herein2020

18 minutes ago, Django said:

It's the most entry-level FF model, that's why it should be compared to the similarly priced A7C. Not a Z9, A1 etc.

And yeah Canon should be praised for not gimping the video specs and giving it FF4K60p & 10-bit.

Like I said this is beneficial for consumers no matter if you're on a rival system. Like for example hopefully it pushes Sony to replace the A7C with an updated A7IV sensor and also give it 10-bit & 4K60p. Alongside IBIS it would have an advantage and be competitive.  

Well for starters R7 is an APS-C cam so that's a pretty big compromise if you have FF EF/RF glass. There really isn't much in terms of APS-C RF options. IQ wise, R7 4K60p is line-skipped. You do get a slightly better body & IBIS. But for those that need/want FF on a budget, that is R8s target. Just look at it as the new and enhanced RP. I could see myself grabbing one for a B-Cam + travel cam.

 

I guess I just look at it the other way, I don't consider the crop sensor to be a compromise at all and I use it with FF glass every day; in fact, I did not buy a single new lens for the R7, even my EF-S glass works with it.  I actually consider it a strength since it produces identical IQ as the R5 up to 3200ISO, but with better battery life, better IBIS, and better heat handling.

What I do consider a much bigger compromise is the single card slot, worse ergonomics, no IBIS, etc of the R8 just because it is a FF sensor.

I do agree, no matter who this camera appeals to; consumers win in the end with more choice.

10 hours ago, gt3rs said:

R8 has the hybrid hotshoe.

Expensive RF lens like the RF 100-400, 600 11, 800 11, 24-105 7.1, 24-240, 16, 24, 35, 50, 85 STM, 24-50, 15-30….

I don’t think people buying an entry level R body will buy 28-70 2.0 or 50 1.2

Yes canon should have included IBIS, a bigger battery, a bigger body and call it R6 II….. boy it cost 1000$ (40%) less it cannot be the same.

The Sony a7c cost 300$ more has no dual card neither, max 10fps vs 40, 4k 30 max and with a 1.2 crop at 30, 8bit only, half the res touch screen…. people should get real…

I didn't say it should have a single thing it doesn't have, all I did was compare the missing features to the type of people those missing features will drive away and concluded with the fact that IMO the R7 at the same price point is a better value while I tried to imagine what type of consumer would find the R8 appealing; I never said it should have xyz feature at its price point.

Also, I didn't find in Canon's documentation for the R8 that it has the hybrid hotshoe, maybe they say it in one of the YT videos or comprehensive reviews, but I didn't see it listed in Canon's marketing materials.

Yes, the RF lenses you listed are "cheap" for RF lenses but I was comparing the ergonomics of the R8 to the Canon Rebel and regardless of how cheap RF lenses are when compared to other RF lenses, they are still more expensive than APS-C lenses meaning you are still  paying quite a bit for a camera that has a lot of compromises at its price point considering the R7 at the same price point has none of them.

9 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

This camera illustrates the significant difference between Canon and everyone else. Even when putting out a compelling package, and for some folks this is a compelling package, they can't help themselves from holding back something significant like IBIS. Meanwhile, others are putting everything they can into even their entry level options. To me this feels like a stop gap more than anything. It's not compelling enough for most serious users, but might provide an upgrade path for RP or R users who might be eying the exit as other companies offer better value and those cameras continue to become long in the tooth.

I am sure they will sell loads of these but to me its hard to tell who will buy this. The absolute only feature that I think is surprising at its price point is the uncropped downsampled 4K60FPS, everything else is a major compromise IMO:

• No IBIS - That rules out most vloggers
• Tiny Battery - Anyone who already owns a Canon body will think twice about getting a new body that requires a different battery.
• Single card slot - understandable at this price point but IMO this single missing feature eliminates this camera from even being used as a B or C camera for paid work. 
• No Hybrid Hotshoe - Once again, understandable at this price point, but I would have thought Canon would standardize on that feature for all new bodies not to mention it might drive sales of Canon accessories.
• Price - This camera is definitely priced out of Canon Rebel territory, but it has the ergonomics of a Canon Rebel. Definitely better specs, but the same ergonomics. Combine that with expensive RF lenses or having to buy EF lenses and an adapter vs crop sensor lenses like the Canon Rebel and you have a rather expensive setup with tons of compromises.

Of course I am biased since I own (and love) my R7, but IMO if you are going with a Canon body at this price point the R7 is a way better value. The R8 makes you accept too many compromises just to say you have a FF sensor and to get non line skipped 4K60FPS.

Also, I agree with @Andrew Reid the ergonomics look pretty awful; the only thing that makes the R7 tolerable without the back wheel is the wheel around the joystick, even then I still wish the R7 had included the back wheel as well just to keep some consistency when paired with the R5.

BTW Canon is confusing me these days, it seems like no two bodies are even the same button layout. I think the wheel around the joystick is great and should have made an appearance with the R6II but it didn't. It would have also made the button layout of the R8 a bit more tolerable.

Needless to say, this is a big nope for me, but Canon being Canon, they will sell tons of these and convert tons more new buyers to their RF lenses. A body like this reminds me of printers; they get you with the rock bottom prices and loads of features....the sticker price comes later when you need to buy the ink. With this body they get you with the low price then you are stuck with either more compromises (buying "new" EF mount lenses), or they get you with the RF lens prices since I get the feeling that most buyers of this body won't already be in Canon's FF ecosystem.

I would have to go with my EF mount Sigma 50mm F1.4 since I don't even own a 35mm prime and that Sigma is the fastest lens I own. I shoot a lot of portraits and love detail shots (video and photos) and my 24mm F2.8 would be way too wide which is the only other prime I own.  The 50mm is also great for talking head shots, but yes it definitely would be a pain in some situations if it were the only lens I own. 

Now if you had said zoom lenses are an option then I would have gone with the EF 24-105mm F4 without hesitation. I had to put that out there because my primes are slim pickings.

1 hour ago, Django said:

No I haven't talked myself into anything yet, still weighing options. My first choice still remains R3 as it ticks off IBIS, battery life, overheat, best AF, vertical grip, 6K RAW compressed and 4K60p oversampled.. only a bit more expensive than a rigged out R5C and a much more elegant solution imo. No more cine features but for critical condition shoots, my atomos could always help handle things. 

R5C comes in second but no IBIS and poor battery life is a major PITA. So I'd end up rigging R5C, either battery grip + cage or external battery + cage. Add a top handle and a side grip or shoulder kit like in the video you linked and you've got a decent weight/balance rig. Still not IBIS level plus you are no longer that versatile for hybrid video/stills shooting.

Yeah lens IS + EIS is always an option but it severely limits my lens use and adds that small crop. Its a workaround but not the most flexible solution. I've gotten so used to shooting FF no crop everything handheld on my R6, that going back to that feels so limiting. I really like shooting handheld on my mirrorless hybrids. And with all kinds of lenses including EF primes with no IS.

FWIW I've been shooting Paris FW events this whole week on my FS7, BMD cams and multiple EOS bodies for stills shooting. Tripods, shoulder rigs, gimbals etc. Honestly such a PITA dealing with all that gear on a crazy hectic schedule. Sucks the fun right out of it. I feel like either a R3/R5/R5C plus a monopod could have almost been enough for the job (not including R6ii/R7 as some parts of the job required RAW).

I have no idea but keep reading about grading issues such as in this thread here:

https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/70778-how-are-you-converting-v-log-to-normal-colour/

Also if I was even considering switching over to Panny it would definitely be the S5iiX I'd want and that's not out until May.

The other alternative is Sony since I'm also invested in that lens ecosystem but the only options are FX3 which has no EVF so no good for my style of shooting and A7S3. 12MP stills, 4K max resolution and no internal RAW are too severe compromises though. Crazy because Sony is number one in the industry yet so behind tech wise in the mirrorless world..

Holy **&t you are shooting Paris FW? Now I am seriously jealous, I shoot all of the big fashion shows here in FL with the biggest being Miami SW. I was invited to NYFW and Paris FW, but no one was willing to pay for my travel. For fashion shows I've got my kit down to a single Lowepro bag and a tripod....I shot Miami SW with the C70 and R5. This year I plan on trying just the C70 and R7.  In the bag I've got my mini XLR shotgun mic, Sennheiser wireless transmitter/receiver + lav mic, side handle for the C70, C70 in a cage, and R5 is just rigged with a shoulder strap for photography. I was able to shoot all of Miami SW, interviews, vendors, models, promo videos, etc. with just that setup.

As far as color grading VLOG goes, I think anything can seem like anything if you pixel peep, if you just get out and shoot and grade until the footage looks good to you and your customer that's all that really matters. When looked at from that viewpoint, VLOG was no worse for me than CLOG.

This year I plan on trying the R7 to see if I can add a bit of walking as well without a gimbal and to be able to switch between the R7 and C70 for video. The R7 will take over for handheld video and photography, C70 for interviews and the runway walks. I tried the monopod thing and couldn't make it work, monopods feel so limiting and still not as stable as a tripod or as dynamic as handheld, even without IBIS I would rather handheld over a monopod.

It does sound like the R3 checks a lot of boxes for you as well, you definitely cannot go from a fully rigged R5C to photography very easily. I don't get why the R5C is so bad on battery life; it doesn't have to power IBIS and its the same sensor as the R5. You could set it up like I did with the C70, where it slides easily into a nato rail V-mount battery setup for long form and slides off into a handheld setup for shorter shoots and gimbal work. That is also how my R7 is setup.

Below is a picture of my setup. The S5 is in the picture but the C70 and R7 both slide right into the same top tripod mount. I use the bottom tripod plate to mount the whole thing to a tripod. For fashion shows I setup the tripod and nato/v-mount (and to hold my spot in the pit), then slide off the camera and go shoot b-roll until the show starts. Of course you still would have that IBIS problem with the R5C and the slower AF......so there's no way around that if you go with the R5C

On 1/21/2023 at 10:56 AM, Ty Harper said:

@herein2020 some interesting points re' the R3 vs R5. I am very close to squeezing the trigger on the R5 and calling it a day when it comes to thinking about cam bodies in the forseeable future. 

I think the biggest downside for the R5 is the overheating issues. I know FW 1.6 is supposed to be the final answer, and I may put that to the test this summer, but either the overheating fiasco was 100% Canon manufactured (I still think this is a bit unlikely given the horrible press), or the R5 really doesn't handle heat that well and Canon released FW that would let users push it closer to premature failure. 

With Sony eating their lunch, it is still hard for me to believe the overheating problems were part of Canon's cripple hammer strategy; restricting/removing features sure, 30min time limit sure, no video tools sure....but overheating?  I think the truth is the marketing department heavily advertised 8K, the engineers only built it to properly handle the heat from far less, and they set the original timer to maximize the reliability and lifespan of the camera. Enter the horrendous press coverage and outraged users and the marketing department told the engineers to fix it at all costs; even if the camera would be less reliable and even if it would shorten their lifespan.

Keep in mind the R5 was Canon's first real mirrorless pro focused camera, so it makes sense they would get a few things wrong. This is also the main reason why I pretty much stick to photography with the R5 or shoot video in the winter; I just don't trust the R5 with the heat. If I lived in a cooler climate I would be a bit less risk adverse. I do think the R5II will hit it out of the park, but who knows when that will be released and actually able to be purchased.

With all of that said, I think if you mainly use the R5 for photography and only shoot a few video clips here and there then the R5 is fine. If you truly do need more long form video or primarily video then the R7, R6II (maybe), R5C, or C70 would be a better option. I skipped the R6 completely because it is worse at overheating than the R5 and I said maybe for the R6II because I don't think it has proven itself on actual shoots that it does not overheat. I never mention the R3 simply because I think most of its price comes from its fast readout and you get more for your money with other models if you don't shoot sports/fast action.

Of course, my list is strictly based on my opinion that the overheating problems in the R5 aren't really fixed; if you believe they truly were fixed with FW 1.6 and that the R5 can shoot video for everything you throw at it without overheating or shortening its lifespan then my list would be: R7, R5, R6II (maybe), R5C, C70 (arranged in order of hybrid capabilities vs video focused with the R7 being the most hybrid focused and with the best mix of both worlds and the C70 being 100% video focused). 

On 1/21/2023 at 1:12 PM, Django said:

As for the 30mn time limit, yeah that annoying. Canon removed it on R3/R5C/R7/R6ii. Don't forget R5/R6 are just second generation Canon mirrorless. It usually takes that third gen for such quirks to be ironed out. Same with Sony A7S series.

What irks me the most about the 30min limit is it's just a FW setting and something they could easily remove; it's not like it needs a HW update to remove it. I think it's still there because Canon still doesn't want users running video long enough to risk overheating. Nothing else makes sense when the R7 and R6II both cost less than the R5 but have no limit (but better heat management).

On 1/21/2023 at 1:12 PM, Django said:

Also been reading stuff here about Vlog being hard to grade and overall CS issues. 

I loved VLOG out of the S5 and I was grading it within seconds in Davinci Resolve. Now though I am hooked on DR's managed color and I don't see a VLOG managed color option so that would be a step backwards, but I definitely didn't think it was hard to grade and I am far from a colorist. Not sure about CS, the XLR module stopped working with my S5 and it took them 2wks to fix it (towards the end of COVID restrictions) but it did get fixed; not sure if Canon would have been better. Of course I am just one user; overall it would surprise me if Canon didn't have better CS.

On 1/21/2023 at 1:12 PM, Django said:

To me this is a big pro for R5C. But I'm used to cine cams. I want all those options. You can have the ones you use the most inside My Menu. You can assign buttons for Q&S. Shutter angle alone is fantastic, set it to 180 degree and you no longer have to fiddle with shutter speeds when changing frame rates. Punch-in while recording to check critical focus. WFM, false color etc. On R5/R6/R3 all you have is that histogram that disappears once you hit record. Its a joke for serious work or complex scenes so you have to use an external monitor which adds weight and clunkiness. All of a sudden R5C with an external battery doesn't sound so bad! YMMV of course, as we see above depending on our requirements and user cases a pro can be a con and vice versa. It is interesting to hear how others shoot and view such things though!

It sounds to me like you've already talked yourself into the R5C 🤣. Nothing else short of the C70 will give you all of those tools in that form factor and obviously the C70 has its own long list of downsides.  I think its going to come down to how important is IBIS to you and are you ok dealing with the external battery pack. Keep in mind too that the R5C is lighter than the C70 so handholding it without IBIS would be even harder unless you just plan on using a gimbal a lot more. 

I did get better with handholding thanks to the C70 but still far from Hollywood quality and Davinci Resolve's post stabilization was a lifesaver at times; then I got the R7 and all was well again. With the R5 and R7 they are so stable that I deliberately add some camera shake at times just to look more dynamic.

One thing that does counter the missing IBIS is lens IS so lens IS combined with digital IS on the C70 made life a bit more tolerable; thats if you have lenses with lens IS. I would imagine that the R5C with lens IS and possibly some digital IS would make it more tolerable along with a cage and handles. I thought this video was pretty good at looking at R5C handheld stability and his handheld rig is similar to mine with the C70 except I use a V-mount battery and a left side handle. 

17 hours ago, kaylee said:

why tf are my premiere exports desaturated and all messed up? color and contrast is a mess!

i just wanna post on youtube like a normal person 😞 

is it the 'monitor' setting within premiere? is it my export settings? whats going on here 😧 

halp im an idiot

Switch to Davinci Resolve....problem solved.  Just kidding (but not really). I used Premier for years, got tired of paying the subscription fees, learned Davinci Resolve in 1 week, best decision I ever made. If you shoot LOG with a DR supported camera, DR's managed color is another real time saver; there's also tutorials that help you do the same things you do in Premier in DR; I used a few of those, a few of Blackmagic's training courses, especially on color grading and project setup, and within 1wk could do everything in Resolve that I used to do in Premier.

No more endless subscription fees, no more weird render failures, no more crashing, no more forced updates leading to project instability, etc. etc. 

1. GoPro (digital IS)
2. R7
3. S5II (if it is a good as the S5)
4. R5
5. GH5

I only listed the cameras that I have owned, all the reviews in the world won't tell you as much as actually owning the camera.

6 hours ago, Django said:

@herein2020 I absolutely value your input, many thanks, but it ain't that simple. I've been shooting Canon since 5D mark1 and have had numerous bodies since, including cinema line (C100/C200/C300). I'm not just upgrading blindly from an R6. So I do really value the cine OS features such as focus/exposure tools, LUT support, XF-AVC, RAW Light, anamorphic de squeeze, unlimited recording, TC, smart hot-shoe etc. Those are the video features I'm missing. R6 was just a stop gap because I refused to spend 4.5K at the time for an overheating R5. C70 ticks a lot of boxes but no IBIS, S35, no high resolution, no stills and high price tag. 

In view of that, R5C is a mix of C70 & R5. The cine features, the fan, FF & 45MP. Downside is no IBIS, no NDs & battery life. The smart-shoe allows for the Tascam XLR unit so that's also a big plus. R5C also has dual iso so although the same sensor, better usage. And 4K60p isn't line-skipped.

R5 gives you back IBIS and ok battery life. Still need a grip. No smart-shoe. Potential overheating. It sort of feels dated and not really much of an upgrade from my R6 aside from 8K.

Then you have R3. up to 6K60p. No overheat. Pro body. IBIS. Stacked sensor. Best battery life. Killer stills specs.

It isn't an easy decision, there is no clear cut winner in everything. And I really just want one body that'll do it best.

 

 

Its not easy being a Canon owner; as always with Canon you really need to pick your compromise 😄. There is one small detail though; the R5 is also dual ISO, its just rarely talked about. It's native ISOs are 800 and 3200. I did forget one big downside to the R5 which is that ridiculous 30min recording limit is still there. No idea what Canon is thinking leaving that in place.

It is definitely a tough decision, I think when it comes to the R3 two more downsides would be the battery and the fixed grip. The battery because only other bodies that size use that battery so if you got a second body it would most likely be the smaller batteries. I really like being able to swap batteries between my R5 and R7. In fact, you probably already have some batteries left over from the R6 that you could use in the R5 and R5C.

The other downside is the fixed grip. I know you would probably never take the grip off of the R5 if you got it but I personally have never used a camera with a grip on gimbal. I would imagine balancing a camera with a grip would be a PITA on a gimbal. With the R5C and no IBIS I would assume you would start using a gimbal more often. So it would be nice to at least have the option to take the grip off for gimbal work.

Of course we could go full circle to the S5II, but there's the lens situation which locks you into L Mount or EF with an adapter.

No matter how you look at it though, its great to have these kinds of choices, will be interested to see what you pick.

On 1/19/2023 at 10:45 AM, Django said:

Ok back to R5C. Taking a closer look at it and it does have a lot going on for it, including various crop modes, various RAW compressions, XF-AVC, 8K/5.9K/3K, anamorphic de squeeze, LUT support, focus assist etc. And active cooling (bye-bye overheat for good). I mean its basically like a high resolution C70 without NDs plus a 45MP camera. For 3500€. 

It's almost a no brainer on paper but I keep hearing about the dreadful battery life. I just have to wonder how bad is it? If the camera keeps dying on me this sounds like overheat caveat all over again. How many batteries do I need for a 4 to 5 hour shoot ? what portable USB-C external power works for it ?

Losing IBIS is going to suck but for handheld shoots I guess I could go for the IS RF STM lenses  (24mm, 35mm, 85mm) plus DIS.

Basically if I can sort out battery life and stabilisation, R5C could be the top contender.

Yeah I can't wait until R5ii and also Canon Europe will sell it with a premium just like R6ii which basically means 5K.

R6ii is 2900€ here which is equally ridiculous considering I can get an R5 now for 3000€ and an R5C for 3500€.

I'm trying to get best bang for buck which means not the latest Canon release.

Your previous camera was an R6, you don't need 8K60, but a frankenrigged R5C is still attractive to you? Sure the R5C has some cool features, but you didn't have them before in the R6 and you are losing IBIS which IMO is more important than most of those video assist features combined. Just my opinion, but if you were able to deal with the R6's overheating, and its limited tools then the most natural replacement would be the R5; which overheats less than the R6, has more video options, higher resolution, and a normal battery grip that will power all video modes. 

Sure the R5C has more video options, and will definitely handle heat better, but no IBIS and major battery limitations sounds like a poor upgrade path from an R6 especially since you don't need one of its main features over the R5; 8K60P. Non line skipped 4K60 sounds pretty good too, but in real world shooting it truly is not perceptible. 

IMO there's other downsides as well to the R5C; long reboot time, fan that draws in dust/dirt, somewhat clunky form factor which could make shooting photos a bit ergonomically unpleasant, and the same DR as the R5.  I think you also lose the stickiness of the autofocus from the R5 when you reboot into the Cinema OS. The C70's AF is still far behind the R5's, I would imagine the R5C's AF isn't as good as the R5'ss as well but not sure about that one.

The video tools sound pretty cool and all, but I have them all in the C70 and barely use them, I just use the WFM in the C70 for exposing. Internal NDs and XLR audio is what makes the loss of IBIS bearable for me with the C70. For the R5 and R7 I just use the histogram kind of like a WFM. I'm guessing though that the R5C's video assist tools don't all disappear from the screen once you hit record especially the electronic level (personal pet peeve of mine); assuming of course that the R5C even has an electronic level when in video mode which is another major thing missing from the C70.

I think you are hung up on the line skipped 4K60FPS as well; here are two sample videos that I found that had a decent variety of footage out of the R5 shot at 4K60FPS and/or 4K/120FPS both of which are line skipped. The first video is a little annoying; obviously 4K60 and 4K120 look identical until you slow them down, but he does have a decent variety of detailed footage that shows the R5 shooting something other than a test chart at 4K60FPS.

1 hour ago, zerocool22 said:

Thanks, If i part with my sennheiser g4 that is a option indeed. (don't have a need for 2 wireless lav systems). 

I do wonder how people are doing it recording it camera on the best way possible. Syncing in post does slow it down a tiny bit. (mainly the loading/offloading of the SD cards, importing the tracks, auto syncing them, set it to stero, bypass the original sound)

When I used the S5 with audio I swore by the DMW-XLR1; but that was mainly because my highest quality mics were all XLR. In your situation, I would just test out the Sennheiser straight into the mic port. The quality of the audio will mainly be affected by the lav mic more so than what port you use on the S5II. For the cost of the DMW-XLR1 you could get a pretty nice lav mic.

The trick with the mic port is to turn down the gain within the S5II to almost as low as possible, then use the Sennheiser G4 setup to bring the levels within the -6dB range. On the transmitter side set the peaks to -12dB, on the receiver side use the receiver to boost the signal until it just taps on -6dB at its peaks within the camera. That will nearly eliminate the camera's noisy pre-amps and rely on the Sennheiser which is going to be cleaner. If you are worried about clipping then turn the transmitter down to -12dB peaks as well.

Personally, I hate post synching audio so whenever possible I keep things simple. I've also found that Davinci Resolve isn't always that great at syncing audio tracks later which is an even bigger PITA when I need to do it manually. 

I am not an audio guy, in fact I hate most things audio, but I do need to record it quite often so when I do I keep it as simple as possible. Shotgun camera mounted mic whenever possible, lav mic to Sennheiser G4 whenever a lav is needed, or straight XLR wired into a MixPre6 with the stereo mix sent to the camera via Sennheiser G4. None of those setups need a post audio sync. 

Shotgun camera mounted mics into the mic port of the camera works surprisingly well if you can get close enough to the talent, as long as they face the camera, and there isn't too much background noise. I've been using them more often lately to do quick run and gun interviews for events vs handing them a mic or fiddling with a lav mic.

BTW, an absolute lifesaver for me in Davinci Resolve is the Carity Vx plugin. I actually can use my shotgun mic more often and can make it sound like a lav mic with that plugin because it cleans up the background noise so well. It has literally saved some bad audio more than a few times for me.

2 hours ago, Django said:

@herein2020 Thanks for the feedback, good to know you've sorted out your issues with R5!

Well 8K compressed definitely tilts the balance more in R5 favour now. 

I really don't get why R3, the flagship doesn't have at least 6K ALL-I/IPB. Sounds like a real oversight.

Only problem I have with R5 is the line-skipped FF 4K60p.

It looks like for up to 4K60p R3 & R6ii are the best options. For higher resolution its R5/R5C followed by R3.

Decisions, decisions.

I really don't think the line skipped 4K60p is that big of a deal; its not like its obvious within the video. IMO only during side-by-side comparisons and even then only when you zoom into a scene which has fine detail is the differences even visible.  Obviously, yes on paper non-line skipped is better, but in practice I personally don't see a difference.

Of course if you are shooting at the TV commercial level with perfect lighting, full rigging, and fine details, then yes in those scenarios 4K60 line skipped might be noticeable, but at least for my projects its perfectly fine.

I know you can't wait that long, but I get the feeling the R5II is going to come along and really set the bar to another level, maybe the R6II would be a good stopgap until then since you consider the R7 a downgrade. 

I think if I had to do it all over again I would get the C70, R7, and wait for the R5II.  

This video is a mixture of 4K60FPS (line skipped) and 4K30FPS HQ (down sampled from 7K), using the R7 and I don't even remember which was which without looking at the source project. I would imagine the R5's line skipped 60FPS is even better but in most side-by-side comparisons, the IQ out of the R7 is nearly identical to the R5 at ISO800.

On 1/12/2023 at 2:41 PM, Django said:

@gt3rs incredible footage, just wow!

I've sold my R6 so I'm in the market for a new camera. S5II is on my radar but lens choice and system familiarity will probably keep me locked to Canon. Logical step was R6II but it is selling for 2900€ which is crazy considering I can get a brand new (grey import) R5 for 3200€ or an R5C for 3500€. Very little price difference in between these two currently.

I am with you on the S5II, fantastic in every way, but too late for me. Once you buy that first RF lens you are locked in way more vs an adaptable EF lens. Not sure if it matters to you, but one big thing the R5 is lacking vs the R6II and R7 is the hybrid hotshoe for audio. 

On 1/12/2023 at 2:41 PM, Django said:

@herein2020 saying he had all kinds of quirks with his copy including major EVF lag.

Everything else I prefer on R5C, namely LUT support which is a game changer in quick-turnaround workflow for me and the separate stills/cine menus. I'm just concerned with absence of IBIS and the dreadful battery life.

I think you have both R5 & R5C but prefer R5C I assume mainly for 8K60p? 

I have very little use for that but I guess its still an added bonus.

Any other reasons why R5C is superior to R5 (aside from the cine OS extras)?

PS: R3 has also gone down on grey market (4600€) and really sounds like a good pro option. Stacked sensor. 6K60p RAW is plenty enough.  IBIS. Extensive battery life. Vertical grip might even come in handy for vertical video shooting which I'm doing more & more. Plus who knows I could maybe develop sports/action career !

I think I got my quirks worked out with that final EVF setting that was added as an option in one of the FW updates. Also, it is winter here in FL so I have been using the R5 more for video. I just completed a commercial shoot and used the R5 as a B cam to the C70 instead of the R7, mainly because the R5 already had the 70-200mm on it and I needed that lens for the shoot.

The R5's IBIS is definitely amazing, I can easily handhold the R5 with the RF 70-200mm at 200mm and it looks like its on a tripod; not for long periods but enough to get the 30s or so that I typically need. In fact, the only camera that I've ever shot with that has even better IBIS ironically is the R7 (not counting GoPros). The R7 is the first camera I've ever shot with that I can walk for brief periods and it looks like I am using a gimbal when paired with the Canon EF 24-105mm F4 IS L lens.  For the commercial shoot the only lens I used on the R5 was the RF 70-200mm and it was all handheld, no problems getting the tripod like stability I needed for all of the shots.

As far as vertical shooting goes, I really dislike small cameras and I shoot vertical (for photography) about 90% of the time since I am mostly filming people, so the battery grip for the R5 really fixes everything for me (makes it bigger, adds battery life, adds vertical shooting buttons). 

IMO, I would definitely pick the R5 over the R3 any day, and just add a battery grip to it (which is exactly what I did). Another feature that I really like for photography with the R5 is that those 45MP files when using cRAW are actually smaller than the 32MP files that used to be produced by my 5DIV. 

To me the R3 is just too focused on sports/action and you pay a lot for that. It does have some great video side benefits and of course I've never heard anything about overheating with the R3. I'm still not 100% convinced it is fixed in the R5 for Florida summer heat.

6 hours ago, Django said:

You do raise a valid point about the 6K RAW. I didn't quite realise R3 didn't shoot 6K Mp4 files. Whereas R5 does 8K h26x right?

Its kind of funny, I have kept the R5 in 4K HQ mode since I got it (which disables and hides all of the 8K options in the menu), so I never bothered looking at the 8K options, I thought it only shot 8K RAW, but somewhere mixed in with all of those FW updates it now has RAW, RAW Light, ALL-I, IPB, and compressed IPB for 8K.  Unless you have an M1 Mac,  you would definitely need proxies for the compressed 8K files. 8K RAW though I can edit with no problems in DR.

Below were the available recording times with a 51GB CFExpress card in the R5 when set to 8K-D (8192x4320) @ 29.97FPS or 8K-U (7680x4320) @29.97FPS:

8K RAW - 24m 19s 

8K RAW Light - 37m 15s

8K ALL-I - 49m 55s

8K IPB - 1h 35m 32s

8K Compressed IPB - 3h 11m 11s

The 8K compressed IPB almost looks small enough to be useable to me, I might have to try it out one day on a shoot.

On 12/21/2022 at 3:40 AM, Amazeballs said:

Year man DJI stuff is awesome, I feel you. I have gone through a number of gimbals myself. My last one was Zhyuin Weebill S which is a nice gimbal and relativly light and compact (but with a mounting plate, small tripod and a top handle its about 1,3kg).. now I dont have it anymore and I want to try something new. I have noticed that Brandon Li uses Crane M3 a lot in his shots and there is a reason for that. DJI RSC2 is 1.2 kg and M3 or Aircross S is 700 gram, so that is a substantial differnce of 500 gram in my experince. You will start feeling it over time pretty quickly. Yes there are some tricks of how to tuck a gimbal under your belt I know them. I am working out actually so just to clarify - not an old crippled dude here. But still I want something more compact and light. Also the reason is that when gimbal adds an overall 1.2kg to your bag you just dont want to carry it anymore. I have so much stuff already - camera, lenses, a drone, monitor, monopod.. and now a gimbal. Its a constant battle of what exactly should I take on a shoot. So every 100 grams count. And here we have 500 of them 🙂 So for travel purposes I want to try a light gimbal. I dont mind paying 250$ just to see how it goes. I am always up for DJI making a gimbal in this category and switching to it. 

And I also want a DJI pocket 3 with a 1 inch sensor so I can ditch my gimbal for some shots completely. 

Cheers. 

It looks like DJI read your mind with the RS 3: https://www.dji.com/rs-3-mini?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=edm&utm_campaign=launch-rs3mini&sc_src=email_6013510&sc_eh=336e9e0d76a557b31&sc_llid=435361&sc_lid=393409123&sc_uid=zsTiv7096T

2 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Re. menus, barely consider them with these things…

I set things up how I want and then rarely, if ever go back into them other than for stuff like formatting cards, checking time sync on multiple bodies etc.

Never had any issues with any of them really…

Same here, the main trick is to use the Favorites menu.  I do try to learn the different menu options intimately though, the worst thing you want to happen is a setting gets changed mid shoot and you can't figure out how to change it back or you get into a situation where you need to change an obscure setting and don't remember where it is.

I think a really hard question to answer now is if I had to pick today would I go with the Canon R7, R6II or the S5II. My biggest gripe with the S5 has been fixed or at least AF is now useable in my book, on paper the S5II really blows away the R7, and I would trust the S5II to not overheat any day over the R6II.

17 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

Did you watch the Tony Northrup video? He used the Canon 24-70 f2.8 with the Sigma adapter, and it worked really well I thought. He moved back and forth, did the "put the object in front of the camera to focus" deal all these people love (that I hate), and had it wide open because he's all about da TONEH!

That is pretty incredible then. Sigma clearly stated their adapter did not support CAF for EF lenses. Even if Panasonic's AF does quite match Sony or Canon, from all of the reviews I've seen it is good enough for what I would need.

14 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Yeah, that's looking really good on Kai's video - at least in terms of tracking.  I didn't notice any pulsing, but on the other hand, nearly every clip/edit of that part of the video was only about 2 seconds long and with a lot of movement.  The pulsing is easiest to see when the subject is sitting mostly still.

The S5II apparently uses both PDAF and DFD so I would imagine there could be times where DFD still rears its ugly head. Panasonic just couldn't let DFD die a graceful death.

6 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

I liked the menus of the GH5 but the menus on the S1 are a horror to me btw. I imagine it's the same with the S5. The interface to dial through the menu is pure horror to me indeed. Maybe that's another reason why i am not willing to use my S1 much. 

The S5's menus are definitely a real PITA but I think its just because it has so many options, not sure how they could have made it better. When I shot with the S5 all I did was set up my Favorites menu and never went into the other menus. Once you do that the S5 is a real joy to shoot with. Also, I have the R7 now and the menus are way better....but I also have nowhere near the level of customization or tools that the S5 had. I will take cluttered menus that I can filter via a Favorites menu any day over less customizability.

Truly incredible camera, they took what was already my favorite camera and made it perfect by fixing the AF. I do hope its not too little too late. If that AF system had shipped with the original S5 there is a strong possibility I would be all in on Panasonic right now for both photos and video. 

I am still not sure though if CAF works with the Canon EF adapter, if not then EF lens owners would still need to buy L mount lenses to really take advantage of the AF.

I watched Gerald Undone's review of the S5II, the one big thing I wish he had tested was the additional stability option which was Boot IS option which I believe uses AI and additional processing for stability.  I really wanted to see if it was anywhere near GoPro's level of stability.

I think the perfect hybrid might finally exist and it is the S5II, my absolute only gripe would be having to buy L mount lenses and for me having already gone all in on Canon its too late for me to turn around. It is definitely a great time to be a photographer and/or videographer no matter what system you choose.

3 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I don't think anyone faults you for your purchasing decisions, I think people just are a bit confused about your insistence that it's a "dead" mount/alliance when your complaints for why honestly apply to every other camera manufacturer. I guess those issues aren't as significant because they're not in a formal "alliance?"

But my problems with the "alliance" actually does not apply to every other camera manufacturer. When you buy a camera body and native lenses from that camera maker you will get the best user experience; I think we both agree on that. I think we also both agree that both Sony and Canon produce every lens you could possibly need in your collection. Notice I said "need" not want. 

My problem with the alliance is that if you buy an L mount camera each individual vendor has a limited lens selection meaning you will have a higher chance of needing something from another vendor which may not perform as well as the native lens you need that doesn't exist. If you take the marketing hype from the alliance at face value then it is easy to assume that you will get a native lens experience from any lens maker in the alliance. This is in contrast to buying a Canon or Sony body then buying a 3rd party lens. Most people I know who bought 3rd party lenses for their Canon/Sony bodies were due to cost not due to lens availability from their chosen vendor. 

I see the alliance the same way I saw the Canon R5 overheating fiasco; Canon heavily marketed the R5 as a very capable video camera when in reality it was not fit for purpose due to overheating. The alliance still markets heavily to consumers that any lens in the alliance will meet the user's expectations when mounted to any L mount camera body. It is easy to extrapolate that into thinking any lens in the alliance will perform the same as native lenses from the individual makers.

The thing is my purchasing decision was far from the minority here when you look at market share; for 2021 all of the alliance members combined market share was less than 11% with Panasonic taking 4.4% of that. When you take out non alliance members, DSLRs, MFTs, etc. the total L mount market share is probably less than 5% and it is only that high thanks to Panasonic's 4.4% contribution and that is assuming Panny owners are buying L mount lenses vs adapters and taking an educated guess at Panny's Point and Shoot numbers. Of course, I wish the alliance well, I am a consumer just like everyone else and more choice is always a good thing but an alliance whose members are competing with each other and impacting the user experience for the purpose of advancing their own brand is a dead alliance in my book.

IMO a real alliance would have been one where they all collaborated on lenses and released non vendor branded lenses where every member made a percentage of the profit from lens sales. That would have ensured maximum compatibility regardless of camera body manufacturer and given them all incentive to provide strict adherence to the specs. Of course, that type of alliance only exists alongside fairy tales and unicorns when you are talking about for profit corporations.

4 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I think you went with Canon, right? I feel like I'd be a lot more annoyed buying into a system that decided four years in to clamp down completely on third party manufacturers than I would be on the L-Mount alliance's issues. 

But you are just proving my point, Canon has literally every lens I need and adapted EF lenses including 3rd party EF lenses work just as flawlessly for me as native RF lenses.  With that said, the one impact it did have on me was I decided not to get the Viltrox speedbooster for the R7. Even if I got my hands on one there was a risk that a future FW update would disable it so I didn't want to take the risk. So was it an annoyance; absolutely, but it was a nice to have not a necessity. 

All of this is strictly my opinion, I don't expect it to be shared by anyone else (although the market share numbers show it is shared by nearly everyone else 😄) but I did feel I should provide context behind how I reached my conclusions. 

Anyway, it definitely was not my intention to hijack this thread 🤣, I did forget two entries on my wish list for the R7 and R6II that would help make them the perfect cameras:

• Dual Native ISO - The S5's second native ISO is 4000 and I found that incredibly useful in low light. The R7 doesn't have dual native ISO and I don't think the R6II does either
• Global Shutter - While we are dreaming I might as well add this one to my list.

58 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

Lenses are the one Canon RF bugaboo, not doing the EF adapter bullshit.

I agree with you if you do not already own tons of Canon EF glass, but for those of us that do, its great to just have to buy one of Canon's recent bodies and every EF and EF-S lens you already own work just like it did with the EF mount. With that said, it would be very mentally difficult for me to go buy a brand new EF lens today knowing the mount has reached its end of life, but the adapters are a great stopgap for lenses that are still optically excellent and still perform like the day I got them.  EF lenses even have some advantages over the RF lenses such as speedboosters, drop in ND filters, etc.

30 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

 

That's not just an L-mount issue though. Sony is starting to do the same thing, where if you're not using Sony lenses you miss out on things like focus breathing correction. A big selling point for Sony was how open the mount was, which resulted in tons of third party lenses when Sony themselves didn't have much of their own lens selection. We're now seeing them becoming a bit more closed off with features that only work with their lenses. And Canon is trying to cut out every other third party completely. Granted, they aren't in any "alliances" but the end results are the same: if you're not using their lenses you're taking a hit with capabilities/performance.

The thing about the L-mount alliance is that things can literally turn around in a moment for them. IF Panasonic finally go the PDAF route, I think you'll start seeing a ton of third party lenses for the mount, like you've seen for Sony and Fuji. Ideally the alliance would have more cooperation, and I hope there is more of it moving forward, but even if there isn't it's not really any different from what every other camera manufacturer is already doing.

Sony does it and Canon definitely does it but at least that is to be somewhat expected when buying into a vendor's ecosystem. The difference with the alliance though is that the customer's expectation is that everything will just work and if you don't dig in past the marketing material you will have no idea why things aren't working later. Your focus breathing correction is a great example; one article I read even said that Sigma disables certain features in their lens protocols if they detect a non Sigma lens has been attached....not exactly an open alliance in my book.

I agree it could turn around but what incentive does it have to do so? The alliance was formed out of necessity and no other reason, at the end of the day each member really wants you to buy their first party lenses and bodies, they don't make anything when you buy another member's products. 

I think if one of the members does go the PDAF route the cracks in the alliance will become even more obvious because newcomers and existing users would expect all of the features they see out of Canon and Sony to just work after buying a L mount body with PDAF (eye tracking, low light tracking, face/head/body/car/animal detect AF, CAF, etc. when in reality it would probably be very hit or miss depending on what alliance member made the lens. I believe even @MrSMW reported first hand that the Sigma L lens was significantly worse at AF than the native Panny lenses and that is just DFD.

So @Amazeballs no I didn't just make such a statement lightly, a lot of research went into me reaching that conclusion. The ability to mount a lens to a body and how many lenses can perform this feat are just two small parts of the equation, the total user experience is the rest and IMO the "alliance" cannot currently offer a user experience equivalent to the E mount on Sony cameras, or the EF or RF user experience when mounted to Canon bodies.  Personally, I decided not to buy into a mount that "might" turn around one day when making my body and lens purchasing decisions.

6 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

I like the blatant confidenace with which you spit out such statements. No biggie. Righ now l-mount has the second biggest lens selection after e-mount (around 105 FF lenses) and its growing cos Panasonic and Sigma are working on it. And other manufactures can join the alliance and start making lenses for it as well if the ever want to (unlike say for Canon RF). Now they have DJI - a very intresting and innovative player in the market. Tha main problem for them is the absence of a reliable AF. If they can solve it (and we all hope they will pretty soon) its hard to predict the future of the system. If more players will join it (like BM, and maybe some chinese\korean manufactures like Youngnuo, Samyang) it might become very relevant at some point. Lets see what Panasonic finally brings out with a S5II lineup. Crossed fingers for PDAF with some fancy AI features. 

Another imporant thing to understand is that both Sigma, Panasonic and DJI do have other profitable buisness so they can afford to invest into L-mount without an urge to make it profitable. 

Primarily because I owned the S5 and did a ton of research before deciding not to go all in on Panasonic's lenses and ecosystem; the #1 reason of course was the dismal AF but the second was the lenses.  You are focusing on the numbers but not the user experience. 

What I found in my research was that sure tons of lenses and multiple vendors; but each one was tweaking their lenses to work optimally with their own native cameras. So the "Alliance" is primarily in name only and yes the physical mount is the same across cameras, but in reality unless you owned a Sigma body and got Sigma lenses or a Panasonic body and got Panasonic lenses then there was no guarantee that you would have the best user experience. This would manifest itself in everything from FW support to AF issues to working properly with adapters.

So, if you go right back to square one and focus on only the lenses from each maker working optimally with their own bodies then yes; your lens selection is in fact limited again unless you go all in on MF lenses or just don't care about AF or adapters. Dead is probably a strong word, but to me, converting my entire camera ecosystem to something like that while trusting that the lenses and adapters that I need will all work properly was definitely an idea that was DOA for me.

1 hour ago, A_Urquhart said:

Yep, BMD needs a mirrorless mount. Im guessing the next iteration of Pocket camera will have L mount. Can't see them getting RF or E Mount. 

The L Mount alliance is dead, that would not be a good direction for them to go in (limited lens selection, inconsistent lens experience between the different members, very expensive Leica lenses, etc.), the only good thing about it is that Sigma makes an L mount to EF mount lens adapter but that would bring them right back to where they are now with an EF mount and the adapter does not support CAF at all.

With that said, I have no idea what mount they could use, no way Canon will let them use an RF mount if Canon doesn't even allow 3rd party RF AF lenses unless maybe they pay a licensing fee and even then I doubt Canon would allow it. The E Mount might be their only other option but that would still mean all existing BM owners would need to get new lenses or an EF to E mount adapter which still brings you back to a dead mount and that's assuming Sony even let them use their mount. No good mount options for BM at this point.

1 hour ago, A_Urquhart said:

The FX30 is close to perfect for me but I too would love an eND and slightly larger 1000+nit screen. I'd be happy for it to be a little bigger to accomodate a 4-5" touch screen and get rid of the buttons on the back. A touch screen would mean they need a menu system like BMD which Sony are far off being able to produce it seems. 

I am surprised no one, not even Panasonic is putting eND's in their mirrorless lines. I often wonder if Sony patented it preventing anyone else from doing it. eND would be a game changer for many of us. Sony definitely took a page from the Canon cripplehammer playbook by not adding it to their FX3; of course it is also possible there is some technical limitation we don't know about or maybe it drains the battery when it is in use.

I would love to dial in F1.8 in midday sun with a 180 shutter angle and let the eND automatically fix the exposure for me.

16 minutes ago, PPNS said:

Arent you just describing a p6k pro?

That would just generate another wish list -- lens mount (EF is dead), IBIS, AF, weather sealing, battery life, photography capabilities, ergonomics, codecs, etc. etc. The OP created a list after evaluating all of the things the FX3 already does perfectly.

3 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

I just thought today, what do I want from a next iteration of Sony FX3? 

I want simple things:

- much bigger screen of at least 1000 nits and around 5 inch diagonal

- build-in eND

- all the firmware upgrades from recent Sony cameras

- maybe a gopro build-in gyro stab, without the need of post processing

And thats it! I have enough resolution, plenty of DR and everything else. Yes sure, I dont mind 6k or even 8k, dont mind more DR but basicly this camera is alreday perfect fot its size. Just need those couple of features that would make my life so much easier. In terms of IQ and sensor tech Sony is already awesome and you can shoot basicly any project with it. I really hopy Sony impliments those things (at lease eND and bigger screen) in the next installment of its FX3 camera.

I agree with you, they are all very close. My own list for perfection would be to start with the R7 or R6II and add:

• eND
• WFM
• GoPro level of digital IS
• Panasonic S5's level of menu customization
• 32bit Float Audio
• XFAVC codec
• Add all of FW features from the R6II to the R7 (focus guides, false color, etc.)
• Add the R6II's back dial to the R7 and add the R7's wheel around the joystick to the R6II
• Add a built in wireless flash transmitter to the R6 and R7.  This would be awesome for quick off camera flash setups

Honestly though, for me the R7 is already close enough that I don't really need any of those things and it is as close to perfect for what I do that it already is the perfect hybrid camera for me.  But nice to haves will always be nice to have 

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

FX3 would be perfect for me with a rear tilt screen.

Shutter angle a bonus as would be internal ND.

That would do me.

It’s really more the form factor and ergos than the capability now (rather than any kind of internal spec) for me with most cameras having the capability I need.

XH2s/FX3/FX30/S5/R6ii/FP… it’s just the rear screen type that is my issue with them all.

For me its just minor ecosystem optimizations that are on my wish list. The resolution, lowlight performance, DR, and codecs of any modern midrange mirrorless are more than sufficient for anything I need. And when I need more I have the C70.

3 hours ago, markr041 said:

I agree completely about the low light. I don't see the haze or the mud in good light, though. Maybe I am seeing-impaired. Or maybe you have exp post confirmation bias - you formed an opinion based on outmoded facts and your old camera (Hero 😎 and that is what you keep seeing no matter what. Your Hero 8 IQ is truly second-rate on dynamic range and color and resolution (and stabilization); and maybe that is what has put you in this state along with countless old posts on the internet talking about how inferior small sensors are. I just do not see what you are describing in the Hero 11 5.3K videos, and I am not blind to differences across cameras. But, maybe I am. I respect your knowledge, that is not the issue. And I am not claiming the Hero 11 IQ is the same as that from the top bigger-sensor cameras, many of which I also use. But dirty window? No.

I really have no bias at all; I literally just grab whatever camera works for me and go shoot with it; I don't do the pixel peeping thing, I am not an IQ purist, I don't sit on YT and watch reviews all day...in fact I am probably one of the least IQ purists on this forum. I also have never even watched a GoPro IQ or review video, I think I watched a single GoPro video on stabilization when I was buying the 8 (the guy mountain biking down a rocky trail and still getting stable footage sold me on the 8), but I have never purchased a GoPro for IQ.

BTW I am not basing my opinion on the Hero 8, I am basing it on the videos you posted along with my own firsthand experience with small sensors starting with the Hero 3 and drone cameras.  I honestly couldn't care less about sensor size as long as it is producing the IQ that I need.

With all of that said, I still see the "sensor/lens haze" in the videos you posted and in every video out of my drones and GoPros. I do think with some very precise color grading and some very specific scenes with perfect lighting and colors in the scene it could be possible to eliminate it, but unless all of those conditions are met, I see the haze instantly when I am watching your sample videos; not because I am looking for it but simply because it is there; in fact I have seen the same haze when using the Canon EF 75-300 F4-5.6 lens, or when looking at dashcam or CCTV footage.  The exact same camera with the Canon EF 24-105mm F4 L lens is a night and day difference proving whatever is the weakest link will decide the final IQ.

Like I previously mentioned, I think some of it may be due to the lens quality that they use on GoPros or it could just be the resolving power of the sensor; either way it is immediately noticeable to me. But you don't have to convince me, shoot with whatever works for you, maybe when the GoPro 20 comes out they will have eliminated it; either way, its no big deal, my Hero 8 is still perfect for what I got it for and its IQ is good enough for what I need when I need a camera that can do a job none of my other ones can; all I am saying is that for me; GoPro has IQ problems that codecs, bitrates, and color profiles can't fix.

54 minutes ago, markr041 said:

I don't see what you see. And I certainly see a big difference in dynamic range, color fidelity, and resolution between the Hero 8 and Hero 11. I think you need to re-evaluate. There have been major advances in processing video in just a few years, allowing small sensors to produce high quality video, new cell phones included. I shoot 8K RAW video too, and I find the Hero 11 capability impressive visually. And you forgot the stabilization ability that has no peers.

I am far from a pixel peeper but my opinion will not change, I checked the samples in your post and I still see it; there's still a muddy muted overall look and feel to everything the GoPros and other small sensors currently produce. 

I see the same thing out of my drone camera when compared to my other cameras and it has a 1" 20MP sensor. 4K/6K/8K, 10bit, etc. doesn't really matter when the sensor and or sensor/lens combination is producing muddy footage. To me the video out of these cameras including the GoPro 11 look like they were shot through a dirty glass window or mirror.  I can reproduce the look by using one of my regular cameras and film a subject reflected in a mirror with a slight haze to it or one that is slightly smudged; that's the best way I can describe it.

That in no way detracts from what they are; fantastic little action cams that can be mounted anywhere and that produce a great image "for what they are"; but it doesn't mean they produce a great image when compared to the rest of the current crop of mirrorless or cinema cameras not to mention they have zero lowlight ability. My GoPro falls apart over ISO400 and my drone falls apart after ISO800. Both are completely unusable at ISO1600.

1 hour ago, markr041 said:

 And you forgot the stabilization ability that has no peers.

I didn't forget; but we were discussing IQ not IS. When it comes to IS though, I 100% agree with you; their stabilization technology is nothing short of amazing and I wish other camera makers could find a way to implement whatever it is they have done.