Django

Hey all, quick follow-up after having purchased the C50 and using it couple days.

The customization is seriously one of the best parts. I have EIS toggle, S&F, teleconverter, display brightness boost, view assist, WFM, false color all on physical buttons so they're instant. Then the touch quick cine menu overlay lets me flip through frame rates, codec, resolution and recording settings super fast without leaving shooting view. It just feels like one of the quickest cameras I've used in real life.

Open gate 3:2 is still my absolute favorite thing. The aspect ratio looks fresh and having that extra vertical headroom for reframing or pulling stills is addictive. Being able to shoot 7K open gate in 10-bit h265 at only 486Mbps in the lowest bitrate is a great data rate to resolution ratio.

The digital zoom via the rocker switches is the other standout. Light press for slow creep, hard press for fast punch, with separate speed curves for each. It's so tactile and controllable, and it makes punch-ins on primes feel intentional instead of a crop hack.

The top handle is really cool too. It gives better balance and a two-handed grip so handheld shake is noticeably reduced, especially low angles or longer takes. But what's even cooler is how modular it is. Snap it off and the camera becomes super compact for travel, storage or quick discreet shots. Having the choice is great.

Still working on stabilization. EIS helps when it's on, but you get that slight crop and occasional motion blur artifacts unless I crank shutter angle to 90° or 45° (which I do now). EIS is disabled in open gate 3:2 so those shots are raw shaky until post. Gyroflow should handle it but I'm still having trouble getting it to recognise the camera or lens. Anyone knows how to manually set it up? Any tricks for getting the gyro data to load properly?

Still in early testing phase but overall the camera feels fast, intentional and pro in a way that keeps me shooting. 

Cheers!

2 hours ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

R3D NE data rate is about 2x of that of N-RAW Normal, which in turn is 2x that roughly expected of Prores 422 LT 4K which is coming to the ZR in a firmware update according to Nikon.  So you can get a 75% reduction in data rate compared to R3D NE in a 4K 422 format in the future. Would this be enough to make the camera practical for you? Another possible help is if video editors will be able to make shortened R3D NE files (after cutting) in the future, to save storage space. I imagine this is just a matter of time, if the camera is popular, it will probably be implemented. 

Yep that's the kind of intermediary codec that the ZR needs. But only if Nikon doesn't cook it with that aggressive noise reduction. You know the drill, Fuji had similar issues I seem to remember you pointing out. 

Thing is, I don't buy cameras based on promised or wishful features anymore. Been burned too many times waiting for "coming soon" updates that arrive late, incomplete, or not at all. So as of right now, the ZR is off the table for me. It's not just the codec situation though tbh, the unreliable view assist/exposure tools and first gen quirks also give me cold feet. 

Good to know LT is officially on the roadmap, though.. great for early adopters but I think I'm done gambling on "maybe later". 

31 minutes ago, mtol said:

I didn't know that the c50 had digital zoom like that. Neat!

Canon stabilized lenses were my go to shooting tool for such a long time and I'm sure the new ones are better than the Ef generation. What I can't stomach is the price of new glass and being locked into a particular lens aesthetic when I want to shoot handheld. But all things considered, as a tool, good lens stabilization can be more organic and less artifact prone than ibis.

I've seen some stabilization tests with the digital is and I am not impressed. 

I also expect Nikon will come out with more professionally oriented cameras soon.

Renting a c50 is a good call. If it feels right in hand and you like the images you'll cut through the noise. 

Yeah I haven't seen any C50 reviews really mention let alone showcase the digi zoom feature. I kinda stumbled upon it when menu diving and was shocked how effective it was, especially the range!

The RF lens system actually isn't that expensive when you look at the STM range. The new 45mm f1.2 being priced under $500 is especially enticing and will be the first one I cop. The L primes are pricey AF and don't have lens IS so I'll probably stick with STM's and maybe even venture back into EF as they're so cheap these days and work like native RF. Some interesting third party cine RF lenses have also appeared (Canon is ok with licensing RF mount to manual glass manufacturers)..

But as far as adaptability Nikon Z mount is killer and one of the main reasons I was so tempted to join that system. R3D RAW is also a great image pipeline, if only Nikon would offer lighter version. I mean REDs RAW compression is the whole purpose of their patent and ironically them suing Nikon. It feels such a waste to not offer it here but ok gotta remember it is a first gen product!

12 minutes ago, mtol said:

As long as it checks all the boxes for you. You really can't go wrong.

For me both the C50 and R6III are close to checking all the boxes, but if the C50 had IBIS or the R6III had the XLR handle, they would be perfect. I know canon has some great stabilized zooms, but I don't want to get married to a system for a feature that most systems are putting in-body.

I'm currently invested in L mount, but just barely - which means I own some adapters and one lens in that system. The rest is EF glass or adapted to EF glass. So switching systems would not be too costly if any one camera hits it all out of the park.

At the end of the day, they're all good machines. I'm not in a huge rush. But I look at the price of used FX3s and kind of think it may make sense to invest in something that will hold its value as the kind of go-to camera for the next 5 years. Then again, I prefer the image out of my S1H to the FX3 any day, and had I gone that route I'd have a more valuable black box and five years of inferior images.
 

Yeah, I'm still torn between the C50 and R6 Mark III (ZR is lingering but fading).

C50 wins big on the XLR handle for clean audio, tally lights, active cooling, and all the cine extras. The real killer is the zoom rocker up to 4x digital zoom via the levers, turning any prime into a smooth parafocal telephoto. That's massive for run&gun when you can't swap lenses; Sony/Nikon hybrids top out around 1.5x in 4K. But no IBIS is a legit worry: digital + gyro + lens IS might work, but I need to rent and test further to see if it's a deal-breaker.

R6 Mark III gives me IBIS, open gate for post cropping/vertical, hybrid stills/video balance, and an EVF. FX3 is still solid (clean 4K up to 120p, great high-ISO, gyro stab) but buying one this late feels off when open gate is high on my list.

Short version: C50 for XLR, cine tools and that crazy digital zoom reach, R6 III for IBIS + open gate + reliability. Renting the C50 soon to settle the stab question.

Oh, and the ZR is likely getting the axe.. too many quirks for my needs.

I am currently doing my own ZR image testing with footage I shot in every codec and the R3D RAW is beautiful, super rich, super detailed. Probably the best image you can get from a mid priced mirrorless. But then the h265 log conundrum. I just messed around with some log files and they're terrible. Reminds me of 8bit FHD 5D3 footage. Actually the whole camera reminds me of my C200 which had either Canon RAW or 8bit. I hated not having an intermediary codec and its the same scenario with the ZR. 

Quite a shame as I love the design, form factor and huge display. But it's basically a massive RAW file camera which isn't going to be practical for a lot of people. I'm headed back to Canon as Sony is in limbo and I don't do L-mount.

25 minutes ago, mtol said:

I have a hunch they will announce something with a higher resolution and open gate. Unsure about RAW. But they have to adapt with the market and surely they're noticing the discourse around the age and limitations of the FX3. 

I dunno this is the same company that released an FX2 couple months ago with a 4 year old A7IV sensor. The A7V hasn't caught up to the competition either. Sony are in their own bubble, too comfortable being in leadership position. Don't forget they also have a cine line to protect, so unless they're planning an entire FX refresh, I wouldn't expect too much from them at this point.

In any case I can't wait any longer so it looks like I will be headed back to Canon, closed lens system but it checks all the boxes.

The ZR with its ultra thin smart adapter is making more and more Sony users switch including a major YT camera bro..  the FX2 got horrible press and A7V has not outperformed the competition so I think its in Sony's best interest to announce the FX3 II sooner than later but the big question is will it finally give Sony users things like +4K, Open gate or even internal RAW? The recent releases make me very doubtful they'll include all of that... 

Speaking of ZR, I got to do some more testing as I await my C50 rental. I really like the camera. R3D RAW is phenomenal. But the file sizes are absolutely insane. I did notice that shooting in SDR compressed doesn't ruin the footage the way N-log does. My theory is that to keep such a compact camera from overheating, they baked in heavy NR and made the bitrate light to not heat up the card. If so, I'm not sure an update will fix the h265 log mush. Also the fact that shooting in R3D RAW changes the color science is a little jarring. Like Casey from camera conspiracies noted, the ZR feels like multiple cameras in one. The image quality and color science is all over the place depending on settings. I value consistency so not sure this appeals to me. 

15 hours ago, ArashM said:

I apologize for the delay, before I expand, I have to say Kye in a note above said it best. In general I don't find -For me and what I shoot- the ZR get's out of the way and just works, I'm not brand new to Nikon yet find the menu diving a bit of a pain, I also can't understand why I can't assign some common used settings to the first quick menu. Getting a card out once you rigged your camera is a nightmare, have to move the whole thing off and pull off anything on the base to access the card. See below on set's like this it's a bit of a mess and you then have to spend time and make sure your camera is back to the right place! Another challenge is the tragic  H265, I shot a small table top for Sephora the other day and couple of mini clips ended up at 293 GIGs, would have shot it on H265 if it was fine, absolutely no need for red code in a perfectly lit set.

I normally shoot on cameras that just do what they need to do and that's all there is to it, we don't even really think much about the camera during the shoot, for my experience so far the ZR isn't at all that camera!

Again this is just me, I'm sure there are people who love using the ZR and that's excellent for them 🙂

 

Thanks for the honest take and rig photo.  I can see how ZR probably isn’t ideal once you build it out like that. 

I’m also a bit skeptical about the cinema positioning. Nikon pushes R3D hard, which is great for high-end grading, but H.265 should be solid and dependable at this level, not an afterthought.

Hopefully some of this improves via firmware. Better bitrates, cleaner encoding, more mature UI. The FX3 launched pretty bare and evolved a lot over time, so there’s precedent.

For me, the appeal of the ZR is the ultra-compact body with that big screen. I wouldn’t want to over-rig it. On bigger sets with serious monitoring needs, I'd say something more modular like the C50 makes more sense.

I've decided to rent the C50 to see if it really meets my needs in client situations. Wish I could do the same with ZR but it isn't available for rental around here.

Really appreciate you sharing the unfiltered experience. It helps a lot. 

true! speaking of which:

On 2/4/2026 at 1:06 AM, ArashM said:

Bought a ZR on a whim, - to my taste- the H265 is unusable, and the RED code files are massive. There are way too many quality of life issues (like extracting the CFB card once there is a cage on the body) that really ruin it for me!

 

..would you mind expanding on these quality of life issues, CFB extraction aside?

I walked out of testing yesterday completely sold on the Canon R6 Mark III as the reliable hybrid for pro stills and video jobs. Solid AF, dependable IBIS, a proper EVF for tough lighting and that familiar Canon workflow I already know inside out. Seemed like the safe, no surprises choice.

Then I spent the afternoon shooting with the Nikon ZR and Canon EOS C50 side by side, and the shift happened faster than I expected.

The ZR surprised me with how compact and genuinely portable it feels. Easy to carry all day without fatigue, and the build quality gives that premium, confidence inspiring solidity. The large bright 4" flip-out screen is a real advantage for quick solo framing and monitoring, especially on location shoots where you need to stay discreet and move fast. Handheld footage stays smooth thanks to strong IBIS, colors and dynamic range deliver right away, and the RED integration could bring noticeable client appeal for higher-end branded or narrative pieces. Adapting my existing Sony Batis lenses works seamlessly too, so no immediate lens spend to get productive.

The C50 brings serious post-production flexibility with 7K open gate, which is hard to ignore if heavy cropping, vertical deliverables, or aggressive grading are regular parts of the job. It is a proper cinema camera with useful pro connections. Still, the smaller screen and lack of EVF makes composing on the move feel more constrained, and the lack of IBIS means EIS or gyroflow post time.

So yesterday I was set on the R6 III. Today I find myself quietly checking ZR deals while weighing whether the everyday portability, big screen usability, and RED workflow edge tip the balance over the open gate capability of the C50 (and the balanced hybrid strengths of the R6 III). Not decided yet. Need a few more real client-style tests to see which one actually streamlines deliverables without adding friction.

Economics aside, GAS is real and it’s gotten out of hand.

The constant hype from camera bros on YouTube and social drives it. Every few months there’s a new “GAME CHANGER” video, clickbait thumbnail, sponsored “first look”, and comment sections full of upgrade questions and system switches. It creates endless FOMO where current gear suddenly feels obsolete, while most “must-have” updates are marginal and don’t matter for real work.

Manufacturers love this however this cycle has the opposite effect on me: I keep waiting. Something new is always around the corner, so I drag my feet and keep changing my mind .. That being said there are game changers from time to time, and for me open gate is that kind of benefit for my workflow I’ve been waiting for and it’s why I’m going back to Canon.

I’ve seen a lot of Sony users claim it’s not important, and anamorphic shills overblow it’s relevance but truth is for me it makes sense when doing multi-platform content. Extracting high-res stills from video takes is another practical bonus that adds real value instead of just another spec bump. That’s what matters to me, not another 0.5-stop DR , marginal AF tweaks, extra IBIS stops, or RAW flavour of the month.
 

Cameras have been more than good for a while now and all the feature creep and size reduction brings other issues like overheating when reliability should remain a priority..

Quick follow-up after spending more time with the R6 Mark III at the shop.

The R6 Mark III is pulling ahead strongly.  IBIS is very effective and reliable for handheld shooting, and the EVF proved extremely useful, especially in bright exterior conditions where the small 3" LCD on the C50 felt noticeably inadequate for precise framing and focus. Flash sync and mechanical shutter add useful flexibility for occasional stills. It delivers most of the key video features I liked on the C50 (7K open-gate, LUT support, S&Q) but with better overall hybrid handling and a lower entry price since I’m starting fresh on RF lenses either way.

The R6 Mark III menu feels more comfortable to read overall (the C50's cine UI isn't well adapted to the small 3" display, text and icons can be hard to parse quickly). Switching between photo and video modes is instantaneous, and the mode dial with independent custom settings (C1/C2/C3) is much handier for fast-paced environments where I need to jump between setups without diving into sub-menus. Overall this makes the UI feel better suited to quick, dynamic shooting.

Downsides: consumer body look (a cage + handle will address that), no XLR top handle, no dedicated digital zoom rockers like the C50. I’ll miss some of the C50’s cine-specific features and the built-in fan for absolute thermal reliability, but tests show the R6 Mark III has fairly good thermal performance in real-world use.

I’m now leaning strongly toward the R6 Mark III. At roughly €1000 less than the C50, it packs a mean punch for the solo run&gun content I’ll be shooting. The open gate capability for multi-ratio work and stills extraction, combined with solid IBIS, the EVF, and overall usability, feels like the best balance. Price to feature ratio is hard to beat in the current hybrid market.

I still need to do more comparative tests as this is too important an investment to wing it and I still low-key want the C50.

Thanks again for all the input, it’s helped narrow things down a bit.

@kye

Thanks for the thoughtful take, two solid points.

On the first one: I don’t really have emotional attachment to camera bodies anymore. They’re just tools that either help me get the shot or get in the way. Lenses are the emotional part for me (the rendering, the character, the way they feel when I look through them), but the body is basically a computer with a mount and some buttons.

That said, ergonomics and UI matter hugely. If I’m constantly fighting menus, fumbling controls under pressure, or the grip feels wrong after 20 minutes, my mood tanks and it bleeds into the set. I’ve shot with cameras that technically should be fine but never clicked with my hands or brain. The day always feels harder and the results flatter. So if the C50’s cine OS with shutter angle, proper exposure tools and XLR top handle let me stay in flow instead of menu-diving or second-guessing, that’s worth a lot more than specs on paper.

Reliability is primal too. A body that fails on set (AF hunting in low light, overheating mid-interview, battery dying unexpectedly, corrupted file, flicker issues, or weird grading artifacts) is a disaster, especially solo. I’ve had shoots go sideways because of exactly that. So even if a camera is technically capable, if it can’t be trusted in the field for hours, it’s not a tool, it’s a liability.

On stabilization: I’m with you. I’m not chasing perfectly locked-down gimbal shots or overcooked EIS. I actually like natural camera movement, it feels alive and human. The stuff that kills the vibe for me is the micro-jitters and tiny breathing shakes on small-body cameras. Those little floating tremors look nervous and amateurish. Big intentional camera motion (shoulder rig sway, handheld energy) can be beautiful and add to the scene, but those small unintentional artifacts from inadequate stabilization are just distracting.

That’s why Gyroflow plus shooting with EIS off (or Standard only when needed) feels like the sweet spot. I get to keep the organic handheld character I like, but I can surgically remove the annoying micro-shake in post without turning everything into a locked-down special effect. If a shot is so dynamic that even that isn’t enough, I’ll reach for a gimbal or shoulder rig anyway. But for 80 to 90 percent of the lifestyle, interview and observational stuff I’m shooting, I’ll be on sticks with handheld B-roll. 

Appreciate the nudge. It’s always good to be reminded that mood, flow and reliability matter more than specs.

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Pity about the EF stuff.  I'm planning to keep mine for as long as possible and I'm still adding more on occasion.  Adapts to everything, autofocus feels native on RF bodies.  Plus most of the lenses were designed before it was assumed that the camera would fix defects with a profile.

I hear you, they are great lenses, especially L series and it was actually hard selling them.. but if I go back to Canon it will be the affordable RF STM series (mostly have IS) and who knows maybe I'll venture back to EF for the more exotic ones like tilt shift etc.

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Isn't the FX3's RS only like 8ms already?  Usually that's enough even for fast action to look good.

Sure it is. Just wishful thinking they put the A9iii GS sensor.

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Just keep in mind that gyroflow-style solutions usually require fast shutter speeds.

Gotcha, I'm trying to test it out but it looks like the C50 test footage mxf files I got don't have the meta data in them 😞

43 minutes ago, FHDcrew said:

Something interesting about canon bodies with IBIS is that I find with a good walking workflow and adobe’s warp stabilizer the results rival gyroflow. Especially on wide lenses I can very consistently get beautifully stable resultS across multiple canon bodies with IBIS. For some reason adobe’s warp stabilizer absolutely thrives at stabilizing the type of footage coming out of these camera bodies with a good workflow. I’ve been able to get amazing results on an original canon r6, r5 and r7. For best results put DIS on Standard and then use warp stabilizer to carry it the rest of the way. 1-3% on warp stabilizer smooths out the jittery IBIS motion. 5% looks like a steadicam. 10% is near gimbal level. 50% is insane. 
 

so in some ways the r6 iii with this workflow could be more useful. The IBIS helps in this workflow meaning you in a lot of situations can keep your shutter at 1/50 and stabilize. Gyroflow without IBIS you really have to shoot at 1/200 or above. 

Interesting, I'm usually not a fan of post stabilisation as it often crops a lot and you get weirdness depending on the shot. Gyroflow seems so much smarter thanks to gyro data. Of course IBIS on the R6 mk3 would actually be enough in most case scenarios so sure I agree IBIS is a plus vs no IBIS on C50, however I feel GF somewhat alleviates the lack of IBIS, and I'm gaining a whole lotta reliability with the C50 fan etc. The top handle on the C50 is really really nice and helps keeping the cam steady, especially with body contact point. 

I was actually all set on the R6 mk3 as it checks just about every box on a hybrid.. and then I tried the C50 and it immediately reminded me of my C100/C200 days, except in a so much lighter package with so many more specs. Now the C50 feels like the 5D mk3 after I upgraded to the C100. Still great but photo centric body and UI. I still have about a week to make my mind so keep the feedback coming!

23 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

What are you using now?  Do you already have lenses?

Without having used it, the C50 seems like a great choice from what you have listed.  If lack of IBIS is a big problem, you could also pair it with a used Canon body (now or in the future) which has decent IBIS for those handheld shots (or your current body if you have one, if it has IBIS).  There's a reason that my R5 comes with me on every shoot.  Need a quick handheld shot?  Just grab it from the bag.  Wanna have someone go pick up some b-roll?  R5.  Suction cupping it to the windshield?  R5.

Plus the second body with decent AF can be really useful for grabbing a second angle, if wanted.  Just set it up, make sure to hit record, and let it do its thing.

I've been mainly Canon/Sony shooter these last years but only have an FS7 left (which I'd sell but has depreciated so much I'd rather keep for gigs demanding a big cam with NDs etc). Lens wise I've just sold my remaining EF glass and as stated still got my Zeiss Batis (E-mount) set. Also have manual Leica M glass.

I guess the FS7+Batis and no EF is what is making me hesitate jump back into Canon. Its going to be an investment.

If only Sony had an FX3 mk2 with global shutter, open gate and tilt EVF I'd be going that route. But that isn't the case and I now have to make a rather quick decision. 

That is where ZR feels like good middle ground: e-mount adaptability, 6K, tons of codecs, FX type body. Affordable. But that soft NR ridden h265 makes me pause. R3D RAW file sizes is also just not doable for fast turnovers.

Plus no open gate on neither Sony/Nikon is a real bummer. Like I said I'm going to have to deliver both 16:9 & 9:16. Having the option of either OG or dual format recording on C50 is mega clutch. The 4X digi zoom option is also killer, it would turn the 24mm f1.8 into a parafocal 24-96mm f1.8 zoom lens! Having tried it, its butter smooth using the rocker lever with various speed velocities.

Gyroflow support is also a BIG plus for C50. Free open source and tests I've seen shows it being better than any type of other stabilisation done before wether mechanical or digital!

If I do go the C50 route, I do plan on getting a second R body for IBIS but also mech shutter stills for flash photography. All in all the upfront investment is what is giving me second thoughts but since its for paid work I'm telling myself its worth to swallow the cost..

Hey everyone,

You know me. I’ve been agonizing over my next camera the entire year of 2025. Countless threads, rental tests, ecosystem debates… I've got a shortlist but I’m still somewhat undecided in February 2026.

Now a proper ongoing gig has landed: high-end lifestyle / product / mini-doc content for a well-known outlet. All solo run&gun: fast stories, Reels, interviews, close-up product detail, lifestyle vignettes, multi-platform deliverables (horizontal main cuts + vertical social + still assets). No crew, just me moving fast in boutiques, ateliers and interiors.

Current shortlist :

Canon EOS C50 (€3,500 ) Pros that keep winning me over after testing:

7K open-gate 3:2 + simultaneous 16:9 / 9:16 dual record to different cards = massive time-saver for vertical/horizontal from one take.

Dual zoom rockers (body + XLR handle) smooth variable-speed creeps and fast punch-ins on primes felt magical.

Built-in fan = no thermal anxiety on longer takes. Cine OS: frame guides for every ratio, false color/waveforms/zebras, shutter angle, base ISO switches.

Gyro data + Gyroflow covers stabilization so well that lack of IBIS isn’t a big issue. C-Log2 grading is easy and beautiful, plus Wide DR mode (I’ve missed that since my C100/C200 days).

Pro mini cine cam body look perception is important in my field; you can charge more with something that screams serious filmmaker.

Cons: Body+lens investment hurts minimum RF 24/1.8 Macro IS STM (~€500) + RF 45/1.2 STM (€500) = €4500 total. Closed RF glass. EIS only (electronic), so very dynamic handheld shots rely on technique or light post-stab.

Canon EOS R6 Mark III (€2,899) Pros: IBIS for aggressive handheld run-and-gun. Built-in EVF (huge for bright interiors/outdoors). Mechanical shutter + flash sync for occasional stills. 7K open-gate 3:2 for post-cropping multi-ratio. Same C-Log2 grading ease and fast hybrid menu/dial switching.

Cons: No simultaneous multi-format dual recording all multi-ratio work is post-crop only. No 7K downsampled digital zoom (FHD only). No built-in fan thermal limits in demanding long takes (30–60 min in 4K/7K high-bitrate). No XLR handle or mounting points out of box. Consumer-looking body doesn't have the pro mini cine cam vibe.

Sony FX3 (€3,500 ) I already have Zeiss Batis primes, so zero lens spend. IBIS, low-light is proven, and it’s the safe solo workhorse everyone knows.

But in 2026 it feels dated: Still capped at 4K internal (no 6K/7K future-proofing). No open-gate all multi-ratio work is post-crop from 4K (quality hit). No RAW for high-end stuff. No EVF. 12MP stills. Spending serious money on a 5-year-old body feels like questionable investment math, especially considering an FX3 mk2 will drop later this year.

Sony FX2 (€2,500) Despite its controversial usage of the old A7IV sensor, it's a real nice body thanks to its unique tilt EVF that I absolutely love. Also a proper hybrid. Its already gone down in price a little bit but like the above FX3 it feels silly investing in a cam with outdated tech and specs.

Nikon ZR €2,200. Cheapest option. I could adapt my Sony glass. Internal R3D RAW is appealing for high-end grading. Big, beautiful display is the main draw.

Main cons: R3D RAW means huge files. H.265 codec applies quite heavy noise reduction that turns into “mush”. No open-gate. Basic controls. No EVF, no mech shutter. Ecosystem still feels young for run-and-gun reliability on a high-profile gig

I’m leaning hard toward the C50 right now. The open-gate + simultaneous dual-ratio recording + rocker zoom control feel tailor made for the exact multi-platform content I’ll be shooting. C-Log2 grading is easy and beautiful, Wide DR mode brings back what I loved on my old C100/C200 days, and Gyroflow + EIS covers stabilization perfectly for my style. Cine menu and exposure tools also feel like a step up for product polish. RAW and anamorphic support for potential high-end stuff. The handling with the excellent top handle makes it feel like an evolved FX3.

It's a hefty investment although I should recoup fast once I start getting paid.

Yes I'm purposely omitting Lumix, a forum favourite I know but I just don't gel with either bodies or lens choice.

Appreciate any real-world takes from people who may have used above gear and/or deliver this kind of content. Thanks in advance.

Indeed.. outside her 60s iconic stardom she's better known here in France for her far-right politics and weird animal activism. Most people I know were rolling their eyes yesterday rather than lighting candles!

I dunno real winner for me and surely my next cam purchase is R6 mk3: 7k, RAW, OG, 4K120p no crop. 

Tried it out and couldn't find any flaws. 7K open gate C-Log2 looks excellent. Recording 7K OG 10-bit H.265 to a normal SD card is super efficient. The S&F mode is surprisingly practical. Being able to set odd frame rates like 46 over 25 directly in camera, in Log, makes it easy to get subtle slow-mo without post tricks. 

They finally nailed it, third lucks a charm. 

In comparison, this A7V feels crippled AF. At least they updated the sensor but why no 4K120p no crop, no OG or +4K? Also I'd be mega pissed if I bought an FX2. Sony's strategy is just plain weird, they lost the plot. The four year old A7SIII /FX3 is still leagues better than this for video. 

Let's not forget Nikon had no cine line, it was a clean buy with zero conflict of interest. Canon and Sony already have full cinema lines, so buying ARRI would create instant internal turf wars. Canon’s C-series and Sony’s VENICE would clash hard with the Alexa pipeline. 

At this point the wild card that makes the most sense is Apple. They could scoop ARRI up without blinking, keep it running as a prestige pro division, and then quietly bake LogC + ARRI color science straight into the iPhone Pro pipeline. Zero internal conflict, huge marketing flex, and a perfect fit with Apple’s long-term imaging strategy.

1 hour ago, kye said:

What lenses would you suggest?

The GH7 combo is equivalent to a 68mm F1.5 but I can't find anything with a shallower DOF without it being too long.  The fastest things I can find are 75mm F1.4 lenses that are a bit longer than I'd like, or 50mm F0.95 lenses but they're deeper DOF than this.

You'd think it's a no-brainer with FF but I couldn't find anything without also adding adapters.  I was hoping I'd missed something!

Generally speaking, FF is going to give you lot more options. TTartisans make a 75mm f1.25 M mount lens that should suit you fine without breaking bank:

 If you're looking for discrete compact street / travel cam plus shallower DOF, I'd stop faffing with focal reducers etc and take the loss and switch to FF with something like the ZR. It's ridiculously small yet has a huge display, has best lens adaptability and you get FF R3D Raw etc. Not to knock the otherwise great GH7 but it seems like the wrong tool for this particular user case.

1 hour ago, Jahleh said:

Editing R3D NE raw clips in Resolve works fine.

For example if you shoot H.265 you can use quicktime in MacOS to open and view your clips, trim unwanted parts out and save only the important to SSD. 
For NRaw that does not work. I have used Resolve to import the NRaw clips from CFExpress card into the timeline, trim (cut) the carbage out, and export (save) important parts as individual NRaw clips via Resolve’s Media Management

For R3D NE and also for NRaw to R3D hacked clips Resolve’s media management exports the whole clips, not only the trimmed parts, so there is no way to save only the parts of Raw footage you want to keep. Red Cine X pro just fails on the export.

After starting to shoot NRaw I took a habit to view, trim, edit and save my daily footage after each shooting day, so that my 2TB card would be empty for the next day. That way I would have only my important NRaw footage stored, and also a quick daily clip of those important parts edited, graded and exported as H.265 to view at the same night.

With R3D NE you either store everything you shoot as Raw, or edit something out of it and store it as H.265.

Ah gotcha, so to sum things up: exporting individual trimmed R3D NE clips fails, not rendering a full edit?

13 hours ago, Jahleh said:

The only big downside is that neither RED Cine X Pro nor Resolve cannot export the trimmed R3D NE clips from the timeline at the moment, probably due to a bug in Red SDK. Resolve just copies the whole clips.
Shooting longer periods from sticks is then a no go atm, unless you compress the raw to H.265 and save that, or edit your project straight from the CFExpress card. Copying whole 2TB to SSD is just stupid, if there is only 100-500GB of footage worth saving.

Hopefully there is an update to Red SDK and the ZR could need a FW update too for some minor bugs and for H.265, which did look softer than Z6iii H.265.

Wait so Resolve can't export trimmed R3D NE clips?!! You have to transcode to h265 before editing?? If so that's a major issue. I don't understand the workaround of "edit your project straight from the CFExpress card"?

As for h265 I think it mainly has to do with the super low variable bitrate which is probably to keep thermals under control, however according to Bloom's review the ProRes HQ displays similar softness which indicates the built-in NR is set way too high. Nikon needs to give ZR some NR settings to get detail back in compressed codecs.

1 hour ago, zerocool22 said:

Not for weddings/event videos you think? Looking for a faster setup. 

 

Faster than what? Only downsides for longer shootings I can think of is the r3d code file sizes, h265 is sorta unusable..