Emanuel

Well, you give yourself to all that work only for trying to understand my thinking, expectations, etc.? : D WOW I sincerely feel myself flattered... I wish all my readers every day could think and give me the same feedback on emails, production notes, sms, instant communication and so on. Really, no empty words, you honour me with your reciprocal consideration : ) OK, in short I will try to resume all that in order to let it clarified as much as possible: There's a new kid on the block. Some other time, overheating didn't allow anything else. Price, this time? Ah, that's OK for what offers but has no IBIS. Do you need stabilization for what BTW? Shaky shots, other than that, for this camera, gimbal shots apply. (that 'you' in italic is me or the people I and my partners will put this sort of device in hands) Will you miss the lack of IBIS for that purpose? Seems not for what I've seen from digital stabilization per se. Would be better to have IBIS? Yes, of course. There isn't. So? Well, lack of IBIS won't put us away of there if or/and when I'll see a chance to buy one or a couple of units. That's it! I don't mind for anything else. I can read the limitations, all the tech speech and information, the thoughts people are posting over these pages but the fact is: nothing has changed the early idea I got from this reasoning and that order :- ) On the straw man argument, yes, but on the opposite, I feel at times compelled to not let my position distorted, intencionally or unintentionally, as happens with my text above-mentioned in this same post. On the need of native Canon RF lens mount with OIS lens, yes, you're right but I think everyone here has implicit this along the digital digitalization in-camera. Our webmaster even starts his artcle saying is NOT switching, written in capital letters, for some good reason and very inherent although nameless, hence the presumption as much as occurs with the filmmaking process you describe up there. Besides, your note in form of disclaimer is rather productive and elucidative, so welcome. With IBIS is a different story indeed, no doubts on it. Thank you for letting us to not forget it ;- )

Olympus/Panasonic IBIS, Canon's AF, etc., pity we cannot have all them altogether and some tend to close up the perspective on the tree rather than the forest, but choices are part of this business : ) As above-posted, price point is IMHO much determinant than this or that feature, at least to me handling budget matters in a daily basis : ) Let alone in a pandemic year. Extras never hurt though and I think competition and sales from a typical market economy is what contributes more to this or that feature and thanks to it makes the things evolve.

I am like you Davide, strictly from an end user perspective with no engineering background other than the film school where we don't discuss the tools, we are trained to make them work and live with their limitations and improvements : ) I imagine there are some other industries looking after something else we don't even need using what we already have. So far so good. TBH the R5C tests I've seen are promising enough to make it shine within its limits. No expectations on unblurring anything. No need for miraculous potion either because the current tools are already fair enough. We have our workarounds too. What we cannot handle, Don, is to reach a price target outside of our budget. Might we buy this R5C if the implementation of the IBIS feature would cost an extra grand, as for instance? Yes. Would we do it from a product already in the $4,500 price range without IBIS or at the cost of its weight then? Probably not. I believe sometimes it's this kind of decisions the product design team has in mind when they decide to include some feature or not. More than adopting the theory of conspiracy they are there to see our expectations fucked up. :- )

This is exactly what I'm talking about... The ideal would be to have both worlds but if some technology will prove to match my needs from its implementation and improvement, I don't give a damn for anything else, what we know and don't know about, important is that fills the cup if so : ) Not much other counts when our user experience and outcome makes us to praise the joy to see our finishing line to be reached and we just become happy campers :- )

Thanks for your information to match my idea, it's exactly my impression, hence my apples to oranges comment :- )

I saw your test. Well done : ) I just wonder on modern digital stabilization mainly this or upcoming cameras to introduce the most advanced technology to gradually provide better results from there.

Maybe, you're right on this one : ) I am not engineer but I believe the degree of complexity may bring a different outcome accordingly the implementation of it. I've appreciated what I've seen from this new entry. At least for my needs :- )

@kye The digital stabilization can vary from a device or method to another. Higher resolution can also play a determinant role there, I guess. I wish it could be as simple as the exposure triangle is ;- )

Your needs don't fit someone's else and vice versa. As much, kind of work, style, etc.. : ) I don't think people are celebrating the lack of IBIS or instead the digital stabilization. I am still waiting to read that. Where? ; ) I just see the test with the camera mounted to the car proves that can even be more effective than IBIS is, or the same at least for shaky shots, as for instance. In my case, I don't give a damn if Canon's IBIS is inferior to any other competitor, no one pays me to be their fanboy and I don't need stabilization for anything other except when I'm using the gimbal and then no IBIS or any other method are any useful. So? If they can offer you a product without a feature you don't need, seems to me a better deal to not pay an extra cost for something you don't need, isn't it? IBIS or lack of it mantra can fit someone's cup but not everyone's. It's all about that.. EAG :- )

No problem, I don't find it rude, I just think you're trying to express your point the best you can through a written form, sometimes we risk to seem rude and we don't intend to, only to make a point or even putting ours to debate : ) I did NOT write one replaces another, c'mon... Much different what I wrote. BTW, I am using IS glass since its introduction. I recall a test done with my 24-105 f/4 coupled to my 5DII 13 years ago even before this community was created by our webmaster. People then found pretty amazing how could an interview be shot handheld using an unexpected focal length going tele with that zoom lens. Still wondering if I hadn't used a tripod, monopod, anything extra to stabilize it, go figure! I obviously understand the contribution of the conclusions of your test, moreover the whole advantages you've fairly shown with. No doubt on it at all : ) Pretty clear and consensual. That's not my point. My point is that we cannot compare the digital stabilization of this camera model in particular with anything other from a different capture device, no matter what else. It's apples to oranges :- ) That car test (done with digital stabilization on a R5C vs IBIS R5) is very elucidative to everyone. Just not to people who don't watch it or have any bias or beef against, so better to not pay attention to it. I instead appreciate to rather praise and evolve my scope as much as I can, so I am always open to listen some new insight, no worries about. If you say, ah but let's change the variables such as shutter speed, focal length, etc. and take a new look? Now we're talking... ; ) So, I find it not exactly hopeful but just interesting any test under distinct premises, camera included.

Horses for courses, of course : ) Thanks for posting @kye I still keep my position though... That's shot on GH5, not a 2022 camera, with higher native resolution to play with along, etc. ; ) Not this Canon one in particular ;- )

For sure not made for wide shots neither as gimbal replacement or do we expect IBIS will stabilize our video for walking !?? ; ) Panasonic and Olympus offer better IBIS, correct, but doesn't replace a gimbal shot, unless your camera movement doesn't justify the use of it. Seems to me modern digital stabilization is much more effective for shaking hands and the test with the camera attached to the car proves it. I hate when we are unfair anyway, and so far I don't see anything other than good efforts this time along this camera release in particular (TBH it has surprised me enough to not be silent for the subject matter : )

I think to be posted 'just 15 hours ago' sounds too confusing... I guess a R5C (because that C is not there for nothing) with internal ND, you mean? ; )

People love to whiningly complain, that's the whole picture :- )

*each world (I guess the representation of two separate worlds was in my mind anyway hence the plural form when I wrote it : D)

Back again to your post, I think any people's complaint on IBIS or lack of IBIS should end here in this video test, thanks for your post BTW even though anything may not surprise me there from what I've already tested myself using one and another but it's always interesting to know some other people are arriving to the same conclusions of ourselves : ) People cannot expect the best of each worlds. IBIS or digital stabilization helps SHAKY hands (IBIS wobble is connected with a physical solution, as simple as that : ) -- Period. Other than that, buy a gimbal and stop whining. End of story :- )

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

As side note, I support people's criticism no matter what... Without it, we hadn't arrived to this model, count on it :- )

Looks like pretty decent the electronic stabilization with a few myriad of settings : ) I must confess I feel myself tempted to buy it... who knows? ; ) These Canon cameras are a tank, inside me there's still a happy 5DII camper... This time there's no overheating excuse, well done Canon ! Separated stills mode doesn't bother me at all :- )

I agree with Ben but I guess kye is also right when claims there's no actually need for ultra high-definition race, except for reframing and/or large format printing IMO : ) I believe frame rate will be the next trend for upcoming camera generations, what else? ; ) Low light, HDR look like to follow the resolution mantra :- )

Yes and no, as wrote above, gimbal can replace it : ) they're not the same either but, the balance on the package from a well designed product can fill the bill. No idea why they didn't add it though, cost-wise or just marketing strategy, probably. Expect something else to let it outdated one of these days then ;- )

PS IBIS or lack of it, which means not the same but here... oh boy, handy light weight and winner form factor make it sound a sweet spot straightaway IMO.

I particularly think 8K/60p is a step further. Overheating drawback as well as respective whining is past now and IBIS can be solved with a mere gimbal ; ) As simple as that. Hybrid concept up! EAG :- )

*I'd rather only check

Good news : ) Redmi Note 7 with Snapdragon 660, Octa-core Max 2.20GHz coupled to 4GB: both rear cameras handle easily 2K/1080p 24 or 30 fps and the main one 3K, go figure... or even 3.5K is reached if you don't mind to drop to about 20fps. And half frame rate for the maximum resolution over 4K, as for the instance the selfie camera to reach 4224 pixels wide. Overcharging the autofocus feature will stress the memory you can monitor, though, very useful tool you don't have playing with the big boys ; ) Cropping to 2.39 format will definitely help. And clean the cache before each take. But, Redmi Note 9, Octa-core Max 2.00GHz with 3GB Quad-cam don't. Only one camera. Not exceeding half frame rate (30 -> 15 / 20 -> 10, no 24/25 on the App) with or without the memory fully loaded, independently of the resolution. I guess because of the MediaTek Helio G85 chip so I'd rather to only check a Snapdragon pick. I will still test the ASUS Zenfone 7 Pro I also keep but I don't expect any trouble as much as happens with the OnePlus 9 where even the 4th one, luma is working as well. Which means every case is one case, obviously :- )