John Matthews

In Canon's defense, if they release a camera that provides 8k, full-frame sensor, decent colors and that's easily editable, they'll have a few problems. First, there's potential that the camera will make the cineline redundant, not that they don't have "better" ergonomic and accessibility. Second, they must have sunk a bunch of money of R&D in those cineline cameras (not that the R5 wouldn't benefit from it). I think the real problem is like what had happened to still cameras. People have still cameras that are definitely good enough (hell, phones are for many people). Most people won't upgrade unless real IQ or performance can be easily felt. Canon wants to "milk" the situation for as long as possible, trying to give substantial IQ and performance increases with limitations. This year, we have 20 minutes of 8k and have to wait 2 hours. Next year, we'll get 22 minutes of 8k and have to wait 1.5 hours. Just a little bit every year so we keep buying the camera that has less limitations. We end up with 29.59 minutes of 8k and only 2 minutes of waiting time. Want no waiting time? You still need to get the cineline cameras and by then, they'll have even more capabilities. All the while, they keep sell the "same" camera, changing only the firmware and improve profitability with manufacturing processes. Not a bad model for making money, is it?

I have to say the reports of the R5 not being able to record 8k video again for 2 hours after only recording 20 minutes seems wildly against all thermal common sense (even when put in the freezer). I can throw almost any object in the sun, add energy to it, and put in a room in normal temperature and the object will return to that temperature rather quickly. A camera doesn't have that much thermal mass that it would stay at super-hot temperatures for that long... it doesn't add up. If it did have that kind of mass, it would make a pretty good heater in winter. Canon is screwing with its customers once again.

Has anyone considered sabotage or conspiracy as a possibility? Was it an engineer? Canon itself? A fan manufacturer? Sony? So many players... this could be a film. 😀

Maybe they'll come out with a reflective aluminum A7s iii? That will solve the problem.

They can't be serious. You'd have to use EF lenses... or some other lenses. What's next? Liquid cooling like the PowerMac G5 of yesteryear?

So what you're saying is that Panasonic lost about 2000 pounds with your buying the S1H rather than the EVA-1 because they made a mirrorless camera that sufficed your needs. Interesting. I'm sure someone is paying attention to that.

Valid points. I wasn't aware of the bricking problem- that sounds bad! Does that RAW hardware come with the FX9 or is Sony making people pay for it? I think this might be the specific point that FX9 owners were peed-off about. As for the R5, I think it has yet to be seen how it behaves under duress... all we know for sure is the insane overheating wait-times, making it unusable for many types of shooting.

Are you sure of this? I have my doubts. Again, Fx9 lacks some of the features of the A7s iii. Bloom's interview with ProAV states otherwise and he had experience with both. He specifically says the A7s iii in slog3 10 bit was every bit as good as the Fx9 with LUTs applied. Maybe I'm wrong. Going back to the topic of Canon, I think the same applies. They're protecting their cinema line in some way, shape, or form. Why wouldn't they? I think people might be underestimating what their cinema line means to them. Only judging them on their R5 product, it does a lot, but they limited it in serious ways so their cinema line is still protected. The question is: did they do it on purpose or not? I say they did because they were so forthcoming about its limitations in terms of overheating. Had they produced a non-weathersealed camera or just with better cooling, it would have possibly surpassed the abilities of their cinema line (in terms of output and practicality due to its smaller size). Just some thoughts.

Not according to some vendors (Pro AV) who were saying their FX9 customers were calling in saying they were upset by some of the features of the A7s iii. This is understandable because the FX9 costs way more and doesn't do everything the A7s iii does. IMO, they just lost some future customers for the next PRO version of the Fx9. I also agree though that these are different products for different people. Still, I think I'd be upset too.

I can help you with this. If you want slow mo on any Olympus camera, you might be disappointed. That said both the EM1 ii and EM1x have 60fps in full 20mp raw (or 30 minutes of 1080p 60fps). In the right conditions, it will look really good (take a look at @Andrew Reid video about the EM1 ii. There's ONE BIG caviot to this: you get about 60 frames or 1 second that you can slow down to 40% at 24fps. The EM1x, EM5 iii, and EM1 iii all have 1080p 120fps, but again, it's not the best. I guess it all depends on your quality tolerance. I currently have the PL9 which has a flippy (down) screen with roughly all the same features as the EM10 iii, but without 5-axis IBIS (it only has 3). It's also smaller. I also have a EM1 ii that I a found smoking' deal on the French equivalent of Craig's list for 800 euros with the 12-40 PRO lens. That camera is in another league than all the cameras Olympus has except the EM1x and EM1 iii. You can find this camera used for much less than the EM5 iii, which is basically the same camera minus a few features and the 1080p 120fps. Hope that helps.

Doesn't Canon already have all the tools and know-how to make a small body mirrorless camera? This seems obvious to me, but they're going to severely undermine their cinema cameras if they give ESOHD what it wants. They'd sell a lot of them in a bad economy context not making much money on them. Sorry Canon, you had your moment to make serious profit had you simply advanced your own products rather than repackaging the same old products that made you dominent. Now, it's too late in this context and you're going to lose serious money.

I think Canon might have rushed this camera to market with the release of Sony's A7s3. It's all about keeping some of the users from switching to the Sony system. It looks like the Sony has some issues with overheating too, albeit seemingly not as bad. I guess nothing replaces that cinema camera that both of these companies sell. It would seem real advancement from small bodies, cinema specs and value will have to come from companies like Nikon, Pentax, and Olympus that are not invested in the big body, high-end cinema market.

I think Canon's quality control is superior to Sony's QC. 🙂

I have zero need (nor budget) for this camera, but I'd like to know if it has some weather sealing. Anyone know?

That's not really a fair trade. I'd prefer to have an out-of-focus image to none at all. Bonus with the Pany- you can refocus it! "Il n'y a que des cons qui ne change jamais d'avis." Je suis d'accord!

I was just saying that it might be cheaper to stretch the limits and fix the ones that break rather than recall everything.

Sorry, I can't stand that guy. The amount of BS that spews from his channel is quite incredible. I said this before, but the waiting time to film again is probably such a deal-breaker for so many people. Also, I don't really even see the point of getting this camera for stills. Apparently, Canon agrees due to them marketing this camera as a 8k video beast.

Can't overheating be somewhat fixed in firmware? I believe Sony had this problem with several of their cameras. It might not be "safe", but it might be cheaper to repair the ones that break than recall the whole lot and go back to the drawing board.

It seems people weren't this hard on Sony for all their overheating shenanigans- and Sony really didn't say anything about it, unlike Canon. Maybe it was just a different time. People just want THE CAMERA with perfect IBIS (no wobblies at the wind end), RAW, PDAF, no overheating, unlimited recording times, great ergonomics with mic inputs (low self-noise, of course), great lens selection and all this at a super-low cost that never loses value on the used market. By the way, 99% or your audience won't even notice as they're too focused on your message (if its a good one). Also, did everyone forget that Canon still needs to sell its cinema cameras that are way more expensive?

But all the ex-camera sales people, turned Canon ambassadors say it's the best thing since sliced bread. What could go wrong?

That video is very telling about the Canon R6. Basically, unusable as a pro tool, but nice for the hobbyist, I think. Then again, why would I carry around all those FF lenses? The image looks similar to my Olympus, which is a good thing! 🙂 Also, the price- Yikes!

Not sure if this was shared already, but it's very interesting to hear from someone that was in the business of investment fims

EM5 Mark III, but you can get a used EM1 Mark ii for much less... and it's better.

Predictions, predictions. This would mean they close the new factory in Vietnam and simply sell the Zuiko, Pen, OM-D names (and patents?) to the highest bidder in China. Are those names really worth that much? Yes, JIP is a private equity firm, but why couldn't they try to make it work by getting consultants that know their stuff? That might be what they did with Vaio, and the conclusion was to outsource the entire production. Don't you think there might be more profitable alternatives than shutting it all down from the get-go? Common sense tells me alternatives exist. It would be a fallacy to believe that just because X company did 1, 2, and 3 that they would do exactly the same thing in a different context (and industry). Am I wrong? I think the only people who really know what's going to happen are in that discussion room with JIP and Olympus. Many people are pretending to know more, but really no one does. We'll see. Maybe I'm just naive and business people do the same thing all the time without any cultural or contextual consideration. It will certainly be interesting to see what they do from a business perspective. Meanwhile, we've got great MFT cameras with an incredible selection of lenses!

Ok. Vaio still makes laptops that make sense to some people somewhere. Sony still has a partial stake in the company. Yes, they found a niche market that appeals to some people. The parallel with Olympus would be different. The important thing here is that the Vaio company still exists today. Again, no one know what will happen. All this doesn't change the fact that Olympus has a mature, compact, mirrorless system with a decent following. They'll be ready to make new cameras, lenses, and audio products in their new factory in Vietnam (a LCC and not China). Canon and Nikon don't have these luxuries right now in mirrorless. It must be a decent business position as JIP wouldn't be interested in them, right? I doubt they're stupid. Olympus is being proactive and doing something about their current position in the market. However, I would concede Olympus believes another company would do better them and I think they simply have too much overhead for a sustainable future. They need to cut jobs and streamline to be more efficient and give us the products we want- that's reassuring (but scary too). Let's just see what JIP can or can't do before declaring Olympus imaging as "dead." In business, this happen all the time! Most of the time, no one cares. Just look at the car industry and you can see a vast number of acquisitions and still most of the companies exist and make good cars today. It makes sense that Olympus wouldn't want another company to own their name. Again, Olympus imaging is only 5.5% of their current company business. It would be unfair to the other part of Olympus to sell the name off.