Canon EOS R5C

[BenEricson]

25 minutes ago, kye said:

 It's a pity, as RAW makes you have huge file sizes or dramatic sensor crops, but it's better than nothing I guess.  Maybe you could also go old-school and partner these with an external recorder that does a high-end Prores variation?

It actually is only 640mbps vs 410mbps. (I think that's the rate spec.) Pretty hopeful it'll do okay on the M1 laptops.

[kye]

1 hour ago, BenEricson said:

It actually is only 640mbps vs 410mbps. (I think that's the rate spec.) Pretty hopeful it'll do okay on the M1 laptops.

According to https://www.canonrumors.com/here-are-some-canon-eos-r5-c-specifications/ the rates for 8K (therefore uncropped) are:

Quote

8192×4320 (Full Frame)

RAW LT

2570 Mbps (59.94P) / 2140 Mbps (50.00P)

1290 Mbps (29.97P) / 1070 Mbps (25.00P)

1030 MBps (23.98P / 24.00P)

RAW R8

1980 Mbps (29.97P) / 1650 Mbps (25.00P)

1580 Mbps (23.98P / 24.00P)

In terms of Prores and what is visible, Prores HQ in 1080p is ~180Mbps and was used on feature films that screened in theatres, so could be argued to be 'sufficient' in terms of bitrate, but if we 'play it safe' and use a 4K flavour, then we could record externally to flavours like:

ProRes 422 (UHD) - 471Mbps
ProRes 422 LT (UHD) - 328Mbps
ProRes 422 Proxy (UHD) - 145Mbps

Of course, this would require the camera to output 8K and the recorder to support that and downscale appropriately.  

Obviously if you need the full 8K then just go with that, but if you were filming for hours and hours, say you were interviewing people for a documentary, then having more reasonable bitrates but still non-plastic skintones would be a good thing to have.

[gt3rs]

4 hours ago, kye said:

According to https://www.canonrumors.com/here-are-some-canon-eos-r5-c-specifications/ the rates for 8K (therefore uncropped) are:

In terms of Prores and what is visible, Prores HQ in 1080p is ~180Mbps and was used on feature films that screened in theatres, so could be argued to be 'sufficient' in terms of bitrate, but if we 'play it safe' and use a 4K flavour, then we could record externally to flavours like:

ProRes 422 (UHD) - 471Mbps
ProRes 422 LT (UHD) - 328Mbps
ProRes 422 Proxy (UHD) - 145Mbps

Of course, this would require the camera to output 8K and the recorder to support that and downscale appropriately.  

Obviously if you need the full 8K then just go with that, but if you were filming for hours and hours, say you were interviewing people for a documentary, then having more reasonable bitrates but still non-plastic skintones would be a good thing to have.

Or just use the internal XF-AVC as every canon cinema user do and in this case you get 4k oversampled 4:2:2 410 Mbts All-i or 160 Mbtis Lgop

[gt3rs]

[ntblowz]

Checking Gordon's preview of R5C it definitely fixed the annoy thing I had with R5 when shooting interior archiecture walk through, the oversampling 4K50/60P fixed the annoy aliasing issue on some details, and IBIS wobble when paired with UW lens.

 

Though handheld shoot R5 will still be better due to IBIS, but sadly most of my shoot is on gimbal 99% of the time so kinda make IBIS moot.

 

Anyway I got company to preorder one.. hopefully to get one in march, it should pair up nicely with the existing C300III/C70/R5.

 

My 20,000mAh 45A Powerbank should support 8K60P without problem.

[herein2020]

I have noticed one annoying thing when looking at the detailed spec sheet for the different video resolutions and codecs: it appears that it is not possible to shoot 5.9K except in RAW. To me 5.9K is much more interesting than 8K due to the possibility of reduced data rates while providing the capability of recomposing and reframing a 4K shot on a 4K timeline, but I would rather be able to pick LongGOP or XF-AVC for 5.9K vs having to shoot RAW.

https://downloads.canon.com/nw/camera/products/cinema-eos/x-eos-r5-c/EOSR5C_specifications.pdf

8K is overkill, 4K is the new standard and to me 5.9K would be the sweet spot if I could shoot it compressed. 

[kye]

5 hours ago, gt3rs said:

Or just use the internal XF-AVC as every canon cinema user do and in this case you get 4k oversampled 4:2:2 410 Mbts All-i or 160 Mbtis Lgop

We were talking about options for avoiding the "clay" skin-tones which the non-RAW codecs provide.  The only way to do that is to either shoot RAW or output RAW to something that won't degrade the skin-tones.

1 hour ago, herein2020 said:

I have noticed one annoying thing when looking at the detailed spec sheet for the different video resolutions and codecs: it appears that it is not possible to shoot 5.9K except in RAW. To me 5.9K is much more interesting than 8K due to the possibility of reduced data rates while providing the capability of recomposing and reframing a 4K shot on a 4K timeline, but I would rather be able to pick LongGOP or XF-AVC for 5.9K vs having to shoot RAW.

https://downloads.canon.com/nw/camera/products/cinema-eos/x-eos-r5-c/EOSR5C_specifications.pdf

8K is overkill, 4K is the new standard and to me 5.9K would be the sweet spot if I could shoot it compressed. 

Yeah, sometimes more isn't better.  Sometimes it's a PITA actually.

[Video Hummus]

48 minutes ago, kye said:

We were talking about options for avoiding the "clay" skin-tones which the non-RAW codecs provide.  The only way to do that is to either shoot RAW or output RAW to something that won't degrade the skin-tones.

And 1GBps for 8K 12-bit footage is reasonable compromise compared to even ProRes HQ data rates at 10-bit.

There are a shit ton of codec options for everybody. 95% solutions to high +2GBps RAW options. Sounds good to me. 

[Video Hummus]

13 hours ago, BenEricson said:

It actually is only 640mbps vs 410mbps. (I think that's the rate spec.) Pretty hopeful it'll do okay on the M1 laptops.

I think the 645Mbps is the RAW LT rate for the C70 4K. Which they obviously set for a safe maximum of V90 cards which the C70 is limited too. 

[Django]

 

1 hour ago, kye said:

We were talking about options for avoiding the "clay" skin-tones which the non-RAW codecs provide.  The only way to do that is to either shoot RAW or output RAW to something that won't degrade the skin-tones.

what "clay" skin-tones?  always thought Canon was well regarded when it came to skin tones.

[Caleb Genheimer]

According to the listed specs on B&H, PSA it DOES have a Full Frame Open Gate 24X36 8K mode in CRL. For anamorphic users, that puts it in a category that only a handful of other cameras hit.

[mrtreve]

Eh this camera is pretty amazing if you compare it to the things we used to get. A 5D MKIV from 2016 was £3599 vs £4499 for this... and that camera essentially didn't work for video.

The lack of IBIS genuinely stings a bit, but it's really tiny for an 8K 60P FF camera. 

I probably won't get one because my C70 does a similar job and for stills I'd prefer something even more compact like my Fuji, but I will probably recommend it to a companies I work with who want some kit to keep in-house.

[gt3rs]

27 minutes ago, Caleb Genheimer said:

According to the listed specs on B&H, PSA it DOES have a Full Frame Open Gate 24X36 8K mode in CRL. For anamorphic users, that puts it in a category that only a handful of other cameras hit.

I think they have messed up the spec.... on canon official there is no open gate unfortunately: 

https://www.canon-europe.com/cameras/eos-r5c/specifications/

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

21 hours ago, kye said:

 

VR is a completely different beast and this is where resolution really does matter (because that 2K limit to human vision is over a narrow FOV) but anyone filming VR isn't using a R5C to do it.  They're using a dedicated VR camera like the Insta360 Pro 2, which means no messing around with lenses, sensor plane alignments, inter-eye distance calibration, etc etc etc.

 

There is actually a desperate need for cameras that can shoot high quality VR180. Canon just put out a lens specifically for this purpose--which is meant for the R5. 

So at this point, nobody has a VR180 camera setup that can match Canon, other than customized mirrored/lens rigs that costs 10s of thousands of dollars. 

BTW, the camera you cited (Insta360 Pro 2) is absolute dogshit. It's not a professional solution by any standard.  The Z CAM K1 Pro is probably the closest thing to the R5C, but it's a fixed lens camera, that can't go above 5.7K in 60fps. 

As per the amount of resolution a human eye can see, obviously distance matter, but in VR, the screen is up against your eyeball, so 8K is well within the limit of visible resolution.

[BenEricson]

4 hours ago, Django said:

 

what "clay" skin-tones?  always thought Canon was well regarded when it came to skin tones.

Maybe it has to do with the high resolution / noise reduction / skin softening. I just get iPhone vibes with the whole color pallet and texture.

[Video Hummus]

4 hours ago, mrtreve said:

The lack of IBIS genuinely stings a bit, but it's really tiny for an 8K 60P FF camera.

I think the micro-HDMI is the worst cripple in my opinion. I honestly think realtime gyro enhanced digital stabilization will be the future. You sacrifice a slight crop and 1-axis of correction (the axis that causes the wobble anyway) for more stable footage without the need for a fast shutter.

47 minutes ago, BenEricson said:

Maybe it has to do with the high resolution / noise reduction / skin softening. I just get iPhone vibes with the whole color pallet and texture.

Well do we know if that is straight out of camera or has it been seasoned to this guys particular tastes? What recording mode + profile did he use and compression ratio? Hard to be conclusive when we don't know what was done. And even so, if the 8K RAW LT holds up and retains the detail then there is a fix at cost of higher (but not deal breaking) storage requirements. Anglebird has +4TB CFX cards coming. I do think Canon has slipped a little bit with their color. Other brands have made huge leaps in consistency and quality.

[Emanuel]

Maybe IBIS and overheating are both sides of the same coin? ; )

[kye]

12 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

And 1GBps for 8K 12-bit footage is reasonable compromise compared to even ProRes HQ data rates at 10-bit.

There are a shit ton of codec options for everybody. 95% solutions to high +2GBps RAW options. Sounds good to me. 

1Gbps is fine for 8K RAW, but if you were shooting a documentary with literally hundreds (maybe even 1000+) hours of footage, halving the bitrate is a significant thing and can make a huge difference.  

The way that documentaries are going now you need to have a build-up and climax, which works for things like athletes preparing for a competition, or some other kind of fixed deadline, but it's very common for people shooting a documentary to not have an end-date.  These situations are very difficult to finance as there's no guarantee of having a good climax or even of having a story where anything happens.  Shooting is normally done with the DoP essentially "on call" and the subjects reach out when anything specific is happening and the DoP drops what they're doing and goes to shoot.  For this reason it's common for the DoP to own all their own gear (you can't rent a camera or lenses on one-hours notice in the middle of the night) and so these are often self-funded, and can take years to film.

This situation is actually quite a likely one for something like the R5C, where a DoP would own something like this and rent more expensive gear for bigger projects, but would rent out this and their own set of (likely vintage) lenses with them when hired on smaller budget productions.  In this sense, having a "medium" bitrate that's still Netflix-approved would matter more for a camera like this than a cheaper hybrid or more expensive cinema camera.

11 hours ago, Django said:

what "clay" skin-tones?  always thought Canon was well regarded when it came to skin tones.

Canon are well regarded for the colour science of their skin-tones, but they are absolutely NOT well regarded for the quality of their compressed codecs on their hybrid cameras.  That's what we're talking about here.

I see ML RAW frame grabs from a 5D3 regularly (thanks to @mercer) and when shot properly and graded with a simple LUT the skin-tones should remind you of an Alexa.  If you're not going "wow" then something horrible has happened to the image.  

Think about all the you tubers who are shooting 4K with Canon FF cameras - when was the last time you looked at one of their videos and thought "holy cr*p those colours are AMAZING"....?  Never?  Exactly....

6 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

I think the micro-HDMI is the worst cripple in my opinion. I honestly think realtime gyro enhanced digital stabilization will be the future. You sacrifice a slight crop and 1-axis of correction (the axis that causes the wobble anyway) for more stable footage without the need for a fast shutter.

Ummm..... how?

Digital stabilisation can line up the frames with each other, but OIS / IBIS actually stabilises DURING THE EXPOSURE OF EACH FRAME.  If you have ANY motion blur in ANY frame then it's there forever and digital stabilisation can't do a single thing about it.

Even worse though, is that once the digital stabilisation has worked its magic, the shot looks smooth but there will be random blurring of frames without any corresponding change to the overall shot.  In other words, digital stabilisation without having very short shutter speeds will look worse than no stabilisation at all.

[hyalinejim]

32 minutes ago, kye said:

I see ML RAW frame grabs from a 5D3 regularly

A digression:

Canon colour has changed considerably since then. From looking at downloadable raw photo samples from that photography site, in general it looks to me that Canons that shoot CR3 files have high saturation colours that are less (over)saturated than models that shoot CR2. Sometimes the earlier look is favoured (portraits) and sometimes the contemporary look is favoured (flowers, avoid blown out areas). This shift in colour engine that coincides with the introduction of CR3 goes hand in hand with Adobe not being able or willing to provide accurate reverse engineered Canon matching picture profiles for ACR and Lightroom, as they had always done previously. 

The new colour is probably better if you're going to work on the image a bit. The old colour is probably better if you prefer SOOC for raw.

That site's studio scene comparison tool is very revealing if you load up old and new Canons. Contemporary Canon is a lot closer to Sony and Panasonic than it used to be for raw files developed in Adobe Standard/Color/Neutral.

Whether that trickles down to EOS picture styles and C-Log, I don't know but I suspect it might in terms of reining in over-saturation.

[kye]

1 hour ago, hyalinejim said:

A digression:

Canon colour has changed considerably since then. From looking at downloadable raw photo samples from that photography site, in general it looks to me that Canons that shoot CR3 files have high saturation colours that are less (over)saturated than models that shoot CR2. Sometimes the earlier look is favoured (portraits) and sometimes the contemporary look is favoured (flowers, avoid blown out areas). This shift in colour engine that coincides with the introduction of CR3 goes hand in hand with Adobe not being able or willing to provide accurate reverse engineered Canon matching picture profiles for ACR and Lightroom, as they had always done previously. 

The new colour is probably better if you're going to work on the image a bit. The old colour is probably better if you prefer SOOC for raw.

That site's studio scene comparison tool is very revealing if you load up old and new Canons. Contemporary Canon is a lot closer to Sony and Panasonic than it used to be for raw files developed in Adobe Standard/Color/Neutral.

Whether that trickles down to EOS picture styles and C-Log, I don't know but I suspect it might in terms of reining in over-saturation.

Interesting.

Does what you describe above still apply for ML RAW files "developed" with the Arri LogC to 709 LUT in third party ML applications, or exported as CinemaDNGs and processed in the Resolve Raw Panel?  
Or just when developing them with Adobe products?