Michael Steiner

Oh dear, it's either underdelivering or overdelivering – the Internet-masses just can't be satisfied. Come on guys, this is Apple. Expecting a 3000$ MacPro is even more naive than expecting Canon to deliver a FF mirrorless with 8K full sensor 12bit RAW for 2000$. You need to manage your expectations a little better and stop being personally offended every time a product is brought to market without targeting your specific needs. One of those camera-bloggers said it right: In the Internet it's always about ME, ME, ME and only ME. No wonder you feel Canon rapes you from behind, Apple pisses on you from above while Sony stands in front of you teasing goodies without delivering. Plenty of alternatives out there waiting to be bought and used the moment you get over being offended for laughable reasons. Cheers

Except there is no $5000 japanese camera that offers prores. There is the C700 for $30‘000 and the Varicam for $15‘000. I dont know of any other japanese camera that records to prores. So no, upselling is not the reason. Nobody says „Oh, the Sony A7 III/GH5/EOS R doesen’t offer ProRes? Then I‘ll get the C700 please.“ Even their Pro-Codecs XAVC and XF-AVC are just variations of h.264, right?

I think this is the first time I agree with Mr Reid on 99 percent of what he writes. Especially in regards to the codec. Why isn’t ProRes an option on any of the japanese sub 15000$-Cameras? What is holding them back? Nobody is spending 3 times more only for a better codec. And with BMD you have it in Cams tha cost only 1000$. So why not implement it? Its like capturing all your stills as PDFs. Somehow you‘ll get it to work but why not just use jpg...?

Many of us somehow absurdly get emotionally attached to the tools we use (I include myself to that group). And then we start heated discussions and some of us post memes with a user group shitting all over the place. So in order to continue the discussion run in circles let me add my few cents as a user of canon cameras and lenses: Sure, the canon tools loose most of the spec-wars. So like all other canon users I must be a fool to keep giving them my money? I entered the canon eco-system back in 2008 or 2009 when I bought a 60D. I added some lenses, batteries and other accessories and eventually stepped up to the C100 when I decided to create videos professionally. Yes, even in 2018 that good old C100 with its crappy 30 Mbs ACHD-codec produced beautiful images that payed my bills and made my customers happy. It would do so even in 2019, but in an ongoing project I have the need for 4K capture so I sold my C100 for a good price and replaced it with a C200 (I considered a switch to Panasonic but did not like the EVA1 too much and the Varicam LT was too expensive). As B-cameras I have used the 60D, the 80D and now use the M50. I do know there are better alternatives from other brands in that form factor. But the additional work to match colors in post, the need for other accessories and the time I'd need to learn and get used to a new system aren't worth those technical improvements for me. I know my tools in and out, I know what they can achieve and what not. And I know there's a service-facility 20 minutes away that will take care of any issue without the need to send the camera to another continent and wait for several weeks or even months. That for me are important factors... From my point of view bit depth, bitrate, color sampling, color science, crop factor (starting from MFT) and resolution (starting from FHD) determine maybe the last 5% of the quality of motion pictures. If we mess up all other aspects like focus, lightning, audio, camera movement, composition etc., the best specs in these 5% will not save our shots. So while it is fun to discuss these aspects of a camera and sometimes fight over them, I think all in all they are still negligible to a higher degree than most other factors. Maybe if I was younger and bought my first camera in the last 3 or 4 years I'd be all in on another brand. But here I am, a happy user of technically inferior cameras form that c-brand that sometimes tends to disagree with all the bashing these tools get in the WWW... We all tell stories with pictures. That's what we have in common no matter what brands we use. And frankly we live in the best of times to do that. Cheers Oh and by the way: Mr. Reids EOSHD C-Log is also one of the reasons I'm able to keep using the M50 as an acceptable B-Cam to the C200. So to a degree it's his fault I keep being a happy Canon-user ?

https://www.newsshooter.com/2019/03/29/tuning-a-short-film-shot-on-the-panasonic-s1/ Some impressive shots from the S1 in this promo-short too. I find the colors remarkably nice. In the right hands, this seems to be an excellent tool.

Could it be Red? They sued Sony over a compressed RAW format in F5/F55/F65 some years ago. Would be a strange move since the compressed versions of Cinema DNG are in Black Magic Cameras for several years already right?

Well I'd say 30p and here in Europe 25p are the standard (normal) realtime framerates. Wouldn't you? 50p/60p is used mainly for slowmo. So unless you're shooting sports or maybe a musicvideo I see no merit in shooting everything 50p/60p. Quality should be more or less identical on the RP as the bitrate doubles: 30Mbs in 30p, 60Mbs in 60p. Higher framerate-modes have often degrading quality since many cameras record them in only slightly higher bitrates. Maybe I misunderstood you?

How and when did they say this? Never took notice of any information like that. Canon did state in an Interview after the C200 release that they could not do a better recording option for technical reasons. But I believe that is just a lame excuse. The C200 has dual processors just like the C300 II, only it's the newer version (Digic DV6 vers. DV5 in the C300 II). So yeah, let's hope they have a moment of mercy and just level up the C200 once the C300 III is out...

Oh, thanks for pointing out that new rumor. I wonder if the C300 III will already have an RF mount if it is announced at NAB. My hope is that Canon will give the C200 a better lower/middle ground recording option (XF-AVC 8bit422 or even 10bit422) once the C300 goes 8K or Full Frame or both (and yeah, I know that's wishful thinking too)...

Not going to happen. You should know this company by now. No way Canon will release a successor to the C100 II with a better Codec than on the C200. Even Sony would't do that. What may will come one day is a C100 with 4k30p in 8bit 420 and no RAW. CanonRumors suggested the first RF-Cinema-Camera will not come before the end of 2019 and that it will be the C300 upgrade. So prepare to be disappointed...

Haha, I too thought about that comparsion just this morning. Indeed, the critics sound somewhat similar. My main production tools are all from Canon and Apple – I must be a crazy dude for some

I'm one of those I too make this observation. It's not often that I spot a video shooter that earns his or her living with a Canon DSLR or MILC. But on the other side there are numbers that contradict this subjective observations. With the M50 ans EOS R Canon has apparently taken the market lead for mirrorless cameras in Japan (Canon Rumors reported that some weeks ago). I don't know if that market is completely different from that in Europe and America but I take it as a sign that potential customers with need for good video specs still represent only a small minority of the whole market. Canon is a successful business, been so for many years. To say they don't know what they are doing (as many here apparently think) is simply naive. Specs aren't everything, reliability and support are just as important if you want to use these tools on a daily basis to earn a living. And Canon does have reliable products and very good support. Nonetheless that's no excuse for what Canon did with the Video-mode in the EOS RP.

I think they the only justification is they don’t want video shooters to buy this camera instead of the EOS R. And I agree, it‘s an arrogant and greedy decision, even for Canon standards.

What makes you think so? I'd have thought "normal" shooters would mainly use 30p...?

Agree on that too. Only thing missing for me is 4K with DPAF on APS-C. I think a mirrorless 7D would have to offer that. I could even live with a crop as it would be my B-Cam for closer angles in Interviews or the wider angles in general shooting situations (with the Tokina 11-16 F2.8). 4K60 is nothing mandatory for me, already have that on the C200. So I hope you‘re right with the M5 II... Sure, that would work. For video it would even work without buying a FF Zoom. But in stills-mode I could only use one of my 8 lenses without compromise. Maybe I‘m a dying species but I just don‘t want to go full frame...

Yes, I too think it‘s highly unlikely we‘ll ever see an EOS-M body that ticks all my boxes. But hope dies last (as you say in german). Maybe some day a mirrorless 7D equivalent will come, be it EOS-M or EOS-RF... And regarding the EOS R: in principle I could work well with what it offers. But I don‘t like the idea of investing 2000 bucks to use only half of that cameras potential. At the EOS RP price point, I‘d consider it (but would still be screwd when using it for stills). Im fully invested in S35/APS-C, no need and no intention to go FF...

I'm no expert but I assume there could be heat issues in smaller bodies like those of MILCs. Maybe also energy issues. I shot with the C100 and shoot with the C200 now. Both have fans, the one in the C200 blows like a ventilator when not recording. Also the batteries are more than double the size of those used in DSLRs and the EOS R (and you still have to change them after 2-3 hours of shooting). So for me it's highly unlikely we'll ever see a DIGIC DV in a stills camera. I think we video-shooters will have to live with the fact that Canon won't ever give us what we want in those smaller Stills-Bodies. I used an 80D as a B-Cam and now use an M50 for that. Both cameras worked fine when I was shooting HD only. Now I switched to UHD and it's a PITA. The lack of DPAF in 4K on the M50 is a big disadvantage when I want to use it for a close-up angle in an interview. Almost all my lenses are APS-C only so I don't want to buy an EOS R. Still hoping for a more powerfull EOS-M body with full sensor 4K and DPAF. Other than that, what's left for us, the XC15? There are lot's of things to like with Canon: support, AF, lenses, reliability... But yeah – looking at all their releases since the C200, theres not much to be happy about as a video shooter...

Fair enough. And I agree - for Video shooters nothing with a similar form factor comes close to the GH5 (when you don't fear MFT).

I predict you'll be disappointed. No way 10-bit Clog is going to happen in this camera.

The crop has to be smaller than on the EOS R. Less MPs, less crop. Otherwise it would have to be upscalde 4K. And I don‘t expect that. Still, don‘t have too high expectations. This could likely be just a Full Frame M50: no 30p, no Clog, no DPAF in 4K. I wouldn‘t miss 30p and Clog too much, I have matched the M50 with EOS Clog easy to the C100 and C200 (maybe not to a Pro-Colorists satisfaction, but close). But DPAF will be missed a lot more on this camera than on the M50. I hope I‘m wrong but think history will repeat itself: expectations are too high -> lots of disapointment -> „2012 called“, „rip off“, „canon is doomed“ -> things normalize, life goes on -> rumors of next camera appear ?

I think this is to decent for a low end Canon release. If there actually is a new 24mp sensor in this Camera (with better DR than the one from the 6D II), Canon Log and 4K in a S35 crop (with DPAF working in 4K video) this would be an almost perfect B-camera for my needs and my new go to stills camera. But I don't think these are the real specs of that camera, at least not at that price point. I expect a mirrorless 6D II with 4k video but without DPAF in 4K. Come on Canon, just bring out an M5 II with full-sensor 4K, DPAF in 4K and Canon Log.

Canon actually anounced publicly their next RF-Camera will be a low-end model: https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2019/01/08/wheres-canon-going-with-the-eos-r-do-they-have-a-plan Btw: in that article canon also confirms a 8k mirrorless camera is in development (or at least on their rosdmap). I most definitly will skip this model (6d II sensor just doesn‘t cut it) but from their business standpoint it does indeed make sense to bring out a low end model. They want to gain marketshare in the mirrorless full-frame segment and will certainly do so with the EOS RP. More so than with an expensive pro camera. Those just don‘t sell enough. Would I feel tricked if I was an EOS R owner? Sure. Is this a customer-friendly aproach? Probably not. But still canon isn‘t really on a dive. It might just be that they do understand this business quite a bit, despite some forum-users thinking otherwise. Face it: specs are not everything. And video specs are even less important in the full-frame segment. All those who expected a full-frame GH5 from Panasonic should know this by now. And now let me take shelter before getting shot for writing this

Thanks for this test! I was surprised by your verdict on the EOS R, especially regarding how it handles the shadows. Did you not experience ugly artifacts in the EOS R shadows? This spring I replaced my 80D with a M50 as a B-Camera and I'm starting to regret it because it handles shadows way worse than the 80D. Take a look at two frame grabs from a Moon Eclipse Timelapse I shot, it's UHD but it happens in HD too: There are some really ugly artifacts you can only hide by crushing the blacks way too far... Even worse they reveal some strange sensor-split. When the moon is in the left part of the image, the artifacts stop in the middle of the frame. Only when the moon crosses to the right half of the frame, the artifacts appear in that half of the frame too... This was shot with EOS HD C-Log as obviously there is no Canon Log on the M50 but I would assume another Log-profile would reveal such artifacts too. Is it save to assume this problem does not exist with the EOS R, just like it did not exist on the 80D? Edit: I replaced the frame grabs as the first ones still had a little grade on them that hided the artifacts a little bit. Now they should be more visible.

But what does „unresolved strike“ mean? If anybody can just claim copyright-violations on three of your videos without any further proof does that strike count as unresolved (when that person does not back down)? If so, Vimeo-users would be completely unprotected from fraud, blackmail, personal attacks...

Maybe that's indeed, like other commentators suggested, a sign for serious legal problems at Vimeo? But what other trustworthy hosting sites are there except of Youtube? Sites that are not in danger of being shut down unexpectedly due to lack of traffic/revenue. Remember Vuala, that cloud storage by LaCie? A few years ago you could get some free GBs on Vuala when buying a USB stick by Lacie. It was limited to a year so I even paid to continue using it only to be informed weeks later the service will shut down... Vimeo is live for 14 years now, that's almost an eternity on the internet. Is there anything else even remotely as established as Vimeo/Youtube?