SteveV4D

Your last comment was a joke.... You need to work on your sense of humour... 🙄

Moving away from the laboured topic of Codecs. I am interested in a few things in relation to the C70. Does the camera offer punch in focus during recording? Does the ef speeedbooster adaptor impede AF in any way. What sort of lenses are there for RF to start off with and are there any crop given its a S35 sensor. Any S35 RF lenses out there or just fullframe. I'm more familiar with Panasonic lenses than Canon; its been ages since I've seriously looked at one, though the R5 and R6 came close before disappointment again reared its head.

To be honest, when I say RAW, I am just as much referring to ProRes or any codec that is easier to edit with than H264 and H265. As I said before, these are delivery codecs not editing codecs. Whilst I'd not argue that most here don't need RAW, many would benefit from a codec that edited easier whilst keeping file size to a respectable level. So my wish is less RAW and more an editable codec other than H264 and H265.

I wasn't contributing to EOS at the time, but I have since expressed criticisms of the P4K in various related threads since despite owning one and it being my primary camera. I did read the P4K thread extensively, and although preordered, even considered cancelling based on the negatives mentioned there. And there were many discussed. Especially soon after the camera was released. Comments like the camera has a fixed screen and IBIS is as obvious as saying the C70 doesn't have RAW, but such unfiltered discussions meant that when I did get mine, I was fully aware of both pros and cons and what they would mean to my workflow. Imagine if the thread had focused only on what the camera could do and how wonderful BM was, my early days with the camera might have been quite different. Maybe frustrated to the point I didn't use it. To me a discussion on how the R5 gets RAW and the C70 doesn't is relevant. I appreciate that shooting RAW is still the exception, but if that exception means working with a codec I am happier editing with and grading better, I welcome being that exception. It doesn't make me a hobbyist or semi Professional. In fact, I am full-time professional. I agree its not essential and not a big enough negative to lead me away from the C70. I'll shoot H264 if necessary. But it won't stop me wishing the C70 had something users of the cheaper Photo camera R5 soon will have, the ability to shoot RAWlite.

Whilst I agree that the RAW back and forth discussion has definitely run its course; the last thing this thread needs is people just telling me what this camera can do and how wonderful Canon is being back in the game and delivering the goods etc etc.. I can read Canons marketing brochure for that. Any camera announcement thread should allow for talk of both the praise and the disappointments of a new camera, and shutting such chat down like lack of evf, fullframe and RAW for talk on how Canon finally strikes back is not of any interest to me. Let me make clear, I like this camera. I like it a lot and I will be seriously looking at buying one. However I want a balanced look at the pros and cons and not a fluff piece on Canon to help guide my decision. None of us have the camera yet and taking any critics of it now as though its a personal attack helps no one. Everytime we get this with new cameras, especially Canon products; we hear counter arguments like, this camera wasn't designed for you, or its made for a different market... which is crap. In a World where a hybrid does 8K when many professional video cameras do not, where we have BRAW from BM for just over a $1000, when even RED are bringing one of their cameras into the affordable range for low to mid budget users, I get weary being told what a camera should and shouldn't be. I do welcome positive talk of this camera and how this camera can work for you. I also welcome discussions where this camera may let certain people down and why. Looking at both sides will help me decide if this is the right camera for me.

You're forgetting TIFF files. And some photographers shoot jpeg. Its about choice. Something video users need. I was getting the we don't need 10 bit, I've been shooting 8 bit for years. Etc etc.. As for hijack... 🤣🤣🤣 Remind me which is the top Canon thread as published recently in Andrews top 20 list... 😉

I was using a 6 year old analogy to explain the current attitude to shooting RAW today... sorry if that was confusing... 🙄 And low/mid budget are often using external recorders... to circumvent the internal codec. Actually I came across a small video shoot in my home town of Reading. They were using Pocket 6Ks.... and shooting RAW, so not all low/mid budget shooters are avoiding it.

You're over generalising consumers. Many here on this forum were looking at the R5, Professionals included and those same people will look at the C70. I am one of them. I would argue that 8K is a feature more for a hybrid as Photographers will use it for short bursts to get stills. Features like the upcoming RAWlite upgrade is however less an R5 feature and more what I would expect on the C70 and it makes no sense for a hybrid to have it and a dedicated video camera not to. I don't care if its a low budget, mid budget or high budget, its laughable to even defend a company that offers Video RAW on a hybrid that is crippled by overheating, but passes on it on a dedicated cinema camera. This lottery of specs that Canon seems to dip in and out of for their cameras is perhaps the most frustrating aspect of their company. C200 gets RAW but not a 10 bit codec. Buy a C300 if you want both or the R5, except that overheats, so people say, if you want long recordings, you should buy a video camera, except when you do, you're not getting the same features the R5 has.

6 years ago many would say they neither needed or wanted 4K, or 10 bit... if we keep to that attitude of what is, nothing would change or improve in the Industry at all. Why do Photographers make such good use of RAW and Videographers are stuck shooting H264. If Videographers need and want H264 and H265, why do they transcode or use proxys.....? A Professional Cinema camera should look to have at least one codec that wasn't a deliverable codec. H264 and H265 are what you use to deliver video files to YouTube. Its not ideal for editing, whatever spin is given on it.

So explain the purpose of the R5 having RAW video capture??? Do hybrid shooters need it more than the examples you give?? I've shot Promo, Music Videos and events on BRAW and have benefitted from the smooth editing and extra freedom it gives. Look I like the C70. I may well buy one. But its not negative to wish for a feature I would value and which can be found in a cheaper Photo camera. Maybe everyone here loves H264 and H265 so much, they're happy with these codecs. Except they're not. They're transcoding it half the time or limiting grades so as not to bog down their computers.

I was simply explaining why the lack of excitement over the C70; its not my shopping list for a camera. 🤣🤣 I don't need 8K (definitely not) or even IBIS or even RAW TBH... I still use cameras that record H264 and as long as you have such codecs on offer for fast turnaround, why not have something that gives a bit more for those who need it. Some of us are editing and grading our own footage. I am not sure why wishing for a RAW codec that is being offered to the R5 can't be available to a dedicated cinema camera is such a hard concept to grasp.

A few years exactly. We've been waiting for it for so long now, the World has since moved on to RAW, 8K and IBIS.

Its not so much RAW, although RAWlite and BRAW have brought it to the masses; its about having an edit friendly codec. Its about the ease of editing with what you shoot with without proxy or transcode. I've shot in BRAW on a SSD drive and edited it directly on a laptop and delivered a video onsite within the hour. So quick and works well with Resolve. In comparison, H264 can take longer to edit. I actually work quicker with BRAW in Resolve than H264 in Premiere. Thumbnails load quicker, playback smoother so you can preview the finished video without encoding first. Saves so much time. A Cinema camera should offer a professional codec for editing rather than a deliverable one you need to transcode. You say RAW workflow is as time intensive as transcoding H264, no its not. The flexibility to work with what you have, to alter white balance and ISO so quickly can take the pain of correcting shots that didn't come out just right. You can apply a LUT you used when filming for quick turnover or spend more time if you need to. And yes, I have the P4K and soon P6K for that. Its not unreasonable to ask for a similar workflow from a camera costing more. That said, I do like a lot about the camera. The lack of proper codec is a negative, but for me the only major one. I can live without the evf. This camera ticks so many boxes for me; I am very tempted to look to buying one. Its the camera the R5 should have been. With Canon it feels like specs are all over the place. No consistent pattern across their line with what they offer. The R5 should have the video recording specs of the C70 and the C70 those of the R5. Then the R5 wouldn't need an overheating cripple to stop people from using it professionally and the C70 would be video camera of the decade.

I have the 24 to 105 EF lens. So I'd probably get the speedbooster. Though need another native lens for AF.

Depends how much you shoot. I would hate to do that for all I filmed...

It is when a photography camera gets it and in 8K.... Its not so much about heavy grades as giving a codec that plays well in editing suites even after grading. H264 and H265 are deliverable codecs not editing codec despite many believing them to be so. Its a great camera otherwise let down by a few things.

What is the intended use? Even as a Wedding Videpgraoher, I have benefitted from BRAW for improve workflow and handling of colour grading. When the R5 is due RAWlite, this is an omission and shouldn't be glossed over simply because of the C70s other more positive attributes. It offers some of what I need, but not all. Give this camera Cinema RAWlite and this would be a perfect camera for me. Maybe 4K downsampled from a 6K one would be a nice addition too.

To be fair RS on the R5 isn't that bad and DR could improve with the cLog3 update. The R5 fails not for the sensor, or performance, but by its software induced limits on recording times. Its a shame that Canon does a give and take policy with its gear and the C70 is no different. That said, I love what the camera offers, even if the lack of professional codecs like RAW or ProRes limit the camera in my eyes. Its taking the small size of a mirrorless and adding proper video controls and features. I'm in 2 minds about getting one.

I was replying to a single post and answer that summed up what the entire thread had demonstrated.. I feel this thread has only shown personal needs and not whether there is a wider need for others to adopt fullframe or larger sensors.

Its still confusing 'necessary for an individual' to 'necessary for everyone'... if we are narrowing it down to what is necessary for a single individual, the answer is massive and can cover such a wide range to make the question pointless to ask in the first place. Maybe the thread has turned from Is Fullframe necessary, to whether larger sensors is desirable to certain needs and style.

This argument overlooks the use of speedboosters, the fact that smaller sensors can via adapters use lenses designed for larger sensors and the issue that many fullframe lenses have crops for certain frame rates.. ie Panasonic for 60p. For me the visual qualities I require come with codec and colour science. Not sensor size.

None of it is even proving that fullframe is necessary. I could argue why shooting film is necessary and produces a look different to digital, but it still doesn't prove it necessary.

Probably not.. but it is a camera designed to do both regardless of how you rig it. Like my GH5 rigged to a gimbal is still a hybrid designed for a Photographer to use. But no one would shoot photos that way. At least, I hope not. 😆

Oddly enough no. My main point is that smaller sensors can cost more than fullframe. Having more money doesn't necessary equate choosing fullframe. Its as much down to personal choice of what you need or want to use - hybrids, smaller cameras, larger cinema cameras. I wouldn't buy a Sony as I've never liked using or editing their footage. And to be honest, I don't shoot enough photos to need a camera that does both. Maybe one fullframe I am thinking about to cover those small jobs where I do. Mostly though, I want to stick to dedicated video cameras.

All those movies I've seen that were shot on S35 are now rubbish as they were using a cropped sensor... 🤣🤣