Jump to content

Canon R6 , C70 or rumored C50 for optimal Youtube quality in 4K


Nigel
 Share

Recommended Posts

If I compare my own Youtube videos made with a canon 200d (sigma 18-35) 1080p vs other channels with similar content when using 4k Full frame DSLR like 1DX Mark II and the canon 5d mark IV. Then I can see the difference quite well even on a mobile (when both channels using sharp lenses). The difference is IMO huge when watching on bigger screens like monitors and TV's. I assume this is probably because the dslr canon 1080p footage is known for being mushy and soft? (is this just because of the low bitrates or are there more variables that come into play beside lenses)? As there are cameras like Arri with gorgeous 1080p files. Even before uploading to youtube on my pc full screen the image is very soft to my liking with the 1080p from the canon 200d.

I would love to upgrade to another Canon camera to get a better result on Youtube (as a hobbyist with high standards). The question is when are there diminishing returns for Youtube delivery? I want to max my quality over there but don't spend too much that will be killed in the end due to compression. The Canon R6 looks like a nice option. However I love my current APS-C glass and wish there was just a decent APS-C/Super 35 Canon video camera with features like DPAF, 10bit, IBIS, 4k 60p and 1080 120p. I don't really need the full frame advantages for video work. I just want detailed nice looking 4k and also 4k 60p option. Something like a R6 but APS-C (maybe at the end of 2021 there will be one according to CanonRumors). The new rumored C50 looks nice and is also Super 35, if it's not to heavy to use on a gimbal that would be nice (but no IBIS). Just a shame if the rumors are true that it will deliver 4k 8 bit while the R6 photo camera shoots 4k 10 bit. I wonder beside the specs on paper if the IQ of a C50 4k 8bit would beat the R6 4k 10bit (while the C50 will probably be more expensive). Since the C50 is a dedicated video camera. The C50 would have more dynamic range I think especially with clog 2 and 3, while the R6 could be pushed harder with grading since it's 10 bit and easier to correct some exposure and white balance mistakes?

Any input regarding the diminishing returns of certain camera models for optimal Youtube delivery? What is in your opinion better a photo camera r6 with 4k 10 bit or a video camera like the rumored C50 with 4k 8 bit (I know it's not out yet but is there more to expect from a dedicated video camera in terms of IQ)? The C70 looks great but a bit overkill I think just for YT and also to expensive for my budget.

Drop your thoughts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
8 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

Canon EOS R if you are ok without 4K 10-bit out of the camera.

Honetly, for YouTube even 1080p that has been up scaled to 4K for YouTube looks good enough for what YouTube is at the moment.

Other than that its the waiting game.

The 1080p upscale to 4k is a very confusing topic to me. People say it's snake oil and others say it works. If I use the upscaling in Premiere pro out of export it looks slightly less sharp than just my 1080p export. Plug ins like Red Giant to upscale are expensive. And upscaling in After Effects seems to work better but it adds more steps in the workflow. Do you have a good tip as workflow for upscaling with nice results but less work as possible? But maybe even if my 4k export is slightly less sharp it would still be better in the end due to better bitrate on YT.. hmm

Canon EOS R would still mean I have to swap my current sigma 18-35, canon 60 and canon 10-18 to FF glas which makes the transition expensive. Since the crop is so large in 4k I could use this APS-C glass lol. but then I don't have 4k 60p.

Since the EOS R has a much higher bitrate than the 200d does the image not suffer from that soft mushy Canon 1080p look like with the old DSLRs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YouTube 4K is barely better than decent 1080p..  here's a thread talking about this very topic:

In terms of why your 200D 1080p is soft, that's a Canon DSLR, and nothing to do with 1080p.

My advice is this:

  • Watch a bunch of videos ON VIMEO to see what cameras are really capable of in 1080p - you'll be amazed.  If you decide you want/need 4K then so be it, but do yourself a favour and try and actually look at images instead of brand names.  And yes, "4K" is a brand name - just how the manufacturers of TVs marketed it to people to get them to replace their perfectly good 1080p TVs.  Most movie theatres have 2K projectors, so lots of marketing was needed to get people to buy a TV that has 4 times as many pixels as a movie theatre.
  • Forget about Canon, or be willing to pay the Canon Hype Tax.  The internet is full of people who think that Canon is the king and everything else is second class.  These people are fools who don't know how to tell if a camera is any good or not so they just check what brand it is and then go hang with the people they know will make them feel better.
    Canon has great colour science - so do most other brands.  Canon has great AF - so do many other brands.  Canon cripples their products because the fanboys and girls will buy whatever they're selling anyway.
  • Go to the ARRI website, the RED website, and the BM website, download their sample clips and have a look at how plain they are.  Try and colour grade them and see what you get.  This should show you that the glorious images that you are seeing online from the cameras that you're lusting after, the Canon ones especially, are due to the skill of the operator in post, rather than the manufacturer who designed the camera.

Good luck.  My journey started with me wondering why my 700D 1080p files looked so bad and thinking I needed Canon colour science and 4K to get good images.  I've now deprogrammed myself and use neither Canon equipment nor 4K, but I've spent a lot of money on glass.

Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nigel said:

The 1080p upscale to 4k is a very confusing topic to me. People say it's snake oil and others say it works. If I use the upscaling in Premiere pro out of export it looks slightly less sharp than just my 1080p export. Plug ins like Red Giant to upscale are expensive. And upscaling in After Effects seems to work better but it adds more steps in the workflow.

DaVinci Resolve has a good upscaler. I doubt it’s available in the free version. There are dedicated programs you can pay money for like Topaz that are pretty amazing.

But yes, you are just getting the extra bitrate from YouTube which is what really matters.

5 minutes ago, Nigel said:

Canon EOS R would still mean I have to swap my current sigma 18-35, canon 60 and canon 10-18 to FF glas which makes the transition expensive. Since the crop is so large in 4k I could use this APS-C glass lol. but then I don't have 4k 60p.

Sorry, I admit I didn’t read your post closely enough. Maybe upgrading to FF EF would be better in the long run as it can be adapted to many things and works great with the benefit of adapters. that add extra useful features, to Canon RF cameras.

 

7 minutes ago, Nigel said:

Since the EOS R has a much higher bitrate than the 200d does the image not suffer from that soft mushy Canon 1080p look like with the old DSLRs?

Canon is usually always softer looking, sometimes to a fault. I would say the EOR R cameras and onward are soft but not to a fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Nigel said:

The 1080p upscale to 4k is a very confusing topic to me. People say it's snake oil and others say it works. If I use the upscaling in Premiere pro out of export it looks slightly less sharp than just my 1080p export. Plug ins like Red Giant to upscale are expensive. And upscaling in After Effects seems to work better but it adds more steps in the workflow. Do you have a good tip as workflow for upscaling with nice results but less work as possible? But maybe even if my 4k export is slightly less sharp it would still be better in the end due to better bitrate on YT.. hmm

Canon EOS R would still mean I have to swap my current sigma 18-35, canon 60 and canon 10-18 to FF glas which makes the transition expensive. Since the crop is so large in 4k I could use this APS-C glass lol. but then I don't have 4k 60p.

Since the EOS R has a much higher bitrate than the 200d does the image not suffer from that soft mushy Canon 1080p look like with the old DSLRs?

Oh, the other thing I recommend is to test things yourself.  I've proven things wrong in 5 minutes that I believed for years and never heard anyone challenge or question.

Most of the things that "everyone knows" online is pure BS, and the ratio of information to disinformation is so small that if someone is disagreeing with the majority of people, then the majority is probably wrong and maybe the minority right.  

Oh, and if someone tells you something is simple, they just don't understand it enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, kye said:

YouTube 4K is barely better than decent 1080p..  here's a thread talking about this very topic:

Despite that topic and all your work you put into investigated it, my eyes do see a difference. It’s shot dependent and wider angle shots with more movement in the scene see the biggest gain.

However, almost everything on YouTube is destroyed by heavy compressing codecs to save on bandwidth. There is a threshold for “good enough” that is reach by even budget cameras. As always, content is what you should be worrying about on YouTube not image quality.

There are channels out there with multiple 100K subscribers and views that are filmed on GoPro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure you'll be happy with the pictures from the R6, C70 or a C50. Make sure you look at the price for the whole system. Most RF glass is silly expensive and the adapters are out of stock (although i am sure they will come back in stock at some point).

How important IBIS and lack of overheating will be is something only you can decide. I got the GH5 because I thought the IBIS would be game changing, but I have realised my filming style relies entirely on tripods... still happy with it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I decide to buy into a RF body, I just buy it to have the 'better' specs that come with. It's just that a Canon dslr is missing good 1080p and with going with the 4k bodies you get a more detailed looking image than the 1080p canon. I was planning to buy an adapter anyway to use my EF-S lenses on the C50 or EF glass on the R6. Most of the RF glass is out of my budget atm. I need different lenses from ultra wide to macro to cover my footage.

I really need good AF because I use my gimbal quite a lot and it's handy for run and gun stuff and tracking shots. Since I already have canon glass this makes it convenient to stay in this system. Switching to Sony is also more expensive to replace my current glass. Some second hand offerings for canon glass have really interesting prices. For example the Sony 90mm macro vs the 60 or 100mm from Canon is a huge difference. Same for the Sony 10 18 vs Canon 10 18. Not only is the Canon glass cheaper it's also much more available second hand.

Fuji lenses also very expensive although the XT4 is nice capable body for my needs. AF not so good as Canon and Sony.

Panasonic bad AF..

Blackmagic great specs for the price but no AF 😞

My best bet and cheapest option would be waiting for the rumored APS C R camera and hope it has 4k 60p. Beside the 4k just to have a sharper image than the soft canon dslr 1080p look.

I don't make videos regularly but when I do I try to push my boundaries. After working for quite some time on a project I would like to have better IQ. I don't do commentaries stuff just cinematic visuals of my hobby. It's also nature related so detailed footage is nice for this IMO. Especially when I compare to other related channels that look so much better with their Canon and Sony 4k footage.

Waiting I guess for an APS C R body or the C50 so I can reuse my current glass and have nice AF and better looking IQ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nigel said:

The 1080p upscale to 4k is a very confusing topic to me.

If you can figure out how to use a DSLR, how to stitch together footage in a NLE/LE and upload it to YouTube.

Then you can figure out upscaling.

In my opinion, look up A.I. upscaling and find an editor that will do that.... then try it out.... if you like it then you don’t have to spend money. If you don’t like it and do spend money on a new camera + lenses... understand that there are other headaches that will accompany it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, mkabi said:

If you can figure out how to use a DSLR, how to stitch together footage in a NLE/LE and upload it to YouTube.

Then you can figure out upscaling.

In my opinion, look up A.I. upscaling and find an editor that will do that.... then try it out.... if you like it then you don’t have to spend money. If you don’t like it and do spend money on a new camera + lenses... understand that there are other headaches that will accompany it.

Oh yeah I know some techniques that can be used. It just seems like a major PITA in my workflow. I saw some videos about using preserve details in After effects and using dynamic link from Premiere pro. However if I need to do this on every clip on  the timeline thats far from ideal... Are there any quicker ways to do it with all clips at once? What about if the edit is done on a 1080 timeline and nest all the 1080 clips and upscale it this way to UHD? Is that possible at all? However than I would also need to scale all the fonts as well no? And then apply noise reduction and final sharpening on the UHD timeline? If I would start on a UHD timeline it would be annoying to browse through all the footage on the timeline which is 1080. Any input for a smooth as possible workflow on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nigel said:

Oh yeah I know some techniques that can be used. It just seems like a major PITA in my workflow. I saw some videos about using preserve details in After effects and using dynamic link from Premiere pro. However if I need to do this on every clip on  the timeline thats far from ideal... Are there any quicker ways to do it with all clips at once? What about if the edit is done on a 1080 timeline and nest all the 1080 clips and upscale it this way to UHD? Is that possible at all? However than I would also need to scale all the fonts as well no? And then apply noise reduction and final sharpening on the UHD timeline? If I would start on a UHD timeline it would be annoying to browse through all the footage on the timeline which is 1080. Any input for a smooth as possible workflow on this?

Just edit the entire thing and then upscale the final product. Technically the upscale should apply to the font and everything else too. You don't need to apply noise reduction and sharpening if you did it already (before the upscale). You know what works? Try 1080/60p - upscale it to 4K/24.

Also, can I suggest that you rent a 4K camera and film something that is similar to a regular project for you.... then you can compare one PITA vs. the other PITA?

Look, I can tell you that the required storage space and computer power needed to edit 4K stuff will become a problem too.... so how smooth you want it, depends on you.... but I'd rather you find out yourself by seeing it for yourself without having to spend too much money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, mkabi said:

Just edit the entire thing and then upscale the final product. Technically the upscale should apply to the font and everything else too. You don't need to apply noise reduction and sharpening if you did it already (before the upscale). You know what works? Try 1080/60p - upscale it to 4K/24.

Also, can I suggest that you rent a 4K camera and film something that is similar to a regular project for you.... then you can compare one PITA vs. the other PITA?

Look, I can tell you that the required storage space and computer power needed to edit 4K stuff will become a problem too.... so how smooth you want it, depends on you.... but I'd rather you find out yourself by seeing it for yourself without having to spend too much money.

Storage will add up quickly indeed. However storage isn't to expensive now a days. I don't have projects super often as a hobbyist as well.

My pc build below
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Wraith Boxed
MSI B450 Tomahawk MAX
Gigabyte geforce gtx 1650 super
Crucial Ballistix 32gb ram 3200 mhz
Corsair CX450M
Pny xlr8 250gb m2
Samsung 860 QVO 1TB

so I think 4k will work especially with proxies which are easy to make in PP.

I will try the upscale part but there is a rule like garbage in > garbage out right? The canon 200d 1080p footage is just super mushy 😞

Good point about renting one to see if it's worth the money and extra work in post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Nigel said:

Storage will add up quickly indeed. However storage isn't to expensive now a days. I don't have projects super often as a hobbyist as well.

My pc build below
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X Wraith Boxed
MSI B450 Tomahawk MAX
Gigabyte geforce gtx 1650 super
Crucial Ballistix 32gb ram 3200 mhz
Corsair CX450M
Pny xlr8 250gb m2
Samsung 860 QVO 1TB

so I think 4k will work especially with proxies which are easy to make in PP.

I will try the upscale part but there is a rule like garbage in > garbage out right? The canon 200d 1080p footage is just super mushy 😞

Good point about renting one to see if it's worth the money and extra work in post.

Seriously though, don't use that crappy one on PP.

A.I. Upscaling or Artificial Intelligent Upscaling.

I did the google search for you - here: https://topazlabs.com/video-enhance-ai/

Visit that and watch the video. If you like it.... great.... if you hate it.... buy a 4K cam. Simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Nigel said:

If I compare my own Youtube videos made with a canon 200d (sigma 18-35) 1080p vs other channels with similar content when using 4k Full frame DSLR like 1DX Mark II and the canon 5d mark IV. Then I can see the difference quite well even on a mobile (when both channels using sharp lenses). The difference is IMO huge when watching on bigger screens like monitors and TV's. I assume this is probably because the dslr canon 1080p footage is known for being mushy and soft? (is this just because of the low bitrates or are there more variables that come into play beside lenses)? As there are cameras like Arri with gorgeous 1080p files. Even before uploading to youtube on my pc full screen the image is very soft to my liking with the 1080p from the canon 200d.

I would love to upgrade to another Canon camera to get a better result on Youtube (as a hobbyist with high standards). The question is when are there diminishing returns for Youtube delivery? I want to max my quality over there but don't spend too much that will be killed in the end due to compression. The Canon R6 looks like a nice option. However I love my current APS-C glass and wish there was just a decent APS-C/Super 35 Canon video camera with features like DPAF, 10bit, IBIS, 4k 60p and 1080 120p. I don't really need the full frame advantages for video work. I just want detailed nice looking 4k and also 4k 60p option. Something like a R6 but APS-C (maybe at the end of 2021 there will be one according to CanonRumors). The new rumored C50 looks nice and is also Super 35, if it's not to heavy to use on a gimbal that would be nice (but no IBIS). Just a shame if the rumors are true that it will deliver 4k 8 bit while the R6 photo camera shoots 4k 10 bit. I wonder beside the specs on paper if the IQ of a C50 4k 8bit would beat the R6 4k 10bit (while the C50 will probably be more expensive). Since the C50 is a dedicated video camera. The C50 would have more dynamic range I think especially with clog 2 and 3, while the R6 could be pushed harder with grading since it's 10 bit and easier to correct some exposure and white balance mistakes?

Any input regarding the diminishing returns of certain camera models for optimal Youtube delivery? What is in your opinion better a photo camera r6 with 4k 10 bit or a video camera like the rumored C50 with 4k 8 bit (I know it's not out yet but is there more to expect from a dedicated video camera in terms of IQ)? The C70 looks great but a bit overkill I think just for YT and also to expensive for my budget.

Drop your thoughts!

I recommend first off that you don't buy anything When these cameras come out and are more readily available rent one or a few of them and make sure they meet your expectations before buying them. Second I recommend you try Davinci Resolve, if you are not doing this for paid work even the paid version of DR will be cheaper than PP within a year. Also, I believe the free version does offer upscaling. I upscale my 1080P timelines to 1440P simply by picking the resolution during the Deliver phase. I do this because YT lets you use higher bitrates if you go over 1080P. Have you looked at your footage on a monitor or TV before uploading to YT? Did it look fine there? A little know fact about YT is that more popular channels get less compression (or so I've heard) so it could just be that YT is not trashing some of that top quality footage that you see on YT as much as it is trashing your footage.

Last but not least, are you sure the footage is mushy because it is 1080P and not something else? Did you go through Sigma's micro focus adjustment process to ensure the lens is properly focusing?

You also have to keep in mind that not all Super-35 cameras will work with all APS-C lenses or even with any of them. The C70 for example will only work with FF glass or so I've been told. I have the C200 and to get it to work with APS-C lenses I had to enable APS-C mode. I have heard that the C70 doesn't offer this mode at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, mkabi said:

Seriously though, don't use that crappy one on PP.

A.I. Upscaling or Artificial Intelligent Upscaling.

I did the google search for you - here: https://topazlabs.com/video-enhance-ai/

Visit that and watch the video. If you like it.... great.... if you hate it.... buy a 4K cam. Simple.

I will look into that. I wonder if it's worth after upscaling with such programs to bring the upscaled mp4 back in PP. Export as Prores again for optimal input in YT? Would that make sense? Even if I have a 4k cam a good upscaling method would still be very nice for 1080 120p footage to match other 4k footage. Thanks for the tip.

 

11 hours ago, mkabi said:

Also.... look up Magic Lantern for your 200D.

Some people are working on it very slowly but the question is if they will ever succeed to do it on the 200d.

 

9 hours ago, herein2020 said:

I recommend first off that you don't buy anything When these cameras come out and are more readily available rent one or a few of them and make sure they meet your expectations before buying them. Second I recommend you try Davinci Resolve, if you are not doing this for paid work even the paid version of DR will be cheaper than PP within a year. Also, I believe the free version does offer upscaling. I upscale my 1080P timelines to 1440P simply by picking the resolution during the Deliver phase. I do this because YT lets you use higher bitrates if you go over 1080P. Have you looked at your footage on a monitor or TV before uploading to YT? Did it look fine there? A little know fact about YT is that more popular channels get less compression (or so I've heard) so it could just be that YT is not trashing some of that top quality footage that you see on YT as much as it is trashing your footage.

Last but not least, are you sure the footage is mushy because it is 1080P and not something else? Did you go through Sigma's micro focus adjustment process to ensure the lens is properly focusing?

You also have to keep in mind that not all Super-35 cameras will work with all APS-C lenses or even with any of them. The C70 for example will only work with FF glass or so I've been told. I have the C200 and to get it to work with APS-C lenses I had to enable APS-C mode. I have heard that the C70 doesn't offer this mode at all.

Yeah on the monitor and tv it's better than on YT because YT adds compression. But overall the image is very soft I think it's just canon dslr 1080p footage. I have a small channel almost 10k subs I do get the VP9 codec though on my vids so thats fine.

I did tweak my Sigma lens on their dock but this is for OVF with photos right? It doesn't affect live view as far as I know?

Hmm interesting about EF-S glass maybe not working on a super 35 cam like c200 and c70.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, PaulUsher said:

Where did you hear that?

I asked the CVP reviewer and he said that EF-S glass will not work on the C70 without severe vignetting and that it does not have an EF-S mode.

 

1 hour ago, Nigel said:

I will look into that. I wonder if it's worth after upscaling with such programs to bring the upscaled mp4 back in PP. Export as Prores again for optimal input in YT? Would that make sense? Even if I have a 4k cam a good upscaling method would still be very nice for 1080 120p footage to match other 4k footage. Thanks for the tip.

 

Some people are working on it very slowly but the question is if they will ever succeed to do it on the 200d.

 

Yeah on the monitor and tv it's better than on YT because YT adds compression. But overall the image is very soft I think it's just canon dslr 1080p footage. I have a small channel almost 10k subs I do get the VP9 codec though on my vids so thats fine.

I did tweak my Sigma lens on their dock but this is for OVF with photos right? It doesn't affect live view as far as I know?

Hmm interesting about EF-S glass maybe not working on a super 35 cam like c200 and c70.

 

I do think maybe you are trying to get more out of the camera than is possible. Definitely starting with high quality 4K will be a better starting point; and of course I am sure you already tried adding sharpening in post. I typically keep sharpness turned all the way down in my drones and the GH5 then add it back in post if needed, so the footage out of my gear starts out soft.  Upscaling really can only do so much, and I believe Kye has done extensive testing and reached the conclusion that the most you can upscale is 20% before it becomes noticeable which is one of the reasons I stick to 2K vs upscaling all the way to 4K.

 

Exporting to Prores won't improve anything, there's only so much you can do after starting with compressed LongGOP footage, its kind of like JPG, what you see is what you get. You can't take a JPG and convert it to a RAW image and suddenly get all the benefits of RAW....the information simply isn't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...