Ty Harper

Ah ok, now I get your perspective/needs much better. I'm on the opposite spectrum and only have EF lenses with IS.

Honestly it was that thinking that had me pick up an R5 as a second cam for its IBIS and I gotta say, I wish I had just bought another R5C. Whatever it is that IBIS does 'better' than Digital IS is lost on me. Nowadays I don't use IBIS or Digital IS and mostly shoot with IS lens on both the R5 and R5C.

I keep hearing about these matching issues, either between R5C and R5 or R5C and C70. I found that a WB and good ole color checker brings these cameras damn near close. So unless people are looking for an exact match, I honestly don't get the concerns. Also 8K RAW might be unwieldly but from what I know, 5.6K RAW on the R5C has only slightly bigger file sizes than its 4K XFAVC 422 files. Yes there's a crop, but that's where the .071x speedbooster can be a helpful. Josh Sattin just did a whole episode about this but it's been a known option for a minute altho prob only for people using EF-L glass: Battery issues aside (although I don't know why we would expect a cam with a dslr styled body to give more than the 1+ hours/2+ with a grip that it currently does with its updated power saving mode) I cannot stress how versatile the R5C is in practical use. It is likely the most versatile all-in-one cam Canon has ever released. Also I think some will look back at our obsession with DR and other metrics in this moment (when pretty much every cam in the prosumer range offers a fantastic image and specs for the price point) and shake their head.

Exactly and exactly - it's why people simply are not grasping how disruptive AI will likely be to the art and entertainment economy. They keep thinking about it in outdated terms and not something that simply needs a critical mass of data to master a thing and not require more human input. To be clear, AI will likely be disruptive to all human driven economies but A&E is the obvious place human creativity has traditionally intersected with commerce.

Well the most obvious reasons it can are: (i) because AI has almost 100 years of data (i.e. film history) to draw from, and (ii) because it likely has (or eventually will have) access to data mined from all these programs we're using right now to make our art. I mean why else do you think some of these apps with these fantastic tools are being offered for us to use for free? And remember AI doesn't need the entirety of that data - it just needs a large enough sample size to crack the code. The mistake we continue to make as humans is thinking that the things that make us complex cannot be reduced to 1s and 0s. But it totally can, if given enough data. And again, none of this will ever end our human need to create or be creative. It will however make it harder for us to monetize our creativity in economically profitable and sustainable ways.

For now I think there will absolutely be a great and lucrative (albeit temporary) lane for AI-linked filmmaking that is indeed an art for "more careful consideration". What will (and is) changing are the fixed jobs that humans in the film world traditionally occupied (like video editors, DOPs, audio engineer, etc). Many of those traditional jobs will/are becoming obsolete - and in their place you will just have creators who use tools (including AI based ones) to do alot of the stuff that was once left to colleagues who specialized in mastering specific said tools. And eventually, yes, AI will likely be for "bland content" or said differenty, mass consumption. But what that really means is that there will be less and less opportunities for human filmmakers to monetize their art for personal longterm economic gain. This will likely also signal the end of producers, showrunners screenwriters, etc as we know it (i.e. any job that essentially revolves around mining data to create the building blocks of storytelling and filmmaking). Maybe I'm wrong, but from my real-time vantage point working in an adjacent/intersectional field of arts & entertainment - the writing seems to be on the wall.

Honestly I'd rather hear people discuss the pros/cons etc of 24p vs 60p vs others than the hyberbolic end of days talk. What kinds of storytelling, visual messaging, etc, benefit from these combinations of frame rates, lightings, resolutions, formats, color grades, audio soundscapes - y'know?

Happy R5C/R5 owner/user/hobbyist here. I love the R5C's form factor and having the C-line video menu, along with the ridiculous amount of pro features squeezed into that dslr-styled body. I also love being able to build it out or barebones it depending on what I'm shooting. But then audio-wise the Zoom F3 allowed me to put down my bulky Zoom F4 and now I have a 2 camera run n gun setup that all fits in a Nanuk 935/Pelican 1550. And now that the battery power issue has been addressed with the R5C (I get over a couple hours easy with the grip) - and the overheating issue has been addressed with the R5, I've got two capable cams that are future proofed with 8K (yes, I have the Ninja V+ paired with the R5). Finally, the RF-EF adapter means you really don't need to go to the RF lenses. There are so many amazingly priced used EF-L lenses at your disposal. But also the VND drop-in filter is fantastic imo and never leaves my camera bodies! Coming from using C300/C100s professionally as a producer - and then owning the 5D MKII/III, 1DC as a hobbyist, I honestly feel like the R5C is my final destination cam purchase. The only thing I might do is sell the R5/Ninja V+ and pick up a second R5C body... maaaybe get a C70 when the prices get to the $2K USD range, just so I have an all-in-one C100 type cam. Either way good luck with whatever you purchase!

FYI - Nexto was acquired by TVLogic and this is their new backup storage product: https://www.newsshooter.com/2023/09/28/clouzen-tainer-all-in-one-portable-backup-storage-review/

I think IQ-wise the RF versions clearly spank their EF ancestors (as they should) - that said, I think we've just gotten to a place where the overall quality we're getting out of our equipment (particularly from the cam end alone) is so good that some shooters (maybe more than ever) are either satisfied with the older lenses they already have - and/or are even open to revisiting older ones. I never thought I'd see the day I was seeing shooters singing the praises of the OG EF 24-105mm f/4 IS, or that I'd have sold my OG EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS to buy an EF 70-200mm f/4 IS - but here we are!

I was referring to the EF 70-200mm f/4. The EF 70-2000 f/2.8 was obviously never an option for gimbal use.

For sure! I should've said "more compelling, for some" bcuz alot of people refer the fixed length style. Especially run n gun shooters using a gimbal (which is another reason many have stuck with their EF versions). Personally I prefer fixed - but nowadays I also value an L-level zoom that is pocket-sized (i.e narrow/longer vs thicker/shorter). Also the RF versions end up being similar in length to the EF f/4 version once they're extended. All that to say, I think Canon missed a great opp to make that "narrow-enough to fit in your pocket" style, a continuing part of the appeal of the f4 versions of their 70-200mm L's.

Ah ok - and from what we're learning the MKII version will zoom internally making it even more compelling! That said there's something about being able to easily fit the EF 70-200mm f4 IS in your pocket (bcuz it's so thin) that I love.

You're probably right - but coming from an EF 70-200mm f2.8 IS (MKI, II & III) the EF 70-200 f4 IS is still a massive difference on all fronts (I had no idea it was THAT much smaller than the f/2.8 models) - especially price-wise (picked mine up for like $500 CAD). Can the RF f/4 version fit in your pocket the way the EF f/4 version can?

Feel the same way - but for some reason lots of R5C and C70 shooters swear by it as their go-to workhorse lens.

Totally! The ND adapter never leaves my R5C and the extra stop you get from the .071x adapter really comes in handy (you usually need to put the R5C in 35mm crop mode to use it tho). Also thanks to those adapters, lenses like the OG EF 24-105mm f/4 IS and the 17-55mm EF-S IS have become more popular than ever. Especially with the C70. Personally I just discovered the OG EF 70-200 f4 IS - god it is so f*ckin' light with great IQ. So I ended up selling my OG EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS. Point is, thanks to these adapters - alot of R5C and C70 users in the groups I'm in are rediscovering the EF-L line in a big way.

Funny enough, it's Canon's decision to offer the EF-RF adapters - specifically the ND filter and .071x ones - that has given the EF lens a massive leg up. Currently I have the RF 35mm f/1.8 and I see myself buying the RF 24-70 f/2.8 next - but aside from that I am a happy camper with my EF-L lenses on my R5C and R5. I've also sold my 1DC and 5D MKIII so it's not like I'm ever going back to the EF mount - it's just that Canon has given us a nice lane for RF-EF users, and I love it!

Can't wait to hear what @IronFilm thinks about this!

Except what can happen is that the people working in the realms that are drying up, will be forced into finding work elsewhere - and within that pool will undoubtably be people who are (i) totally qualified to work in these other realms - it's just that they chose to apply the same core skill sets in a different realm within the same industry (ii) people overly qualified to work in these other realms of the same industry who really need the $$. These people will very likely disrupt said realm, intensify the competition, drive fees downward, and eventually squeeze some people out of said realm. Point is, I can totally see cinematographers, tv/film producers, and most definitely preditors (producer/editors) who might've been working for decades in stable areas of the industry (even unionized gigs) - making a fairly quick/easy transition to the wedding world. So while I think you're probably right about that 10 year window - I think every realm needs to be prepared for turbulence - and not just from AI itself, from similarly skilled colleagues looking for work within the next 10 years.

I was a club hip-hip deejay in another life and grew up thinking the record store (like these forums) would always be the community meeting place for all things pertaining to deejay culture. Then the digital revolution came and changed everything. But it didn't happen overnight. We just started going to the record store less and less as it became clearer and clearer that Serato had disrupted the vinyl-spinning era and deejaying as we knew it. Then Serato started added more features that rendered the skill sets deejays had spent their entire careers honing (like beat-matching, beat juggling, transitioning to acapellas etc, etc) and coveting, completely irrelevant. Fast forward almost 20 years later, and now streaming (and soon AI) have made being a deejay super-accessible, but also super hard to monetize, while rooting it in motivations and incentives that share little with what it meant to be a 'real deejay' pre-digital revolution. All that to say that I think what some are feeling/seeing is a similar shift, a transformation, a departure from the online filmmaking/video culture we've been familiar with, to something else.

I think that's the practical assessment, bcuz while the RF line is an improvement (love the 35mm f1.8 and will eventually get the 24-70mm) - I don't know that the percentage to which it is an improvement on the EF line is proportionate to the percentage to which the RF price has increased by compared to the EF versions, much less compared to used EF glass in like-new condition.

@Django my bad, I took your concerns about investing in lenses as you feeling you had to go all in with the RF lenses - but yes, I agree and would argue that Canon offering EF-only specialized adapters has been the thing driving alot of the R5C love and is also possibly the most un-Canon like gesture/strategy we've seen to date, lol

100% true but I cannot stress enough to you just how many R5C users in the forums I'm on are going the EF-L + adapter route and are really loving it (myself included!). If you really need the penultimate IQ, etc, by all means invest in RF-L lenses (and with no judgement either!) but the EF-RF drop-in filter adapter and the .71x speedbooster - coupled with the tumbling price of used EF-L lenses makes that much less of an issue if you already have EF and EF-L glass. There's also a lot of people revisiting lenses like the OG Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 and the EF-S 17-55mm. And while the RF-L lenses definitely give you better AF performance and features - the performance of EF-L glass on the R5C is no slouch at all. It's more a case of EF lenses being really good and the RF lenses being better. Anyways, if you're on FB there are some great R5C/C70 groups worth joining.

Have no idea and I wager most owners don't either, lol - just get an FX-Lion Nano One (or Nano Two) or the Smallrig VB50 or VB99. But this guy does great analysis of the R5C and says Canon has not given any official details about the exact requirements (he discusses all this in the second chapter of this video) - so basically it seems like we just know what works and what doesn't:

And yet he seems to think it's too tripod-like, lol, so I don't even get what he's looking for. To be clear, I agree that the Digital IS on the R5C is nothing to brag about at all. I think handheld it can give you good static shots with seemingly pleasing movement - but even that requires some degree of familiarity with the cam itself (which he didn't seem to have). Point is no one should be buying the R5C for its in-camera stabilization (I keep it off most of the time) - and I'd say the same for the R5 as well. They're both great cams (particularly the R5C which is so feature-rich otherwise, imo!) but as you say, there are cams out there with better stabilization features.