gt3rs

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

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

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....

 






















 

Rumored cameras are terrible at video. And photo.
😜

Yeah big yawn. This camera is about 2 years too late. Canon R5 already did the high MP, 8K $4K FF hybrid camera in 2020.
And with no weird crop factors, binning or horrible rolling shutter like the A7RV displays. 

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. 
 

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

Just got the Kolari VND filter and can confirm that it fits the official Canon drop-in adapter perfectly with no issues I can see so far.

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. 

I'm a big user of insta360 cameras, I have 2 of them, mostly to film myself and sometimes I use for projects too.... looking and some side by side the 1inch is definitely a step forward.

I do agree that 8k would be the bar minimum.... I think the industry stays away from 8k as stitching 8k video would probably only be possible on top-of-the-line phones and PCs.... and the market that they target it is mostly consumers. Same for requiring higher speed microSD

8k, 400 Mbits, 10 bit LOG would be the quantum leap that is needed to have 360 cameras used more professionally

All screen shoots from videos:


 

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.

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...

This is the same way to get the Sigma MC21 to "work" on Leica by taping over the pins (for similar reasons in terms of blocking by the camera) but it becomes a dumb adapter with no control of AF, Aperture and IS.
So, yes, you could do that with the Meike/Viltrox/Kolari etc but lose all of that stuff in the process which may or may not be an issue depending on what you are mounting on it (just using EF as an intermediate mount etc for older manual lenses) or only use manual focus anyway.
But the best way I can see to have your cake and eat it in terms of keeping all of that, insuring yourself against future firmware blocking and not having the dramatic colour casts at greater intensities is as @ntblowz does it by using the official adapter but swapping out the NDs for the Breakthrough versions.
More expensive in the short term but not as costly as having an adapter that all of a sudden is rendered useless.

I got the Canon VND but changed the filter to breakthrough X4 VND for best VND on the market.
We also got the Canon speedbooster for C70 but once we migrate to all RF lens (24-70 2.8, 28-70 F2, 15-35 f2.8, 70-200 F2.8 etc) it kinda becomes irrevalent.. except just for the EF 35mm F2 IS which we still have pairs well with C70.
We just dont buy third party for best compatibility issue, I have a friend who have Sigma 24-105mm Art but it locks his C70 up from time to time.. once he changed to Canon no more lockup.
 
Next upgrade will be looking at V-Raptors and Komodo combo.. at least our RF lens still works.
 

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.

 

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Tested on our R5 and RED Raptor, the RF 50mm 1.2 far out resolved the EF 50mm, which looked out of focus in comparison. Resolution isn't everything, but the EF also suffered from more chromatic aberration, fringing, and busier bokeh.
I don't know. Great lenses are expensive—even EF lenses like the 35mm 1.4 ii or the most recent EF zooms. The RF are nearly the same price as those—and the Sony counterparts as well. If you're complaining about the RF, you might as well complain about everything else.
About the RF exclusivity, we'll see how it plays out. Still see a ton of 3rd party RF lenses being released on B&H. 
 

One can absolutely live with EF lenses plus adapter as they most all work better on the R cameras than on the DSLR, so no rush to move to RF. 

But I do not agree that RF ones are not much better than the EF versions actually it is the opposite other than price(for the L series) they are mostly all a big improvement:


RF 70-200 2.8, much more compact and quite a bit lighter than the EF version. Only downside is no TC support.
RF 70-200 4, incredibly compact and light weight compared to the EF.
RF 100-500, lighter, sharper, longer than the EF 100-400, only downside with TC it starts at 500mm
RF 24-70 2.8 IS, has IS and a tad lighter weight than the non IS EF version
RF 15-35 2.8, wider, sharper and has IS compared to 16-35 2.8 III EF. Not even a fair comparison.
RF 85 2 IS, sharper and with IS compared to the old (imo junk) 85 1.8
RF 50 1.8, a tad sharper than the EF version
RF 50 1.2, much bigger and heavier but just in another league from the old EF 50 1.2.
RF 85 1.2, much bigger and heavier but just in another league from the old EF 85 1.2.
 
Unique and no equivalent from Canon in EF mount:
RF 16 2.8, affordable, very compact and quite sharp
RF 35 1.8 IS, affordable, very compact super sharp, but noisy AF
RF 24 1.8 IS, too early to tell
RF 28-70 2, heavy and big but very sharp and unique, challenging for video due to the 95mm filter size
RF 600 and 800 F11, very affordable long tele with quite good image quality
RF 24-240, surprisingly good image quality for such zoom range
RF 100-400, affordable and very light weight long zoom with an ok image quality
 
A let down:
RF 400 2.8, no included TC as Nikon now does, just the EF version with glued on R-EF adapter
RF 600 4, no included TC, just the EF version with glued on R-EF adapter
RF 800 5.6, no included TC, sharpness so similar to the RF 400 + 2x with an insane price, it makes no sense
RF 1200 8, no included TC, sharpness so similar to the RF 600 + 2x with an insane price, it makes no sense