Django

Right, but according to Gerald Undone, the C70 actually has superior DR than FX6/A7S3 (with NR turned off) at 60p and below. So it's kind of a toss up as far as DR imo.

You’re right, hadn’t realized the FX6/FX3/A7S3 can’t do 4K S35 crop, that eliminates a ton of lens & punch-in options. I guess advantage R5/R6 who can do both and C70 as well with the speed booster.

8K is no joke. Forum users like @gt3rs use it to reframe & grab stills amongst other user cases. 4K HQ mode on R5 does exactly that (8K downsampled 4K). It DEFINITELY shows finer & clearer 4K than non-oversampled 1:1 4K. 1DX3/R6 also downsamples from 5.5K and shows similar 4K improvements. Personally, after experiencing 10-bit 4:2:2 log on R6, I can't go back to 8-bit log for grading. MJPEG is also a stone-age codec to manage. Good riddance. That said, I can't deny early Canon CS has a certain mojo (still own my early 5D's & C100). 5D3 ML 14-bit RAW is still the golden standard as far as I'm concerned color-wise. Would be interesting to see how R5 RAW and 10-bit Clog fares against a 1DC.

Sony has a 'look' but the sensor is only a small part of it. As others mention, the color science, image processing, picture profiles, codecs/resolution, lenses etc have a much stronger impact on final IQ. For the most part, Sony makes damn good sensors which is why other manufacturers that can't do better in-house buy them.

The Canon VariND adapter is the only native behind lens solution for a hybrid mirrorless system AFAIK. I can’t wait to receive mine, game changer for sure.

There are several tests out there that have shown it overheating, not to mention why would the FX3 add active cooling if it didn’t have overheating? As for my A7iii comment, I was referring to the 6K oversampled IQ vs 4K 1:1 readout of the A7Siii. Obviously the A7S3 has other strong advantages such as 10-bit internal, super low rolling shutter & 4K120p.

@gt3rs Loving those screen grabs, I hadn't even thought of the 8K RAW benefits for that purpose. For any type of fast action just scrub to that perfect frame, extract it, reframe, retouch.. etc. Just brilliant. That and the 4K120p kinda makes me regret not splurging the extra cash for an R5. Still couldn't really justify it at this particular point in time with work so slow here post-COVID. Also mad envious, ski resorts are shut down here in France. Where is that by the way? Sick hors piste action..

Nah.. "wide DR" is Cine line only unfortunately. love that profile.

The A7S3 overheats too, just not as bad and it can't do 8K or RAW. Its 4K isn't oversampled either so in some ways the older cheaper A73 has a more detailed IQ. Also 12MP for stills is a major downside (vs the 45MP on R5). If you're not a hybrid shooter and only video matters than you might as well skip the R5 & A7S3 and go straight for FX3/FX6 or C70 imo. Right, my point was that the Nikon Z6/Z7 can't do any type of internal log which is kind of a joke. Personally, I can't go back to 8-bit 4:2:0 log after having 10-bit 4:2:2 log, difference is major when it comes to grading.

I've never dealt with Canon USA as I'm EU based but have always heard their CPS service was good. You mention this happened during Covid lock-down, perhaps that is the culprit? Good luck with Sony CPS service, I heard they have the slowest turnover for repairs. That said FX6 + A1 sounds like a fire combo. The overheating timers have been proven to be artificial, especially on the initial firmware. Doesn't really matter if you're in Cali or Antartica. There is an easy hack to work around this though and basically start shooting immediately after it overheats. You could also fallback to 4K non HQ mode which never overheats. Not ideal perhaps but its the price to pay for such features as 8K downsampled 4K in 10-bit 4:2:2 with DPAF. FYI, the Z6 can't even do internal log in 8-bit.

@TomTheDP Not complaining either, 20ms is indeed fine and you can get down to 15ms in FF UHD just by shooting in 4K60p. Overall I'm finding R6 to be excellent bang for the buck.

Right, the FHD is miles better than on previous gen Canons but you won't be getting the yet unrivalled SOOC 4k downscaled FHD like on the C100. I'm holding on to my C100 despite its age for that purpose alone.

I haven't found specific test numbers for R6 RS in FHD but they should be similar/identical to 1DX3: 11ms 25-60p & 7ms in 120p.

Sorry, scratch that I didn't drink my morning coffee: R6 does 20.3ms in S35 mode. It drops down to 15ms only at 4K50/60p.

@Simon Young R6 can do full DPAF in all modes including FF 4K60p. No 1.3x mode but S35 crop mode does also half the RS to 15ms.

I'd be curious to see A7S3 vs R5/R6/1DX3. Sony has the advantage in RS, DR, codec options & lowlight but Canon now has the edge in resolution, oversampling, internal RAW and still better SOOC colours, AF & lack of noise reduction.

I recently picked up an R6 which shares the same sensor and I'm honestly quite impressed by the (10-bit 4:2:2) 5.5K downsampled 4K IQ. To me it just strikes the perfect balance of file size / IQ ratio. Rolling shutter is pretty severe in 24/25p but somewhat mitigated by DIS+IBIS and indeed shooting in 50/60p halves the RS to acceptable performance.. The sensor also has something imo, which the previous 5DIV / EOS R lacked.. also noticed fine grain at high ISO compared to the banding issues in previous gen Canons. The R6 overheats though and doesn't have the 1DX3 5.5K Raw and most importantly just doesn't quite feel pro A-level. Same as the RF lenses, something feels lost in translation with the mirrorless line quality build wise. In the end, RF mount is the future for Canon (if only for the EF Vari-ND adapter & speedbooster for S35) and IBIS is just too convenient to go back to shaky handheld 4K imo. That said 1DX3 is definitely the last of the mohicans as far as I'm concerned and definitely deserves some kind of in-class award in that regard. Now let's see what R1 brings to the table.

As someone invested in both Canon & Sony systems I can assure you I quite realise the fact that you can get great IQ out of both systems, and that in 95% cases the end client/viewer will not know the difference. While these type of blanket statements are obviously true, they don't really advance the discussion within the filmmaking community that ARE aware of key differences that WILL make a difference in the actual shooting environment. And while native lens selection & ergonomics are subjective, other technical details like sensor size, resolution, codecs, raw support, ENDs etc are not. Getting back to the subject of sensor size (of which I might create its own thread) I think it's really interesting the route Sony took with putting FF sensors inside their traditionally S35 cine cams. I think this may be an advantage. The Canon R5 (and even R6 to some extent) is kinda proof that those sensors can actually output superior IQ to their S35 counterparts. It's kind of a an odd situation when you're consumer hybrid camera can shoot 8K Raw and you're $15K C500 II flagship can't !

I think you're missing the point here. There is something new here and that is that Sony has started placing FF sensors instead of S35 sensors in all their cine line. It's a pretty BIG deal and certainly changes a lot, including some of those factors you are mentioning such as noise. TC is present in both products so I don't even know why you are listing it as a difference. By the way, I already mentioned that in the end it's a question of ecosystem but that doesn't mean we can't compare two new cine cameras from competing brands in a similar price bracket. Yeah the Canon speed booster is interesting, I'm not sure its available yet though as I haven't seen a single review of it. That said, from my experience with Metabones, they are handy tools but the IQ does suffer a bit and its just not the same as having a native FF sensor. Lets not forget a FF sensor can also crop to S35. Now the FF/S35 DoF not changing can be seen as an advantage or disadvantage depending on your preference. Perhaps a FF hybrid (R5/R6) + a S35 (C70) cine combo would give you best of both worlds and hence be the most versatile solution. Definitely an interesting argument you are making there.

This test is kind of an eye opener. Seems Sony's strategy to fit FF sensors inside their cine FX line is the right move vs Canon. Better low-light, better AF etc. And with the E-ND the Sony really has a tech lead. In the end as he points out its a question of ecosystem but it does seem to me FX6 > C70. Any C70 users care to comment?

Damn someone got a sweet deal on an A7S3!! I agree though, I severely dislike Alpha bodies and rarely if ever use EVF for video. FX3 is the first Sony mirrorless hybrid that doesn’t look/feel like consumer grade photo camera. The active cooling is probably the most significant addition on such small high performance cameras. If Sony indeed adds a few missing cine features like DCI, scopes etc FX3 could be a bombshell!

@TomTheDP Canon R6 uses 1DX3 sensor and hence has abysmal RS in 4K25p (30ms) switching to 4k60p halves the count down to 15ms though, so for fast action better to shoot in that mode on that camera. R5 has much better RS performance. A7S3/FX3 are the FF mirrorless kings with a whopping low 8.7ms in 4K25p. This alone places them way ahead of the curve for fast movement shots. FX3 is growing on me, seems like a superb camera for stealthy run & gun.

S1H has 29.7ms RS in 6K and 24.2ms in FF 4K which actually places it around 1DC (25ms) & A7S (24ms). Definitely poor RS performance by 2021 standards.

@Dunjoye not sure what you mean, I find the IQ super clean. Much less noise than on any previous gen Canon tbh. Obviously high-ISO introduces noise, but I find the noise on R6 to be very fine grain and quite filmic compared to the horrible banding present on older sensor models. You can also turn NR off which is good. Re: AF Lens noise I don't have much experience with RF lenses but they do seem louder than their L counterparts. I've noticed quite few RF have open barrel front moving elements so that could be part of it. Fast F1.2 and hybrid macro lenses like the RF35 are going to struggle to be silent as well. Optically, the RF lenses are quite amazing though. I've got my eyes on the RF 15-35mm 2.8L IS. I don't do much telephoto stuff and like to shoot close to my subjects.

STM is much quieter and faster than adapted USM lens but there is an external moving element so if you're planning on using a shotgun mic, it could still pick up movement during fast focus shifts in a quiet environment.