit disappointing there are no reasonably fast crop lenses to go with the cameras or for the C70. Hopefully soon For wildlife photography though am sure the R7 will be a big seller

https://www.videohelp.com/software/The-Levelator This is a great free bit of software that I always run my final audio mix through - don't know exactly what it does but it comes out sounding better every time

Films I've enjoyed seeing in 4k HDR on a projector are mainly those I was too young to see at the cinema and as mentioned have been digitally remastered such as The Shining (great quality and colour), Apocalypse Now (love the grainy cinematography), 2001 and then more recent films like The Matrix benefit from the remaster. One film I would love to see in 4k HDR is The Fall by Tarsem Singh

I agree but guess it's all relative, the Canon R5 is £4300, GH6 way less than half that at £2000. Think this is a great camera and with the Olympus puts M34 back on the map and hopefully has a decent future. Many folks been writing M43 off but I feel it has a lot to offer. What would really be a statement of intent would be a proper cine/eng zoom with good range, take advantage of the M43 unique sensor size, has been crying out for one for years

Looks like the C5 name is already taken R5c is so yesterday. https://www.canonrumors.com/new-reports-about-the-next-cinema-eos-camera-have-surfaced-cr1/ The name for the camera is suggested to be the EOS C5, which would be a new line of Cinema EOS cameras from Canon. The camera is a combination of the EOS R5 C and EOS C300 III, similar in appearance to the EOS R5 C, but more square, with the electric ND filter of the EOS C300 III, the professional interface of the EOS C70, and an extended battery compartment. Its XF-AVC recording format is the same as the EOS C70, but it uses a modified version of the EOS R5 C’s CMOS sensor with a total of 22.5 megapixels. With a sampling resolution of 8192×2160, it is capable of perfect oversampling to 4K 120fps, making it Canon’s current 4K 120fps product with the best image quality. When the frame rate is reduced to 72fps or less, DGO mode is turned on to provide a higher dynamic range. Unlike the current EOS C70, it does not offer RAW recording for now. Full pixel QPAF, and RAW internal recording in subsequent firmware. In terms of photography, it no longer offers a mechanical shutter and is replaced by in-body stabilization.

No IBIS is only a blessing when shooting 24mm and wider. If Canon allowed you to turn IBIS off and just use the lens IS at these wider focal lengths and then have both stabilising systems working at more telephoto then we would have the best of both worlds. I'm really not sure why Canon wouldn't allow this at least in the R6 (and R5) that I tried, it was infuriating

All good points, I've not had much luck taking stills from video unless there's little movement in the shot - slow shutter speed always creates blur, I guess shooting in 50p and 1/100 or even 100p 1/200 and bringing back to 25p in post could work but may compromise quality. In my world I don't see 8k being asked for any time soon and by then there will likely be better and cheaper camera available. To be honest most of what I shoot still gets delivered in HD, your requirements may well be different of course. I would personally take better DR and usability over higher resolution and possible future proofing Haven't noticed softness in C70 footage but maybe subconsciously that's what I've liked about it, some of the R5 8k footage I've seen looks almost too sharp and video like. Admittedly I've only seen it on 4k screen so maybe it comes into its own viewed at native resolution. Not experienced an 8k screen yet Anyway nice to have choices I think you'd probably be happy with either, both camera produce a lovely image

If you don't need the photo side of it (I think you already have an R6?) then I would say the C70 wins for ease of use, nds and audio, battery life and the DR difference is huge - brings it much closer to the big boy cameras in image quality. Adding RAW is the icing or gravy, choose your topping The only thing holding me back from C70 is no evf (I hate this recent trend) but that depends on how you use the camera, lots of folk it seems don't use them

I don't like using gimbles I want to be able to have the handheld look and IBIS helps smooth out jitters from these small mirrorless cameras without having to rig it out. Canons IBIS isn't as good as Panasonic's and Olympus, it's their 1st attempt but I would still find it useful - the wobble effect is only on really wide shots where IBIS isn't so important anyway. But 35mm and above it is a great asset to have. The external power needed to get 8k 60 is a bit of a bummer, the Anker power brick required is wider than the R5c. Now the compact camera has cables and other crap hanging off it and we're back to Franken rig. The little internal batteries don't seem to be able to run this camera for very long on some of the other shooting modes either. It will need external power. I think it is a fantastic camera and there will be some amazing stuff shot with it, I love that they have kept the evf (unlike the fx3), but for my style of shooting there are too many new gotchas

By all accounts Canon Cinema cameras have fairly poor AF compared to their stills cameras such as the R5. I'd say that was a backward step

Hmm I agree that using the video OS and it's exposure tools etc is a good thing but not when the AF quality takes such a big hit.

No more overheating and getting proper exposure controls are big improvements over the R5 and worth the fairly small price increase for many. 8k 60p needing external power is a bit of a gotcha though, keeping the horrible micro HDMI for a video orientated camera is criminal and losing IBIS is a huge disappointment - to me anyway. There's also talk of the AF for video being the lesser quality dpaf version 1 as in C70 standard rather than what folk have become accustomed to with the dpaf version 2 on recent stills cameras such as R5, R6 One step forward 2 steps back in some ways, classic Canon wanting you to buy both R5 derivatives

https://www.newsshooter.com/2021/09/02/tilta-cooling-kit-for-the-canon-eos-r5-review-does-it-actually-work/?fbclid=IwAR1dbGvyOsq7UncrDlTvAfKCXDJHTVa1z5y3MhcNlIaYFtgeYKVfJKDEqHs Seems bonkers that a product like this even has to exist but anyway the Newsshooter review is up, fan noise and all kinds of usability issues make this a no go for me but am sure some may find it useful

R6 now has c-log3 and recording to 2 cards for back up https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support/details/cameras/eos-dslr-and-mirrorless-cameras/mirrorless/eos-r6?subtab=downloads-firmware

I've got Fuji X-t4 with spare battery, 16-80mm f4 plus 35mm f2 and Smallrig cage with Hdmi clamp I am thinking of selling for £1750 if you're interested. Was f going to put it up in the marketplace. Am in the UK though...

oops sorry double post

Yes sorry it was a somewhat rhetorical question - I realise it is subjective and people have different tolerances to noise but when these figures are thrown around that are so far from what is practical and useable maybe there needs to be a universal scientific way of testing (and an agreed level of noise as a base line) otherwise it is just completely meaningless and misleading

Am just relaying what I read from some Canon users. On these crazy DR claims (Canon aren't the only ones), when does this becomes false advertising? I start to lose respect for companies when they spin these figures, at some point they should be made accountable. If Arri has 14 stops of useable DR and the market leader (Arri don't feel the need to mislead), how do the others get away with their false claims?

20 plus stops of DR claims makes me laugh, reminds me of RED marketing - but are these going to be RF or EF mount? CAnon has definitely been busy of late though not sure how present C300 III and C500 II owners will feel so soon after their pretty major investment, there has been grumbling of lack of firmware updates compared with FX9, hope Canon doesn't leave these folk out in the cold...

I've only used the S1 but yes from what I can see it holds a few advantages to the S5 other than size. IBIS is supposedly better, full size hdmi is priceless, the new firmware takes it close to the S1H, those with an S5 may be able to tell you what is better on the smaller model. With vlog upgrade I have to say the S1 image is hard to beat, DR and colour both are amazing

I think a lot comes down to what do you actually mean by affordable? I saw that as best value for money and so I would say the Fuji X-t3 gives you the best image for the price - they are going for under £600 used here, the Panasonic S1 and Fuji X-t4 you can find for about £1000 and then the S5 which is newer about £1400 used. They are all amazing cameras and represent great value with added features at different price points And as mentioned if you are happy with HD then the Canon C100 used is also a lot of camera for little money

Used Fuji X-t3, absolute bargain

Ok from what I can find out the R5 doesn't have this problem and it's yet another bit of cheap crippling from Canon. This R6 is going back there's just too many gotchas for shooting video, I would prefer to use my Fuji's - the AF is the only real plus for the R6 (and lowlight) but if I can't touch control AF when using a monitor then its useless to me. The tracking AF on the Fuji is actually pretty good and works with external monitor hooked up like every other camera should. The R6 is a nice stills camera I'll give it that. Unfortunately the R5 is just too expensive for my intended use

If I have the small camera and big screen icon enabled in HDMI display menu I get this message... "Card recording not supported. Device connected via HDMI is used instead of camera for menu display and image playback" I can only record with just the big screen icon enabled which turns off the cameras touch screen. So annoying From what you say the R5 doesn't have this limitation but Video Hummus said it did, am slightly confused or am I misreading what one of you is saying?

Interesting, does the LCD screen stay on - with the R6 if I have the cameras LCD and external screen on then I can't record to the cameras card. With just the external screen on the cameras LCD is not turned on and doesn't seem to respond to touch. Was hoping to be able to use the touchscreen for AF purposes mainly, tracking etc