R5: What do 'video people' think?

Peak freak said:

Just to be clear, I think the R5 is shaping up to be a great (stills) camera that a lot of Canon photographers have been waiting for, including myself.

However, I am heavily critical (or confused) about their marketing and promotional campaign, prior to launch. I believe they targeted video content producers / professionals with desirable specifications and despite initial concerns about things like heat dissipation, continued to assure its ability for video use.

I think it was straight-up misleading, but many people have come to Canon's defense that their marketing was not misleading, or it unintended to be so. I'm going to guess this support is all from photographers.

So, I'm curious. What to video users think? Were Canon taking the p*ss, or is it all good in the hood?

[I'm not just talking about 8K. 5 minutes of 8K RAW is impressive. I'm talking about its overall usability, for a 'video professional'].

Click to expand...

CameraBeans said:

Peak freak said:

Just to be clear, I think the R5 is shaping up to be a great (stills) camera that a lot of Canon photographers have been waiting for, including myself.

However, I am heavily critical (or confused) about their marketing and promotional campaign, prior to launch. I believe they targeted video content producers / professionals with desirable specifications and despite initial concerns about things like heat dissipation, continued to assure its ability for video use.

I think it was straight-up misleading, but many people have come to Canon's defense that their marketing was not misleading, or it unintended to be so. I'm going to guess this support is all from photographers.

So, I'm curious. What to video users think? Were Canon taking the p*ss, or is it all good in the hood?

[I'm not just talking about 8K. 5 minutes of 8K RAW is impressive. I'm talking about its overall usability, for a 'video professional'].

Click to expand...

I talked to a video guy at a recent wedding, he was convinced the R5 would overheat and that the Sony a7s III was in his words “the most perfect video camera they could make”.

He’s also convinced the Sony has 15 stops of DR, can shoot 4k 120p for 2 hours straight, and has better “more subtle” IBIS (his words).

Of course he is also a current Sony shooter and he really loves his a6300.

I told him about the bitrates of the R5 and the improvement from external recording. He didn’t seem impressed.

Click to expand...

Peak freak said:

CameraBeans said:

Peak freak said:

Just to be clear, I think the R5 is shaping up to be a great (stills) camera that a lot of Canon photographers have been waiting for, including myself.

However, I am heavily critical (or confused) about their marketing and promotional campaign, prior to launch. I believe they targeted video content producers / professionals with desirable specifications and despite initial concerns about things like heat dissipation, continued to assure its ability for video use.

I think it was straight-up misleading, but many people have come to Canon's defense that their marketing was not misleading, or it unintended to be so. I'm going to guess this support is all from photographers.

So, I'm curious. What to video users think? Were Canon taking the p*ss, or is it all good in the hood?

[I'm not just talking about 8K. 5 minutes of 8K RAW is impressive. I'm talking about its overall usability, for a 'video professional'].

Click to expand...

I talked to a video guy at a recent wedding, he was convinced the R5 would overheat and that the Sony a7s III was in his words “the most perfect video camera they could make”.

He’s also convinced the Sony has 15 stops of DR, can shoot 4k 120p for 2 hours straight, and has better “more subtle” IBIS (his words).

Of course he is also a current Sony shooter and he really loves his a6300.

I told him about the bitrates of the R5 and the improvement from external recording. He didn’t seem impressed.

Click to expand...

Riiiight!

But this has got me thinking. Why did Canon simply not produce a camera that could do 4K at the level of the A7S3, but with all the other Canon goodies like their IBIS, colour, ergo's and so-on?

Maybe downsizing 45Mpix to 4K without overheating and maintaining high quality just can't be done (yet).

Maybe it is the R6...

Click to expand...

CameraBeans said:

Peak freak said:

CameraBeans said:

Peak freak said:

Just to be clear, I think the R5 is shaping up to be a great (stills) camera that a lot of Canon photographers have been waiting for, including myself.

However, I am heavily critical (or confused) about their marketing and promotional campaign, prior to launch. I believe they targeted video content producers / professionals with desirable specifications and despite initial concerns about things like heat dissipation, continued to assure its ability for video use.

I think it was straight-up misleading, but many people have come to Canon's defense that their marketing was not misleading, or it unintended to be so. I'm going to guess this support is all from photographers.

So, I'm curious. What to video users think? Were Canon taking the p*ss, or is it all good in the hood?

[I'm not just talking about 8K. 5 minutes of 8K RAW is impressive. I'm talking about its overall usability, for a 'video professional'].

Click to expand...

I talked to a video guy at a recent wedding, he was convinced the R5 would overheat and that the Sony a7s III was in his words “the most perfect video camera they could make”.

He’s also convinced the Sony has 15 stops of DR, can shoot 4k 120p for 2 hours straight, and has better “more subtle” IBIS (his words).

Of course he is also a current Sony shooter and he really loves his a6300.

I told him about the bitrates of the R5 and the improvement from external recording. He didn’t seem impressed.

Click to expand...

Riiiight!

But this has got me thinking. Why did Canon simply not produce a camera that could do 4K at the level of the A7S3, but with all the other Canon goodies like their IBIS, colour, ergo's and so-on?

Maybe downsizing 45Mpix to 4K without overheating and maintaining high quality just can't be done (yet).

Maybe it is the R6...

Click to expand...

I am a photographer who shoots Canon and I don’t buy the Sony hype. A lot of photogs who shoot Sony seem naive and clueless. I have shot with people using a lot of different cameras in tough conditions. My photos always look better. Canon delivers the goods time and again.

To be fair I think Canon did fine with the R5 and the word is it doesn’t overheat with an external recorder. I mean if you’re serious about video buck up and get a rig with an atomos attached. I also don’t think the R5 will have anything resembling a meaningful limit for video once the product is settled and fully updated.

Click to expand...

JayPhoto1 said:

I think you really want the opinion of truly hybrid shooters — 50/50 guys and gals. Without a doubt pure stills shooters will agree this is a phenomenal camera and pure video shoots will say it’s a failure. I don’t have my camera yet but will next week. The true test is a mixture of still shooting with the occasional video capture. If the camera can work in that environment, I think canon can claim some success. It’s certainly a win in the stills category but there must be some redeemable value in the video capabilities— especially since Canon made the blunder and market this as an exceptional video camera with 8k capabilities. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

Peak freak said:

JayPhoto1 said:

I think you really want the opinion of truly hybrid shooters — 50/50 guys and gals. Without a doubt pure stills shooters will agree this is a phenomenal camera and pure video shoots will say it’s a failure. I don’t have my camera yet but will next week. The true test is a mixture of still shooting with the occasional video capture. If the camera can work in that environment, I think canon can claim some success. It’s certainly a win in the stills category but there must be some redeemable value in the video capabilities— especially since Canon made the blunder and market this as an exceptional video camera with 8k capabilities. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

Good feedback thanks. Yep, hybrid shooter is the term I should have used.

In the long run, I don't think the over heating issue will be big issue, but at the moment it is. It's a bit of a shame because I think the R5 will possibly be the best FF mirrorless camera for photography, but they are copping it because of an issue that perhaps should have been obvious, but wasn't. And for that, I blame their marketing.

Click to expand...

PhotoSiem said:

I”m a videographer and photographer. Certain weddings I only shoot pictures, other only video, and Lately the combination. This means including around 700 edited pictures, a trailer of 2.5 minutes and a happy and cinematic overview of 15 minutes. I shot all my weddings on 1080p because it is light, edits quickly and my Movies still makes my client cry of happiness. Because of the hybrid situation i cant put me camera on a gymbal, so IBIS is key and Canon now delivers this big time. When my footage is jerky i tend to not use it(or be bummed about it and use some warp), so i am real curious what real life IBIS will be. I will probably use the light 4K on the R5, and converted to 1080 it still will look stunning. I did a lot of weddings now and In the end the Authentic Edit, original shots and creative shots and personal cliënt relation will make it a succes. Resolution not so much. So yes, once again the defination of professional is subjective. ( sorry for my Dunglish ) p.s i am invested in Canon, i use an rf 24 70 and rf 50 1.2 lately, so no way switching to other brands, just make the best out of what you have and put your energy in being creative instead of looking at the other” Greener” side. Video example:

Click to expand...

CameraBeans said:

Peak freak said:

Just to be clear, I think the R5 is shaping up to be a great (stills) camera that a lot of Canon photographers have been waiting for, including myself.

However, I am heavily critical (or confused) about their marketing and promotional campaign, prior to launch. I believe they targeted video content producers / professionals with desirable specifications and despite initial concerns about things like heat dissipation, continued to assure its ability for video use.

I think it was straight-up misleading, but many people have come to Canon's defense that their marketing was not misleading, or it unintended to be so. I'm going to guess this support is all from photographers.

So, I'm curious. What to video users think? Were Canon taking the p*ss, or is it all good in the hood?

[I'm not just talking about 8K. 5 minutes of 8K RAW is impressive. I'm talking about its overall usability, for a 'video professional'].

Click to expand...

I talked to a video guy at a recent wedding, he was convinced the R5 would overheat and that the Sony a7s III was in his words “the most perfect video camera they could make”.

He’s also convinced the Sony has 15 stops of DR, can shoot 4k 120p for 2 hours straight, and has better “more subtle” IBIS (his words).

Of course he is also a current Sony shooter and he really loves his a6300.

I told him about the bitrates of the R5 and the improvement from external recording. He didn’t seem impressed.

Click to expand...

lawny13 said:

We humans are very short sighted.

Look at COVID, and climate change as simple examples of this.

When I first got into photography I went with the marketing hype. New cameras for better IQ etc etc. But over time I learned a few things that many on DPR seemed to have forgotten since we just pulled along with the tide of marketing and the new and shiny things.

We are all in some way constantly chasing that higher DR, higher IQ, etc etc, but seem to forget that it is EXACTLY want the manufacturers want us to do.

In the end though, some old truths are still correct right? Lenses, lighting, content, and creativity are the most important aspects of photography right?

That said. Canon is still new to MILC. I know they have the EF-M line, but seriously, they were never really serious about it, and FF brings a whole different level of engineering. So they are now on their second gen MILC. If you consider patents and tech, it isn't like they have the sony tech to use for their stuff. So this is all their own tech they are pushing out. If you look at it in this way, their first attempt with the RP and R, was already a step up from the A7, and I would argue the A7II. These R5 and R6 are both in my opinion a stop up from the A7III and A7RIV. Heck I would say that the R5 is a step up of the A7RIV. I simply don't completely get why people are so hard bent on comparing the R5 to the A7SIII, considering the MP difference between them. Here is a thought experiment for you all. If canon produced a camera like the R5, but with a 12MP sensor do you really think it wouldn't be able to perform on par with the A7SIII??? I think so. Or at the very least come close to it. But when looking at things in a sensible manner, the R5's competition is in fact the A7RIV. Not saying that people can't compare the R5 to the A7SIII, but there is a reason way sony made the latter a 12MP camera. It is meant to be video centric, not a stills camera. And generally not a hybrid camera either. If you do pro work where you need to deliver high Rez images... the A7SIII just won't cut it.

My main point though is that canon is IMHO tearing it up. They seem to be going full steam ahead with their camera developments, and I have no doubt that with FW updates the R5 and R6 will improve, and that the R5II and the R6II will likely greatly address these issues we are seeing now. If the R5 doesn't overheat with the atomos recorder mounted to it, it is an indication that it is the processor that is the cause of the overheating. The processor is canon's first gen. It is a massive leap over what they have had previously. Usually with processor development the next step is to improve efficiency and thermals. All you need to do is look at intel and AMD to know this is the common approach.

So... pick a brand. And keep in mind they do tend to leap frog each other. And focus on creating. It has always been the case and I don't see why it wouldn't be the case now. I am worried about nikon though.

BTW... I think there is a simple solution to canon's problem. Since so many people don't seem to care about bitrate, they should release a FW update that allows users to select an option for lower bit rate. Less bit rate generally means less data, and less processing, and thus less heat.

Sony has implemented these tricks to deal with their own limitations. The EVFs showing lower Rez, line skipping during shooting, lower bit rates, etc etc. All of this serves to speed up performance, improve battery life, and decrease heat generation. I commend canon for not wanting to "cut corners", but at times it would be good to give these options to the user to decide. For example. I might not mind an EVF doing line skipping while out doing BIF since it would likely greatly improve my battery life. Some people might not mind sony level bit rates, if they don't grade heavily, and if it means improving record times, and probably greatly decreases heat generation at the processor.

Click to expand...

Mr_Win said:

CameraBeans said:

Peak freak said:

Just to be clear, I think the R5 is shaping up to be a great (stills) camera that a lot of Canon photographers have been waiting for, including myself.

However, I am heavily critical (or confused) about their marketing and promotional campaign, prior to launch. I believe they targeted video content producers / professionals with desirable specifications and despite initial concerns about things like heat dissipation, continued to assure its ability for video use.

I think it was straight-up misleading, but many people have come to Canon's defense that their marketing was not misleading, or it unintended to be so. I'm going to guess this support is all from photographers.

So, I'm curious. What to video users think? Were Canon taking the p*ss, or is it all good in the hood?

[I'm not just talking about 8K. 5 minutes of 8K RAW is impressive. I'm talking about its overall usability, for a 'video professional'].

Click to expand...

I talked to a video guy at a recent wedding, he was convinced the R5 would overheat and that the Sony a7s III was in his words “the most perfect video camera they could make”.

He’s also convinced the Sony has 15 stops of DR, can shoot 4k 120p for 2 hours straight, and has better “more subtle” IBIS (his words).

Of course he is also a current Sony shooter and he really loves his a6300.

I told him about the bitrates of the R5 and the improvement from external recording. He didn’t seem impressed.

Click to expand...

Sony has consistent 4 K 24/60/120, and this is huge, canon has various IQ, some better some worse, inconsistent is annoying.

bitrates don’t translate to better IQ. Historically canon has had better rates, not better IQ.

CLOG in canon is v1/2, not 3, and rated only 12 stops DR vs Sony’s 15 rating.

Sony has dual ISO. 16000 is the second base iso, should be better in low light by two stops.

canon has better ibis, Sony’s has a gyro based along with ibis. Canon will be more convenient, Sony offers a bit of convenience and flexibility.

Sony has audio with 4 K 120, super practical for speed ramps.

canon has 4K crop mode, super convenient (other Sony’s do as well).

Sony has no record limit

Sony has full HDMI.

canon overheats in all tests, Sony overheats in 2/20+ reviews

Sony recovers very fast if overheating. Canon very slow.
Sony has hot swappable memory

Sony has dual, even triple when external recording. Canon records to one card.

Sony allows long gop in all framerates, not forced to use all-I.

canon does internal raw, Sony external but higher quality

due to overheating Behavior, Canons video is inferior to most full frame options on the market, a novelty. If it didn’t overheat, it would be greatfor enthusiasts, but lack of dual recording, hard to lump in the camera category.

Click to expand...