PaulUsher

4 minutes ago, Jordan Lee said:

Looks great to me! Do you know if the shot at 0:44 in your first link (where it rolls focus to the guy in the white headband) was using AF? If so it looks really smooth to me. Also is that 18-135 an EF lens or an RF lens?

Yeah I like that shot too - yes, all AF. The 18-135 is EF-S mount. Had the drop in ND filter behind it.

1 hour ago, Jordan Lee said:

Wow, thank you both very much for your detailed replies. You've given me a lot to think about. I'm in the same boat as you, Trek of Joy, where I miss my Canon colours and am tempted by the R6. I was also really hoping to be able to utilize that drop-in ND adapter with EF lenses too. Do either of you have any video samples you've shot that feature AF use?

Here's some ENG I just shot for an agency - rough as sh*t but there's some demonstration of smooth AF changes https://vimeo.com/431234900

And here's the AF locking  on and tracking a drone - between 4 and 6 mins approx https://vimeo.com/425105022

Neither are the perfect AF examples I'm sure you're looking for but these demonstrate AF performance in pretty extreme AF use cases - both are at telephoto length on the 18-135 (crop mode), It has the smooth STM motor - the RF nano motors are even smoother

1 hour ago, ntblowz said:

Play around with the footage.. like super slideshow..

Anyway i just put default Alexa lut and look good already.

Wanted to see what a 2K delivery looked like. Just dropped on my custom lut for the R. I'm seeing a lot of information, beautiful rolloff

5 hours ago, Lux Shots said:

Stunning? You really think this is stunning? Every camera looks good on an overcast day with limited dynamic range.

Yeah, I do. Is that ok? 😉

And not every camera ‘looks good on an overcast day...’ - you know there’s more to a picture than DR. There’s one thing being sassy, which I dig, but there’s no need to be silly.

Me enjoying this image doesn’t make your GH5S any worse. Does it make you feel better to know I’m not buying the R5? Doesn’t mean I can’t appreciate this footage.

Everything that Trek of Joy said re DPAF! You can trust it with both RF and adapted - R5/6 look even better for focussing. I too use touch to focus - and the drag to focus is excellent for controlled pulls. Touch screen and EVF best I’ve used - you can even use them in tandem: eye on the EVF, finger on the LCD to change focus.

I can’t compare with Sony but can give you a rundown of the R’s AF performance with specific lenses:

RF - quickest AF overall but it’s lens specific. The RF35mm STM for example is slow - behaves a lot like the EF 50 1.8 STM - whereas the RF 15-35, RF 24-70 and RF 24-105 are more responsive, smoother pulls due to the nano USM motor. They are also the quietest - silent. Note though that these RF lenses breathe a bit, so they’re not ‘cinematic’ in that sense, par for the course with standard zooms.

For cinematic breathing and pulls it’s got to be the Sigmas. They don’t snap too quickly into focus with DPAF. Very smooth transitions. 24-35 f2 is limited range but outstanding, virtually parfocal with no breathing. If you’re up for shooting crop, the 18-35 is still the one to beat - I’ve never seen it autofocus better on any other camera. Talking of crop, EF-S STM lenses (10-18, 18-135) are also very responsive and smooth focussing, breathing pretty well controlled, and almost silent. But they have aperture penalties. The EF 24-105 STM is just the same, silent, smooth pulls, actually a decent video lens but variable aperture.

As for EF, very mixed bag. Still to find a standard zoom that ticks the boxes. Canon’s own 24-70s are probably the quickest and smoothest but quite old (not designed with video in mind), noisy and no IS - no prob for the R5. I still think they’re better with DPAF than third party. Sigma 24-70 OS is also noisy, breathes heavily, but focuses smoothly. Tamron 24-70 VC very noisy, breathes, focussing far too snappy - opposite of cinematic - but locks focus better than its Sigma counterpart. Very ‘sticky’, so a lot depends on use case.

Least breathing (zero breathing) is the Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8 (Angenieux design) and it’s almost parfocal, but so noisy that even lavs pick it up, so it’s manual focus only. Good news is the RF cameras also have a great manual focusing system. Eye tracking still works ie. you still get a focus box automatically around the eye, tracks wherever it is in the frame. Just adjust the focus ring until box goes green.

Best primes for smooth AF  - again the Sigmas, though they occasionally back focus. Just adjust AF settings to make them more sticky. Or tap to refocus. Some of the older EF hold up surprisingly well: 28 f1.8, 35 f2, 85 f1.8 - but all are noisy. Overall the RF lenses will tend to perform better than EF in terms of speed and smooth transition.

More generally I prefer the well-performing EF over the heavy RF so I can use the drop in ND or speedbooster. I actually like the 4K crop mode on the R, so the Sigma 18-35 and Tokina Angie 28-70 are my go-to pair for cinematic focussing in crop mode - with EF-S STMs for versatile plastic video backups. For FF, I say RF first for all round video performance, and Sigma for smoother cinematic narratives. I’d favour Canon EF primes and their standard zooms over the Tamrons but not by a huge margin.

Hope this is useful. The R5 may be a different animal of course, so I say rent lenses / buy-to-return and have fun experimenting.

27 minutes ago, mechanicalEYE said:

Not sure this was a canon ad, more of a personal test... I do not believe Moc works for Canon.

He’s the Canon Vietnam ambassador.

The footage looks stunning.

14 minutes ago, Neumann Films said:

The only thing that I have found that works is: narrative stuff with BTS to show how it was done. The problem is that...it's not a financially stable or viable system. I can afford to do them maybe once a year. Which is totally fine, it just doesn't lead to growth. So, you couldn't really do that as a starting point and expect a channel to grow. Well, maybe you could, I just think it would be tough. 

The nice thing about YouTube is that there are probably 1,000 different ways to do it and still be unique and different. Narrative + BTS isn't the only way, it's just the only thing that's worked on my channel thus far. That and 8K videos 😂

Yes there are lots of ways, narrative + BTS being a good one, each of us would have our own approach, my partner has a online sketch series that parodies Tubers for example, incorporating narrative with traditional product placement,  but yeah it’s a full-time effort, it’s hard to pull off as a sideline.

15 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The wide-angle selfie 30p IBIS autofocus shot is the new "video".

I'd like to get back to cinema.

This. Among other things I’m doing a practice-based PhD researching convergence of UGC-Film forms as well as practices - the project is called Film2.0 ... If we all here experimented, integrating filmic aesthetics and narratives into YouTube content then we’d have the beginnings of a movement that resets the balance and gives us the best of both worlds. Transmedia forms that drive online audiences to our cinema screenings, that deliver filmic content and reach a mass-social-media audience, that allow us autonomy and self-funding. We can dare to dream, can’t we? Maybe this needs its own thread...

19 minutes ago, Neumann Films said:

The truth is that YouTube is going all hive mind (like Reddit or any other social media conglomerate) and any uniqueness becomes monetized, packaged and then replicated to the point of parody. How many people have a “What’s up guys!” intro that is copy and pasted from everyone else? How about the same lighting in their studio background? Same thumbnails, same titles, same content. It’s become junk food ready for mass consumption. Icky.

Agreed. Plenty of room then for intelligent and creative types like us to revolutionise the form, or else it stays this way.

17 minutes ago, Neumann Films said:

Oh, I agree, but I don’t think it will be in this format. This style is on its final legs IMO. Wide angle handheld, talking to the camera, padding run time to get to 10+ minutes. Audiences are slowly catching on to the runtime pads and are being turned off by it. Enough people leave and creators will go back to more condensed content or evolve to actually make meaningful 10+ minute videos.

Yeah agreed this style needs to evolve. The problem with these guys (not just the tech tubers but the lifestyle YouTubers etc too) is that they too readily become salespeople. Audiences tire of that. That they don’t use their influence / activate their audience to fund and produce their own films is telling. It seems they’d rather be YouTubers than filmmakers...

7 hours ago, Neumann Films said:

Huh, Vlogging is still a thing, eh? I figured it would have run its course by now. Maybe 8K RAW doesn’t make sense for 10+ minutes of mindless fluff. Just a hunch.

Whether we like it or not integrative UGC practices are here to stay. We started out in a different era but will anyone start out today without an online platform? 

Transmedia practice, too, will only become more prevalent as storytellers authenticate themselves and their proof of concept online, building audiences and income streams there, whilst promoting and interleaving their projects and stories from digital platforms to traditional media. 

Agreed there’s a lot of fluff out there right now, but not all of it is without value, and we will certainly see more innovate and quality work on YouTube/online in the coming years. It’s not just about the tech catching up to that, but about developing tech now that shapes these possibilities going forward.

On 5/6/2019 at 2:39 PM, mercer said:

I have a plastic fantastic coming in the mail today... the Canon 24-85mm 3.5-4.5. I paid less than $60 for it. I’m hoping it matches well with my Canon 28mm 1.8 for a two lens set up. 

The flickr samples look pretty good, has anyone ever used it?

Hey man, curious to know how did you get on with this lens? AF performance & noise? How bad is breathing for video? Any quirks or character of note? I like experimenting and I’m looking to try a light and low-profile all-rounder to pair with R and metabones speedbooster... not for work, just for fun. Thanks for sharing 

5 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

15mm is pretty damn wide. Very hard to eliminate wobble without doing a digital crop EIS. 

It also happens when he zooms in. I’ve moved on from these cameras as a purchasing decision, so it doesn’t bother me either way, but trying to help you guys out. In my experience it’s very similar warp that we’ve been getting on the R in rolling shutter modes once the stabiliser tries to correct - but definitely more controlled on the R5

Revealed: rolling shutter/IBIS issue

He claims/thinks the warp is a result of being at 15mm with IBIS, but it’s not. It happens when he zooms in too

I think this is the IBIS wrestling with the rolling shutter. Very similar to the warp on 1DXIII and EOSR when their DIS fights the RS. I’ve been struggling with similar issue on R for months

2 minute mark onwards:

7 hours ago, padam said:

After assessing all the specs and looking at R6 sample images... I just don't want to deal with the severe rolling shutter in the 1.07x crop 4K video on the R6.

I think When I do upgrade (which probably will not be any time soon, but I do plan to slowly expand my RF lens collection and just keep using the EOS R) it will be the: The EOS R5

Agreed mate. I think for existing R users, the R5 represents an upgrade in ways the R6 simply doesn’t. 

2 hours ago, padam said:

That 20MP sensor is very well balanced for video and stills, they have been using one in the 1DX II and III which people were forced to buy if they've found 5D IV to be too weak, they've just crippled it too much after bringing it down to this low price point.
One pretty much has to shoot it in FF (1.07x crop) and deal with the severe rolling shutter and take advantage of the superb IBIS and because it is oversampled, the digital IS can be utilised as well without degrading quality at a noticeable level, great ISO and dynamic range as well.
So I guess despite all of this crap, it will still look good.

Or it can shoot in 1080p, which is still fine, just like on the EOS R, but it starts to look like quite bad value, double the price to have IBIS and 1080p 120fps, joystick (that's actually very good for pulling focus when shooting with the screen flipped out, so it can't be touched) dual card slots, fast shooting rate, but also less megapixels for stills, inferior screen, no top LCD, etc.

I wonder if they consider adding in the 1:1 crop mode in firmware if enough people complain about it

Yeah in the end it’s going to produce decent images in the higher quality mode, and most target users may not see the IQ differences we’re discussing (though they may notice the overheating..) The reliable modes (incl 1080p) will be great for YouTubers especially, they already love the R. 

It’s just not the upgrade, or camera, I was REALLY hoping for. I think we’re still waiting for a camera of true convergence - that you can use for traditional critical paid work in one moment, then strap round your neck for personal/social media in the next. But it’s getting pretty close.

There’s an argument that for some use cases, the reliable modes of both R5/R6 already deliver the dream. Someone will argue that the XT4 does too. Someone else will suggest another camera ticks all their boxes. Bottom line is every man’s bar is set differently. When we step away from our judging tables, and put away our microscopes, at least we can see that advancements are being made, that it’s a great time for gear heads (if a little frustrating at times for those like me who are impatient) and that convergence — though it may be process — is at least happening.

30 minutes ago, padam said:

Yikes indeed.
Unfortunately you are probably right with this one, as I tried to look it up everywhere, and Canon Europe says it is a "62% crop of the horizontal area", which is right around 1.6x

I understood the IPB compression with the UHS-II cards apart from 4k60p it is an artificial limitation, but whatever.

But a 1:1 crop would have required less processing and much better quality and much more like their APS-C cinema cameras, so not happy about it at all.

If the R6 had been a 26mp sensor then a 1:1 crop would have covered their EF-S lenses.

Come to think of it, the RP is 26mp isn’t it? With a 1.6x 4K crop mode! But the 4K lacks DPAF or c-log or something... I forget how they crippled it lol. What a mess. We all want just one camera that ticks the boxes - not four that somehow don’t!

8 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

Could fit if it use 1.5x like Nikon do, they got UHD in crop mode that is 1:1 on their 20MP FF camera

The issue is the RF cameras need a 1.6x crop (at least) to be compatible with Canon’s EF-S lenses.

7 minutes ago, padam said:

That would be upscaled 4K on the R6 with 1.6x crop as there is not enough pixels (unlike on the EOS RP) it does not make sense to me, and it would be quite bad indeed

I mean, yikes 

4 hours ago, padam said:

I sincerely hope it won't force the camera into a 1.6x crop mode

R6 1.6x (& R5 1.6x) crop mode confirmed - by Canon in the ProAV interview (around the 1 hour 11 min mark.) So not 1:1 - it’s binning?

No 1:1 4K across either camera. All oversampled 4K overheats. R5 has one 4K mode that probably won’t  overheat - it’s full frame but binned. R6 has one 4K mode that probably won’t overheat - it’s cropped and binned.

Canon also say in that interview that no 1080p mode is oversampled. It’s always binning from full width.

R Classic: 1:1 4K and oversampled 1080p - in m43 crop mode that can be speedboosted (upto 30p only).

So all three are decent but soft 1080p FF cameras (with the R offering oversampled crop 1080p). As for reliable 4K, Canon have three cameras:

R5 FF 60p camera (binned)

R6 S35 60p camera (binned)

R m43 30p camera (1:1)

42 minutes ago, padam said:

Yes I know, I am annoyed that it looks so good on paper that it is hard to resist.
Although I will build up my lens kit first and keep using the R for now, that is always better. But if I see a deal that gives some discount over the MSRP, I will jump on it.

The 1DX III has a 1.33x crop mode, and it is cinema 4K, so I guess the 1.4x UHD crop on the R6 is pretty accurate. I have some really great compact Leica lenses with a nasty magenta cast towards the edges and heavy vignetting.
They are getting completely cropped out for video, so it's a dream scenario for me, if the IBIS continues to function well with these, it's a huge improvement over 1.75x crop and no IBIS even if I ignore the frame rates. But I actually shoot the 720p 120p sometimes, so I won't, it is a really great feature to have.

The Sigma 18-35/1.8 is also downright perfect for covering this image circle, so I sincerely hope it won't force the camera into a 1.6x crop mode or something when mounting it, with the latest firmware it does that on the EOS R, no option to shoot FF.
The Canon EF-S 10-18/4.5-5.6 IS STM also covers this crop through almost the whole zoom range.

Both should work, but whether Canon will allow them to work, we don't know, it would be pretty stupid to restrict these, but we know how Canon does things.

I hear ya, it’s been tempting. And yeah Canon always find some way to break your heart...

l’ll be interested to see what the crop factor the R6 has. The 10-18 and 18-35 are among my favourites too. Avoided that firmware to keep enjoying the 28-35mm end FF 🙂

I tend to buy grey market for best value. Some dealers offer service warranty - if you’re in the UK I recommend HDEW. 

1 hour ago, padam said:

One can use the 1.4x crop mode on the R6, that's still a lot better than the 1.75x crop on the R and a lot less rolling shutter (probably around 16ms, same as a C300 Mark III)
Or with the full sensor, the ISO is a huge improvement. And there is room to engage the digital IS on top of the IBIS without really degrading the quality.

With the speed booster + EOS R basically looses all access to any other frame rates
It practically becomes a 1.24x crop 4k30p EF-mount-only camera, with quite a bit of rolling shutter, e.g. quite limited.
And of course there is that 1080p 120fps which is the other Achilles heel of the EOS R.

Overall, the R6 is miles ahead of the R for video, it is a baby 1DX III (with 10-bit and Canon Log, it kills the 1DX II as well, less compressed, but 8-bit 4:2:2 no Log or FF 4K)

The only question is will it receive a price drop after the early months, because if it does not, then it is probably better to get one as soon as possible.
It does not seem overpriced at 2500$ compared to 2300$ original MSRP the EOS R, which is worth almost half as much now.
The Metabones Speed Booster makes them even closer in terms of pricing, so it is does not look like something worth spending for.

You make a nice case for the R6, especially as a crop sensor camera. I’m sure it will be useful for those coming to the R line afresh looking to maximise its strengths. Does it have a 1.4x crop? I thought it needs to be at least 1.6x for the APSC lenses. 1.4x can land you in awkward focal lengths. I don’t think it works for me personally.

Don’t get me wrong, for most coming to the RF system, the R6 is a better entry point, especially vloggers who want super stable selfies/ walk-and-talks, and B-rollers who love super slowmo.

I don’t really shoot slomo though, mostly doc, some video/photo journo (occasional narrative but don’t really recommend any Canon cam for that). I prefer 1:1 readout over binning (even that downsampled FHD on the R), I’ve grown accustomed to true 24p ALL-I internal or solid HMDI out, and I want to enjoy the benefits of a speedbooster. I approach the R as more a M43 camera (approx 1.8-1.9x crop with DIS) whereas R6 - if it only works in a 1.4x or 1.6x without overheating - is more a S35 camera.

As I’ve learned over 18 months of use to mitigate RS with the right lenses and techniques (it’s actually pretty easy when you know how) and built a chestpod for some use cases, I’m only left wondering whether the R6 and super stabe is worth trading my R for; it’s a just a quandary for me personally because of the way I‘m now set up to shoot. For me though, personally, the R6 seems to offer neither the benefits of FF 4K without overheating or the M43+booster approach.

3 hours ago, Vrzalík said:

And what Canon EOS R6? Is there any overheating issue too? Today I watched one Youtube video and R6 has overheating issue too. 😞

 

Yeah I saw last night Canon admit even the R6’s 4K <30p recording limit on that ProAV interview: 40 mins before overheating. This isn’t going to work for me. I don’t even need to see the footage. You can get better performance from the R’s 4K 1:1 readout + speedbooster. I’m done looking at these cameras now and moving on. 

5 hours ago, Matt James Smith ? said:

My experience is that bitrate impacts motion artefacts in IPB footage (higher=better, obvs). 170mbps in h265 is pretty high. Almost up there with the C300mkII 10bit ALL-I 4K (about 400mbps in h264 I believe). I’d be quite hopeful it’s going to be decent IPB, and I’d choose IPB a lot anyway, if I had the choice, simply to keep file size down. A Ninja V can be used if Intra frame is really needed. Hell, the C200 can’t even do 10bit external 4K. It’s not a disaster for me. 
 

Rolling shutter and overhearing remain the big question marks.

Yeah the R6 is certainly not a disaster, there are worse problems to have than deciding on a camera upgrade 😉 I’ll wait till there’s real word footage, I want to test it, but it looks like a good entry point to the RF line for most. 

As an early adopter I can testify to the benefits of RF. My problem is I’ve made the R+Ninja work so well for me that I’m struggling to think of the R6 as an upgrade (though it will be for some, each to their own use case).

My summary from another thread:

Comparing it to the R6, the R Classic has ALL-I, true 24p, (vs IPB 23.98p), 4K 1:1 native readout for APSC, or 1:1 4K FF with Metabones (plus the speed booster’s benefits), 28ms rolling shutter vs 31ms of 1DXIII sensor, mini HDMI (vs R6’s micro), lighter for a gimbal, 30 megapixel stills vs 20mp, £1000 cheaper (used) for newcomers and it definitely doesn’t overheat. Same colour science, same log. But it lacks 60p in 4K, the improved IBIS, and the improved autofocus of the R6. I don’t use slomo so I’m really not sure whether it’s worth the upgrade for me as the R’s DIS works well and the autofocus is already blazing. It’s the IBIS I’m interested in: 8 stops is gimbal-like, and destroys any rolling shutter artefacts. Need to see more footage....

2 hours ago, Yurolov said:

Have you tested on 10 bit footage? 

Heheh well with the R we have to shoot 10 bit on the Ninja V - and ProRes is always intraframe so no way to compare..

10-bit will have more colour info and I don't know how much that will help with fast moving subjects, so let’s just hope the IPB footage from the R6 looks great for some other reason. All things being equal IPB has worse blurring artefacts than ALL-I and that’s just a result of the compression method. If the R5 has ALL-I, and the R6 could have had ALL-I, then it's fair to say that the R6's compression method has been dumbed-down to differentiate the models.

Whether anyone else really notices or cares in another thing. But I have stopped shooting IPB because I didn’t like even the occasional ghost-like blur I got from it (for others who shoot slomo - I don't - they could notice it even more in the R6's 60p IPB) - plus it doesn’t edit anywhere near as well as ALL-I on my iMac, though other folks say their mileage editing IPB varies depending on their computer.