Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by padam

  1. 2 hours ago, Snowbro said:

    People try to say this camera is a true 1D C II, but it isn't, it's a sports camera that has video features. A true 1D C successor would have LOG 2 and many other features missing from this one. 

    It is (apart from the internal recording limit), just invest in a lot of very expensive memory cards (which were similarly outrageously priced, when the 1DC came out) shoot in RAW and you have access to Canon Log 2 (but no 4k60p AF since it is FF only)
    The 1DC could only record in MJPEG, no peaking, no AF, it was never a true 'C' camera to being with, just a 1DX with heatsinks, 4k, Log and a crop 1080p mode (a useless 1080p60p 720p upscaled mode) and that's it, the 1DX III has similar improvements in comparison to the 1DX II (more recording options, 10-bit with Log or RAW)
    They will never do a stills camera with the same processing and codec options as their video cameras.

    Of course if they do a mirrorless flagship equivalent with IBIS, it may kill the 1DX III for video, but it's Canon, so they will figure something out to differentiate the two models.

  2. 2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

    Yes, good plan!

    No conclusions until the fat lady sings. But it ain't looking great, is it? You spend in my case £5800 and find out the rolling shutter in 24p is worse than Sony's low-end mirrorless camera? These things should not happen. Not at that price. Nope.

    True, no other camera offers 5.5K 60p RAW. However the image quality must be evaluated to see if the massive file sizes make it worth shooting. Some cameras take a short-cut with the sensor output in RAW. Optimally, RAW is a 1:1 readout - the RAW pixel data, written directly to card. If the Nikon Z6 for example had an optimal ProRes RAW solution with the Ninja V it would be 6K. The sensor is 6K. Ask yourself how they get to 4K RAW. Look closely at the pixel quality vs 10bit 422 V-LOG on the S1H. It ain't a pretty picture.

    It is very special to have a cinematic, film like image, but then there is the question of getting the shot in the real world. What hinders you, etc. Superb image quality is nothing if you miss a shot, or the rolling shutter messes up the shot.

    Taking away AF in the high resolution full frame 60P modes really annoys me, but I am not going to unfairly throw the camera under the bus for it... The AF is still in a different league to the S1H, which is this camera's closest competitor for video quality.

    Even before release on the specs sheet it was 100% clear that the 5.5K raw can only be a full sensor readout as well, so it was never in question like the Nikon Z6 or the Sigma fp.
    Furthermore, most of what one needs to know about the 1DX III image has been put out there on the internet for months, so it's not like one is forced to spend that much money to find that out.
    Unless the intention is to dissect every new stills camera via an article, and it is not so difficult, because it is crystal clear that there won't ever be a perfect one, each one will have some sort of issue or compromised feature.
    Despite the amazing feature set it is also quite clear that compared to their Cinema cameras, the stills cameras with different processors won't have the same rolling shutter and editor-friendly codecs and file sizes in less compressed formats. (And with the C300 III we can add dynamic range to that list as well) that's because it's a Canon camera, other brands can be associated with other quirks/issues.
    For using them as a B-cam (and taking some stills), they look mighty good.
    The main line is that can be used for video with amazing results, and people made amazing stuff with cameras that have even worse rolling shutter, but if that's a concern there are other options. Could they have enabled an AF-disabled FF mode to reduce the 4k24p rolling shutter? That remains a mystery but the AF seems to be a headline feature anyway.

    I do wonder though, if people love to complain about the 1DX III being inadequate, what's the EOS R6 going to get with an cut-price sensor and processor, probably worse rolling shutter, dynamic range and much more limited video features?
    Will people going to forgive considering it will be the cheapest camera they make with dual card slots and 4k60p with a great IBIS and AF systems, which are well integrated with their lens lineup and it's going to be easy to get a decent image without much care (e.g. vloggers)?
    (Sorry if this review was posted already)


  3. 26 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

    Did the A6500 improve over the A6300? The A6300 was unbearably bad in 4k.

    It's the same, except the IBIS filters it a little.

    This has them in order, the EOS RP is the 'leader' in terms of sensor speed, but because it is not sampling more pixels, it still cannot beat the Sony to be a rolling shutter champion (comes close though)

    Can the R5 beat the A6300 and its relatives?
    The 8K vs 6K readout is certainly promising.
    But thanks to many years of evolution, I fear that it may not beat it and we will struggle to see as much rolling shutter again.


  4. 51 minutes ago, ghostwind said:

    The lack of IBIS on the 1DXMKIII is killing me - literally. If it had it, it would be incredible. But yeah, then the R5 would have one less major advantage to tick in the comparison box. Urgh!

    Because the FF 4K is 5.5K oversampled, the electronic IS won't degrade the image in a significant manner, if you look at the linked slashcam tests, it just crops in slightly.
    It seems to work quite well from other YT tests.

  5. 5 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

    Massive RS. AF quirks. Huge file sizes.

    Before we conclude how bad the 1DX III is, at the moment no other FF camera offers 5.5k 60p to start with. None.
    And the R5 will not sample 5.5k at 60p, so AF will be enabled in all 8K or 4K recording modes as stated.
    It is likely to be more like a Panasonic S1R or Leica SL2, e.g. not the most detailed, but very good rolling shutter in 60p (30p is still in question).
    There will be a mountain of recording options to reduce the file sizes, and external 4K Prores recording will be supported as well.

  6. 4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

    - No live histogram, waveform or zebra (this is the most puzzling one but was always like this on Canon). An external monitor fix this but I hate to have cables and one thing more to power.

    The R5 will have zebra included, it was shown in a product video (probably not the other two) so in theory they could add that to the 1DX III with a firmware update as well.

  7. 1 hour ago, Simon Young said:

    Wolfcrow tested out the 1dxIII extensively on a job and praises many things, but rolling shutter performance in 5,5k raw is not one of them. It’s really bad (which makes me cautious about both the R5 and R6) But the image is as expected gorgeous.


    It is only true for full sensor 4k30p, full sensor 4k60p (when the AF is disabled) has half as much rolling shutter, big difference



  8. 27 minutes ago, Vintage Jimothy said:

    Perhaps it might be overkill, but I do like using vintage glass a lot of the time whenever I don't need to rely on autofocus. I do plan on investing in RF lenses too if I get the R5, but it's a matter of price and what lenses are available by that point in time.

    I suppose if I really save my pennies, I could try to eventually nab the RF 28-70mm f2 lens. That lens does seem pretty magical...

    What I meant that if you are happy to use those, maybe the R5 is not really needed right away, if we look at how much cheaper it is going to became after a year or so, while the Panasonic S1 will become even cheaper right now (it will cost less than half as much slightly used) as it will loose some of its appeal and from what I've seen, the IBIS works really well even with vintage lenses.
    And of course there is also the R6, but that will probably not offer enough unfortunately, it it targeted even more at EF or RF users as the AF will be one of its big strengths.

    Yes, it is in terms of how the 28-70/2 looks, although it is still different so use  in practice compared to prime lenses and since I am not selling most of those, it is probably the one that has to go in the end.
    And the balanced handling, wider range, silent AF and stabilisation of the 24-105mm f4 IS makes it pretty compelling for video.
    And there is the "happy medium" 24-70mm f2.8 IS, which is offers a bit of both. Sure, the lenses are expensive, but they are also well thought-out compared to the competition (especially the zooms, dual IS will work really well with the option of electronic stabilisation added in as well).

  9. 1 hour ago, Vintage Jimothy said:

    The only other thing holding me back is how pricey most of the Canon RF lenses are so far, which admittedly was also a bit of a concern I had with the L-mount and the S1H. If I opt to save up for the R5, I'll probably save up to get it with the RF 24-105mm f4 lens (which I'd wager is probably going to be the kit lens) and probably continue to build out my vintage lens kit so that I have at least one high quality versatile lens to use with autofocus and then have a number of primes I can switch in and use manually if need be. That should work, at least until more affordable RF lenses start coming out, right?

    This camera is probably overkill for using manual lenses and the IBIS might not work as effectively without electronic contacts. (The Panasonic S1 series/Leica SL2 are the only ones which are 5-axis with every lens so they are best suited to manual lenses, Nikon/Sony is only 3-axis and I guess Canon will behave similarly)
    I mean, it will still work just fine, but the whole point of this camera is to have full compatibility with EF and RF lenses with full Dual-Pixel Af support (and of course Canon colours), while also offering full feature set that the internet was complaining about until now. I am using manual lenses on the EOS R as well, but not many people do.
    In my experience, RF lenses are the way forward for both photo and video (but the EF lenses are still quite good, too).

  10. 39 minutes ago, Vintage Jimothy said:

    That said, I do want to hear more about details like the R5's battery life, rolling shutter, overheating and the like, much the same as most others in this thread and on the Internet. I have to imagine some sort of compromise had to be made in one or all of those areas. Same goes for low light capabilities and dynamic range. 

    It won't have any compromise regarding low light or dynamic range as long as the 4k30p is downsampled from the 8k, which it probably will, while the 4k60p and 4k120p are going to be line-skipped.
    The rest is impossible to make without some sort of compromise, the EOS R battery life is really good but it has no IBIS and full sensor video, although the new battery is higher capacity which should offset it a little bit. 30-minute limit is a given, but it should be fine until that time, or it should be better with an external recorder (which also records is a less demanding codec)
    Rolling shutter will be interesting, as the sensor has to have a fairly decent speed to have 8k30p mode in the first place.

    6 minutes ago, MeanRevert said:

    So any reason why no one’s talking about the R6?  Seems like 4K is enough for a lot of people.

    It is not aimed at the professional video market and it is not going to cannibalise the EOS R5.
    Yes, it will do 4k60p and 1080p120p, but I don't expect the cheap sensor to have great dynamic range to start with, so it will be restricted to 8-bit 4:2:0 H.264 IPB codec and no Canon Log. Of course people have been shooting on the 1DXII without Log for ages, so it's not like one can't produce great video with it. But it will be a big step down form the R5, as it should be for almost half the cost and the EOS R will remain relevant as the 'cheap' option to have access to Canon Log, but no IBIS.

  11. 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).



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

  12. 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.

  13. 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).

  14. They are going up in value because of their status and it is difficult to find one with minty glass.
    The 50/1.2 LTM is also great and much smaller, but the 50/1.4 LTM (v2) that performs the best, it seems underrated in comparison, easier to find, I use it on the EOS R and it makes great video.

  15. It was a simple design decision on the C300 Mark III. They've kept the EF mount because of compatibility, all the glass obtained and used for any Canon cinema camera fits on these new models from the get go and it can be swapped out for PL as well. They also don't have to re-engineer anything on the camera for the new RF platform, it saves costs, enables them to improve other areas.

    In their first cinema-related RF mount camera, they will probably make something smaller and more modular, to sell their V-ND EF RF adapter instead of having internal ND at a higher price. That could wait until the next generation, maybe then they will switch to the electronic variable ND as well, since they do have a patent for it.

  16. 1 hour ago, Cliff Totten said:

    Its not just the processor that needs cooling. Reading out a large sensor in 8k at 30+fps will heat that sensor up...big time. Its going to suck amps galore and get really hot. Sony often clocks their sensor readouts down to keep them cooler in small passive Alpha bodies. A fast clocked 15 millisecond readout in 8k 30p....in a passive cooled body?...no damn way!!!  That sensor will be clocked at 35-45 milliseconds and will jello-o like crazy. Even THEN,  it's still going to get hot. I'm betting on 8k clips no longer than 5 min and a required cool down in between clips. 4k?....be ready for pixel binning/line skipping and a forced 29 minute recording limit. You guys wait and see....the "Canon Cripple Hammer" is alive and well. They have to also make the Cine EOS managers happy too. 

    And please.....nobody tell me; "Canon Cine EOS managers have ZERO concern for anything that an R5 has to offer"  or "The R5 doesn't compete with the C200 or C300 so Cine EOS managers don't even pay attention to the R5 because they are two different markets"

    Oh...they care and the have a lot to say about how the R5 should be "properly" crippled.

    While I agree about the rolling shutter, there is too much moaning here about other things.

    It is the first 8K non-cinema camera, which is also an up-to-date mirrorless camera, with plenty of great features, full stop.

    And there will be no extreme price premium, like it was with a 1DC (and think of it what else it could do, besides being a 1DX shooting MJPEG 4k25p with a crop and no AF or a sharp 1080p mode in S35mm crop mode, a 'fake'  upscaled 1080p 60p, and all this without a time limit...not much)

    (Yes in the future it might be usable as a B-cam next to an 8K cinema camera costing many times more.) Let's just see when there is going to be another one, they will be facing the exact same challenges.

    It a stills camera that has some serious video capabilities allowed by today's technological advancements, but it's never going to be perfect. Do most of the potential buyers of this camera want a huge body at all times (instead of an optional battery grip) with an active fan to continuously cool down the sensor and kill the battery life? I really don't think so.
    Could they do a camera more focused on video? Yes, probably, and it won't be a full-fledged stills camera anymore and it would cost even more money.
    They have obviously considered heat when designing this camera, which is clearly bigger in dimensions than a Sony, so it has more room for things like a heatsink, and it is likely that the LP-E6NH will have less heat build-up as well, new processor, etc.
    This camera was not designed for long recording times in the first place. But the option is probably there to use the external recorder and bypass that limit up to 4k60p.

    I am more interested in the R6, since I do think they could cripple that camera much harder if they are pricing it more aggressively.

    Oh, one important thing I forgot: codecs.

    Yes it is not a RED with variable compression RAW, but it gives a lot of options:
    You can shoot highly compressed onto SD cards (yes, processor intensive, but it still still superb to have that option)
    But also, you can also shoot higher bitrates and RAW to CFExpress.

    And this is all 10-bit internal (the Panasonic S1 or Nikon Z6 for instance, do not utilise the power of CFExpress)
    So other cameras don't offer the same level of flexibility (it is either this, or that), the 1DX Mark II in particular, a popular stills camera for video, has just been outclassed in this regard.

  17. 6 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

    The EOS R is that but I suspect it outsold the S1 and S1R combined two fold simply because it’s a Canon and has DPAF.

    It's not just that, it is a lot smaller and cheaper (the kit lens, too), the S1 price hasn't dropped that much yet (I expect it this year)

  18. 32 minutes ago, Devon said:


    Does anyone have experience buying camera bodies (not lenses, as the risk seems lower) from gray market sellers? They offer new cameras for about the same price (or better) than used condition cameras. So to me, if the Gray Market warranty is shoddy anyway, there wouldn't be one with a used camera anyway. So no benefits buying used in that regard.

    The only thing that would stop me from buying the FP from the above link is that, Ken Rockwell states on his site "In the case of digital cameras, you probably won't be able to get software and firmware updates... (https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/gray-market.htm)"

    Since the FP definitely relies on the update coming out this summer, I am a little hesitant. 

    Did anyone buy their FP from gray market? Were you able to update the firmware? Does anyone have any insights to buying camera bodies (not lenses) from the gray market?

    Complete BS (Ken wants you to use his affiliate links, and not buy it from somewhere else for potentially cheaper), the firmware will update on any camera, no problem. The only difference is with some brands, some languages and frame rates are not available (the fp is NTSC/PAL switchable, so no problem there)

  19. 28 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

    Can't be much worst than this as it will not make it in time for 30fps..... as we know that 4k 60 and 120 also have DPAF either are cropped or pixel binned or it is a big improvement over 1Dx III..... hope is the last one but in fact I could not find that 60 or 120fps are not cropped or pixel binned or both

    Funny that an older press release started with: Canon reveals further EOS R5 details – shutting down speculation that some specs are ‘impossible’

    Non-cropped, internal recording 8K video capture – up to 29.97fps in 4:2:2 10-bit in Canon Log (H.265) or 4:2:2 10-bit HDR PQ (H.265)

    Non-cropped internal recording 4K video capture – up to 119.88fps in 4:2:2 10-bit in Canon Log (H.265) or 4:2:2 10-bit HDR PQ (H.265)

    I expect the image to soften at every higher frame rate (does not matter since it leaves rival behind by far) and maybe some crop will be available as well.
    But I don't expect great rolling shutter, when it reads the whole sensor. Maybe the IBIS will help to combat some of that, we'll see.

  20. 5 hours ago, androidlad said:

    R5 will have Canon's fastest on-chip ADC from 1DX III with readout speed at 174Kp/s @ 12bit, compared to Sony's current gen of 180Kp/s.

    With this data, the 45MP sensor can scan DCI 8K at 40fps so rolling shutter will be around 25ms.


    According to this test the 1DX III rolling shutter is 32ms in full sensor mode up to 30p (according to a different measurement, it is 28ms and the EOS R measured on that is also 28ms, so it is exactly same as the R)

    Interestingly, it does improve to 16ms when switched to full sensor 60p and the AF gets disabled (so twice as good as the EOS R).

    Not sure how it affects things, but the R5 will have the AF enabled, so if it runs is a similar mode as the 1DX III, the rolling shutter could be very severe in 8K and even worse than the 1DX III, unless it is something very special compared to the 1DX III.
    If not, they may not use the full sensor in either of the 4K recording modes to make the rolling shutter much better.

  21. 8 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

    If your EOS R works for you now it'll still work for you when the R6 comes out tho

    I am perfectly fine with 20MP over 30, IBIS is huge for video just on its own, two card slots perfect for shooting weddings
    and even if is has the 1.4x UHD crop (same as the 1DX crop mode just not cinema 4k), it would still be a big improvement over 1.75x

    Even if it has worse dynamic range and no Canon Log at all, I would still consider it, if it is priced right.

  22. 5 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

    Lacking 10 bit and RAW is enough to separate it from the 1dx MK3, cropped 4k 60p even more so. 

    Maybe have changed their thinking and it will have the same dynamic range as the 1DX III and only the readout speed is lower and the IPB codecs and the 20MP 45MP gap is now wide enough to differentiate. Sounds way too good to be true to me, it's Canon who would rather cripple it harder to have more headroom to cut prices in the long run, so I have my doubts, and it would kill my EOS R, I guess I have some time to sell it on, but they would also kill it for the future as well.

    And the 4k30 uncropped rolling shutter will be very bad and worse than the 1DX III, it would be just like the EOS RP in cropped 4k mode (33ms, very severe) or maybe they disable the AF and run in it a different mode.
    Interestingly, enough the 1DX III FF4k60p (raw 60p) has the AF disabled, but the 14ms rolling shutter is really good, the FF4k30p (raw 30p) with AF is 28ms, same as the EOS R crop 4k, not great, but it is full sensor. They could have enabled that mode for uncropped 4k30p manual focus, so it would be closer to cinema cameras, but they just decided to leave it separate.

  • Create New...