cameraeye

For me, for visual FX green screen where the higher the resolution the better and also composites where the raw footage can be framed wider, tracked out and blown up as needed.

The delay is there because the camera essentially reboots to a whole other OS when you switch modes.
Think of it as windows/Mac boot OS on a single computer.
I think its an ok tradeoff considering all the video options you benefit from the full C line OS (assist tools, shutter angle, LUT import etc).
Panasonic gives you a lot of that in their hybrid OS but Sony, Canon, Nikon, Fuji never and I hate that.
It's true that for hybrid shooters that need to switch modes at the blink of an eye (sports, action, news, wedding etc) an R3, Z9, A7S3, S1 would probably be better suited.
For all others including myself that don't switch modes so often and can accept an 8 sec delay it's a complete non-issue and a well-worthy tradeoff.
 
 

The one in resolve is  close enough that I'm not going to use ND's for shots on my Z6 anymore.

Also for VFX work results are far better when you pull a key off a high shutter speed and then add the motion blur in post. Makes cleaning up hair work far easier.

You know, I'm really looking forward to someone talking about the shutter speed on the R5C.  I mean, how does it work?  I know that the numbers are similar to other cameras, but I don't want to make any comparisons that get different results.  You've really opened my eyes about that, I mean when you take the exact same technology and take it from one device to another how can we really be sure that the fundamental principles will be the same?  Does a shorter shutter speed give a darker image, like on every other camera ever made, or is it different, maybe it gives a lighter image?  Maybe the colours start to go strange?  Maybe people who are happy get brighter?  How does the rotation of the earth factor in?  I wouldn't want to make a comparison that will give different results all around.
and what about ISO?  Are higher numbers better?  Does it go up and down?  Maybe the even numbers are good?  Once again, every other camera ever made works in the same way, but can we really compare?
I mean, what do we know about anything anyway?  None of us has ever used an R5C.  Maybe the images are from another camera and it's a hoax?
How can we know it really exists?
How can we know anything?
Are you real?
Am I even real?

what "clay" skin-tones?  always thought Canon was well regarded when it came to skin tones.

Correction: According to Canon, C70 Cinema RAW Light recording will be internal to the SD card:
https://www.canon.co.uk/video-cameras/eos-c70/?fbclid=IwAR2nBNoajqaNaIfH_u0du_JtTESFDUEEjCauYmzFwG1wGoxkgLjGc00TtY4
Cinema RAW light
The EOS C70 now offers users the ability to capture Cinema RAW Light internally to SD cards*. RAW provides you with greater image quality and flexibility in post-production.
On-top of the existing 10-bit XF-AVC currently found in the EOS C70, 12-bit Cinema RAW Light LT features data rates up to 645Mbps, offering much more manageable/efficient file sizes to streamline your workflow, while retaining the same benefits of RAW. Simultaneous recording of Cinema RAW Light and XF-AVC Proxies is also supported.
 
* firmware available in March 2022

Hello to everyone on the forum!
A Merry Christmas from me!
I hope you're looking forward to having a good break over the holidays and are ready to welcome in 2022. Talking of holidays - I have been having a break from EOSHD for a few months. I went and sat on a hill and finally had time to reflect on my work which is this blog and the community around it. The last video had a lot of support, it's made me really appreciate what I have in a more positive light. I'm mega appreciative of the people who took the time to say how EOSHD has helped them over the years and that they want it to continue.
So that's what we'll do! EOSHD is back.
Read the full blog post here

Beautiful!  Well done on filming the bees like this - I've tried and it's no easy task.
Also, don't apologise for posting your own stuff, assuming it's relevant to the conversation..  It separates you from the people here who don't shoot anything and just talk about film-making without actually doing it 🙂 

Just wanted to comment. this is probably one of the most honest article about the FPL. it is too expensive for me but I definitly see who would use such a beautiful camera. 
I moved last year from FUJI (that is just trying to milk its APSC users with 10year old overpriced lenses + new body designs that copy sony) to Sigma and got an FP with i-series, a 85 1.4 and a 35 1.2 and from day 1 where I shot some small videos with the FP and the 45 2.8 I knew I made the right decision.
 

The only issue with that is that camera companies only tend to hand out demo models to established 'influencers'. At least early on.
But otherwise, I agree and it would be more 'fair' if these tools reached the hands of shall we say, more real world users rather than kit reviewers.
The latter does happen, but only later down the line and usually after the user has purchased for themselves but by then, a preconceived idea of the tool is already established whether it's 100% accurate or not from those early 'reviews'.
Which is why I personally take all these kinds of things with a pinch of salt and make my own mind up. I've never bought a camera or piece of kit based on anyone's opinion but my own. 

Now your username is relevant again 😉

Yeah, the colours are always gorgeous with ML thanks to the bit depth and colour science. 
I get a cropped real-time display in Live View, then I press the 'info' button to show me a grey scaled live view (low fps) of the actual raw framing. Then I go back to real-time and click record. I'm so used to it these days haha 🤣🎥

Just posted my latest Video with the EOS M & 2.8K Raw. Truly remarkable what this camera still can do. Tried to emulate the Super 16 look although I mainly used Canon L Glass.
https://youtu.be/ohDS3ErANOs
- - Gear Used- - 
*Camera - EOS M (Original w/ ML)
 *Lens - Canon 17-40 F/4 | Canon 24-70 f/4 | Canon 35 F/1.4
 *Tripod
- - Settings - -
 *2.8K RAW 2800x1190 [2.35:1]
 * 23.98 FPS, 1/48, WB 5200, ISO 100
- - Editing - -
 *All graded in MLV App (ALEXA LOG C Profile w/ Creative Adjustments enabled, Exported Prores 4444
 * Finishing touch in FCPX 8K Timeline & Export (LOL), added little saturation and exposure adjusted, No sharpening at all.

Hold on a minute and listen.
We do not have a monster at all.
It remains crippled. And in dire need of a firmware update.
The actually reliable video modes are line skipped mush.
But most of all think about your principals. It pisses me off to be honest when a company has been shown to cheat their customers, but then the customer just goes "ah what the heck" and rewards them anyway to the tune of 4 grand.
If you really feel strongly about the fact that Canon have lied, or have even been "tricky bastards" - why would you then rush out to reward them for that with $4000 on a new camera?

I'd like to hear from Tilta as well as Canon.
If my fridge doesn't cool the camera externally what does their fan do differently?
Canon said officially: "Use an external fan to dissipate heat"
Well I used an external fridge to dissipate heat and it made no fucking difference.

As an engineer myself, I hear your arguments. Ask yourself this as you try to calculate plausible thermal resistance transformations. Isn't this just too damn complicated?
I have never had such a difficult time with thermal management in any design I've done.
Artificial firmware limitations are what's the culprit. Of course, if Canon does fix it in firmware, they will say it's a bug, which is a definite lie.

Absolutely. Nobody would care if it wasn't for the fact that an incredible camera has been kneecapped.

crippleclock.exe

Stars Wars analogies do not bode well for future canon cameras.

I was wondering this too. What if the R5 was designed and ready a while ago when Canon were still conservative on the video specs side and changed course late in the day.

But it’s not a bonus. Even if they didn’t market the video the way they did. You literally can’t use your “bonus” most of the time. You don’t sell someone chocolate and say actually you can only eat that for 3 seconds and then you have to wait to eat a little bit more. And you don’t include 8K RAW VIDEO if the design is inadequate to actually operate it. If it was a stills camera first, then you simply don’t include those video features at all. Basically what they did with all their other 5D cameras.

But it’s not a bonus. Even if they didn’t market the video the way they did. You literally can’t use your “bonus” most of the time. You don’t sell someone chocolate and say actually you can only eat that for 3 seconds and then you have to wait to eat a little bit more. And you don’t include 8K RAW VIDEO if the design is inadequate to actually operate it. If it was a stills camera first, then you simply don’t include those video features at all. Basically what they did with all their other 5D cameras.

Imagine if Canon created a breakthrough sensor with low RS, good DR, 8k and doesn’t overheat- but exactly like the 5dIII after the II thought, ‘we can’t give them something this good, let’s cripple it’. But then they cripple it too much on the secret insider cripple-o-meter and get caught because if they uncripple it everyone will know.

I watched Philip Blooms sequel film, and I came to the exact same conclusion- it looks thin. Same as the sII. At the right fingers any footage can be fixed and improved, I'm just not convinced Sony have made the leap into 'doesn't need to be touched and it looks right' territory.

So if a camera feels like it will fall apart due to use, the materials feel really cheap to the touch, it is not as weather sealed as other comparable cameras, it is not comfortable to hold, and the menu systems are a mess you would still care more about IQ? I'm not here to debate Canon vs Sony or any other brands, I love my current setup and I'm glad you are getting the results that you paid for out of yours, but to me IQ isn't everything.
Years ago I realized I'm not producing Hollywood blockbusters, my avg viewer will view my final output at 480P on their cell phones, the content matters a lot more than the IQ, actual Hollywood movies have been shot on GoPros, and YouTube will do more damage to my footage than I ever will in the camera.....so yes I know better IQ can be gotten by many cameras other than the GH5; but for me, the GH5 feels good in my hands, has a menu system that is very easy to work with, and feels rugged and reliable; these things I value more than IQ.
With that being said, sure the GH5 has many shortcomings and I have learned to work within them (highlight rolloff, DR, lowlight performance, no AF, poor color science), so if Canon delivers the same ergonomics, features, and menu system from the rest of their line, and fixes all of the things I don't like about my GH5 I will gladly upgrade.