DBounce

Seems I've gotten pretty good at understanding how Canon will cripple their new cameras? ???Or maybe they read my post, so they know what to cripple? I bet Canon will cripple the "Pro" version of the EOS R by adding that new sensor with BSI and DPAF... with Eye Dectect that works. And I also bet they'll screw us over by adding IBIS, dual card slots and a higher resolution EVF... a wider flip out screen and raw output ? We can only hope they remember that CLog is for losers and leave it out. Dam you Canon, I really hope you don't dare put out such a camera.

I'm not saying it won't. I love to see the boundaries pushed. But there is more to the image than just color... motion cadence is perhaps even more important for video. It's hard to pin down. But having had both cameras side by side for two months and doing exhaustive test of both systems... I can tell you that the Canon just looked more cinematic. In both motion and imagery overall. Yes the Nikon was more detailed. Yes the Nikon had less noise at higher ISOs. But regardless of that, the output from the Canon just plain looked better. I hated parting with the NIkon Z6... because I knew it was better from a technology standpoint. But in the end I just had to accept the truth; the end results looked better from the Canon. While many complained that the Canon is soft (Imagine that... don't we always complain about over-sharpened images?), the Nikon was iMO a bit too sharp. And while I found it relatively easy to increase the sharpness of the Canon's image, I soon learned that decreasing sharpness without looking artificial proved much more challenging. And yes I turned down internal sharpening on the Nikon. There is no way I am aware of to match the organic feel of the Canon. So while I am happy to hear that Nikon is working on the firmware, I knew this back when I still owned it. Personally, I don't think 12 bit color is going to make the image more organic. I don't think 12 bit image is going to change the motion cadence. It will certainly make the image more flexible in post. But then again I never felt that the Nikon lacked flexibility. The codec is not bad. And if you record externally as I did, there is ample data to bend. They are fixing something that didn't really need fixing. You'r just going to end up with bigger files. Here's a point. Remember the huge fuss with the C200? Everyone complained that they left out 10 bit when it can shoot 12 bit raw. The problem is those 12 bit files are HUGE. This is why I mostly shoot 8 bit on my C200, unless I am shooting under challenging conditions. But in controlled lighting? I shoot 8 bit all day long.

Firstly, 4k is four times the resolution as 1080p. Secondly, unless cropping in you are downsampling... which takes processing power. This idea of recording two frames doesn't work so well with moving images. It's high time we had sensors with pixel by pixel gain adjustment.

I personally think it's great. It sends a message that Canon will hear. And that will force a response. But that said, I prefer the Canon imagery which is why I parted with the Nikon. There is mojo to the Canon image that the Nikon lacks. I'm not saying the Canon is better... In fact on paper it's greatly inferior. But art cares not about spec sheets.

Because the cpu's in cameras pack the same power as a flagship smartphones made by companies with market caps of almost $1 Trillion US?

When Panasonic or Fuji finally release the organic sensor that they have been promising for the last few years. That sensor is supposed to have per pixel gain adjustment meaning NDs are no longer needed and HDR is real hdr instead of simulated or calculated HDR like on a smartphone. But who knows if/ when that will be released?

I want the new Canon BSI sensor. It’s about time they showed something new sensor wise.

You do know Canon is adding eye AF to the EOS R via firmware don’t you? I’m not knocking that the RP sounds like good value, but the EOS R has 10 bit out and CLog, magnesium alloy build and a larger battery. I feel the RP is a good option if money is an issue. However, barring that the R is still better overall. And well it should be, it cost substantial more.

Just because Nikon says it isn’t a malfunction, doesn’t mean it isn’t. ?Where have I heard this crap before?

Good thing it's not STFU?

Anyone who has ever seen a building collapse from fire knows that the structure will gradually collapse as different parts of the structure weaken from the fire. It is impossible for a building to fall uniformly from fire and impossible for steel to melt from open air fires, as open air fires simply do not burn hot enough.

Is there a problem with the EVF? Can't say I've noticed it. Not sure what the RP will bring. But as for the EOS R, while not perfect, it represents the most complete package. Yes there is a crop in 4k. But that image imo looks better... and it makes your subjects look better. No fussing in post to get it there. Reliable AF makes it a perfect B-cam to have on a slider that is automated. It consume cheap readily available media. I really believe it is the most balanced of the bunch to date.

I’ll be curious to learn how @Snowbro makes out with this update. I never experienced this issue but it would be nice to know if it is resolved.

Most here want their footage to look cinematic or filmic... I don't think the "real world" is either of those things. And I also feel most people want to look good on video... not ordinary... which of course the "real world" is. If you are trying to capture "real world"... well, don't worry about lighting... because no one has a gaffer following them around making sure they look good at every angle... and that the shadows hit their face just right. At least they don't in the "real world". Throw the rule of thirds... and every other rule out the window... the "real world" doesn't follow those rules. Gimbals... you don't need no stinking gimbals... "real world"! You'll save a bunch of time... your footage might end up looking a bit ordinary... a bit too "real world", but if that's the look your going for... good for you. However when I shoot I do want my subjects to look good. I definitely want the end product to look cinematic. I may fail in this effort more often than not... but I will continue to try to achieve the look.

Well most movies are shot on either film, Arri or Red. So I’m not sure what conditioning you are referring to? Personally, I just find Canon’s imagery more filmic overall. While colors are more pleasant and complementary. This is only my opinion of course. But if I don’t like the image... regardless of camera brand; it just means I have to do work in post to attempt to get it where I do like it. The closer it SOOC image is, the les work in post. I would love to see Sony put out a camera that crushed it in all aspects. But so far... imo, they fall short on overall image, easy of use, speed of delivery etc... YMMV.

It’s 1:03:14 into the video. With global shutter this should be really interesting.

Apparently Fuji unveiled a new modular Medium Format concept in Dubai. There is talk of Fuji adopting global shutters in order a facilitate smaller medium format bodies.

Ripped off? Can’t say I feel ripped off. And as you state, you don’t buy Canon so how can you really speak with any authority to the matter. Had the Fuji X-T3... two bodies... a full collection of lenses including MX cinema glass. Both bodies died. Yet I didn’t feel ripped off. I also wouldn’t call their cameras “shit”... but from personal experience I would be hesitant to buy from them again. The image was pretty good, but I prefer the Canon. I also owned the Nikon Z6. I wouldn’t call it “shit” but it’s AF is nowhere near as good as Canon’s. Also the image is a bit digital feeling for my taste. Reliability was good. Who was “ripped off”? Did they not get a camera they paid for? Did Canon lie about the specs? I just don’t understand the hostility?

Trust me when I tell you something like that would not have gone unnoticed by me. I’m very critical of my gear. Freezing AF would have immediately been picked up. There are thousands of these cameras in the market right now. Can’t say I’m seeing any videos describing these issues. I’m thinking your were defective.

Agreed @Django I think @Snowbro got a lemon. My R exhibits none of the freezing or banding he mentioned. If it did I would have returned it day one. Yes, RF is the future, but I think you are looking longer term for EF to be fazed out... 10 years or so. Canon are getting set to release four new EF lenses in the coming weeks.

The card slot for XQD is identical to CFExpress. The XQD card slot can be updated via firmware and it will support CFExpress with those blistering read/write speeds. I don't think raw is the issue. By right, raw should be less processor intensive as it is written without processing and in most cases only minimal compression. The only bottleneck is the recording media.

Then you are really also talking about changing the recording media also. I don't think sd cards have bandwidth for internal raw. However, if they choose to go the Nikon/S-Line route and adopt a CFExpress compatible slot on the GH6... well, internal raw could easily be accommodated. And honestly, at that point I think few would choose a P4K over the GH6. There are certainly things that Panasonic could do... but they could do those things right now with the S1/R. Why they don't is open to debate. Come to think of it... why did Panasonic put XQD/CFExpress in the S-Line? Are they, like Nikon, planning to offer internal raw recording via a firmware update? You just might be onto something.

I feel like ProRes Raw is a given externally. But internal raw is just not in the cards imo. Panasonic seem pretty committed to Contrast Detect AF; supplementing it with AI to make up for any deficiencies. Honestly, it might well prove to be successful.

IDK, the newest firmware on the S1/R looks like it was doing a respectable job with AF. The earlier firmware seemed good a drawing boxes around people and things... but those boxes didn't always translate into sharp focus. Firmware version 0.6 would seem to address this issue from the limited footage I have seen. Still, we need to see how it does under backlite conditions and in low-light. It's looking promising though. That said is it better than the competition? I don't think so. Sony's latest AF seems amazing and we all know Canon has AF nailed down pretty well. Soon enough AF alone will not be a major factor. For all it seems to bring on paper, I need to be blown away to want to invest the $10k or so to get onboard with a whole new system. And before adopting a completely new system I have to have confidence in it. At this point it's a tough sell... for me anyway. The GH6 is a different story. It builds of the success on the GH4 and GH5/S... All were/are great cameras. Good imagery, battery life, ergonomics, menus etc... But just making usable AF and better low-light doesn't seem to cut it today. The EOS R has the ND adapter... That's a step in the right direction. Panasonic could easily trump all other cameras on the market IF... and it's a big IF... they would finally put that dam organic sensor in a GH body... or the S1 for that matter... had they done that I would have preorder the S1 on announcement... bleeding edge and all. If it makes it into the GH6 then that would be a game changer for many conditions. True HDR video with no need for NDs. But many seem to feel that Panasonic will not do this. But if they don't, I cannot imagine what breakthrough technology they will add to make the GH6 more compelling than it's APSC counterparts?