gt3rs

Is also 1400 USD + tripod collar vs. 500 USD used.... and I think is a bit the point I'm trying to make this middle ground lenses are more hard to justify that cheap or the really expensive one.

For me is both, did you notice that most A/B test are in good light, minimal camera movements, static subject, using the main camera and not the wider and tele as they have less quality. Just look at this when moving and using the wide camera a Gopro is much better than the iPhone 15 and a Gopro is so far away in quality than a mirrorless: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEfFk5GR5y0 Somebody with great skills can make very good video out of in iPhone but imo there still no magic to make a super tiny sensor and lens look like a FF camera, the gap is narrowing but is still there.

No way as I truly hate taking videos and picture with my iPhone, but is a great tool for the times that I cannot or is too impractical to take a larger mirrorless camera. I'm still not sold on the fake DoF although now you can do it after the fact so is less risky. No aperture, hard to control SS, limited low light capability, max 120mm tele... and for me I just hate all the touch UI, no dials, no evf, etc... last but not least no removable storage.... so you need to resort on using external SSD or external CFExpress+Reader that defeated a bit the whole phone idea... Do I use it now yes (13 pro max), will I move to the 15 pro max, probably, would it replace mirrorless camera even for private stuff? Not for me but I'm the one going around in NY for pleasure with a R5+28-70 so everyone is different.

The EF 70-200 F4 IS is really a gem... on the opposite the OG EF 24-105 imo is one of the worst lens I had, the EF 24-70 2.8 II is much better. I don't think Canon have a lens problem as there are so many EF lens out there.... I think the strategy to offer first the two extreme makes sense. I'm sure more 1.4 options will come. There was another thread complaining about no improvements of RF over EF counterpart and I don't want to repeat myself but people should try both before talking nonsense. Btw Sony 50 1.2 is a also quite big and heavy 70g lighter and similar size as the RF, the Nikon one is 100g heavier than the RF and much bigger: https://camerasize.com/compact/#903.787,634.975,907.934,ha,t ...

I think they got quite right, people that can afford expensive glass will go buy them at premium and sell their EF ones that allow people with less budget to get great lenses. The sport example is a good one just look how affordable a EF 200-400 1.4x has become.. Would you buy a mid range RF 85 1.4 or a cheaper used EF 85 1.2? Would you buy a mid range RF 24-70 F4 when you can get a cheaper used EF 24-70 II 2.8? Most of the people criticizing RF lenses they don't own them, is funny to observe. I sold my EF 24-70 II 2.8, EF 50 1.2, RF 35 1.8 (btw very good lens for the price) and EF 24 1.4 for a RF 28-70 2.0, one of the best decision ever, but this also allowed people to get really good EF lens cheaper. If the EF lens support would not be as good as it is on the R cameras, I would agree but they mostly work better than on DSLR.... so plenty of good options and some gets cheaper and cheaper, it is a good thing for people with limited budget.

Why Apple should invest on a shrinking and niece market is really not in their DNA and mission....

Really? Not sure why you are so aggressive? You can make any ratio out of a square sensor but not the inverse. It allows also auto horizon level, better stabilization and more anamorphic support too but according to you I’m the only one interested in the world in this but yet Gopro hero 11, 11 mini and 12 have a 8:7 sensor, Insta360 go 2 and 3 have a 1:1 sensor… https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/features/i-think-gopro-hero-11-blacks-87-sensor-is-the-future-of-smartphone-photography The new Black magic phone app let you film landscape by keeping the phone portrait a square sensor would be even better and so on… But honestly why are you attacking me? Having a bad day? This place is getting worse by the day… call me ignorant and arrogant because I asked a feature in a forum that some companies are already implementing…. wow

We are also talking about photo either from video or directly as photo. On top of social media, a lot of publications, books or photobooks have portrait format so I don't agree with your assessment. Just one example the hockey team that I cover wanted a vertical photo for their year book and also an horizontal poster for the vip area of one of the most iconic photo we did. It was a live action no time to rotate bla bla. Square sensor problem would be solved. As it was a 45Mpix photo I could crop vertically for the year book cover. Plus what about anamorphic... stabilization, auto horizon level so many application for a square sensor. Not everybody just do films....

iPad with iPadOS 17 and USB-C supports UVC so you can use them as monitor with a cheap hdmi-usb-c dongle. Will iPhone 15 support this too this is the question…

From a 8K you get a portrait 3:4 image of almost 14 Mpixels, a vertical 9:16 video slightly above 4k. From a 45 Mpixels 3:2 photo you get a 3:4 22.5 Mpixels portrait one. For my uses cases I rarely take pictures in portrait mode as I can give two versions instead of one by shooting landscape. For the video I never shot vertically as most vertical video are for social media anyway and 4k is more than adequate. I found framing in post vertical video it gives me more control. Btw I hate vertical video but I'm just too old 🙂 Never the less why no 3:2 open gate RAW !?! Or although I understand is much more complex why no square sensors (I know then square EVF, square LCD, incompatibility with many lenses etc...). Gopro and Insta started to get this right in some of their cameras...

I saw that it has one big flaw for me it needs a battery and is a Sony battery that I have none. So one more charger, set of batteries, etc. Would have had power by USB also I would have brought it… Maybe as on the iPhone 15 Pro with USB-C there will be more elegant solutions…

I also from time to time intercut to (R5, R5c) iPhone footage, you can spot it but most of the audience does not even notice. I even intercut 360 reframed content that is even more lower quality. But is more important to get the shot. As you said not everywhere is easy to be there with a R5 type of rig. I also started to record with the iPhone on top of the R5c as I tend to use really long lenses in the 300mm to 600mm range so I can have a second view much wider with the iPhone (77mm). I have a 13 Pro Max and contemplating a move to the 15 Pro Max for 3 reasons: 120mm instead of 77mm, satellite emergency (I can skip the Garmin and its subscription) and the most important for me the workflow as the lighting (non really lighting speed 🙂 ) is a huge pita. Hopefully with direct SSD/CFexpress reader support I can record directly or quickly copy to an external storage. I use to use Filmic Pro but is now a robbery and also the UI imo was a bit cumbersome especially when I'm in hectic places so I went back to the normal camera app. I just installed the Blackmagic one and it seems ok but I need to test it out more. Overall I truly hate filming with the iPhone but it get the job done when it would be hard to have a bigger camera. Btw my R5 in 8K RAW never overheated but I had once the iPhone on top in 4k 25fps overheating and shutting down 🙂 It would also be cool if you could use it directly as a wired monitor..... but for Apple is too much to ask...

I have an iPhone 13 pro max and I some time use video that I intercut with my R5c and R5, is better than gopro and co imo but I really hate the shooting experience due to the internal storage and slow transfer speed and hard to manage file system..... also it does not keep the focal length selected e.g. 3x. I used iFilmic in the past, imo also not relly great, but now with the new subscription is a robbery. The new on is intriguing if you can really shoot to an external SSD or maybe even a CFexpress or SD reader... this would be good. I also hope that with the USB-C transferring video to a pc will be much faster and reliable. When I shoot athletes with long lenses I mount the iPhone on top of the flash shoe so I have a "safety always in focus version" and a more wide shot too, but the 77mm is still too short, I feel that 120mm is a good focal length for this. So in one pass I get 400mm/500mm and 120mm.

Probably the most underwhelming release in gpro history. This should have been a free firmware. Ripping off customers… Gopro really needs a new leadership.

1 2 3 … ready fo the next Gopro disappointment. It seems a HW and Firmware fix of the Hero 11 issues but of course they will introduce new issues.

I don't want another device just another Rode RX on my second camera. If I have the RX sending TC to Deity or similar I cannot send the audio to the camera... a dual RX would make it much more simpler. I don't want an additional set of devices. 2 TX, 2 RX, 2 Cameras a common scenario.

As far as I could see you can have only one receiver, you can jam sync a camera, move to the next and so on but you cannot have 2 receivers at the same time.

I agree with you, classical youtube non sense, yes is not a professional time code system but for 400$ you get time coded 2 x 32 bit recording, really nothing to complain about. Would be cool if in the future they would support additional receivers to sync time code across cameras instead of jam sync.

There was a thread a few months ago claiming that RF lenses were not a step forwards compared to their EF equivalents, happy now to see that I'm not the only one seeing the improvements and value. Having said this adapted EF lenses works so well that people can skip RF altogether either by using their collection or by buying quite discounted used EF lenses.

You are right that is far from a scientific test, especially when they do not publish the AF settings that they are using. Btw the use case of people facing away is something that improved a lot with the latest firmware the video was made before the new fw. The stabilization test is a wired one either you mount both cameras on the same bracket or is not really scientific.... is even a different framing..... As I said multiple times the Z9 seems a really good camera, so it make sense to learn and test both cameras before investing.

Yes, it has mymenu. You can also assign a button to change the S&F framerate quicky, but it does not work for me as I normally go from 8k RAW to 4k 120 10bit and back.

I think best for you is to rent a R5c for a day and try the hell out it. For me when I do video 9 out of 10 times I pick the R5c as A cam and eventually the R5 as B cam. If you plan to use quite a bit 4k 100/120 the R5c is noticeable sharper than the R5, can also record audio (separately on the SD) but does not have Face AF in 100/120 fps. I try not to use the R5 in 100/120 as the quality is not too great and the editing is a pain due to h265 10bit 4:2:2, R5c XAVC so much faster. One recent R5c 4k 120 fps segment. Don't look at the motion cadence as it was shoot at 1/2000, F2.8. It was a test for a lens and I did not have an ND filter for that lens diameter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AjNP0MdwXs Fro anything slow motion R5c wins hands down with 8k and 4k 60p and better quality 4k 120...

@Django I feel that by the time you decide the R5 II and maybe even the R5c II will be available 😃 Maybe a used R5 when the new model will be announced is not a bad idea.

You are the one confused that has no idea why a gopro or insta360 or DJI Osmo have a much more effective image stabilization than Sony (including Catalyst) Nikon, Canon, etc. Is called physic and the longer the lens the bigger the shake will be amplified, it will have more motion blur, much bigger delta between same pixel and more rolling shutter effect due to sensor size, and the result is not comparable. So please don’t call me confused when you have zero explanation why…. Btw I wrote software in the past for images alignment so I kind of know how eis algorithms works

It is the sensor size that dictates the lens length in mm for the same FOV. Let's assume you need the same framing so the same FOV of ~150°, Gopro needs a ~2.9mm lens, APSC ~9.5mm lens, FF ~15mm lens. FF 15mm will have more shake and blur than 2.9mm. It is not the only reason but it also a key aspect why 360 cameras have even better stabilization than Gopros. Insta360 X3 has a FF 6.7mm equivalent where Gopro is FF 12mm equivalent. Now if you take in consideration that Gopro is 12mm FF equivalent, rarely you will film with a FF at 12mm but more > 24mm this challenge is even bigger. Also the smaller the sensor size the less rolling shutter issue tends to have (assuming similar tech), as an example Gopro has a rs of 1/240 in video mode that is twice as fast as the fastest "consumer" FF camera A7s III at 1/120... I'm sure EIS could do better that the current status especially if you would allow much bigger crop, use really high shutter speed and have faster sensors but for the moment it cannot compete with Gopro size sensors.