MdB

True. But most systems are made by one brand, except m43’s. It operates differently on Olympus and Panasonic cameras. Whether it bothers someone is another matter. They don’t apply the same corrections. Look up m43’s purple green blobs. They have different sensor stacks and the optical designs are design around the different stacks. The stacks are part of the optical considerations. Sure they ‘work’-ish, but doesn’t mean they are well optimised. Great! Now what about all the models that don’t / didn’t have IBIS? Or had IBIS that didn’t work in video? Now pair that with a system that favours different focussing types. It makes for one mount with many different ‘compatibility’ layers to consider.

Not so much between hardware generations. Development drops off pretty sharply on the older platforms as soon as they start on the new one. They get so many updates and new features as they are developed for new cameras using the same basic hardware, which then trickles into the older models (on the same platform). Some minor, non-hardware specific stuff does come across from time to time. On the plus side the X-T3 does look pretty awesome. Have a Fringer ready and waiting...

That is curious logic. They reference a crop mode for 1080p - What makes you make the assumption that it has anything at all to do with a 1.6x crop in 4K? Just seems like an odd leap. The crop they have (on all the previous 4K cameras) is a 1:1 crop of pixels. That's what dictates the crop size. Obviously we don't know about a pixel binning or full sensor read option. Again a kind of ridiculous comment. "what if they could only take one photo before they explode?!" Sorry where is the moaning about the 'crop' on the more expensive GH5S? Or the Leica SL having only S35 4K? You seemed to like that camera well enough. How much did people bang on about the GH4 and pretty much every Panasonic (including new ones just released) other than the GH5? Indeed. Here's a list of cameras (that I know of) that you have bought with 4K 'crops': GH4 Leica SL A99 II (same as A7R II) A7R II (full frame was unusably bad, supersampled S35 was way better) A7 III (crops in 30p) X-T2 X-H1 GX85 1DC NX500 Need I go on? It has literally been the latest round of camera powered by Sony sensors that haven't needed it. And? Isn't that the same bitrates as Panasonic are 'famously' providing in their superior video abilities? Not even remotely a problem. The last thing of any real expense is memory cards on a long professional shoot. I seriously doubt I would use ANY of these toys on a long professional shoot. Ok now you're making digs, don't like having people disagree with you huh? Funny last week I was named a Sony fanboy. What's the reality? Why? Because you're so angry at the 'fanboy' that you'll just lash out at BS for the sake of it? Defend what? 100Mbps 8bit 4:2:0... You're in dream land. S35 the only way to get decent video quality... Yeah sounds like it's thumping the Canon already Oh please do tell me what the 'and so on' is? Nikon only has Log on HDMI out and same with 10bit. Are you going to shoot everything to an external monitor? Or are you going to stick with the dreadful internal 8bit with no Log? Worse AF. Pathetic line up of lenses. Sounds super! At least use a Sony... Still didn't answer the question. The M5 has no 4K, so how does that sensor 'still' have a 4K crop. It is the first time it was used. So is it a new sensor? Or the same? "M50 has a wild 4K crop" Brillant, well done. This is definitely true. Sony provides all those other brands that would be up the creek without them... No DFD with Olympus (or anyone else's) lenses, even half of Panasonic's range. Weird mix of what does and does not work with the mixed IS. Clutched MF / AF works differently. Digital corrections. Sensor reflections due to different filter stacks. How do they suit? Then there is the huge difference in IS strategies between brands, that one's always fun. Context?

Not for video it doesn't. Nice to have the option. Not everyone is recording hours of speeches. It still has the IPB mode. Fuji offers one only option. Something you've polled? The Canon has the chunkiest codec of all those listed here. Will have to wait to see what the Panasonic has. According to? It's way behind everyone else. If you want to weigh these things up it's gotta be on more than just crop size. Oh because you say it it's true? I've owned both. People raved about how good the X-T2 was (it isn't). People raved about how bad the 5D IV is (it's about the same). Ok. I guess that settles that... 'still'... weird choice of word considering the M5 doesn't have 4K. The M50 sensor also had quite a bit of extra AF area coverage (plus actually introducing 4K). But I'm sure they're exactly the same because they both say '24MP'.

AFAIK the EF-S crop mode references are for stills? I could be wrong, would need to have another look through the data sheet. Not sure all of those are advantages specific to smaller sensors. Hmmm, but there are so many incompatibilities and issues if not using 'on-brand' lenses in m43's I'm not sure that's actually a strength. Pretty sure EF is still a bigger system and there isn't the incompatibility issues that Panasonic have.

Well ignoring the X-T3 for a moment, the X-H1 is more video focussed how? Certainly doesn't have the same level of AF. Doesn't shoot All-I high bitrate. Doesn't have dual slots either. Small battery with poor battery life. Then finally - How do you know it is 'a lot less' money? Interesting. The M50 from memory had an incrementally different sensor with slightly different pixel count. That sensor AFAIK was a reasonable step up from earlier M5 etc (although most assume they are the same). Well luckily there are stuff-all Canon EF-S lenses anyway. But that's not an issue with the EOS R anyway. Should do. The IPB 4K codec has. No clue what the point is... A lot of people claimed the faster processing by Fuji meant considerably better RS on the X-T2 than the A6300. Not sure the truth behind it. X-T2 is my experience has just as bad rolling shutter as the 5D IV in my experience.

What do you define as severe? 1.3x crop is annoying and rubbish. You can't use APS-C lenses and yet makes FF lenses significantly less wide. Arguably it is more useful for 8bit than 10bit. Yes I get it, you're a 1DX II apologist because you own one.

Actually both end up being about the same. Canon's technology is behind. Then again they could have put the 1DX II sensor in it, that probably would have gone down better.

Until Sony made sensors available that could downsample on the fly for third parties, everyone cropped to get 4K. Nikon, Panasonic, Sony, Leica and Canon. I see only Canon get flogged for it though. It was fine when the GH4 cropped, fine that that X-T2 and X-H1 crop. Fine that the SL crops... Yes Canon don’t buy their sensors from Sony. Thank you Sony for giving most other brands cutting edge tech.

I don’t entirely disagree, I am sick of that. Yes we get it, you have a 1DX II, which also: has a severe 4K crop No IBIS No Log Omission of 10bit Yet you’re so unaffected that this camera won’t have those things because your camera... also doesn’t have those things. Mans yes, Sony put their top video features in their video flagship (in mirrorless). Panasonic put their top video features in their video flagship (in mirrorless). How hard is it to understand that this is probably not a video-centric model or ‘video flagship’? The whole system isn’t written into stone by one model. Yes 5fps is kinda lame with AF. I’ve been saying for a long time that despite how good DPAF is, Canon don’t have the tech to support around it. Their blackout between shots will also almost certainly be horrendous compared to the competition.

Log is not in picture styles on Canon DSLRs. 5D IV is a lot like 1DC really, but at a fraction of the original price. But hasn’t gained much ground though, but adds DPAF. This camera looks to be closely based on that camera.

Ugh, not this again. That is with dual pixel RAW. Not dual pixel AF, while shooting RAW. Dual pixel RAW is capturing data at both image sites and enabling things like micro AF adjustment after the fact. Servo AF (which is dual pixel AF continuous) while shooting (RAW or JPEG or RAW+JPEG) is 5fps. I could make just as similar lists about Canon. Yes because they are meant to be competing products derp derp

People are getting bogged down with the Dual Pixel RAW function (like that in the 5D IV) with is not the same as Dual Pixel AF. Saying 3fps with dpaf (live view) makes zero sense, what other kind of view do you think it has? Dual pixel RAW enables some extra after the fact editing by using the additional information, however it is expensive computationally and memory wise, which is why the fps drops when in use. Using DPAF gives 5fps apparently. Lock AF is 8fps. Both still behind the competition, but not 3fps. Owned. Ugh. I find this argument repulsive as it really does just let big companies completely off the hook and way too easily. Fine you think Canon's user interface and motion cadence and colour science and ergonomics (and whatever other fanboy buzzword of intangible and unprovable nature you can think of), I do too. That ineffable something that makes something feel better to you... go for it! BUT - That should not be Canon's great Unique Selling Point, rather than their ONLY selling point. That should be what makes them stand head and shoulders above Sony or Panasonic or whoever. But instead we get weak sauce products that are behind the competition and make excuses with ineffable fanboy nonsense. Just because I have a personal preference for a particular design etc doesn't mean I should constantly miss out on commonplace features just so they can sell me the next model down the track that finally gives us that. I shouldn't spend all my time disregarding that feature as rubbish or unnecessary just because my preferred brand doesn't have it. We need to make brands accountable to us as consumers rather than make excuses for them in order to feel like we belong to the club.

Look how much it helped 5D IV sales. That was rumours, they never changed the crop. The only they did was add C-Log through a protected firmware update (i.e. has to be installed by Canon not user installed). I doubt it would be 'much' different. Definitely not! There was a rumour by fanboys that they were doing some amazing turn around in video specs, but they just released the paid C-Log update instead. Funny how difficult fact and fiction are to seperate these days. Like how everyone is clinging to a $1900 price tag when that rumour was clearly wrong about everything else. C700 is underwhelming? Done a lot of production on it? Sony had a GM supposedly, or certainly patents for one. Or use the much lower cost Sigma 1.8s for crop. Sure do. But I guess they aren't 'too' concerned about selling them to the EOSHD crowd. I think they still think they can undercook it and get sales. This whole release (and Nikon's too) read as this: "we think Sony sell well because they are mirrorless and for no other reason. If we make our existing products mirrorless they will sell well too". Which is very narrow thinking. To be fair this is the launch of a new 'system'. This camera represents only one model in said system. Sony didn't do anything 'special' in video with E-Mount until the FS series and the A7S series. Same with Panasonic. Just because those brands have video-centric models doesn't mean this is fair to compare against those. It is inevitable that Canon will have more models in the the range using the RF mount including a (likely) video-centric model, compact model and high res model (at least). Yeah it was just hopes and dreams made from fanboy tears. They sure do. Although I would argue they are being creative (way more than Nikon) with their lenses releases for this - Which is what Canon are known for. It's a VERY good reason to buy this system.

Yet MJPEG is All-I too, 8bit 4:2:2 at 500Mbps... So what is the big advantage? Plus that was for DCI 4K.

Well to be fair that is their low end option in that camera. They do also offer RAW in camera too. 8-bit 4:2:0 has it's place. So they knew they were being outdone on every spec yet this is the one that they wouldn't let go through? Don't think so. Yep. Although conceivably they could always make one if they are getting serious about video with this new mount. Canon are putting 12bit RAW into their 'entry level' C-series line, so 10bit out (or even internal) is not completely out of the realms of possibility, but still feels unlikely (happy to be dead wrong).

To be fair, anyone who mentions anything remotely favourable about a Sony is hung, drawn and quartered as a Sony zealot / fanboy regardless of how much they actually care (or don’t) about Sony. As the technological leader (and the one that plays in the most spaces in the recent past) they tend to get mentioned a lot. $1900 was part of a totally bunk rumour that also said it was 28MP... i wouldn’t be clinging to that. They also said no RF lenses at one point.

Yep pretty much. I still find it funny that a bunch of fanboys assumed Canon and Nikon would just land a totally better system than they’ve been honing over years ‘just coz’. Nikon got closer with the body because they used the photoshop clone tool. Canon have a couple interesting lenses because that’s what they do. Actually Sony had a patent for a 28-70mm f/2 they were supposedly about to release, wonder what (if anything) ever happened to it?

Well yeah, I mean there is no spec for the EVF (magnification but not res, refresh etc). There is major parts of the video spec missing. Where would BT.2020 live on this spec sheet? Not saying it has C-Log (likely doesn’t). That 5D IV spec sheet is obviously updated since release of the camera. Not MJPEG. Does have an IPB 120Mbps mode also. 1.4kg 28-70... well stop being a pansie The 28-70 is only marginally bigger / heavier than my 85Art. That strapped to my 5D is seemingly roughly around the same size and weight. Sounds perfect to me. but yes, I knew 12mths ago this was going to be a mirrorless 5D IV-ish. But really sits between 6D II and 5D IV. As someone who quite likes their 5D IV I think it looks ok-ish. But really they’re launching a new SYSTEM and to me that part is exciting. Those lenses are just so much more interesting than any other mirrorless system IMO and there are only 4 of them. They can always make a better camera higher in the range.

Interesting. I think there are still quite a few specifics missing from this documentation. Plus looks like these things are subject to change.

Yeah all those clowns shooting 1.5x S35 hey?

Well I think Andrew is making up that figure. Difference to the 5D IV would be minimal. Does it? That’s odd considering the 5D IV doesn’t ship with C-Log (well does, sorta). Uhm no, it’s 1.75. There’s no PL mount adapter. Just a confusing name. There are three adapters and they’re all EF. Theory: All-I 4K ‘is’ 10bit. Makes no sense to go to all that effort to do new codecs but end up in exactly the same place.

Canon have only just got the processing grunt for H.264 4K finally... C-Log on DSLRs are not in the picture styles.

A7 II shoots 4K?! But no you’re right. It mainly one model which apparently people think makes them an expert on everything.

Let’s just say the lenses are it’s strong point lol Same video specs as the M50, except offer IPB and All-I. So maxes at 480Mbps. Which is nice compared to Sony / Nikon. But no clue on crop or EVF specs. 5fps with AF is pretty basic.