Stab

As a stop-gap measure, could you use a filter on front of the lens.  Companies like Tiffen offer various models.
Obviously something on the filter stack would be easier, but in a pinch...

Rawlite make them for Blackmagic cameras, so it is possible. But also camera specific, and who knows if they're developing it for any other systems.
https://rawlite.com/

You are 75% wrong.
For years we are talking about the E.U "tax", everything here is a lot more expensive and include tax/VAT, while the U.S prices, maybe they do, maybe do not.
Most things are a lot more expensive in Europe, even European things, like Sennheiser mics, MKH50 par example, one of my favorite microphones ever, is around 1.200$ in U.S, and around 1550euros =1850$, and it is made in Germany.
Canon cameras for years are a lot more expensive in Europe, for many posts I was saying how expensive the C200 was, while relatively modest priced in U.S, in my E.U country was thousands of $ more.
You can order something from U.S, but you have to pay V.A.T/tax and customs. Maybe A7sIII is too new to send copies elsewhere, wait a month or so.
Some things are closer to what you are saying, I am just not sure, that is why I give you the 25%!

Here's the result of that Shot Match feature, just so you're aware:


I think the video you're looking for from Aram K is this one:
 

The answer is no.
No designated anamorphic mode that will lets you preview the desqeeuzed image.  Also, the IBIS will not take the anamorphic lens into account. I'm afraid only the S1H can do that. Or the GH5 and GH5-s 🙂

The answer is no.
No designated anamorphic mode that will lets you preview the desqeeuzed image.  Also, the IBIS will not take the anamorphic lens into account. I'm afraid only the S1H can do that. Or the GH5 and GH5-s 🙂

Canon wont fix anything. And people who still think this is all a big 'mistake' or design flaw are clueless. 
This is the Cripple Hammer we were all expecting. Canon is still protecting their C-line. And they always will. 
Now they might have underestimated the damage to their brand and name. But none of this should come as a surprise. Of course Canon knows exactly what they are releasing. And why. 
 

Again, if this isnt deliberate, how do you see the alternative playing out? Did they not test the camera's? Did they test them at 3 km high? Did they test them for 5 min and called it a day? 
Canon themselves have released the information about overheating first. They know exactly what kind of product they are releasing. It has an 'overheating management' tab in the menu ffs. 
They jusy want to release the r5 and r6 right now, in their current state. For whatever reasoning. 
Idiots. 
 

I’ve been excited about it, expected it to work fine and put in my pre-order. Sadly, that pre-order is on the brink of death. The Cripple Hammer exists!!
Seeing videos of people using fridges, ice packs and fans just to help the camera work is just not acceptable. Even as a B-cam. People are going on that the non-HQ 4k mode can run forever, but what’s the point in buying this just to use the low quality mode? 
To get the most out of the R5 - the addition of RF lenses is a big investment and certainly not worth it with these issues being the elephant in the room on a shoot.
Its cool to see what Tilta has done, but I would find having an accessory like that really annoying. What if you have a beard? Haha. 
I’m still going to try the camera and rent it for a hard as nails shoot, with my EVA1 and GH5 at hand. See how it goes in the non-Youtuber real world. 
 
 
 

I also want to add that the S1 doesn't suffer from overheating issues. And it does not have a fan like the S1H does.
I filmed a ceremony the other day with 2 camera's. It must have been 35 degrees celcius that day. Never overheated and could easily record an hour of footage.
In other words, the camera doesn't even need a fan. It just needs to be better designed and most likely a bit bigger.
But we all know that Canon did this, kind of, on purpose. It is the CRIPPLE HAMMER at play here we all were expecting.

I think the cause of all these overheating problems is pretty easy to fix. 
MAKE THE BODIES LARGER.
It is a race to the bottom, to make / keep camera bodies smaller and lighter. Whilst, on the other hand, the specs and capabilities are increasing. It's like a identidy crisis. What do you want?  A smaller body? Or better specs? You can't have both apparently. Not yet.
Panasonic got everything right with their S-line. Except for AF. Which is something they could fix. 
Even the S1, which has no fan, doesn't overheat. I've tested it at weddings in the sun, at 30c and it keeps on going. No recording limit as well. Why can it do this? I believe because of the bigger body. Simple physics.
Of course Sony A-bodies overheat. Look at how small and fiddly they are.
If people would just get over the fact that their camera bodies have to become a big larger and heavier to get it to function properly, then this wouldn't happen. 
 

I mean...sigh...this is not the end of the world, I guess. You "CAN" still use the R5 for events if you plan it carefully.
Stage play - Use 2 R5's and start one 10 min later than the other. This allows one to force time stop before the other. Then just stager the record start/stops back and forth between them.
Your kids school singing play - Time your record stop when some other kid is singing to as to make sure your time is rationed in favor of your kids performance.
Wedding - Plan in advance with the priest. Setup a hand signal to let him know you are stopping. This triggers him to tell the audience...."we will now have a moment of silence for the bride and groom"...assuming the room is not hot, you can stop/start again without missing anything.
See?....the R5 "IS" doable if you PLAN your work and RATION your time wisely.
CT

I recently picked one up too. Quite impressed with how cinematic it looks.
Flare is a bit naff but apart from that... It's like LA7200 on steroids.

Hi Stab
I think the optics must have become misaligned somehow but I've got no idea how. I ended up getting a halo around high-contrast areas. I don't know if it happened suddenly or was a gradual thing. As I said I noticed during lockdown after taking a few pics. I didn't need to pixel peep, it was pretty easy to see.
I did initially think it might be the AF but I did some tests and it definitely wasn't; something had happened inside the lens. This is probably just a one-off but as I said I've read a few people having problems with the AF/MF clutch and aperture ring on these lenses and (as far as I know), they had to get replacements as even those parts weren't serviceable.

Most Rokinons I've used are nothing special wide open, but fine by f2. They have unusually even resolution across the frame. Some of them I wasn't wild about the bokeh with but it's not bad. The 50mm I understand is good even wide open.
They aren't bad. Do you have the option of renting or returning what you don't like? I feel like hipsters would sneer at Rokinon and corporate clients might ask why you're using old lenses their grandfather owned if you showed up with Nikkors. I had both for a while and there is nothing terribly wrong with any of them, except my 24mm f1.4 Rokinon was soft wide open.
Unpopular opinion: 28mm f1.8 EF, 50mm f1.4 EF, 85mm f1.8 EF is a really good and really affordable kit, especially used, except for the focus ring. Big but not too big. But a lot bigger than Nikkors and bigger than Contax. Consistent 58mm fronts. Fast. Good center performance. Canon-branded so they look legit. Nice build quality and durability. Not as clinical as Zeiss or Sigma, not super vintage. I don't own the 50mm f1.4, but it's based on the nFD 50mm f1.4, which I think is the best of its kind, and the other two aren't perfect, but they perform better at f1.8 to me than their Rokinon brethren and I like the look more, too. And so incredibly cheap for what they are. Like $700 used for a set of three. The 28mm f1.8 has a bad reputation but it's actually pretty good, center is perfectly sharp even wide open. The 85mm f1.8 is very good.
The focus throw is short and they don't have hard stops, and that might be a deal-breaker for you or you might shoot the kind of content where it's not if you're just pulling off the barrel anyway. But other than that they're just great. Absurdly cheap for what you get. Nice and chunky, too.
Well, that explains why nFDs have the smoothest focus rings I've ever used. 
The K35s turn yellow over time, so does the Cooke 75mm, and apparently the rare glass in the Super Baltars degrades over time, too. It's almost like an E60 M5, when you tune something as far as you can tune it, it's not built to last. Master Primes fail in extreme cold. The Iscorama plastic parts are all apparently a mess, too. Anything bespoke or over-engineered seems to have issues, but those are always the most fun and most special. Aren't M43 lenses still serviceable at least? And if rehousing changes the focus mechanism, is there a market for your 85mm? I'll ask about this issue next chance I get, but it sucks. Panchros and K35s fail too, though. And virtually every cinema lens gets haze or stiff focus rings. I have some museum quality vintage lenses and it sort of hurts just to use them or to put focus gears on them that will scratch the barrels or whatnot.
 

Yes, video is very hard. The difference between, for instance, wedding video and photography is almost ridicilous. 
I have seen photographers literally just burst firing away at the wedding cake whilst moving the camera. One of those 30 pics should be alright, not? 
And if not, you just crop and enhance the 30 MP 14-bit raw image until it looks good, with a bunch of downloaded Lightroom presets. Also, the shooting is done on auto iso, auto focus, auto shutter speed, etc. The difference couldnt be greater. No audio, no capturing complete stories or scenes,  no camera movement, no keeping the focus, no 'shit people might move in front of my camera soon', just recompose and burst away. And yet they earn the same or more. And girls drool over them. The last one was a joke. But not really. 
But then, lets talk about actual film making. I just finished my first feature film script. Jesus christ, i have a lot of respect for writers now. What a task, to do it properly. And it's never finished. There is always room for improvement. Of course I wrote something that needs a big production budget and a lot of visual effects... Impossible to pull of without major funding or a production company. But then, i will probably not be given the chance to direct. Difficult. 
But working on proper film productions is the only way forward. No more messing around with cheap and soap like short films. Or test video's. Cat video's. Travel video's. They were interesting when i started out, but also because camera's were just getting better and content was interesting just because it was shot with a certain camera. Those days are over. Every modern camera looks good. Its a done deal. 
Also, there a literally millions and millions of video's online now who do the same thing. Everyone seems to do the same. Billions of GB's of test video's, flowers with shallow dof, their girlfriend in slowmo in the park, their last holiday with a cheese voice over to make it look like there is a narrative, city shots without meaning, etc. 
I cannot look at it anymore. It's the 'easy' version of film making. You point your expensive big sensor camera at random stuff and expect that people will want to watch your 'film'. There is no story, no narrative. Also not when you add a voice over in post. Or music you ripped from another youtube video. 
Yes i am very harsh. Also on myself. I want to make real films. I am talented, but i'm not sure i have enough of it. And i will ever make the high end narrative stuff that i appreciate from selective other people. 
And... If i will ever fully enjoy it. Because film making is indeed hard. Long, exhausting days on the set. The stress. The constant 'will this even work'. 
But, when you finally do create something which has story, performance and production value and it all comes together and actually does work, it is the most beatiful form of art that exists. 
When you blow the audience or your clients away, in retrospect it was all worth it. 
Or was it? 
 

If you need the lenses to be physically large and have cinema ergonomics, then Rokinon is the only option in that budget range.
However, in my personal experience, Nikon AI primes produce the more traditionally cinematic image compared to Rokinon. Rokinon has strange colors. I have a harder time color correcting Rokinon shots than Nikon ones. I remember watching Duclos tear down the 35mm and his bafflement at finding an orange lens element inside. Doesn't surprise me. It's not that they're terrible, but every time I used them it's an uncanny valley, something is off feeling about the colors. I never had issues with sharpness even wide open, especially not compared to vintage Nikons.
In my opinion, follow focus gears and a step up rings make the Nikons look aesthetically like cinema lenses. If you really wanted to you could even add lens hoods or something like that. My recommendation is to stick with Nikon, save the money, and enjoy beautifully imperfect images, the best build quality out there and the ultimate adaptability.

Just the fact that you're on full frame means any bespoke cinema lenses are going to be pretty obscenely expensive. Established DPs will shoot with Rokinon or Nikon but there is a bias against Rokinon being cheap, I think. They're not even bad, but it's no one's top choice. Whereas Top Gun 2 is Sigma Art, which is kind of crazy. And Joker has some Nikkor. But no one's top choice is Rokinon. I'd try to avoid that kind of client in the first place but that's not always an option.
Not all of this is personal experience:
The Nikkors offer the best price/performance I think. They've been used for years for Vistavision and Joker had at least one Nikkor used pretty extensively I've read. Focus direction is backward, if it matters to you. The f2 versions of 28 f2, 50 f2, 85 f2 are all 52mm fronts. Make sure to match vintages approximately if consistency is your goal, coatings changed over time, likely not too much in recent years.
The Contax lenses do feel bigger and the mechanics are really high end, they feel a lot nicer than many "true" cinema lenses. But focus rings are a bit stiff in some cases. The 28mm and 50mm f1.4 have 55mm fronts, I suspect the 85mm f2.8 does, too. Again, I never had issues with Nikon focus rings being too small but these are bigger. More room for fingers. Better grip. Again you could just get follow focus gears.
https://followfocusgears.com/
And have wider diameters and a better grip and look more "pro" but a bit silly to get those without a follow focus?
Canon SSC Aspherical is rumored to share the same designs with K35s, the most desirable set of vintage super speed lenses you can get. The 24mm and 85mm are 72mm fronts, 55mm is a 58mm front, but is still enormous and the build quality is outstanding. A set has recently gone from like $2000 on eBay to $8500 or something ridiculous so good luck. This is sort of the ultimate, though. 
The next generation (nFD L) has the same designs but different coatings and the 55mm has been replaced with a 50mm f1.2 with a different design. By all accounts that one is tiny and has 52mm front threads but the others remain large. I think these correlate with second generation K35s, a bit less desirable. Build quality and mechanics have been downgraded a bit. Coatings are updated and a bit less vintage but a tenth of a t-stop faster. You could probably still get a set for $2500 or less. The 50mm might be a little small and you'd want to buy a 72mm step up ring I guess. I've also read the bearings in these can degrade over time and will eventually need repair.
If you don't need hard stops, Sigma Art is an option. If that's too clinical, first generation Canon EF L are the basis of the CN-Es, I think, at least some of them, and you get the pro red ring. I think Blue Ruin was shot on these, looked good to me. Mix of 77mm and 72mm fronts, easy to add some step up rings. If you don't need hard stops this might be the best option with that Sigma to L adapter. Never tried it.
Some of the ZEs I think are updated Contax designs and less desirable. I think the 25mm f2, 50mm Makro Planar, and 35mm f2 I think are new and excellent but the line was recently discontinued so not too expensive. Milvus is pretty high end, never used it, but excellent performance and big. Maybe a bit clinical. Sort of a Sigma Art/Otus type deal. Rent one?
 Can't speak for the build quality, but the image from SLR Magic MicroPrimes is stunning. Apo designs so bokeh is smooth with pure colors. You could get a 25, 50, 85 for 3500 euro I think. 82mm threads and 2 pounds each despite being "micro." I think these are bespoke "cinema" designs but miniaturized, but it remains to be seen how the construction holds up. Optically from what I understand they are excellent. Not so sure about the mechanics.

That's totally fair. I have a few of them and they're very solid options for the money. 
If that's the case, I think you may need to adjust your parameters a bit, true cine lenses are more than 2500 each, let alone for a set.
Kye is also right. Are you worried about declicked apertures? Focus gears on the lenses? Uniform front filter size?
If Rokinons/Samyangs are too cheap for your blood and would be an embarrassment, definitely don't get them.
Take a look at the Zeiss Z series lenses. They were replaced by the Milvus line and as a result are pretty cheap now.
I've been building a set of these out and have gone with the ZF.2's for Nikon mount. 
These are the classic zeiss designs in modern, all metal, super solid format. They have that zeiss look and are very cool.
That said, they're not a uniform size, the 50mm 1.4 is small like a Nikon or vintage prime.
But you can find them cinemodded by duclos. Now I think it'd be too expensive to send them in to be cinemodded by duclos on your budget, but if you look for them preowned,  they've gotten pretty cheap on ebay. You could definitely get a 3-4, possibly 5 lens kit put together for your stated budget.
The problem there will be obtaining longer focal lengths, they're all generally still pretty expensive. (135/2, 85/1.4, 100/2 macro)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Only thing I can think of is a set of Rokinons if you want larger glass. 

Yes, video is very hard. The difference between, for instance, wedding video and photography is almost ridicilous. 
I have seen photographers literally just burst firing away at the wedding cake whilst moving the camera. One of those 30 pics should be alright, not? 
And if not, you just crop and enhance the 30 MP 14-bit raw image until it looks good, with a bunch of downloaded Lightroom presets. Also, the shooting is done on auto iso, auto focus, auto shutter speed, etc. The difference couldnt be greater. No audio, no capturing complete stories or scenes,  no camera movement, no keeping the focus, no 'shit people might move in front of my camera soon', just recompose and burst away. And yet they earn the same or more. And girls drool over them. The last one was a joke. But not really. 
But then, lets talk about actual film making. I just finished my first feature film script. Jesus christ, i have a lot of respect for writers now. What a task, to do it properly. And it's never finished. There is always room for improvement. Of course I wrote something that needs a big production budget and a lot of visual effects... Impossible to pull of without major funding or a production company. But then, i will probably not be given the chance to direct. Difficult. 
But working on proper film productions is the only way forward. No more messing around with cheap and soap like short films. Or test video's. Cat video's. Travel video's. They were interesting when i started out, but also because camera's were just getting better and content was interesting just because it was shot with a certain camera. Those days are over. Every modern camera looks good. Its a done deal. 
Also, there a literally millions and millions of video's online now who do the same thing. Everyone seems to do the same. Billions of GB's of test video's, flowers with shallow dof, their girlfriend in slowmo in the park, their last holiday with a cheese voice over to make it look like there is a narrative, city shots without meaning, etc. 
I cannot look at it anymore. It's the 'easy' version of film making. You point your expensive big sensor camera at random stuff and expect that people will want to watch your 'film'. There is no story, no narrative. Also not when you add a voice over in post. Or music you ripped from another youtube video. 
Yes i am very harsh. Also on myself. I want to make real films. I am talented, but i'm not sure i have enough of it. And i will ever make the high end narrative stuff that i appreciate from selective other people. 
And... If i will ever fully enjoy it. Because film making is indeed hard. Long, exhausting days on the set. The stress. The constant 'will this even work'. 
But, when you finally do create something which has story, performance and production value and it all comes together and actually does work, it is the most beatiful form of art that exists. 
When you blow the audience or your clients away, in retrospect it was all worth it. 
Or was it? 
 

Yes, video is very hard. The difference between, for instance, wedding video and photography is almost ridicilous. 
I have seen photographers literally just burst firing away at the wedding cake whilst moving the camera. One of those 30 pics should be alright, not? 
And if not, you just crop and enhance the 30 MP 14-bit raw image until it looks good, with a bunch of downloaded Lightroom presets. Also, the shooting is done on auto iso, auto focus, auto shutter speed, etc. The difference couldnt be greater. No audio, no capturing complete stories or scenes,  no camera movement, no keeping the focus, no 'shit people might move in front of my camera soon', just recompose and burst away. And yet they earn the same or more. And girls drool over them. The last one was a joke. But not really. 
But then, lets talk about actual film making. I just finished my first feature film script. Jesus christ, i have a lot of respect for writers now. What a task, to do it properly. And it's never finished. There is always room for improvement. Of course I wrote something that needs a big production budget and a lot of visual effects... Impossible to pull of without major funding or a production company. But then, i will probably not be given the chance to direct. Difficult. 
But working on proper film productions is the only way forward. No more messing around with cheap and soap like short films. Or test video's. Cat video's. Travel video's. They were interesting when i started out, but also because camera's were just getting better and content was interesting just because it was shot with a certain camera. Those days are over. Every modern camera looks good. Its a done deal. 
Also, there a literally millions and millions of video's online now who do the same thing. Everyone seems to do the same. Billions of GB's of test video's, flowers with shallow dof, their girlfriend in slowmo in the park, their last holiday with a cheese voice over to make it look like there is a narrative, city shots without meaning, etc. 
I cannot look at it anymore. It's the 'easy' version of film making. You point your expensive big sensor camera at random stuff and expect that people will want to watch your 'film'. There is no story, no narrative. Also not when you add a voice over in post. Or music you ripped from another youtube video. 
Yes i am very harsh. Also on myself. I want to make real films. I am talented, but i'm not sure i have enough of it. And i will ever make the high end narrative stuff that i appreciate from selective other people. 
And... If i will ever fully enjoy it. Because film making is indeed hard. Long, exhausting days on the set. The stress. The constant 'will this even work'. 
But, when you finally do create something which has story, performance and production value and it all comes together and actually does work, it is the most beatiful form of art that exists. 
When you blow the audience or your clients away, in retrospect it was all worth it. 
Or was it? 
 

Wedding videographers are not just underpaid for the work they do, but there is less demand for them too!
For every wedding with a photographer, only some will have a wedding videographer too. 
Yet how many weddings with a videographer don't have a photographer? Practically none would ever dream of doing it the other way round!

Yes, video is very hard. The difference between, for instance, wedding video and photography is almost ridicilous. 
I have seen photographers literally just burst firing away at the wedding cake whilst moving the camera. One of those 30 pics should be alright, not? 
And if not, you just crop and enhance the 30 MP 14-bit raw image until it looks good, with a bunch of downloaded Lightroom presets. Also, the shooting is done on auto iso, auto focus, auto shutter speed, etc. The difference couldnt be greater. No audio, no capturing complete stories or scenes,  no camera movement, no keeping the focus, no 'shit people might move in front of my camera soon', just recompose and burst away. And yet they earn the same or more. And girls drool over them. The last one was a joke. But not really. 
But then, lets talk about actual film making. I just finished my first feature film script. Jesus christ, i have a lot of respect for writers now. What a task, to do it properly. And it's never finished. There is always room for improvement. Of course I wrote something that needs a big production budget and a lot of visual effects... Impossible to pull of without major funding or a production company. But then, i will probably not be given the chance to direct. Difficult. 
But working on proper film productions is the only way forward. No more messing around with cheap and soap like short films. Or test video's. Cat video's. Travel video's. They were interesting when i started out, but also because camera's were just getting better and content was interesting just because it was shot with a certain camera. Those days are over. Every modern camera looks good. Its a done deal. 
Also, there a literally millions and millions of video's online now who do the same thing. Everyone seems to do the same. Billions of GB's of test video's, flowers with shallow dof, their girlfriend in slowmo in the park, their last holiday with a cheese voice over to make it look like there is a narrative, city shots without meaning, etc. 
I cannot look at it anymore. It's the 'easy' version of film making. You point your expensive big sensor camera at random stuff and expect that people will want to watch your 'film'. There is no story, no narrative. Also not when you add a voice over in post. Or music you ripped from another youtube video. 
Yes i am very harsh. Also on myself. I want to make real films. I am talented, but i'm not sure i have enough of it. And i will ever make the high end narrative stuff that i appreciate from selective other people. 
And... If i will ever fully enjoy it. Because film making is indeed hard. Long, exhausting days on the set. The stress. The constant 'will this even work'. 
But, when you finally do create something which has story, performance and production value and it all comes together and actually does work, it is the most beatiful form of art that exists. 
When you blow the audience or your clients away, in retrospect it was all worth it. 
Or was it? 
 

Sounds like you should look into Rokinon/Samyang lenses. 
The Nikon 20mm 2.8 and 85mm f/2 are both fantastic lenses, but are also both small, which you say you don't like.
The samyang/rokinon lenses are all faster aperture and bigger in size.
They're widely available in a ton of mounts, cover full frame, and are cheap/easily replacable.