Canon EOS R5 - What Panasonic, Sony and Fuji can do to fight THE 8K BEAST

[SteveV4D]

29 minutes ago, chadandreo said:

I owned a GH5, XT3 and a 1DX II and let me tell you there is a world of difference. I sold my Panasonic kit Not too long after getting the XT3. 
canon - 10+ years, GH4/5 - 5 years and the Fuji for 1.5 years. 
 

sure there are many workarounds and complicated setups the can make MFT work, but at the end of the day in cannot do what a larger sensor can do. I don’t think every shot needs to be wide open and crushed backgrounds, but when it calls for it it’s available. To me, it is like someone saying  “ I don’t need a car with a trunk because I can strap everything on the roof.”

Having worked with MFT for years, I can honestly say there is no need to have complicated setups and workarounds for MFTs.  What on earth were you asking of MFTs to make such a statement?

I have 12mm 1.4 primes for wide angle and pleasing shallow depth of field.  Speed boosters aren't that complicated and whilst yes, it's not fullframe, MFT has it's own advantages too.  Smaller camera bodies and lenses.  More adaptable to a wider range of lenses.  Less rolling shutter. 

Smaller sensors than fullframe certainly have their uses.  A lot of cinema cameras use S35 not fullframe, like the C200 and C300.  They seem to get by quite easily.  Personally I prefer S35 over MFT.  I find it a good compromise between MFT and fullframe, each sensor having their own disadvantages.

However I've never struggled with MFTs and with a variety of lenses, seem to be able to cope very well with a variety of locations and tight spots and still get a good angle and bokeh.

[Miklos Nemeth]

Still it is just a kind of rumor, even the Canon EOS 1D X Mark III is not available, it was announced to be available mid February 2020, actually now, and I'm definitely looking forward to hands-on evaluation by reviewers like AR, here. As for how the heck Canon could make a 8K video camera while the S1H cannot? The only explanation I can think of is that all recent 24M cameras, A7III, Z6, S1, S1H, fp, all use basically the same Sony sensor (technology), and somehow Canon managed to make a sensor that is revolutionary and better in this regard than the Sony sensor technology. It could be just by-mistake or whatever.  

[Pedro]

If they are not crippled the R5 and R6 will be very expensive.
I'm betting Sony will deliver slightly better specs than their current FF line up such as 4k10bit internal, 4k60, maybe 6k and release it at half the price of the competition.


 

[Andrew Reid]

52 minutes ago, Miklos Nemeth said:

Still it is just a kind of rumor, even the Canon EOS 1D X Mark III is not available, it was announced to be available mid February 2020, actually now, and I'm definitely looking forward to hands-on evaluation by reviewers like AR, here. As for how the heck Canon could make a 8K video camera while the S1H cannot? The only explanation I can think of is that all recent 24M cameras, A7III, Z6, S1, S1H, fp, all use basically the same Sony sensor (technology), and somehow Canon managed to make a sensor that is revolutionary and better in this regard than the Sony sensor technology. It could be just by-mistake or whatever.  

Canon making their own sensors is a big advantage on the others who tip-toe around with half a foot in the door of the design process and 100% of the manufacturing contracted out to Sony who have a virtual monopoly. Fuji, Nikon and Panasonic all have their own designs, Panasonic even has the organic sensor tech with TowerJazz and there are other manufacturers like Samsung capable of matching or exceeding Sony's capabilities, but I think it's an insane risk to have CMOS sensors from one supplier (Sony) in nearly ALL the current mirrorless models! Canon took a while to bring their new manufacturing plants in Taiwan online but now it appears to have paid off.

Sony will have to go lower on price with the A7S III or do something surprising like the FS5 e-ND.

[gt3rs]

1 hour ago, Miklos Nemeth said:

Still it is just a kind of rumor, even the Canon EOS 1D X Mark III is not available, it was announced to be available mid February 2020, actually now, and I'm definitely looking forward to hands-on evaluation by reviewers like AR, here. As for how the heck Canon could make a 8K video camera while the S1H cannot? The only explanation I can think of is that all recent 24M cameras, A7III, Z6, S1, S1H, fp, all use basically the same Sony sensor (technology), and somehow Canon managed to make a sensor that is revolutionary and better in this regard than the Sony sensor technology. It could be just by-mistake or whatever.  

Some users just got the 1Dx III so is shipping, probably in small quantities, but a few people have it already. 

[zerocool22]

1 hour ago, Pedro said:

If they are not crippled the R5 and R6 will be very expensive.
I'm betting Sony will deliver slightly better specs than their current FF line up such as 4k10bit internal, 4k60, maybe 6k and release it at half the price of the competition.


 

Allthough you will be stuck with a metabones adapter if you are using EF lenses like a lot of folk. So if the EF-RF adapter is alot better (which I reckon it is) it is worth a little more money as well. 

[Trankilstef]

Just humor but I really want to know what's the catch. 

[Django]

Canon have been working on 8K for a long ass time. In fact they first presented their prototype at Canon Expo in 2015:

Canon Expo 2015: 8K Cinema EOS technology demo camera recording to four external recorders

Some footage even appeared last year:

..and here is the official page of the mammoth housed in what most thought might be the C300 mk3:

https://www.canon-europe.com/photokina/8k-camera/

"Capture exceptional detail with our first 8K camera in a Cinema EOS system."

Now what is sort of mind-boggling to me is that they are finally introducing this tech in a consumer camera first! 🤯

 

[Andrew Reid]

Especially after so long telling customers that 1080p is good enough and they don't need 4K!

As U-turns go it's pretty huge.

[Miklos Nemeth]

2 hours ago, gt3rs said:

Some users just got the 1Dx III so is shipping, probably in small quantities, but a few people have it already. 

I guess they were preproduction models only. When AR, PB or JB, so some reputable videographers, report their results and opinion, then I'd say we can start talking about reality and not hyperboles. I used to have the EOS R, and the gigantic 1.8x 4K crop totally killed it, I simply wasn't able to get myself used to the practice that my excellent 16-35f4L wide lens is just a paperweight for 4K video. The first version of the video AF on the EOS R was really disappointing vs what Sony had at that time even in A7III let alone A9. Today the EOS R's video AF is quite OK, even to my high expectations, too. So, I'll wait and see, if this just rumor-announced EOS R5 is really up to the hype and fanfare. I agree with the commenters that a year ago Canon wasn't even able to make non-cropping 4K, had zero experience in sensor stabilization, and suddenly they are releasing a camera that simply jumps over, leapfrogs evolutionary steps, from "stone age to rocket era" with one jump. We'll see, in a couple of months I guess.

[Matthew19]

My 1dxIII will be here Monday - preordered on Adorama. 

[Andrew Reid]

Canon were first to 4K in a stills camera as well... 1D C in 2012.

Panasonic we tend to appreciate because they are first at accessible prices. Sony are usually second with even better specs, but lately seem to have forgotten whether the accelerator pedal is on the left or right of the car.

Canon clearly had the technology for 4K from an early stage and it seems they have repeated same step up with 8K, early too.

Being "early" isn't often associated with Canon, but R&D department seems to go a lot faster than the marketing and actual camera releases seem to suggest.

The big unknowns are:

• 4K crop factors and frame rates
• Internal RAW or not?
• 8K rolling shutter and frame rates (as well as any crops - could be 2.35:1 for all we know)
• In what modes Dual Pixel AF works and when not
• Spec and pricing of R6 (if it is 1D X III video spec and internal RAW I would go for that over 8K instead, even if more expensive than the R5)
• Codec type, bit depth and bit rates

There are MANY areas where the cripple hammer could come out but looking at 1D X III which was remarkably unscathed, unusually for Canon, it bodes well!?

[eleison]

7 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Smaller sensors than fullframe certainly have their uses.  A lot of cinema cameras use S35 not fullframe, like the C200 and C300.  They seem to get by quite easily.

Well, if you mean "get by quite easily", as in create your own set like they did the "psycho shower scene", sure.

[SteveV4D]

2 minutes ago, eleison said:

Well, if you mean "get by quite easily", as in create your own set like they did the "psycho shower scene", sure.

Yes if only they had a mirrorless fullframe camera shooting 8K when they made Pyscho.

[eleison]

3 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Yes if only they had a mirrorless fullframe camera shooting 8K when they made Pyscho.

Things are definitely a lot better now.  Hitchcock and his film crew would be amazed.  Since they were shooting film,  they would have to stop and reload every 5 minutes.  I think each roll/ cassette of film only shot 8minutes at most.  Imagine having to switch sd cards every 8minutes, and store them somewhere.  They also had to figure out how to build a set, and than actually build one - now, if they were shooting equipment that we have now; they can probably get away with just shooting on location if they wanted.  Also, I'm not 100% sure, but sensor technology has eclipsed film technology from the 60's so less light is needed; and you don't have to carry several different "box speed".  Not too mention all the grading options that we have now compared to the super35 film days.  Lets not also forget the ability to crop.  It's really hard to crop  film so it wasn't widely done.  I don't really remember an instance that they did. 

I do declare, if Alfred came back from the dead today, he would get a stiffy followed by a heart attack muttering to his grave saying "what a bunch of stupid gear heads" shaking his head at this forum.  Laugh all you want, but Alfred would give his left nut for a full frame 8k camera.  When George Lucas started with digital filming, a few decades ago; he paid like 1 million dollars for a 1080p camera?  I'm not sure what it was, but it was expensive ----- for 1080pm.  Let that sink in. 

But than, who knows?  He might have also given his right nut for a MFT 8k camera.. hahahahahahah

[Cliff Totten]

Yeah,....with this "8k" R5, I would almost best my very life that it wont be anywhere close to the doomsday dream camera that we all want it to be. I fully expect that Cannon will cripple it in the grossest and most heart-stabbing ways. By the time we read all the Cannon asterisks and fine print clarifications, 90% of the air will fly out of our balloons. Cannon's DNA will just never allow them actually build the camera we all want.

Oh well....it was nice to dream for a couple of months...

[Caleb Genheimer]

This past year, I’ve had a HUGE personal revelation concerning digital cameras. Firstly, the Pocket 4K has opened my eyes to the image quality and flexibility that is missing in any camera that lacks RAW or near-raw codec options. It really is a sticking point for me at this juncture, and sets apart what I would trust as a professional tool from what is prosumer. I just don’t want that uncertainty about quality during production. 
 

Secondly, I recently got a 16mm camera, and there’s still in 2020 NOTHING digital that can touch real film. There’s just not. The nuance in color, detail, highlight retention, everything... it is simply unmatched. Only ARRI gets anywhere near the ballpark. The myriad of other cameras, even cinema cameras, are of course capable of producing beautiful images, but they don’t come out of the gate like ARRI does. 
 

That first test roll of Vision3 500T scanned you an SSD full on blew my mind, and I was going into it expecting to be impressed. 
 

Now, instead of obsessing over which new multi-thousand dollar digital camera body I should commit to for the next four or so years, I’m obsessing over what I might shoot on a few thousand dollars of celluloid this year. 
 

IMO everyone should shoot film once. Honestly, 16mm cameras are not terribly expensive, even good ones with crystal sync and quiet operation for sound recording compatibility. Excluding getting your own, many rental houses still have SRs just sitting around, and will rent them out for very reasonable rates. Kodak has labs all over the place, most of them staffed by wonderful and helpful people. 

 

Obviously, there’s no permanent replacement for the convenience of digital cameras in the modern content creation environment, but film is also a more viable and accessible option for the occasional project than most people realize... and as more people use it, it will be more likely to stay alive and well. Using film re-adjusted the way that I shoot digitally as well.

[chadandreo]

11 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Having worked with MFT for years, I can honestly say there is no need to have complicated setups and workarounds for MFTs.  What on earth were you asking of MFTs to make such a statement?

I have 12mm 1.4 primes for wide angle and pleasing shallow depth of field.  Speed boosters aren't that complicated and whilst yes, it's not fullframe, MFT has it's own advantages too.  Smaller camera bodies and lenses.  More adaptable to a wider range of lenses.  Less rolling shutter. 

Smaller sensors than fullframe certainly have their uses.  A lot of cinema cameras use S35 not fullframe, like the C200 and C300.  They seem to get by quite easily.  Personally I prefer S35 over MFT.  I find it a good compromise between MFT and fullframe, each sensor having their own disadvantages.

However I've never struggled with MFTs and with a variety of lenses, seem to be able to cope very well with a variety of locations and tight spots and still get a good angle and bokeh.

Simply what works for me might not work for another person. I am a documentary filmmaker and I cannot afford to miss a shot tinkering around with a camera to get the look I want. I would use the GH5 for interviews and other stationary shots without issue, but when on a gimbal, run-n-gun setting or a moving subject, I ran into a lot of issues especially when working with the Metabone.

Just as you mentioned, I much prefer S35 to MFT.

Another thing, as a hybrid shooter, there is no debate in the fact that Panasonics Contrast AF is not usable for video and barely for photos. I have shoot thousands of hours with the GH5 and I have put it through its paces and it was a great system at the time when it came out, but Pana dropped the ball with the AF. Technology is evolving rapidly.  WHen traveling I would have to bring a GH5 and 5D for photo and video, now its either the 1DX II or X-T3.  

Also, the lenses might be smaller on the GH5, but the price isnt much different than comparable lenses for FF or S35. 

I have found the X-T3/S35 to be the perfect medium when it comes to size, IQ, DOF, Low Light, etc. Also the hype around Fujis color science is the real deal. I greatly do miss being able to record to 2 cards and the GH5 menu system. 

 

Edit: I use the Canon C-Line for jobs with the right budget. 

[OliKMIA]

Just for fun

Other than that, as I said earlier, I expect some sort of crippling/strong limitation on 8K in this small body. The real decision maker will be the 4K specs (crop, codec, IQ, etc.). And hopefully something below $4k...The 1Dx3 is nice and all that but that's a $6K brick with fixed screen. Not very user/gimbal friendly.

 

[Andrew Reid]