Mustafa Ali

47 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

A lot of misconceptions here.  I don't own the S1H.  I am looking to add a fullframe camera to my range and currently looking at Nikon, Sony,  Canon and Panasonic.  Each have their strengths and flaws.  I was seriously looking at the R5 and R6 before this fiasco.  Panasonic chief flaw is their AF and as gimbal use is a chief requirement for any fullframe camera I buy; it is a major concern for me, despite its superior features, and why I hesitate to go for it.

I saw the video you posted.  I saw no detailed landscape shots.  Just the same shot of the model with background out of foucs at various levels of depth of field, depending on aperture.  All shots cut very quickly and shot in soft light, with OOF background to help sell the argument.  I saw nothing like a 100% cityscape and landscape shot in the video you posted.  Care to share the timecode for the shot you speak of... 

I am not after specs.. if I was I may have fallen into the trap of  the R5 which promised specs but gave us poor usablity both in recording and the codecs used for editing.  The R5 falls far shot of being usable for videos, aside from AF and IBIS, the latter which is wobbly at wide angles and why I have fallen out of love with IBIS after using it on the GH5.

Again I ask, if the downsampled 4K from 8K is so detailed, how can it be so easily matched to line skipped with just a bit of sharpening.  Even Wolfcrow had this to say about HQ vs standard 4K, taken from a link on his big Youtube review of the R5:

"There is definitely a difference, and 4K HQ is objectively better. However, I can hardly see a major difference in resolution in HQ. There is a difference between resolution and sharpness. You can add sharpness later, but resolution cannot be created.  At 100% the difference exists, but it’s too small to fret about. I’m really not sure the 4K HQ mode is true downsampled 8K, because the dissimilarity is striking. I don’t know why 4K HQ mode is this bad, when it should be a lot better."

Which adds weight to my question to you?  Why is downsampled 4K so bad, that line skipped 4K can so easily match it?

As for grading, it depends on the type of grading..   what you're doing with the image and how professionally you colour grade.  I tend to push it harder and a soft line skipped file doesn't cut it.  I want a good image to start with, not soft mush.

My clients don't pixel peep, I do.  That's why they pay me.  I don't pay a mechanic to fix a car so it looks okay by my ill-informed standards, I pay them so it looks good by theirs. That's why you use a Professional.  If I fell into the trap of down grading my work because of clients poor knowledge of video, I would be a poor videographer and professional.

Justifying the R5 with talk of Ninja is apologists talk.  Its frankly insulting to suggest buying an external recorder just to get unlimited recording of proper fullframe 4K.

Hey Steve, 

Out of curiosity what are you shooting on currently ? And like I said, if you want to see some more examples of normal 4k, I will be happy to do it for you and upload it somewhere so you can download it and test it. Just tell me what you want to see exactly i.e. moving objects, static buildings and etc.. This is not to convince you to get the R5, but it would be to help you decide whether it work for you or not. 

Regarding the downsampled 4k which you say is bad - You do realize that you're seeing the 4k HQ and normal 4k at 200% zoom along side the 8k in his video  ? Unless that is your use case, I don't see that to be an issue for me personally. 

Second thing, like I said, I don't care about justifying the R5 or who buys or who doesn't. Everyone's use case is different and just because it works or doesn't work for me doesn't mean the same would apply to someone else. 

Regards,

M

@Steve,

You obviously didn't see the video. I have shots where background is not blurred at f5.6 so you can look at detail in the trees and the surroundings.. If you really are interested I wouldn't mind shooting some city scapes and etc and upload it somewhere for you to download and test it. Even then, I think you have already made up your mind before even using it and testing it out for yourself. So I would be wasting my time. 

So do you have the S1H ? If not, why haven't you got it already ? That tells me you're only after specs rather than actual usability - S1H was made for video hence it is a better video camera period (if you don't care about autofocus). Silly comparison but ok. On the other hand, If you already have the S1H, why care about the R5 if video is your priority ? 🙂  

To your last statement, you can still use a ninja 5 to get unlimited 4k HQ if you wanted to record country scapes for hours. Grading wise, from my testing, I found no difference in normal 4k vs 4k hq. If you care, check out Wolfcrow's video on youtube on the R5 and different modes compared  - he has extremely resourceful content about filmmaking in general.

Not sure what you are shooting and who in the world is pixel peeping your videos to see every small little detail besides you - Honestly just curious. It would be interesting to know.

I am just sharing my first hand experience. That being said I have no interest in defending the R5 or convincing you to buy it. It's your choice and you know what's best for you. Good luck!

21 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

It costs considerably more than that in the UK and for that price, you get cropped 4K at HQ - not fullframe, normal 4K which still looks rubbish even when sharpened judging by samples I saw, 4K over an external recorder, which defeats weather sealing, ease of hand holding and portability.  3 things I would buy this camera for.  Plus some lovely video modes I would love to use but can't.  I also get codecs that are hard to edit, a crap micro HDMI port, no dual card recording, and no RAW output via HDMI, something the competition provides.  What a bargain... 🤔

What crop in 4k HQ ? And the normal 4k looks rubbish ? See the video I made comparing both and please be honest with yourself. For reference, check Wolfcrow on youtube, he is a real filmmaker for over 20 years where he did the multiple tests for moire and quality of the normal 4k vs 4k HQ and even he confirms the difference is second to none once you sharpen the normal 4k. Which other full frame camera besides the a7siii is giving you all those 3 things again ? Not to mention if you want highest quality on the a7siii you have to shoot in h265 as well.  I agree, the micro hdmi is horrible and wish it had a full size HDMI or even a mini HDMI... But again, there is a lot to complain and whine about any camera, but once you use it in real world, it is a different story.  Trust me, even I started hating this camera as I started to read the online threads, but when it arrived, and after using it the way I normally use the camera for my needs, I am really liking it even with it's limitations (haven't had a problem yet). Only thing I am mad about is Canon putting in fake overheating timers (if that is true) - Very dishonest and unethical. 

47 minutes ago, A_Urquhart said:

Before I can suggest some cameras to you, what do you shoot? Specifically, what type of stills, what type of video, pro or hobby? 

What scenario do you shoot that requires a Full Frame 10bit camera but the same scenario allows the camera to be out of action for up to 3hrs at a time to "cool down" as is being reported? You saying that a camera that isn't Full frame, 10bit and has Canon's AF isn't usable? Maybe the camera isn't the issue then? And what have you been using until now that all of a sudden, the R5 is the only 'usable' option?

Yes, I can still shoot 1080p50 on the R5 but then I can also do that on cameras that cost far less and require less babying and hassle.

I'll happily backflip on my earlier comment's saying too much time is being wasted on this camera. Good on Andrew for taking the time to rip the heart out of Canon. I wish him well. If you are waisting your time to make this camera usable for your own work, then it's your time I suppose but it's a waste because no specs matter on the R5 if you can't use it. Create with another camera that allows you to shoot when and how you like, not a camera that dictates to you how you must work.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying.. By usable I meant which high MP camera besides the R5 has "usable video features of the R5" let alone the non usable features like 8k/4k 120p.

Why get an apsc camera when the R5 can be used as an apsc camera as well ? I personally love the full frame look and the low light capability of the bigger sensor. Even with APSC, Sony is the only other camera with good autofocus. I had fuji xt-3 in the past and the AF In video was nothing comparable to the a7iii or the EOS R. Even the xt-4 overheats in 15 mins using 4k 60. Second thing is lenses. Canon has the best lens selection overall in my opinion. 

So coming to your point, if you can't create with the R5 which has solid usable video features (except for 4k 120p and 8k), then the problem isn't the camera ? BTW, for work, I shoot portraits, landscapes, corporate videos, promo videos and short films. For fun, I also make youtube videos (travel, vlogs and sketches). 

Ask yourself, did you have a problem with the a7r1v or the 5dmk1v being $3500 at launch with no 4k 24p 10 bit 422 internally, 5.1 oversampled super 35 4k mode, 4k60./120 or 8k. For me specs isn't the issue, their marketing is. If Canon said here is the R5, a beast of a photo camera with 4k 24p and limited 4k HQ and high speed video, most people wouldn't be raging at this point. They marketed this as a 8k PRO video camera which it's clearly not. 

My main issue like I said again is with shady business practices that Canon seems to be doing, if it's true about the faking the overheating and etc. 

1 hour ago, A_Urquhart said:

So, in reality i'd be spending nearly $4000USD ($6500AUD here in Australia) for a camera limited to 4k 24-30p?

I like (and sometimes need) to shoot at 50p every now and again.....I'd have to worry about the camera shutting down after a few minutes (minutes!) and then being inoperable for 30-mins to an hour? Really? You find this OK? What good is 4K 10bit if you can't record it because the camera won't let you?

I have zero care for 8K and the difficult to edit files the Canon produces without transcoding so that feature is a non issue and shouldn't even be marketed by Canon with the camera in it's current crippled state.

The A7SIII is a hybrid camera, NOT a video camera. Unless you are doing quite a bit of cropping in post, it's 12MP files are good enough for most people that don't need to blow up for billboards.  OH and BTW, and here in Australia the broadcasters I often work for still prefer 1080p files out of camera so there is nothing wrong with 1080p. TVC's, Music Video's etc are a different story but then most hybrid cameras do over 1080p anyway so......it's a moot point.

And there are plenty of other options out there too. 

I really do hope Canon fix the issues with the R5, and if they do....I still won't consider it.  I try to avoid companies that are into shoddy practices, and canon have proved that they couldn't care less for their customers.

 

 

 

 

Have you actually used the R5 bro ? I am shooting video in normal 4k 24p through out the day with appx 50-100 photos (2-4 hours in total but not non-stop) and I still am able to shoot 4k 60 in small bursts when I need it. Your case might be different. But until now, what were you shooting 4k 50p Full frame on that now all of a sudden you find it absolutely necessary ?  Like I said, you are paying $400 more for all the video features (some useful, some not) compared to what someone would pay for an A7r1v when it first came out. Or you can wait till the price drops and firmware fixes. 

"OH and BTW, and here in Australia the broadcasters I often work for still prefer 1080p files out of camera so there is nothing wrong with 1080p. TVC's, Music Video's etc are a different story but then most hybrid cameras do over 1080p anyway so......it's a moot point." -- Thanks for proving my point. You can still shoot 1080 60p on the R5 if 4k 60 is not available and no one will give a shit or know unless you crop a lot in post. 

Plenty of options ? -- Really ? Which Full frame high megapixel camera is an option again ? -- that has nearly the same usable video features as the R5 and amazing Auto Focus ? NONE. If there was one, I'd be drooling over it. 

(usable = Full frame 4k 24 10 bit 422 internally , Unlimited 4k 24p 5.1 oversampled in super 35 mode, Unlimited 4k 24p HQ and 4k 60 over the atomos Ninja )

I also hope Canon fixes this to be honest. Not that I can't make amazing stuff with the camera in it's current state and limitations, but not having the limitations would be great nonetheless. It's more about ethical business practices for me than mere specs that I don't care too much about (8k, 4k 120p). And that's the reason I am in support of Andrew because at the end of the day that's what he is trying to push for - Businesses shouldn't get away for malpractices. 

7 minutes ago, sev7en said:

Dear,

where you found the camera for 3899? I see as minimum 4700 US Dollars.

Here in the US it's $3899 🙂. 

4 minutes ago, mechanicalEYE said:

He's in the US I believe, and received his pre-order.

That's correct. Also, thanks for all the tests you have been doing!

2 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

PM also did a video recently stating that 'content is everything' after this whole R5 fiasco blew up. These two are really back-pedalling hard!

The problem with their argument is this....sure content is king, being productive and actually making something with your camera is more important than pixel peeping and agonising over camera specs BUT when the camera you have stops you from being able to create content or stops you from being able to be productive because the camera is NOT WORKING, then it's time to ditch that POS and move on. 

A 4K, 1080p, 720p or even SD camera is better at shooting content than an "overheated" R5. Sure, those R5 specs sound impressive, but when you only get those specs for an hour or two a day (and two hours seems generous here!) and the rest of the time the camera is a brick, ANY camera that allows you to record images regardless of specs has it beat!

For a fleeting moment I was ready to possibly give Canon another look as my personal / family camera but after this, zero chance. My Fuji X-T2 still takes great shots so I'm in no rush but I am intrigued by this new Full Frame Panasonic due to be announced soon. 

Here is another way to look at it:

How much was the A7R1V when it came out ?  - $3499 (has basic 8 bit 420 4k 24p, 1080 24/60/120 fps)

How much was the 5d MK1V when it came out ? - $3499 (Cropped 4k 24p, 1080P 24/60 fps)

How much is the R5 currently ? $3899 - So for the extra $400, the R5 does almost everything of what the cameras above do, PLUS you are getting - 4k 10 bit 422 internally , Unlimited 4k 24p 5.1 oversampled in super 35 mode, Unlimited normal 4k 24p which looks amazing once sharpened,  Unlimited 4k 24p HQ over the atomos, minimum, restricted and somewhat useless -  8k, 4k HQ, 4k60/120Fps once the camera overheats. Decide if extra $400 is worth it. But as it is, it is still the only High MP camera that can do all of this and has no real competition. 

Before you compare it to the A7siii, that is a video camera and not a photo camera. Yes 12 mp is fine for photos and online content, but so is 1080p video.... 🤷🏽‍♂️

I agree the marketing of this camera was a total FAIL. And some of the conspiracy theories pointing to canons practices are surely questionable.  I appreciate what Andrew is doing because at the end of the day it is still a win win for us if Canon does something about the overheating. 

1 hour ago, mechanicalEYE said:

So I just tried recording externally with R5 screen off.  (Using the R5 battery, with no cards in camera)

This was indoors in a cool room.

I started the recording on the Ninja at 09:14

I stopped the recording at 10:15

Recorded 4K HQ continuously for 1hr and 1 minute with no overheat warning on the R5 screen, and no overheat shutdown through the duration of that hour.

I immediately shut camera down, then unplugged the HDMI cable, and removed battery.

I then reinserted the battery and put in the CFexpress card, turned camera on and overheat counter said I could record 15 minutes.
 

I did something similar. I recorded 4k 24p HQ externally via the Atomos with no cards in for 35 mins or so. Then shut the camera and inserted the CfExpress card and tried to record in 4k120fps and see how much time I get. I only got 5 mins left in 4k 120!! So this tells me, using the ninja V is only good for recording 4k HQ 24 fps and after that the camera becomes useless for any high frame rate recording in 4k, let alone 8k. Got hit hard with the cripple hammer lol. 

11 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's only possible in APS-C 1.6x crop mode. May as well get an EOS R for that, it's a lot cheaper than $4000.

I was asking if it can do 5.1k downsampled 4k without a crop with a possible firmware update. 

I wonder if 4k HQ in the R5 be 5k oversampled like the R6 instead of 8k downsampled. Not sure if that is technically possible.. But if possible, maybe that might help with the heat ?

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Please keep that shit head off my forum.

Hey Andrew, I recently stumbled upon his videos too, and didn't find them too bad. Wondering is there a reason why people dislike him or does he give out fake news of some sort ? Just curious. Thanks!

I realize this camera could be a winner for photographers and garbage for some video shooters. For me however, it's in the middle. The R5 is definitely a Better EOS R with Superb Autofocus, dual cards slot, 45 MP, up to 1080P 120 (future firmware update hopefully) and un-cropped but low quality 4k (NON HQ). But for $3899 ? Makes no sense. May be for $2899 this would still be ok-ish..

It does not make sense to pay $4k for a camera that was advertised as a filmmakers tool for pro use which can't even shoot 1 min of 4k HQ after some moderate use. If A7iii, Z6 and other full frame cameras can do oversampled 4k without overheating, then surely it's not unreasonable to expect a $4000 camera to do at least 4k24p HQ without overheating. 

8K | 4k 60FPS | 4k 120 FPS | All for 15 - 20 mins mins is OK. Thank you Canon for adding these feature and making them avail to us for some use.  But 4k 24p HQ for only 15-20 mins and overheating even in this mode ??  HELL NO! 

For all the people who are saying to shoot video get a cine cam, or you're a noob if you don't have two cameras and etc - Look, the Sony a7iii, Z6, S1 can all do High Quality 4k 24p without any overheating issues. Even to use this as a B-CAM it needs to be reliable. That's all I need, a camera that is reliable to use in the field. Not something that I'm constantly worried about overheating for using a feature i.e. 4k HQ, that it was advertised to do.