What REALLY prompted Canon suddenly to get their act together with video?

[Django]

5 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

Moving back to the R5, everyone is going on about 8K RAW, but file sizes will be massive I imagine.  BRAW is very good at getting file sizes down, but I'm not sure Canons implementation of RAW is as compressed.  

But what of 4K RAW in the R5?  Is it included?  The P6K doesn't offer 4K RAW, only ProRes.  Theres some argument that the camera has to shoot at maximum resolution for RAW.  Whether true or not.  So is RAW in the R5 reserved only for 8K; in which case how useful will it be for the majority of users.  How many of you planning to buy the R5 will be shooting 8K RAW?  Especially if there is a time limit. 

At a time where I'm struggling to get my clients to receive and value 4K over HD, where does 8K actually fit into peoples workflow?  Apart from vanity projects, 'hey I'm shooting in 8K' videos, to be buried on YouTube, along with all the 6K videos out there.  

RAW is 8K only, 4K is 10-bit 4:2:2.

How useful is 8K? Nobody knows as nobody here has probably ever shot in it.

Kinda uncharted territory but I can think of a few uses. Just like when ML gave us 5D2/5D3 users RAW.

Files were enormous, recording time very limited.. but for those quick money shots it was the beez neez!

It will eventually become standard so it's also a future-proof investment. Bit like the 1DC (minus the price).

[Avenger 2.0]

1 hour ago, Django said:

How useful is 8K? Nobody knows as nobody here has probably ever shot in it.

I guess it is only useful for select projects that require extensive image manipulation.

Don't see myself doing a complete wedding in raw or even prores.

[SteveV4D]

55 minutes ago, Django said:

 

It will eventually become standard so it's also a future-proof investment. Bit like the 1DC (minus the price).

I think you can take future proof a bit too far.  😁 By the time I live in that future of 8K, there will be loads of choices for 8K cameras, all of which will be an improvement on the first one to adopt it.

Of course if you buy the 8K now and then save all those 8K files for that future, good luck.  Aside from the huge amount of drives you'll need; by the time you get to that 8K future, you'll be shooting on 16K and those 8K files will be so old tech.  😅

[SteveV4D]

16 minutes ago, Avenger 2.0 said:

 

Don't see myself doing a complete wedding in raw or even prores.

I film Weddings with my Pocket 4K set to BRAW.  Other cameras are sadly H264.  At Q5 setting, it's not much larger than ProRes, but so worth it.  Not just for being able to adjust ISO for those shots where lighting caught me out, but also because it edits so smoothly.  It was so frustrating editing H264 in Premiere.  Thumbnails would take ages to load.  Playback choppy even before effects were added.  In Resolve, I can add effects and still playback the image.  Not so well with the H264 files alas; but its saved me so much time and hassle doing the switch last year to BRAW and Resolve.  I actually enjoy editing these days, as opposed to wanting to smash my computer and send foul messages to adobe.

[Django]

47 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

I think you can take future proof a bit too far.  😁 By the time I live in that future of 8K, there will be loads of choices for 8K cameras, all of which will be an improvement on the first one to adopt it.

Of course if you buy the 8K now and then save all those 8K files for that future, good luck.  Aside from the huge amount of drives you'll need; by the time you get to that 8K future, you'll be shooting on 16K and those 8K files will be so old tech.  😅

I think you're looking at this the wrong way. It isn't about saving 8K files for later. It's about you're 2020 camera investment having lasting power for the years to come. Personally, I hate flipping gear. the longer I can own a camera the better. Hell I still find use for my 2012 C100 or my 2005 5D Classic.

Some people still use/love the 1DC, even though its 4K isn't supersampled or even no crop.

So I think it will be many years if not a decade before this 8K no crop RAW / 4K120p no crop 10-bit 4:2:2 camera will be "obsolete". 

Go ahead, mark my words.

As for the 8K itself, my current iMac Pro has 5K resolution so already out resolves 4K footage. 8K isn't a distant future for me as I'll be seeing the benefits immediately.

Real case use? I already use cropping a lot in 4K to macro inside timepieces, jewellery or even package shots in general.

I could see a wedding videographer using this just to get that ring money shot from a distance without ruining the scene for guests or having to go 400mm and miss the overall candid atmosphere. 8K would allow 2-in-1.

Having multiple video custom settings on the R system also means you can switch 4K to 8K as well as HFR on the fly. Very practical for above scenarios and just grabbing money shots in general.

[SteveV4D]

9 minutes ago, Django said:

I think you're looking at this the wrong way. It isn't about saving 8K files for later. It's about you're 2020 camera investment having lasting power for the years to come. 

Fair enough.  But I think I'll save my investment for the future when a) I'm sure I have one and am not dead by virus, b) have money to pay for that investment and c) I shall wait and see what other manufacturers can offer for that 8K future before jumping in.

11 minutes ago, Django said:

 

As for the 8K itself, my current iMac Pro has 5K resolution so already out resolves 4K footage. 8K isn't a distant future for me as I'll be seeing the benefits immediately.

I don't have a 5K display.  If I did, I think 6K is a good trade off between file size and extra resolution.  For now at least.  I'm not sure how seeing 8K on a 5K display can be classed as a benefit.  Sure there are, and will continue to be 8K TVs coming down the line, but when it comes to resolution in smaller cameras, you need to capture more pixels to see the real benefit.  4K gives great HD, 6K gives great 4K.  Technically 8K will give great 6K.  You'll need at least 10K for a great 8K image.

I do see 8K being great for sport and areas with fine detail, but will actors and actresses who are already feeling worried about the detail that 4K does to their wrinkles, spots and pimples really want an 8K camera pointing at them. 😂😂

[Django]

^ see the real use cases I've added.

as for "actors & actresses", 35mm film the cinema standard for decades already resolves at an equivalent of 6K. and 70mm film (IMAX) is typically scanned at 11K. 

of course most projections and finishes are still in DCI 2K but 8K footage simply isn't as far-fetched as you may think.

[Leica50mm]

I recently purchased the Canon 1dx mkiii. The 6k raw is so hard to work with, it’s not worth it in my option.  I have a maxed out trash can set up and final cut cut and Davinci just choke on it.

I have a red dragon 6k and the footage pays like butter. I wanted the raw and autofocus, but it’s just isnt  happening for me. 
I can’t imagine how bad 8k will be to work with.

[gt3rs]

8 minutes ago, Leica50mm said:

I recently purchased the Canon 1dx mkiii. The 6k raw is so hard to work with, it’s not worth it in my option.  I have a maxed out trash can set up and final cut cut and Davinci just choke on it.

I have a red dragon 6k and the footage pays like butter. I wanted the raw and autofocus, but it’s just isnt  happening for me. 
I can’t imagine how bad 8k will be to work with.

I find the 5.5k RAW quicker than 4k 10bit h265 in Resolve Studio on a PC..... 

[SteveV4D]

24 minutes ago, Django said:

^ see the real use cases I've added.

as for "actors & actresses", 35mm film the cinema standard for decades already resolves at an equivalent of 6K. and 70mm film (IMAX) is typically scanned at 11K. 

of course most projections and finishes are still in DCI 2K but 8K footage simply isn't as far-fetched as you may think.

You must have added that in whilst I was replying.  I didn't see that part of your reply initially.

You're right about IMAX, but I think film is more forgiving that digital when it comes to detail and resolution.  Maybe the fine grain in film helps, I'm not sure, but the detail feels less obvious and in your face.

1 hour ago, Django said:

 

Real case use? I already use cropping a lot in 4K to macro inside timepieces, jewellery or even package shots in general.

I could see a wedding videographer using this just to get that ring money shot from a distance without ruining the scene for guests or having to go 400mm and miss the overall candid atmosphere. 8K would allow 2-in-1.

As for your examples, I've used 6K on my GH5 for close ups of watches.  So good point.

The ring shot is a nice example, but it doesn't mean you have to shoot 8K for it.  My GH5 can switch easily between using the entire 6K sensor for a 4K image or a 4K crop of the sensor to punch in closer.  Less latitude in the edit I know, but smaller file size in return. 

That said, they're all good examples of 8K use, and why I do look at getting the Pocket 6K.  In my mind, I'm not sure my system is ready for 8K.  I've been on the fence over 6K, and only now thinking it would be worth it.  8K is still too far in the future to invest now.  Not that I can anyway.  

Besides, we have to see the trade off.  If its rolling shutter and a time limit, useful application of 8K would be further reduced.  It's already limited by the fact the R5 doesn't do what the Pockets do, output to an SSD via USB.  This is what makes filming 6K RAW viable for me.  It's a shame the R5 has ignored this feature.  My 1TB Samsung drive was a lot cheaper than 512gb Cfexpress card.  Filming 8K RAW will be very expensive.  

[Django]

Yeah I don't see 8K as the main attraction, but more as a bonus really. I'd only use it sparingly for money shots. Just like I did ML RAW on my old 5D3. YMMV.

[ade towell]

I think I'd make a lot more use of RAW if it did it in 4k though. Haven't been keeping up, will the R6 be more tailored to 4k?

[padam]

On 5/4/2020 at 6:10 PM, ade towell said:

I think I'd make a lot more use of RAW if it did it in 4k though. Haven't been keeping up, will the R6 be more tailored to 4k?

With the cost cutting on the displays and build quality, it can be seen as a much cheaper 6D-class camera with IBIS, 4k60p and 1080p120p
8-bit 4:2:0 IPB compression (8-bit 4:2:2 external) and no Canon Log (crop, no AF in some modes) would be the most logical to expect from Canon., capable as a consumer camera, but not a pro-level camera either for stills or video. 
Which would mean that for better dynamic range, 10-bit or RAW codecs (to CFExpress cards) one needs to step up. But we'll see.

And yes lower-res 4k RAW would be useful, except that's exactly what their Cinema cameras provide, so I can't see them putting anything similar in a stills camera.

Or next year, the 1DX III 5.5k60p RAW recording capability with IBIS will be put in a mirrorless camera (for about the same price).

[ade towell]

All sounds about right, a shame as not interested in an 8 bit camera and I'm not willing to pay the premium for a stills camera with a RAW feature I don't really want when I can get a proper video camera used for about the same price. 

Is a bit like the C200 conundrum for me, 8 bit is not enough, RAW too much for my needs, just give me a decent 10 bit.

Will stick with the Fuji XT3 

[gt3rs]

Currently no Canon camera either DSLR or C line offers RAW in resolutions below the sensor wide. So a 8k sensor will be 8k RAW only, 5.5K will 5.5K RAW and so on....  So I don't expect any DSLR with 4K RAW from Canon at the moment.... 

5 minutes ago, ade towell said:

All sounds about right, a shame as not interested in an 8 bit camera and I'm not willing to pay the premium for a stills camera with a RAW feature I don't really want when I can get a proper video camera used for about the same price. 

Is a bit like the C200 conundrum for me, 8 bit is not enough, RAW too much for my needs, just give me a decent 10 bit.

Will stick with the Fuji XT3 

The above is pure speculation.... I would not rule out 4k 10bit... probably no RAW if they go SD card only....

[padam]

32 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

The above is pure speculation.... I would not rule out 4k 10bit... probably no RAW if they go SD card only....

It is more likely that they will make the long-rumoured XC-series 'comeback' camera with a sensor and processor similar to the C300 Mark III (maybe no DGO) and the RF-mount to accept the V-ND EF adapter. That could become much more popular despite not being a hybrid camera.

To have a cheap FF stills camera from Canon with 10-bit C-Log internal recording just sounds way too good to be true, the base point should be the 6D Mark II or EOS RP, and this camera will be a huge upgrade already over them  (for more money of course, like the R5 is over an EOS R). They will probably save costs on the processor as well, and I can see them starting the limitation right from the sensor itself. But if I am wrong trying to be realistic, and they make a camera, which makes many of their other much more expensive models less attractive, I am happy about it.

[gt3rs]

39 minutes ago, padam said:

It is more likely that they will make the long-rumoured XC-series 'comeback' camera with a sensor and processor similar to the C300 Mark III (maybe no DGO) and the RF-mount to accept the V-ND EF adapter. That could become much more popular despite not being a hybrid camera.

To have a cheap FF stills camera from Canon with 10-bit C-Log internal recording just sounds way too good to be true, the base point should be the 6D Mark II or EOS RP, and this camera will be a huge upgrade already over them  (for more money of course, like the R5 is over an EOS R). They will probably save costs on the processor as well, and I can see them starting the limitation right from the sensor itself. But if I am wrong trying to be realistic, and they make a camera, which makes many of their other much more expensive models less attractive, I am happy about it.

Imo there is no marked for video dedicated camera below 4k usd it cost too much to produce vs the margin and quantity. The only way is reusing body etc. so there will be no more XC or maybe not even C100.... either will be photo camera with powerful video capability (Canon strategy) or modified version (Panasonic strategy).

[padam]

3 hours ago, gt3rs said:

Imo there is no marked for video dedicated camera below 4k usd it cost too much to produce vs the margin and quantity. The only way is reusing body etc. so there will be no more XC or maybe not even C100.... either will be photo camera with powerful video capability (Canon strategy) or modified version (Panasonic strategy).

https://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-rf-mount-modular-cine-camera-appears-in-drawings/

https://www.canonrumors.com/rf-mount-cinema-camera-in-the-works-cr2/

Ok, it may not be that cheap, but it will be cheaper than a Komodo.

[Super8]

On 5/1/2020 at 1:43 AM, zerocool22 said:

No but still 4 or 5 times! At canon c500II prices you should compare it to a red dragon epic.

How much is the RED Dragon Epic?

The P6K is suppose to be a cine camera. Compare it to the 1DX III if you want a cheaper camera.

[Leica50mm]

16 hours ago, padam said:

With the cost cutting on the displays and build quality, it can be seen as a much cheaper 6D-class camera with IBIS, 4k60p and 1080p120p
8-bit 4:2:0 IPB compression (8-bit 4:2:2 external) and no Canon Log (crop, no AF in some modes) would be the most logical to expect from Canon., capable as a consumer camera, but not a pro-level camera either for stills or video. 
Which would mean that for better dynamic range, 10-bit or RAW codecs (to CFExpress cards) one needs to step up. But we'll see.

And yes lower-res 4k RAW would be useful, except that's exactly what their Cinema cameras provide, so I can't see them putting anything similar in a stills camera.

Or next year, the 1DX III 5.5k60p RAW recording capability with IBIS will be put in a mirrorless camera (for about the same price).

4k raw would be awesome