gt3rs

7 hours ago, ntblowz said:

I am actually not that enthusiastic on R5C after using it 6 months later... the C70 got a lot more use nowadays, and sometimes if we are out shooting remotely R5 get picked over R5c because of battery and weather sealing against all weather and condition.  We got a tiny sand stuck on the on switch of C70 which we have to send in to fix when we did a shoot on the dune, the R5 have no problem whatsoever.

So R5C is mostly a tripod camera with usb power adapter connect to the main for us nowadays beside acting as still cam.  My friend also use R5C as tripod camera with v mount battery while he roam around on his C70 too.

R5 and R5c have exactly the same weather sealing and same rating.

On 12/4/2022 at 10:45 AM, filmmakereu said:

  

Any estimation how bad rolling shutter is on R5 C 8K50P/60P?

around 15ms same as 24-30p, 8ms 120p

the above chart is misleading as it seems for photo not video, r3 is 9.9 in ff 24-60

At this point cinematic = is not a still picture 😂😂 

4 hours ago, MrSMW said:

One note of caution re. this control of focus breathing and that is I don’t think it simply works with all lenses, but specific ones. Sony at least has a list. Not sure about Canon…

At the moment it seems a huge list 🙂: https://cam.start.canon/en/H001/supplement_0160.html 

27 minutes ago, herein2020 said:

 

 

Shutter lag didn't even cross my mind, it could be a combination of EVF and shutter lag for my R5. Or it is still possible my R5 simply has more lag than it is supposed to; my brief R7 tests show a big improvement. CPS didn't seem to have an official test for this, in the ticket notes all they said was that they compared it to another R5.....no help at all if the second R5 they compared it to had the same problem.

I definitely don't need a 1DXIII for the things I shoot, my 5DIV was more than adequate for everything I threw at it.

Mirrorless will always have some latency as the sensor needs to be read so some ms goes there then image need to be processed, then displayed compared to a glass only that is the OVF.

Now is the R5 worst than others? There is a video on YouTube that compares the latency of Sony A1 vs R5 and both have around of 250ms total latency with the R5 20ms more mostly due to the shutter lag imo (be aware that there is the human latency too in that test). Now compared to the only mechanical one of the 5D IV that is 83ms + human latency you will notice but both would need some anticipation anyway. 

My point is that as being constant this latency your brain will get used to it and notice less or none. In addition, with mirrorless, other than strobe situation, you can take 20, 30 or even 40 fps now getting much more chances to get the perfect timing. 

Drones with digital transmission have the same issue and yet people can maneuver them in incredibly challenging situation mostly due to getting used and anticipate.

Assuming that your R5 was configured correctly you will get very similar latency with R3, A1 or R7.

Really not sure why you cannot do it with an EVF..... but people are different so fair enough. Then you should buy a used 1Dx III until you find one. 

I'm still a bit puzzled as is mentioned the strobe example, where you are in single shoot mode so in the right settings R3 and R5 both runs at 120 fps refresh, now the R3 can maintain this even at 30 fps making is blackout free but the lag is the same so in a single shoot there are no difference.
Btw there is another lag that is a shutter lag that is a different story, and this is 83ms in machinal and 50ms in ES for the R5, 5IV is 58ms (plus 86ms blackout) and R3 is 20ms in ES.

Some more examples where timing is key with strobes but if you do it a lot you will notice as your brain will start to anticipate the "lag"

7 hours ago, Django said:

Your issue prompted me to investigate on my end so I popped on my Speedlite flash last night on the R6 having my nephew around and tried to catch random split second movements and to my surprise I found it was pretty easy to nail shots. I also couldn't notice any significant lag from the EVF when set to smooth. So I don't know if its a user case thing,  if R5 and its 45MP somehow increases the lag, if you got a lemon or wether ballerinas are just much harder to shoot than an 8 year-old (I'd assume so!) but for my expectations the R6 works just fine even for flash photography.

Since you've also got an R7 have you noticed any difference concerning EVF lag with your R5? 

I also never had a problem with lag on R5 and strobes, the only thing I need is to disable exposure simulation as it would be all black in scenarios like this one

23 hours ago, Django said:

As for OVF/EVF well if you're using ES then of course blackout disapears and you might have more keepers but that doesn't eliminate EVF lag, adds RS artefacts and you lose 14-bit IQ. That probably doesn't matter as much to you then nailing the shot given your type of extreme action work (impressive shots btw). R3 would be better for the EVF but also 50% more fps (30fps vs 20fps) in full 14-bit RAW and lower RS. But I understand 45mp may ultimately trump those specs/IQ if you crop a lot.

 

The 14-bit gives you max 2/3 of a stop and only up to iso 160 from 200 on no difference: https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS R3,Canon EOS R3(ES),Canon EOS R5,Canon EOS R5(ES). 
This is why I shoot in ES most of the time other than the few times I need max DR and I can use ISO 100 or ISO 400 (btw the R3 has less DR than R5 at iso 400 mechanical)


The key differentiator of the R3 imo is the very fast rolling shutter so for somebody shooting any ball related sports it may make a big difference. My grip with the R3 is the price, it should be more on the A9 range than on the A1/Z9 range....

Overall price performance the R6 II is much better than the R3, the same for R5 vs R3....

R3 should have had the same spec but with a 45 Mpix sensor then would be worth the price imo.... R1?

3 hours ago, Django said:

Never meant to single out the FX30. Really all I'm saying is I'd like mirrorless manufacturers in general to focus bit more on RS. We've got 10-bit log, we've got RAW, ProRes, 4K120/6K/8K etc. But read-out times are still average to poor on most of these prosumer cameras. I understand stacked sensor tech is still fairly new and expensive, I just can't wait to see it in every hybrid. XH2S is the only affordable large sensor camera that seems to sport one at the moment.

A1, Z9, have stacked sensors, but none provides better RS in FF than traditional CMOS. 

R3 has stacked sensor and is definitely better 9,9ms in 6K and 6,6ms in S35 but is half the pixels than A1 Z9 R5 and so on...

I would not take the R5 on sales as a metric as I would guess that the R5 is the most sold R series model, so you get more on the used marked.

Regarding the EVF latency I'm really not sure what to say and it is probably that some people adapt better than the others. One thing is for sure my two R5 and my one R5C behave exactly the same, but they are also configured the same. 

I was surprised how quickly I adjusted from 1Dx III OVS/mirror blackout to R5 EVF 20 fps (I use 90% ES). I have more keepers while tracking & panning with the R5 than the 1Dx III and this it is what it counts for me.

This is why I never moved to the R3 as I prefer to have the 45mpix than the better EVF....

 

I got maybe 5 frozen episodes with the R5 in 2 years all due to a crappy CFExpress card.

I used to move around R5 + adapter + 200-400 F4 (3.6 kg lens) by holding only the camera with one hand and never had issue with play… and this 1-2 times a weeks for 2h hockey matches.

I cannot come up with 1 single advantage of the 1Dx III vs. the R5 for video usage. And only 1 for photo: initial AF acquisition.

And the 1Dx III uses a completely different sensor that the R3 so it does not have the same image and quite bad RS and no AF in 5.5k 50/60p. 

I owned both for a while then sold the 1Dx III for adding a R5c.

46 minutes ago, genXtechguy said:

I have an R3 and although it has a very high quality internal RAW format, I would love if Canon gives it the ability to do ProRes RAW.  Especially now since this R6 II can do 6K ProRes RAW.  The R3 also does 6K.  As an FCPX user, I plead with you Canon .. pleeeease, it just makes sense now.

Move to Resolve no need for external recorder if you have internal raw. FCPX not sure how long it will exist not a priority for Apple imo....

4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Nikon have launched the MC-N10, a $429 remote grip for the Z9 which really does bring a lot to the party for video shooters.

it let’s you control all aspects of the camera like ISO/Shutter/Aperture etc but also has some neat tricks for focus and zoom.

They are not making getting the Z9 any less appealing are they ?

It should be both wired and wireless as the gimbal example is just a pain with a cable and there should be more power zoom lenses... I believe Nikon has no FF ones and neither Canon has if you exclude the Cine ones.

On 10/19/2022 at 8:58 PM, Ty Harper said:

Anyone using the R5C with a gimbal? Would love to know what other owners are using and what the experience has been like. Currently looking at either the RS2 or RS3 but I'm coming from the Glidecam era so gimbals are new to me. I'll also be looking to use mine with the battery grip and compatible Smallrig cage which I have no interest in dismantling - so curious how that might limit or complicate things for me.

I used the R5c with the full cage and the FxLion One Battery on top of the cage on a Ronin S quite a bit and depending on the lens is a bit at the limit with the clearance. The EVF of the R5c is stick out quite a bit and the cage need some more space on the motor side.

Sold the S and now I use a RS3 Pro and due to stronger motors and longer harms I can mount whatever with no issue. For my Africa project I did use a lot with the 70-200 and no problem at all to balance and still have enough clearance to go underslung.

Although Smallrig claims the cage to be compatible with the DJI arca plate ,mine is not and I tested with RSC2 (too small for this camera anyway) and RS3 Pro plates and due to the security pin both cannot take the cage directly. I have the R5 full cage so maybe.
Bottomline either you mount the DJI arca adapter (that comes with the gimbal) on the tripod hole of the cage or if you want something more solid you need to buy this: SMALLRIG Quick Release Plate for Arca-Type Standard Compatible with DJI RS 2 / RSC 2 / RS 3 / RS 3 Pro Gimbal - 3154  or this SMALLRIG Camera Quick Release Plate Adapter with Arca-Swiss for DJI RS 2/RSC 2/RS 3/RS 3 Pro & for Ronin-S Gimbal - 3061.

I use the gimbal on high vibration environment quite a bit, on MTB, Motorbike, Jeep, Skii, Heli so the stronger motor of the RS3 Pro is a no brainer for my usage. For only 200g more is imo worth. The new auto locking of the RS3 and RS3 Pro seems a small thing but it makes life so much easier. 

R5 and R5c have the same weather resistance.  Both not at the same level as 1Dx.

Used my R5 and R5c in sandy, light raining and light snow with no issue so far but they are insured so I take more risks without worrying. 

If the video will be used only on YouTube you can use most of music, but you will not be able to turn on monetization and YouTube will turn on monetization and give the revenue to the music copyright older. So, you can use a Lady Gaga song with no problem, but you get advertisement on the video and you get zero revenue.

4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

No, both the Kolari and Meike adapters also provide electronic control for AF etc.

A simple handshake ID check between camera and adapter/lens will be able to tell the camera the identity of what it is connected to it and compare that with an approved list at which point the camera can then adopt a policy of "if you're not on the list, you're not coming in" and prevent any operation until you remove it.

 

 

Are you sure that you could not just create a simple pin passthrough adapter as the camera don't need to be aware of the adapter, of course they could check if EF lens is mounted check if OEM adapter is used, and then other adapter manufacturer are screwed. But as the adpaper support fully manual lens not sure they would really do this...

After 2 years of Canon VND adapter for EF and using normal screw in VND on RF lenses, I'm not sure that the adapter is more convenient. 

Going from min to zero is a pain as either you remove the filter and put a clear one or swap the adapter, I find unscrewing faster as I can simply put in the pocked the vnd and I'm done. 
The small wheel for me is not as easy as the front filter to do fine adjustments.
The plus that you can use lens hoods.

If I would start all over now, I would probably look into some magnetic system.
As adapter the kippertie revolva seems a better solution but is very expensive and I'm not sure how compatible is with the R5/c...

On 9/4/2022 at 8:18 PM, Andrew Reid said:

Only the Komodo is RF, the others have swappable mounts. For instance one of the best mounts for RED is EF, so completely incompatible with RF or mirrorless lenses. That's the Motion Mount with electronic variable ND built in. So what use is RF for RED users who want to use that?

You are far better off with either EF or PL lenses for the vast majority of RED's bodies, especially the proper high-end stuff. Komodo is entry level.

This is not correct as RED V-Raptor has a fixed RF mount and you need adapters for the other mount. The RED V-Raptor XL has a swappable PL mount where you can buy the EF mount.

So from the latest 3 models that RED sells two are native RF.

 

On 9/3/2022 at 12:03 AM, ntblowz said:

Interesting to see EF 24-70 2.8 II @ 24mm 2.8 is better than EF 24mm 1.4 II at 2.8, I have RF 24-70 2.8 and got RF 24mm 1.8 a while back, on my test RF 24mm is definitely quite sharper on the corner than RF 24-70mm, does that mean RF 24mm is actually shaper than EF 24mm 1.4 II L on corner?!

There are 3 tier of RF prime, the L prime the IS prime (24/35/85) and cheap prime (16/50), I do find the 16/50 image quality is not as sharp as IS primes and L zooms.

The biggest problem is that the 24 L 1.4 II has tons of CA and wide open is quite soft, it improves at F2 and good a F2.8 but the 24-70 II is at least in my copy a tad better than the 24 II 1.4 so I don't use it a lot.... I brough for video on the 1Dx II with the 1.3x crop now in FF I use it even less.

If the RF 24 1.8 has less CA and a tad sharper than then 24 1.4 II then it will be up for sale....
The below is not really a fair comparison as is not the same camera 45mpx vs 50mpx but it seems that the RF is a tad better: 
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1625&Camera=1508&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=480&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

RF 50 1.8 I don't have it so is hard to comment but I tested a version of my friend and is not particularly good, one of the few RFs that I do agree is not better than EF counterpart and may even be a tad worst.

The new "affordable" wide primes relay a lot on software correction especially for barrel and vignetting thus they could optimize more sharpness and size, some people scream scandal, I don't care as the final image counts...
This also a problem if third parties reverse engineer and not officially supported as the trend is to use software to correct lens desinences....

Geometric distortion and vignetting are corrected also in RAW video, obviously CA is not.

 

38 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

That is incredibly soft.

Is not a picture is a frame grab at 1/100 from 50fps video...... is normal that is soft as there is motion blur....... it was to demonstrate AF at 2.8 while an animal sprinting at 50+ mph.....

This is a picture at 1/1600

@Kisaha are you a kid or what to downvote 🤣? This is really professional..... 

I have one button to cycle through the AF frame, one to enable / disable face tracking, one to pause AF while pressing, and one as suggested above to toggle AF on/off.

One thing that I find super useful is peaking with AF..... on the R5 peaking does not work while in AF but on the R5c it works and I find a realy life saver as even is super bright sun or strange angle on the LCD I can always monitor if the AF is spot on or not. 

 Cheetah hunting R5c 8k 50, 1/100, F2.8 400mm with AF

4 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

You can compare whatever lenses you want, but it's not fair to compare primes and zooms. The design of a zoom lens prevents it from matching the optical quality of a prime. That's the trade off you make for convenience and versatility. So, I mean, if you want to compare a 16mm prime to 16mm on a zoom you're free to do so, but no one is going to take it seriously. It's just not a useful comparison. 

Can people read?

Absolutely not true, some zooms are better than primes as posted above the EF 24-70 and EF 70-200 are optically better than EF 50 1.2, 85 1.2 and on pair with 135 2.0. The EF 24-70 2-8 II at 24 2.8 is much better than the EF 24 1.4 II at 2.8. I have/had all these lenses. All expensive L lenses.

The new affordable RF 15-30 seems a tad better in the corner that the RF 16 2.8 (here we go again with a zoom better than a prime) and both better than the old 16-35 II L. Also, most of the EF L wide angle zooms are better than the EF 14 2.8 L v1.

Now in case of the proclaimed by people that never have used one, no improved RF lenses, the RF 50 1.2, RF 85 1.2 are better optically than the RF 70-200 and RF 24-70.

But yes I lost all my credibility by really comparing zooms with primes instead of trusting you guys with the super generalized statement: primes always better optically than zooms and RF are no improvements over EF.

I'm really sorry that I'm so dumb not trusting your claims but lose time in testing things out.........

Do me a favor test one of the above examples you may learn something new.