# Confirmed: Canon EOS R5c to be announced next month [CR3]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 22, 2021)

> The long-rumored Canon EOS R5c is going to be announced in mid-January I have been told. It’s safe to say that the camera will be announced sometime between January 11, 2022, and January 18, 2022.
> Retail availability will begin 6-8 weeks after the announcement. I’m beating a dead horse here, but the chip shortage will still be playing a role in stock levels.
> Canon EOS R5C Information
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## bsbeamer (Dec 22, 2021)

Any word on pricing?


----------



## goldenhusky (Dec 22, 2021)

I wasn't expecting the announcement to be that fast. This is very exciting!


----------



## goldenhusky (Dec 22, 2021)

Can't wait to see the price. Hope it is ~$4500 USD


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 22, 2021)

As a hybrid shooter who does photo & video within seconds of each other on wedding days, I'm not that impressed. 

If you're going to go vented and sacrifice weather sealing, then it needs at least some cinema features beyond timecode (which will never be used in a hybrid photo/video environment) such as internal NDs. The 1Dc was great because it could handle shooting in a downpour, but with this R5c I'll have to worry about a tiny drizzle. I'd prefer a normal R5 with unlimited 1080p and non-HQ 4k recording (100% possible with firmware) over one vented that gives me unlimited HQ & raw. 

I love that Canon is attempting to straddle the photo/video fence here, but my feeling is meh. It should honestly be priced at $3,900, as you're trading weather sealing for some basic video features that competitors already offer in sealed bodies (unlimited record times up to 4k). Maybe the unlimited 8k and raw recording is appealing to enough people that the price can be pushed to $4500? It's certainly a minority of professional videographers/cinematographers who'd make use of that. Though maybe I'm just shortsighted here. Unlimited 8k recording is pretty significant when I think about it. Maybe I take it all back haha. Damn I'm probably going to buy one.


----------



## H. Jones (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> As a hybrid shooter who does photo & video within seconds of each other on wedding days, I'm not that impressed.
> 
> If you're going to go vented and sacrifice weather sealing, then it needs at least some cinema features beyond timecode (which will never be used in a hybrid photo/video environment) such as internal NDs. The 1Dc was great because it could handle shooting in a downpour, but with this R5c I'll have to worry about a tiny drizzle. I'd prefer a normal R5 with unlimited 1080p and non-HQ 4k recording (100% possible with firmware) over one vented that gives me unlimited HQ & raw.
> 
> I love that Canon is attempting to straddle the photo/video fence here, but my feeling is meh. It should honestly be priced at $3,900, as you're trading weather sealing for some basic video features that competitors already offer in sealed bodies (unlimited record times up to 4k). Maybe the unlimited 8k and raw recording is appealing to enough people that the price can be pushed to $4500? It's certainly a minority of professional videographers/cinematographers who'd make use of that. Though maybe I'm just shortsighted here. Unlimited 8k recording is pretty significant when I think about it. Maybe I take it all back haha. Damn I'm probably going to buy one.



The EOS R3 already provides unlimited HQ 4K record times in a fully weather-sealed body complete with access to XLR adapters through the new hotshoe, and flip-out screen. It's a very viable alternative if weathersealing is a huge concern. Granted, it's more expensive, but there's definitely trade-offs to adding or removing any features.


----------



## unfocused (Dec 22, 2021)

I'm not the target market, but I will be interested to see exactly what this camera looks like. They are calling it an R5c, so I want to see just how much they have altered the basic R5 body.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 22, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> The EOS R3 already provides unlimited HQ 4K record times in a fully weather-sealed body complete with access to XLR adapters through the new hotshoe, and flip-out screen. It's a very viable alternative if weathersealing is a huge concern. Granted, it's more expensive, but there's definitely trade-offs to adding or removing any features.



The R3 is a great camera but unlimited record times is a feature Sony & Panasonic offer in all their weather-sealed hybrid cameras at the $2500+ price point. Hoping Canon competes.


----------



## jwpatmore (Dec 22, 2021)

C-Log 2 would be huge as long as it is priced below the C70. My question is if it has C-Log 2, what will the dynamic range be compared to the C70 at 16+ stops?


----------



## jwpatmore (Dec 22, 2021)

H. Jones said:


> The EOS R3 already provides unlimited HQ 4K record times in a fully weather-sealed body complete with access to XLR adapters through the new hotshoe, and flip-out screen. It's a very viable alternative if weathersealing is a huge concern. Granted, it's more expensive, but there's definitely trade-offs to adding or removing any features.


The R3 also overheats in the highest recording settings just like the R5 and the R6 (in some situations)... Just saying...


----------



## entoman (Dec 22, 2021)

My guess is that the only significant changes to the body will be:

bulkier rear plate to accommodate the cooling fan
extended EVF eyepiece
Undoubtedly there will be significant changes to the menu system, and probably waveform and other additions to the EVF.

I also think that Canon are clever enough to design a cooling system that will not adversely affect weather-sealing.

Just my opinion, of course...


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

goldenhusky said:


> I wasn't expecting the announcement to be that fast. This is very exciting!


The Z 9 reception may have annoyed Canon


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> If you're going to go vented and sacrifice weather sealing,


Venting does not sacrifice weather-sealing one bit.
The only thing exposed to the air is the heatsink.
S1H, FX3, C70, and basically every RED camera are all weather-sealed.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

jwpatmore said:


> The R3 also overheats in the highest recording settings just like the R5 and the R6 (in some situations)... Just saying...


It takes an hour to overheat in 4K 60.
4K 120 overheats in a few minutes.
However, the recovery time is a lot faster than the R5 and R6.
It should not be an issue for most hybrid scenarios.


----------



## iheartcanon (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> As a hybrid shooter who does photo & video within seconds of each other on wedding days, I'm not that impressed.
> 
> If you're going to go vented and sacrifice weather sealing, then it needs at least some cinema features beyond timecode (which will never be used in a hybrid photo/video environment) such as internal NDs. The 1Dc was great because it could handle shooting in a downpour, but with this R5c I'll have to worry about a tiny drizzle. I'd prefer a normal R5 with unlimited 1080p and non-HQ 4k recording (100% possible with firmware) over one vented that gives me unlimited HQ & raw.
> 
> I love that Canon is attempting to straddle the photo/video fence here, but my feeling is meh. It should honestly be priced at $3,900, as you're trading weather sealing for some basic video features that competitors already offer in sealed bodies (unlimited record times up to 4k). Maybe the unlimited 8k and raw recording is appealing to enough people that the price can be pushed to $4500? It's certainly a minority of professional videographers/cinematographers who'd make use of that. Though maybe I'm just shortsighted here. Unlimited 8k recording is pretty significant when I think about it. Maybe I take it all back haha. Damn I'm probably going to buy one.


The R5 overheats in 1080p?

News to me. 

Has this actually happened to anyone?


----------



## twoheadedboy (Dec 22, 2021)

iheartcanon said:


> The R5 overheats in 1080p?
> 
> News to me.
> 
> Has this actually happened to anyone?


He's saying "I'll take what the R5 already gives me over what the R5c is reported to be giving me"


----------



## Tremotino (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> The R3 is a great camera but unlimited record times is a feature Sony & Panasonic offer in all their weather-sealed hybrid cameras at the $2500+ price point. Hoping Canon competes.


So go and work with Sony or Panasonic and live with their tradeoffs.
Oh.. I forgot, Sony is the perfect camera with no compromises...


----------



## xps (Dec 22, 2021)

goldenhusky said:


> Can't wait to see the price. Hope it is ~$4500 USD


Do you really think? I ordered the C70 RF for my grandgrandson one year ago for 5400€. But with 8k and all those other R5 features? I´d love to see it at this price point, but my promise is 1000€ more


----------



## xps (Dec 22, 2021)

entoman said:


> My guess is that the only significant changes to the body will be:
> 
> bulkier rear plate to accommodate the cooling fan
> extended EVF eyepiece
> ...


Maybe an C70 like housing?


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 22, 2021)

entoman said:


> My guess is that the only significant changes to the body will be:
> 
> bulkier rear plate to accommodate the cooling fan
> extended EVF eyepiece
> ...


I doubt that, putting a 3/8th and 1/4 mounts on the top plate that doesn’t interfere with the hotshoe functionality would necessitate a complete body redesign, throw in the active cooling and I can’t see the R5C looking anything like the R5, and certainly not sharing any body parts.


----------



## sanj (Dec 22, 2021)

Waiting to see the specs.


----------



## sanj (Dec 22, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I doubt that, putting a 3/8th and 1/4 mounts on the top plate that doesn’t interfere with the hotshoe functionality would necessitate a complete body redesign, throw in the active cooling and I can’t see the R5C looking anything like the R5, and certainly not sharing any body parts.


I suspect it will be very very close to R5. We will know soon dear Private.


----------



## Jordan23 (Dec 22, 2021)

I assume Canon adds 8K60P just to beat Nikon to it. Canon should add a crop 5.1K120P, that would have been an awesome feature.


----------



## cayenne (Dec 22, 2021)

goldenhusky said:


> I wasn't expecting the announcement to be that fast. This is very exciting!


Me too...but I'm afraid that announcements early will have nothing to do with meaningful availability of the camera itself, with shortages, delays, and supply chain problems we've seen with all other camera gear these days.

I think the better questions to ask is, when will this actually be hitting peoples' hands....?


----------



## BakaBokeh (Dec 22, 2021)

This camera is arriving way sooner than I expected.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 22, 2021)

sanj said:


> I suspect it will be very very close to R5. We will know soon dear Private.


Well the Sony FX3 is the benchmark and the top plate design of that is as close to perfect for a crossover as possible, and the three 3/8th threads with the detachable XLR/top handle is pretty unbeatable. If Canon compromise the top plate design by putting a 'normal' EVF and new style hotshot on top of it then it is very clearly aimed at the photo end of the crossover spectrum.

Not that I have any skin in the game, I have zero interest or need in the camera, just always interested to see how Canon is thinking.


----------



## Jordan23 (Dec 22, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> It takes an hour to overheat in 4K 60.
> 4K 120 overheats in a few minutes.


According to Canon 4K120P recording time is around 12 min.


----------



## sanj (Dec 22, 2021)

So. Is Log 2 better or Log 3? Does anyone know? Thanking you in advance, I have been struggling with this answer for a bit now.


----------



## sanj (Dec 22, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Well the Sony FX3 is the benchmark and the top plate design of that is as close to perfect for a crossover as possible, and the three 3/8th threads with the detachable XLR/top handle is pretty unbeatable. If Canon compromise the top plate design by putting a 'normal' EVF and new style hotshot on top of it then it is very clearly aimed at the photo end of the crossover spectrum.
> 
> Not that I have any skin in the game, I have zero interest or need in the camera, just always interested to see how Canon is thinking.


The "C" indicates it is for the cinema end.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Dec 22, 2021)

sanj said:


> So. Is Log 2 better or Log 3? Does anyone know? Thanking you in advance, I have been struggling with this answer for a bit now.


It provides more dynamic range, "better" depends on the application. https://www.visuals.co.uk/visualsbl...og-2-and-canon-log-1-side-by-side-comparison/


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 22, 2021)

iheartcanon said:


> The R5 overheats in 1080p?
> 
> News to me.
> 
> Has this actually happened to anyone?


No, unlimited recording as in the absence of a software time limit. Canon arbitrarily limits R5 recording time to 29 minutes & 59 seconds in all shooting modes.


----------



## robotfist (Dec 22, 2021)

sanj said:


> So. Is Log 2 better or Log 3? Does anyone know? Thanking you in advance, I have been struggling with this answer for a bit now.


They are both good. They are different settings for different situations. Canon Log 2 provides more dynamic range but is harder to grade and you really have to protect the shadows, as it's not great in lowlight. Canon Log 3 was created to fix the issues of Canon Log 2 (easier to grade, better in low light) but at the expense of dynamic range and highlight rolloff. I use Canon Log 3 in lowlight and Canon Log 2 in bright light.


----------



## entoman (Dec 22, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I doubt that, putting a 3/8th and 1/4 mounts on the top plate that doesn’t interfere with the hotshoe functionality would necessitate a complete body redesign, throw in the active cooling and I can’t see the R5C looking anything like the R5, and certainly not sharing any body parts.


If you are right, I just can't see it being called an "R5C".

The very name strongly suggests that it will be almost identical in design to the R5.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

xps said:


> I ordered the C70 RF for my grandgrandson one year ago for 5400€.


I hope you are over 100 years old or that sounds like overkill


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 22, 2021)

entoman said:


> If you are right, I just can't see it being called an "R5C".
> 
> The very name strongly suggests that it will be almost identical in design to the R5.


Well that was true of the 1DX/1DC, but with active cooling, new mount points on the top plate, as well as a different and bigger hotshot design I don't see that there is a lot of the R5 left.


----------



## CafferyPhoto (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> As a hybrid shooter who does photo & video within seconds of each other on wedding days, I'm not that impressed.
> 
> If you're going to go vented and sacrifice weather sealing, then it needs at least some cinema features beyond timecode (which will never be used in a hybrid photo/video environment) such as internal NDs. The 1Dc was great because it could handle shooting in a downpour, but with this R5c I'll have to worry about a tiny drizzle. I'd prefer a normal R5 with unlimited 1080p and non-HQ 4k recording (100% possible with firmware) over one vented that gives me unlimited HQ & raw.
> 
> I love that Canon is attempting to straddle the photo/video fence here, but my feeling is meh. It should honestly be priced at $3,900, as you're trading weather sealing for some basic video features that competitors already offer in sealed bodies (unlimited record times up to 4k). Maybe the unlimited 8k and raw recording is appealing to enough people that the price can be pushed to $4500? It's certainly a minority of professional videographers/cinematographers who'd make use of that. Though maybe I'm just shortsighted here. Unlimited 8k recording is pretty significant when I think about it. Maybe I take it all back haha. Damn I'm probably going to buy one.


----------



## Teebaybay (Dec 22, 2021)

Hopefully with the imminent release of the R5c and the potential confirmation of no record limit of 29:59, I'd hope Canon would do a future firmware update passing along that feature to the R5 and R6 as they did with the AF features of the R3.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

Jordan23 said:


> I assume Canon adds 8K60P just to beat Nikon to it. Canon should add a crop 5.1K120P, that would have been an awesome feature.


Canon can announce it but I doubt they would beat Nikon to it.
IntoPix has already announced 8K 60 TicoRAW for the Z 9.
It is supposed to come in a firmware update in the first quarter of 2021.
We will need to see how practical it will be.
The R3 basically records 6K forever at 30 FPS but can only record 1 hour at 60 FPS.
The Z 9 only records 8K for 2 hours at 30 FPS.
How long will it record 8K for at 60 FPS?


----------



## CafferyPhoto (Dec 22, 2021)

xps said:


> Do you really think? I ordered the C70 RF for my grandgrandson one year ago for 5400€. But with 8k and all those other R5 features? I´d love to see it at this price point, but my promise is 1000€ more


The C70 is and always will be an A+ video production camera. So much dynamic range. Built in audio interfaces. Almost every setting a button click away. No worries about the "competition" from the R5C


----------



## CafferyPhoto (Dec 22, 2021)

sanj said:


> So. Is Log 2 better or Log 3? Does anyone know? Thanking you in advance, I have been struggling with this answer for a bit now.


Different strokes for different folks


----------



## RayValdez360 (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> As a hybrid shooter who does photo & video within seconds of each other on wedding days, I'm not that impressed.
> 
> If you're going to go vented and sacrifice weather sealing, then it needs at least some cinema features beyond timecode (which will never be used in a hybrid photo/video environment) such as internal NDs. The 1Dc was great because it could handle shooting in a downpour, but with this R5c I'll have to worry about a tiny drizzle. I'd prefer a normal R5 with unlimited 1080p and non-HQ 4k recording (100% possible with firmware) over one vented that gives me unlimited HQ & raw.
> 
> I love that Canon is attempting to straddle the photo/video fence here, but my feeling is meh. It should honestly be priced at $3,900, as you're trading weather sealing for some basic video features that competitors already offer in sealed bodies (unlimited record times up to 4k). Maybe the unlimited 8k and raw recording is appealing to enough people that the price can be pushed to $4500? It's certainly a minority of professional videographers/cinematographers who'd make use of that. Though maybe I'm just shortsighted here. Unlimited 8k recording is pretty significant when I think about it. Maybe I take it all back haha. Damn I'm probably going to buy one.


just get an r3 if you want to shoot in the rain.


----------



## SUNDOG04 (Dec 22, 2021)

Just give me a body geared toward the general advanced enthusiast and/or landscape photographer. It seems everything is directed toward video and sports photography, or maybe the reviewers or camera companies are conditioning people to that they need that. I don't have a problem with that, but has the general photography person been forgotten or perhaps few exist any more. As someone whose primary interest is landscape and general nature photography, and R5 as awesome as it is, is overkill and priced out of my range. The R model would surely not be bad and hopefully Canon can update. I suppose if my 6D crapped out, I could go for that model, but not very inspired to currently change from what I have.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 22, 2021)

sanj said:


> So. Is Log 2 better or Log 3?


Log 10 is # 1, so it’s the best.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Well the Sony FX3 is the benchmark and the top plate design of that is as close to perfect for a crossover as possible, and the three 3/8th threads with the detachable XLR/top handle is pretty unbeatable. If Canon compromise the top plate design by putting a 'normal' EVF and new style hotshot on top of it then it is very clearly aimed at the photo end of the crossover spectrum.
> 
> Not that I have any skin in the game, I have zero interest or need in the camera, just always interested to see how Canon is thinking.


The description sounds like a normal EVF.
Earlier rumors were of an optional hot shoe EVF like the M6 Mark II.

From the top, the R5 and C70 do not look as different as you might think.




__





Compare camera dimensions side by side







camerasize.com


----------



## entoman (Dec 22, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Well that was true of the 1DX/1DC, but with active cooling, new mount points on the top plate, as well as a different and bigger hotshot design I don't see that there is a lot of the R5 left.


Probably a different top plate/EVF, and a new back plate for the cooling, but the same basic R5 body shell.
Hopefully that way it will keep the price within sensible limits - there's a lot of competition out there.

We'll find out soon enough


----------



## sanj (Dec 22, 2021)

robotfist said:


> They are both good. They are different settings for different situations. Canon Log 2 provides more dynamic range but is harder to grade and you really have to protect the shadows, as it's not great in lowlight. Canon Log 3 was created to fix the issues of Canon Log 3 (easier to grade, better in low light) but at the expense of dynamic range and highlight rolloff. I use Canon Log 3 in lowlight and Canon Log 2 in bright light.


Thank you for this valuable reply! Appreciate!


----------



## sanj (Dec 22, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> It provides more dynamic range, "better" depends on the application. https://www.visuals.co.uk/visualsbl...og-2-and-canon-log-1-side-by-side-comparison/


Thank you!!!


----------



## robotfist (Dec 22, 2021)

I've mentioned it before, but I'd really rather have the R5C sensor use less megapixels and be better in lowlight than have unlimited 8k. For shooting video, I find better light sensitivity to be a much more useful feature than more resolution.


----------



## NorskHest (Dec 22, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Log 10 is # 1, so it’s the best.


You’re not funny


----------



## DBounce (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> The R3 is a great camera but unlimited record times is a feature Sony & Panasonic offer in all their weather-sealed hybrid cameras at the $2500+ price point. Hoping Canon competes.


Really? He’s what you miss, the rolling shutter is much less on the R3 than on all the Sony bodies. The usable low-light is way better on the R3 than… well, just about everything… as DXOMark has already stated. But want proof? Check out this ISO performance test shoot that goes from 3,200 up to 25,000. Pay particular attention to the 10,000 ISO mark.Very clean and no mushification caused by in camera noise reduction like on Sonys.


----------



## NorskHest (Dec 22, 2021)

robotfist said:


> I've mentioned it before, but I'd really rather have the R5C sensor use less megapixels and be better in lowlight than have unlimited 8k. For shooting video, I find better light sensitivity to be a much more useful feature than more resolution.


Don’t use that low megapixel talk with these people they will have a meltdown and probably try to get you banned, then they will tell you to go buy a Sony and then they will tell their wives how badly they burned someone on the forums best not provoke the people who post too much here.


----------



## DBounce (Dec 22, 2021)

Jordan23 said:


> I assume Canon adds 8K60P just to beat Nikon to it. Canon should add a crop 5.1K120P, that would have been an awesome feature.


I doubt it. It would need to have way faster readout speed.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> As a hybrid shooter who does photo & video within seconds of each other on wedding days, I'm not that impressed.
> 
> If you're going to go vented and sacrifice weather sealing, then it needs at least some cinema features beyond timecode (which will never be used in a hybrid photo/video environment) such as internal NDs. The 1Dc was great because it could handle shooting in a downpour, but with this R5c I'll have to worry about a tiny drizzle. I'd prefer a normal R5 with unlimited 1080p and non-HQ 4k recording (100% possible with firmware) over one vented that gives me unlimited HQ & raw.
> 
> I love that Canon is attempting to straddle the photo/video fence here, but my feeling is meh. It should honestly be priced at $3,900, as you're trading weather sealing for some basic video features that competitors already offer in sealed bodies (unlimited record times up to 4k). Maybe the unlimited 8k and raw recording is appealing to enough people that the price can be pushed to $4500? It's certainly a minority of professional videographers/cinematographers who'd make use of that. Though maybe I'm just shortsighted here. Unlimited 8k recording is pretty significant when I think about it. Maybe I take it all back haha. Damn I'm probably going to buy one.


Why do you assume active cooling necessitates no weather sealing? They are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## sanj (Dec 22, 2021)

NorskHest said:


> You’re not funny


Perhaps the holiday season has set in and he is already down a few. Yes, stupid comment.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

robotfist said:


> I've mentioned it before, but I'd really rather have the R5C sensor use less megapixels and be better in lowlight than have unlimited 8k. For shooting video, I find better light sensitivity to be a much more useful feature than more resolution.


Sounds like you want an R6c.
I am not sure what the demand would be for that but maybe there are enough people with your desire.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 22, 2021)

NorskHest said:


> Don’t use that low megapixel talk with these people they will have a meltdown and probably try to get you banned, then they will tell you to go buy a Sony and then they will tell their wives how badly they burned someone on the forums best not provoke the people who post too much here.


Sounds like you need to detox from your time on DPR. Good luck with that.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 22, 2021)

sanj said:


> Perhaps the holiday season has set in and he is already down a few. Yes, stupid comment.


Some people find math challenging.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

DBounce said:


> I doubt it. It would need to have way faster readout speed.


The readout speed for video of the R5 and Z 9 are practically identical.
The Z 9 is marginally faster.
There is noticeable rolling shutter in video on the Z 9.
None during photos.
Which makes little sense with 120 FPS photos at 11 MP when 11 MP is more than enough for 4K video.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Dec 22, 2021)

Does the original R5 do anything this doesn’t? Or is this basically an R5 Mark II after only 18 months?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 22, 2021)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> Does the original R5 do anything this doesn’t?


Overheats, presumably.


----------



## peters (Dec 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> The R3 is a great camera but unlimited record times is a feature Sony & Panasonic offer in all their weather-sealed hybrid cameras at the $2500+ price point. Hoping Canon competes.


hm, which camera do you mean for 2500$? There is none as far as I can tell which offers the same image quality the R5 gives you AND 8k AND 4k120 AND a highres-sensor with 20fps for photography.... All of these models are compromising on one end. Only true hybrids which are stronger than the R5 current in BOTH, photo and video are the Sony A1 and the Nikon Z9. Which are both much more expensive.


----------



## peters (Dec 22, 2021)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> Does the original R5 do anything this doesn’t? Or is this basically an R5 Mark II after only 18 months?


Probably smaller, lighter, probably cheaper, better for travel, weather sealed.
So overall the R5C is more of an video centered R5. 
If you are not interested in video, I guess that the R5 is the better choice, if any of the points above matter to your shooting style =)


----------



## peters (Dec 22, 2021)

iheartcanon said:


> The R5 overheats in 1080p?
> 
> News to me.
> 
> Has this actually happened to anyone?


Nope, and I can not belive this at all. 
It does not even overheat in (regualr) 4k. It also doenst overheat if you record 4k60 or 4k hq externaly.


----------



## peters (Dec 22, 2021)

Tremotino said:


> So go and work with Sony or Panasonic and live with their tradeoffs.
> Oh.. I forgot, Sony is the perfect camera with no compromises...


I know your are being sarcastic, but in my opinion the Sony A1 is indeed right now the most capable hybrid camera out there. The specs in all regards are incredible. Though a bit expensive =)


----------



## peters (Dec 22, 2021)

Jordan23 said:


> I assume Canon adds 8K60P just to beat Nikon to it. Canon should add a crop 5.1K120P, that would have been an awesome feature.


Ha, jeah thats possible and would be quite astonishing 
I would be more interested in a good looking 4k240 though. Or even a 1080p480 or something. If its just okay looking. That would be a great feature in my opinion =) I think 8k60 is a bit over the top and not nearly as usefull as a 240 or 480 frames option, at least for my work. In my opinion slowmotions gives you an advantage and new creative possibilities. While higher resolution like 8k are pretty much just a general improvement of quality, which does not offer that many creative new options. A good framed 4k image is pretty much as good as an 8k image where you need to crop. 8k is certainly the future, but I think right now higher framerates and DR are more interested.


----------



## peters (Dec 22, 2021)

SUNDOG04 said:


> Just give me a body geared toward the general advanced enthusiast and/or landscape photographer. It seems everything is directed toward video and sports photography, or maybe the reviewers or camera companies are conditioning people to that they need that. I don't have a problem with that, but has the general photography person been forgotten or perhaps few exist any more. As someone whose primary interest is landscape and general nature photography, and R5 as awesome as it is, is overkill and priced out of my range. The R model would surely not be bad and hopefully Canon can update. I suppose if my 6D crapped out, I could go for that model, but not very inspired to currently change from what I have.


I think (depending on budget) the best landscape options right now are in this order the Canon R5, Sony a7R IV and Fuji GFX 100s. The sensor is incredible, expecialy at this pricepoint. And btw, many EF lenses cover the GFX 100s sensor!


----------



## tomislavmoze (Dec 22, 2021)

iheartcanon said:


> The R5 overheats in 1080p?
> 
> News to me.
> 
> Has this actually happened to anyone?


It overheat in 1080 120p unfortunately almost as fast as 4k. At the end R6 is better regarding record time recovery and 1080p modes.


----------



## Rocksthaman (Dec 22, 2021)

peters said:


> hm, which camera do you mean for 2500$? There is none as far as I can tell which offers the same image quality the R5 gives you AND 8k AND 4k120 AND a highres-sensor with 20fps for photography.... All of these models are compromising on one end. Only true hybrids which are stronger than the R5 current in BOTH, photo and video are the Sony A1 and the Nikon Z9. Which are both much more expensive.


He’s clearly talking about unlimited recording, weather sealed hybrid cameras. That would be the Sony A7iv & A7c and Panasonics s5


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 22, 2021)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> Does the original R5 do anything this doesn’t? Or is this basically an R5 Mark II after only 18 months?


Why would you expect a newer camera to do less?
I guess the question should be will the R5 Mark II do anything this doesn't.


----------



## unfocused (Dec 23, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> I doubt that, putting a 3/8th and 1/4 mounts on the top plate that doesn’t interfere with the hotshoe functionality would necessitate a complete body redesign, throw in the active cooling and I can’t see the R5C looking anything like the R5, and certainly not sharing any body parts.


I guess we will know next month, but it seems strange to me to call it an R5c if it has a radically different body style.


----------



## SteveC (Dec 23, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Overheats, presumably.



That's a feature. It's hard to use a camera with gloves on, the buttons are so dang tiny. Since the R5 will keep your hands warm enough that gloves are unnecessary, it's easier to use in cold weather.

But then on the other hand, it's hard to work a camera in hot weather with oven mitts on.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 23, 2021)

SteveC said:


> That's a feature. It's hard to use a camera with gloves on, the buttons are so dang tiny. Since the R5 will keep your hands warm enough that gloves are unnecessary, it's easier to use in cold weather.
> 
> But then on the other hand, it's hard to work a camera in hot weather with oven mitts on.


Careful, humor and levity are apparently unwelcome in this thread.


----------



## sanj (Dec 23, 2021)

unfocused said:


> I guess we will know next month, but it seems strange to me to call it an R5c if it has a radically different body style.


It will not!


----------



## sanj (Dec 23, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Careful, humor and levity are apparently unwelcome in this thread.


Neuro, if you were joking above about Log 2 vs 3, I am sorry that I did not get the joke and reacted. But I read the post several times and it just came across and a rude remark - something you are known for, so perhaps I overreacted. In any case, if it was a joke (which I still do not get), I am sorry.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 23, 2021)

sanj said:


> Neuro, if you were joking above about Log 2 vs 3, I am sorry that I did not get the joke and reacted. But I read the post several times and it just came across and a rude remark - something you are known for, so perhaps I overreacted. In any case, if it was a joke (which I still do not get), I am sorry.


Math humor. The base-10 logarithm of 10 is 1, written as Log 10 = 1. Thus, Log 10 is # 1. Was not intending to offend.


----------



## sanj (Dec 23, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Math humor. The base-10 logarithm of 10 is 1, written as Log 10 = 1. Thus, Log 10 is # 1. Was not intending to offend.


You are right, I am math-challenged. I still do not get it. Let it be! LOL. Because the comparison was between 2 and 3. As I said, let it be.


----------



## dcm (Dec 23, 2021)

sanj said:


> Neuro, if you were joking above about Log 2 vs 3, I am sorry that I did not get the joke and reacted. But I read the post several times and it just came across and a rude remark - something you are known for, so perhaps I overreacted. In any case, if it was a joke (which I still do not get), I am sorry.


You probably weren't alone. The log 10 comment has a fairly narrow audience in the fields of science, math, and engineering. It also plays off one of the common themes on the forum where larger spec numbers (think megapixels, frames per second, etc.) are always better. So log 10 would naturally be better than log 2 or log 3. I don't think Canon is that far yet


----------



## Jethro (Dec 23, 2021)

To paraphrase Bishop Berkeley: 'If a joke is told in a forest, and nobody laughs, is it still a joke?'. Answer: Yes! Because of the path of destruction it leaves in its wake which can be observed later.


----------



## SUNDOG04 (Dec 23, 2021)

peters said:


> I think (depending on budget) the best landscape options right now are in this order the Canon R5, Sony a7R IV and Fuji GFX 100s. The sensor is incredible, expecialy at this pricepoint. And btw, many EF lenses cover the GFX 100s sensor!


I would add to that Nikon Z7 II


----------



## Inspired (Dec 23, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> The R3 is a great camera but unlimited record times is a feature Sony & Panasonic offer in all their weather-sealed hybrid cameras at the $2500+ price point. Hoping Canon competes.


When I first heard of the R5 I thought it was a direct competitor to the A7iii which it should have been but they instead put the R6. 
5d owners looking to upgrade to the R5 are now met with a price tag almost double the 5D pricing.


----------



## David - Sydney (Dec 23, 2021)

Inspired said:


> When I first heard of the R5 I thought it was a direct competitor to the A7iii which it should have been but they instead put the R6.
> 5d owners looking to upgrade to the R5 are now met with a price tag almost double the 5D pricing.


Where are you looking at pricing? The 5Div was released in 2016 @USD3599 and then added the clog upgrade a year later for $3600. 
The R5 is USD3900 so less than 10% price increase for substantially increased features (except for battery life!)


----------



## edoorn (Dec 23, 2021)

In fact, you're getting a better deal for your money since the worldwide inflation between 2016-2020 was higher than the price increase of the 5D4 -> R5


----------



## jayli (Dec 23, 2021)

The C70 has a dual gain output (DGO) sensor, which some people claimed to be a little better than A7S3. The R5, even in RAW, is crap (https://www.cined.com/canon-eos-r5-lab-test-to-film-in-raw-or-not/). C-Log 2 is only going to help to the extend still less than its own RAW dynamic range.


jwpatmore said:


> C-Log 2 would be huge as long as it is priced below the C70. My question is if it has C-Log 2, what will the dynamic range be compared to the C70 at 16+ stops?


----------



## Jordan23 (Dec 23, 2021)

peters said:


> I would be more interested in a good looking 4k240 though.


Actually me too. After playing with the 4K120P on my R5 the last month, I'll take higher fps in 4K over 8K60. Who knows, maybe Canon will surprise us with a 4K180/240 with the 5RC.


----------



## fox40phil (Dec 23, 2021)

Jordan23 said:


> Actually me too. After playing with the 4K120P on my R5 the last month, I'll take higher fps in 4K over 8K60. Who knows, maybe Canon will surprise us with a 4K180/240 with the 5RC.


I think this will only appear in a R5II. I am waiting for this one^^... with blackout free EVF and maybe 8k60.

Let’s see what the C brings to the R5!


----------



## HenryL (Dec 23, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Where are you looking at pricing? The 5Div was released in 2016 @USD3599 and then added the clog upgrade a year later for $3600.
> The R5 is USD3900 so less than 10% price increase for substantially increased features (except for battery life!)


Exactly. But why let facts get in the way of a good whinge?


----------



## bsbeamer (Dec 23, 2021)

Does Canon view the FX3 as the main competition here, or is it Nikon? Most people I know mostly want a Canon version of the FX3 that shoots better quality still images with much better native control/adapter of EF lenses. The rumored specs seems to be heading in that direction. Nikons are not exactly popular with video shooters.


----------



## DBounce (Dec 23, 2021)

bsbeamer said:


> Does Canon view the FX3 as the main competition here, or is it Nikon? Most people I know mostly want a Canon version of the FX3 that shoots better quality still images with much better native control/adapter of EF lenses. The rumored specs seems to be heading in that direction. Nikons are not exactly popular with video shooters.


The FX3 does not shoot better quality video than the A7S3. They are identical. That said, I do believe the R5C is inspired by the FX3. And that’s concerning. The FX3 has the same software as the stills variant; The same 4:3 rear display… Shutter speed rather than shutter angle. No additional video monitoring tools. And no excellent EVF. I believe the FX3 is actually a worst camera than the A7S3. But then again, overheating in practical use, was never an issue with the A7S3… rendering the FX3 largely irrelevant IMO.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Dec 23, 2021)

jayli said:


> The C70 has a dual gain output (DGO) sensor, which some people claimed to be a little better than A7S3. The R5, even in RAW, is crap (https://www.cined.com/canon-eos-r5-lab-test-to-film-in-raw-or-not/). C-Log 2 is only going to help to the extend still less than its own RAW dynamic range.


Probably should share the more contemporary link, covering CLog3 and the Ninja V+: https://www.cined.com/canon-r5-external-8k-prores-raw-dynamic-range-lab-test-8k-without-overheating/


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 23, 2021)

bsbeamer said:


> Does Canon view the FX3 as the main competition here, or is it Nikon? Most people I know mostly want a Canon version of the FX3 that shoots better quality still images with much better native control/adapter of EF lenses. The rumored specs seems to be heading in that direction. Nikons are not exactly popular with video shooters.


Canon just wants to sell cameras.
They are not in any spec contest against Sony or Nikon


----------



## Sampetra (Dec 23, 2021)

peters said:


> hm, which camera do you mean for 2500$? There is none as far as I can tell which offers the same image quality the R5 gives you AND 8k AND 4k120 AND a highres-sensor with 20fps for photography.... All of these models are compromising on one end. Only true hybrids which are stronger than the R5 current in BOTH, photo and video are the Sony A1 and the Nikon Z9. Which are both much more expensive.


The person you're replying to said _"The R3 is a great camera but unlimited record times is a feature Sony & Panasonic offer in all their weather-sealed hybrid cameras at the $2500+ price point. Hoping Canon competes."_ Your response not only doesn't address his issue, but is condescending and you make it seem like we should all genuflect in honor of the R5.

The simple fact is that the 29.59 recording limit is absolutely ludicrous on a body that expensive and other companies have excellent, cheaper cameras that don't have that flaw. The limit is arbitrarily forced on the user through software and there's no reason for it other than for Canon to upsell customers on more expensive cameras. Canon billed the R5 as the ultimate hybrid camera, it absolutely isn't that and they should join their competitors in removing the recoding limit. It costs nothing to remove.

I totally get that some folks have already said on this site something to the effect of, "then just buy a Sony/Panasonic/etc", but as someone that already owns Canon glass, it'd be nice if they offered a hybrid camera with no recording limit at the same price points as their competitors. We as consumers should expect more for our money, not stan for corporations and exclaim how happy we should be despite critical flaws.

Finally, in answer to your question:


> hm, which camera do you mean for 2500$?


Here's a few that have both weather sealing and no recording time limits with their current prices - 

a7 IV - $2,498
a7 III - $1,998
a6600 - $1,398
Lumix S5 - $1,697


----------



## RaPhoto (Dec 23, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The readout speed for video of the R5 and Z 9 are practically identical.
> The Z 9 is marginally faster.
> There is noticeable rolling shutter in video on the Z 9.
> None during photos.
> Which makes little sense with 120 FPS photos at 11 MP when 11 MP is more than enough for 4K video.


----------



## gavinz (Dec 23, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Good news. I guess the R1 will depend on how the Z9 does. I hear it is selling out which is not a surprise. I hope Sony and Nikon continues to pressure Canon on price and performance. I am still waiting for my RF switch which will be until we can travel more freely


----------



## RexxReviews (Dec 23, 2021)

Most likely going to announce at Imaging USA 2022 that runs from Jan 16–18, 2022 or RIGHT before the conference starts. I also expect to hear some Sigma news at this conference.


----------



## reef58 (Dec 23, 2021)

Sampetra said:


> The person you're replying to said _"The R3 is a great camera but unlimited record times is a feature Sony & Panasonic offer in all their weather-sealed hybrid cameras at the $2500+ price point. Hoping Canon competes."_ Your response not only doesn't address his issue, but is condescending and you make it seem like we should all genuflect in honor of the R5.
> 
> The simple fact is that the 29.59 recording limit is absolutely ludicrous on a body that expensive and other companies have excellent, cheaper cameras that don't have that flaw. The limit is arbitrarily forced on the user through software and there's no reason for it other than for Canon to upsell customers on more expensive cameras. Canon billed the R5 as the ultimate hybrid camera, it absolutely isn't that and they should join their competitors in removing the recoding limit. It costs nothing to remove.
> 
> ...


Each camera has compromises unfortunately. You have to decide which ones you can live with and choose from there. My only irritation with Canon is they do not sell the "ultimate" camera. My 1dx3 has auto focus which is not as capable as the R5. A C70, C100, C200, C300 etc have worse AF than the R5 and 1dx. The C70 is close, but has no EVF, and no full sized xlr's. I suspect the C200mk2 if one comes will be nice but who knows?


----------



## twoheadedboy (Dec 23, 2021)

Sampetra said:


> The person you're replying to said _"The R3 is a great camera but unlimited record times is a feature Sony & Panasonic offer in all their weather-sealed hybrid cameras at the $2500+ price point. Hoping Canon competes."_ Your response not only doesn't address his issue, but is condescending and you make it seem like we should all genuflect in honor of the R5.
> 
> The simple fact is that the 29.59 recording limit is absolutely ludicrous on a body that expensive and other companies have excellent, cheaper cameras that don't have that flaw. The limit is arbitrarily forced on the user through software and there's no reason for it other than for Canon to upsell customers on more expensive cameras. Canon billed the R5 as the ultimate hybrid camera, it absolutely isn't that and they should join their competitors in removing the recoding limit. It costs nothing to remove.
> 
> ...


I would prefer the limit wasn't there too - but how is it "ludicrous" for a *hybrid* body? If your goal is to routinely turn on the video camera and let it roll for 60/90/120+ min, wouldn't a non-hybrid video camera be a much better choice on a variety of fronts? Because you're getting to the point where you are maxing out your battery and storage on video usage, and cannot use the photo capturing capabilities of that camera. In my view, a "hybrid" body is either photo or video first but reflective of a usage pattern where a mix of usage in a period of time is the norm. There's really no such thing as a purely photo-oriented mirrorless, so maybe a Canon shooter has a cine for long-form video and an R5/6 or R3 for photography and specific short-form video applications (b-roll, field shots, etc.) You can even retrofit an R5 to be better-suited to longform video by adding a Ninja V/V+ to it.


----------



## iheartcanon (Dec 23, 2021)

tomislavmoze said:


> It overheat in 1080 120p unfortunately almost as fast as 4k. At the end R6 is better regarding record time recovery and 1080p modes.


Has this actually happened to you? 

I have never heard about any overheating in 1080p. 

Perhaps there were other factors involved (wrong video C3 settings etc) as I cannot see this being normal.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Dec 24, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> Why would you expect a newer camera to do less?
> I guess the question should be will the R5 Mark II do anything this doesn't.


Good questions. I suppose my original question boils down to: Is the R5c a true successor to the R5 that does *everything* the R5 does, plus enhanced video capabilities? Or will the R5 retain some advantages for still photography?

If it's the former (everything + enhanced video), then the question becomes why is it called R5c and not R5 Mark II? Canon has traditionally gone longer between "Mark" updates for its higher end bodies, so maybe calling it Mark II after only 18 months would risk pissing off a very profitable customer segment. Or maybe they just want to emphasize its enhanced video capabilities.

@peters mentioned weather sealing as another difference (post #62), since a fan requires vents. I suppose the fan will also shorten battery life, so the original R5 may have an advantage there too.

Perhaps the real "R5 Mark II" will be released when Canon is able to include all of the R5 + R5c features in a single sealed body that doesn't overhead and doesn't require a fan or ventilation openings.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 24, 2021)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> @peters mentioned weather sealing as another difference, since a fan requires vents. I suppose the fan will also shorten battery life, so the original R5 may have an advantage there too.


There’s no reason it can’t be fan-cooled and weather sealed. It’s not like the fan is going to blow air on the sensor. It just needs to cool the back side of a heat sink.


----------



## entoman (Dec 24, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> There’s no reason it can’t be fan-cooled and weather sealed. It’s not like the fan is going to blow air on the sensor. It just needs to cool the back side of a heat sink.


The way I see it is that the important internals of the camera will be fully weather sealed, but the fan-cooling unit can't be, as it must allow a free flow of air (and therefore moisture and water) to the fan itself.

But I don't really see that as a major problem. Anyone using a camera (even a fully sealed 1Dxiii or D6) will take sensible precautions and use some kind of rain-shield in appropriate circumstances. Sure, it's possible to get caught out by an unexpected rain shower, but a poncho or even a clear plastic bag takes up barely any room in a pocket or cambag. Operating a camera with a rain-shield is a bit cumbersome compared with a "bare" camera, but there again standing about in the pouring rain isn't exactly comfortable anyway.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 24, 2021)

entoman said:


> The way I see it is that the important internals of the camera will be fully weather sealed, but the fan-cooling unit can't be, as it must allow a free flow of air (and therefore moisture and water) to the fan itself.
> 
> But I don't really see that as a major problem. Anyone using a camera (even a fully sealed 1Dxiii or D6) will take sensible precautions and use some kind of rain-shield in appropriate circumstances. Sure, it's possible to get caught out by an unexpected rain shower, but a poncho or even a clear plastic bag takes up barely any room in a pocket or cambag. Operating a camera with a rain-shield is a bit cumbersome compared with a "bare" camera, but there agin standing about in the pouring rain isn't exactly comfortable anyway.


Waterproof fans are not difficult or expensive to make.


----------



## entoman (Dec 24, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Waterproof fans are not difficult or expensive to make.


Probably true, I wouldn't know. Either way, I have complete confidence that Canon's engineers are easily capable of designing a cooling system that will at worst have a very minimal effect on weather-sealing.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 24, 2021)

entoman said:


> The way I see it is that the important internals of the camera will be fully weather sealed, but the fan-cooling unit can't be, as it must allow a free flow of air (and therefore moisture and water) to the fan itself.


The point is, the fan cooling unit does not need to be open to the rest of the camera. It can be a separate, ‘open’ chamber (or sealed with a membrane), on the back of a heat sink (solid metal).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 24, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Waterproof fans are not difficult or expensive to make.


Impeller pumps are fans that work when submerged. Ever had a fish tank? There’s one in my cat’s water fountain, too.


----------



## entoman (Dec 24, 2021)

I've read that most of the heat generated comes from the memory cards, rather than from the sensor or processor(s). So perhaps the engineering problem that needs to be solved, is how to extract heat from the cards. Attaching a heat sink directly to a removable card might be problematic.


----------



## mdcmdcmdc (Dec 24, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> There’s no reason it can’t be fan-cooled and weather sealed. It’s not like the fan is going to blow air on the sensor. It just needs to cool the back side of a heat sink.


Ah, so you’re suggesting the back of the heat sink (the radiating part) crosses the boundary of the weather sealed core, then the fan can be in the non-weather sealed region. Makes sense.


----------



## Sampetra (Dec 24, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> I would prefer the limit wasn't there too - but how is it "ludicrous" for a *hybrid* body? If your goal is to routinely turn on the video camera and let it roll for 60/90/120+ min, wouldn't a non-hybrid video camera be a much better choice on a variety of fronts? Because you're getting to the point where you are maxing out your battery and storage on video usage, and cannot use the photo capturing capabilities of that camera. In my view, a "hybrid" body is either photo or video first but reflective of a usage pattern where a mix of usage in a period of time is the norm. There's really no such thing as a purely photo-oriented mirrorless, so maybe a Canon shooter has a cine for long-form video and an R5/6 or R3 for photography and specific short-form video applications (b-roll, field shots, etc.) You can even retrofit an R5 to be better-suited to longform video by adding a Ninja V/V+ to it.


It's ludicrous considering that Sony and Panasonic have hybrid cameras that cost less than the R5 that also have weather sealing and no record limits.

As far as I'm concerned the R5 isn't a hybrid camera, for video work it's a glorified toy.

Also, as I said in my first comment it costs Canon _nothing_ to remove the record limit. It's only there to upsell customers to other cameras and is an awful practice that should be called out.

Regarding adding a Ninja, why should I pay more for additional hardware/batteries just to get a feature that should already be there? That's insane and says to me that you're willing to throw money at a problem that Canon intentionally caused in order to get you to spend more money. So... I guess Canon's plan worked on you.



> reef58 said:
> Each camera has compromises unfortunately. You have to decide which ones you can live with and choose from there. My only irritation with Canon is they do not sell the "ultimate" camera. My 1dx3 has auto focus which is not as capable as the R5. A C70, C100, C200, C300 etc have worse AF than the R5 and 1dx. The C70 is close, but has no EVF, and no full sized xlr's. I suspect the C200mk2 if one comes will be nice but who knows?



Sure, I get that...

...but the recording time limit is a "comprise" that Canon arbitrarily forces on the user. It costs them nothing to remove that limitation. There's no extra hardware or R&D to make that happen.

The "feature" of unlimited recording time already exists on competitors cameras in both the R5's price bracket _and lower price brackets._

It's intellectually dishonest of you to say that the lack of unlimited record time is a "compromise" when it costs Canon literally nothing to remove it. Don't defend their shady business tactics.


----------



## 2Cents (Dec 24, 2021)

jwpatmore said:


> C-Log 2 would be huge as long as it is priced below the C70. My question is if it has C-Log 2, what will the dynamic range be compared to the C70 at 16+ stops?


C-log 2 would be great but easier to edit video codecs will be the most important feature for me. Just smooth and easy to edit for the majority of users and people will love it.


----------



## peters (Dec 25, 2021)

Sampetra said:


> Finally, in answer to your question:
> 
> Here's a few that have both weather sealing and no recording time limits with their current prices -
> 
> ...


Okay, yes, these have no recording limit. But otherwise they are far far far far away from the feature set the R5 got.
All of these have SIGNIFICANT less megapixel. which does matter to a lot of photographers.
All of these got no 8k, no 4k120 (or am I mistaken?), no external nor internal raw video at all (maybe the lumix does?). The a6600 doesnt even have a fullframe sensor and the lumix S5 doenst have any usable autofocus.
All of these are great cameras, especialy at the pricepoint. And yes, you are correct, they do offer unlimited recording. But so does the iPhone or any cheap camcorder for 500 bugs.

Yes, Canon could include unlimited recording and they should. But this comparison is in my opinion realy far off.
The only cameras with the same features, resolution and speed in photo AND video mode, are the Nikon Z9 and the a1. Both cost over 6k currently 
And its worth pointing out that you can record unlimited in ANY mode with an external recorder with the R5. Even in 8k raw (!), in 4k HQ or in 4k60. In my experience a monitor is for serious video work a must have. So the Ninja V can easily solve this problem - with prores, prores raw, h.265, with external power if needed, with extra audio layers, timecode, directly to an SSD.
But of course you are right, it would be better if Canon would remove this limit in the camera so we would not need additional gear =)


----------



## peters (Dec 25, 2021)

SUNDOG04 said:


> I would add to that Nikon Z7 II


True =)


----------



## peters (Dec 25, 2021)

Rocksthaman said:


> He’s clearly talking about unlimited recording, weather sealed hybrid cameras. That would be the Sony A7iv & A7c and Panasonics s5


ok, thats true, I missed that. In that regard its totaly true.

Though I think the comparison is off. These are great cameras, but got much less features, especialy in the photo department (much lower megapixel count, much slower, no usable autofocus, no 8k, no 4k120, no raw video...)

So yes, its certainly possible and cant be a problem for canon to remove this limitation. But the comparison is not quite fair =)


----------



## peters (Dec 25, 2021)

Sampetra said:


> As far as I'm concerned the R5 isn't a hybrid camera, for video work it's a glorified toy.


Sorry, but this is a bit harsh, dont you think?
I use the R5 for both every day. I agree that its certainly more at home in the photo-department. Given the micro hdmi input its obvious that video was maybe not the first priority.

But saying its a toy is over the top. If we look at the specs its pretty obviously a serious tool. 
It offers 8k raw. And external prores RAW without recording limit. 
4k60 and 5k60 clog prores raw externaly
4k30 oversampled from 8k which looks STUNNING in 4:2:2 clog1 and clog3.
4k120 which looks excellent.

All these modes are qualitywise excellent and just as good as the competition. 
Paired with ibis and one of the best AF systems, all inside a small body which works great on gimbals, drones or handheld. 
You can add an atomos for additional sound recording options.

All these specs are hardly found in many other fullframe hybrid cameras. Actualy only the Nikon z9 and Sony a1 (which are both way more expensive) got the same features. Another option is the Sona a7s IV which is certinaly a more rounded video camera, but with 12mp a bit lacking on the pohotography side. Other option may be the Lumix S1H, which is missing a usable AF system. 

Only thing I miss is a better audio interface. but given the size its hard to implement and comparable models are not much better. The R5c will adress this with the hotshoe interface. The R5 even got timecode over hdmi and peaking. 


The record limit and the micro hdmi port are hardly big enough points to say the R5 is a toy when it comes to video. Especialy since you get 8k raw, 4k120 internaly and 5k60 raw out of it.


----------



## peters (Dec 25, 2021)

entoman said:


> I've read that most of the heat generated comes from the memory cards, rather than from the sensor or processor(s). So perhaps the engineering problem that needs to be solved, is how to extract heat from the cards. Attaching a heat sink directly to a removable card might be problematic.


I think its the sensor and processor, not so much the card. This guy build a cooling unit for the chip. He goes into great detail =)


----------



## twoheadedboy (Dec 26, 2021)

Sampetra said:


> It's ludicrous considering that Sony and Panasonic have hybrid cameras that cost less than the R5 that also have weather sealing and no record limits.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned the R5 isn't a hybrid camera, for video work it's a glorified toy.
> 
> ...



I don't know. Move to Sony, I guess? Again, I don't disagree that others don't have more video features on a stills-based body. I also agree with the 30 min recording limit being disappointing. What you have failed to address is the very nature of "hybrid" that I previously raised, because you didn't counter what I said with any real shooting scenarios, just brochure bullet points. I will state again - a shooter who routinely needs to shoot long format video would be better served by owning/renting a proper video camera, because "hybrid" as Canon defines it (and the marketplace agrees, judging by sales), are scenarios where you are *mixing* stills and video; it is not suggestive of a cine-worthy level of video capabilities packed into a stills body with no limits. 

I would love to shoot 2+ hr videos directly on my R5, but that's simply because I don't wish to own or rent a video body for the scenarios in which I want to do that (a few times per year at most). And when I do that, I know I'm not shooting stills, or I have to carry a 2nd body to do so (generally I'm prioritizing video over stills and taking a few snaps with my high-end phone), therefore it's not a "hybrid" situation. A hybrid scenario would be if I was taking candids at a wedding reception and recorded the cake cutting to video (R5 has no issues accommodating this situation, even with 8K or 4K120); if I was the staffed videographer recording the whole wedding, I would not be doing so on my stills body! This is basically the same argument about the EOS R not having 2 card slots...not an issue for most people, definitely not an issue for the intended audience. I shot that body with no issues for 3 years, though I appreciate having 2 card slots on my R5 now.

It's not "ludicrous" though, because if it was, you wouldn't be on a Canon forum having this argument, you'd just be shooting Sony, which you indicate has what you want. There's a difference between what's ideal and what's possible, vs. what Canon might be interested in bringing to the market. They have never not had the 30 min cap so you're not encumbered by something that did not previously exist, and if it's that important to you (and others), then dollars will do the talking, Sony will start to overtake Canon, and they'll have to change course. I don't see that happening though, because MOST stills and hybrid shooters are not blocked by the 30 minute limit, and those that are probably have a cine body or a Ninja anyway, and are choosing to work around Canon's limitations because they prefer the other features the platform has, rather than shoot Sony solely because they don't impose a video limit on their stills bodies.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 26, 2021)

mdcmdcmdc said:


> If it's the former (everything + enhanced video), then the question becomes why is it called R5c and not R5 Mark II?


The R5 Mark II would not have active cooling and even more still photo features than the R5.
I would also expect at least 50 MP.
For reference look at the S1 and S1H.
The Sony FX3 is an a7S III with active cooling, no EVF, and a different name entirely.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Dec 26, 2021)

entoman said:


> Probably true, I wouldn't know. Either way, I have complete confidence that Canon's engineers are easily capable of designing a cooling system that will at worst have a very minimal effect on weather-sealing.


The C70 already has such a system.


----------



## Sampetra (Dec 27, 2021)

peters said:


> And its worth pointing out that you can record unlimited in ANY mode with an external recorder with the R5. Even in 8k raw (!), in 4k HQ or in 4k60. In my experience a monitor is for serious video work a must have. So the Ninja V can easily solve this problem - with prores, prores raw, h.265, with external power if needed, with extra audio layers, timecode, directly to an SSD.
> But of course you are right, it would be better if Canon would remove this limit in the camera so we would not need additional gear =)



Why should I buy an external recorder, adding to cost and space in my bag, to get a feature that Sony and Panasonic cameras in the same and cheaper price brackets already have? 

It costs Canon _nothing _to remove the recording limit. It's there to upsell people, why are you defending this?



twoheadedboy said:


> I don't know. Move to Sony, I guess? Again, I don't disagree that others don't have more video features on a stills-based body. I also agree with the 30 min recording limit being disappointing. What you have failed to address is the very nature of "hybrid" that I previously raised, because you didn't counter what I said with any real shooting scenarios, just brochure bullet points. I will state again - a shooter who routinely needs to shoot long format video would be better served by owning/renting a proper video camera, because "hybrid" as Canon defines it (and the marketplace agrees, judging by sales), are scenarios where you are *mixing* stills and video; it is not suggestive of a cine-worthy level of video capabilities packed into a stills body with no limits.
> 
> I would love to shoot 2+ hr videos directly on my R5, but that's simply because I don't wish to own or rent a video body for the scenarios in which I want to do that (a few times per year at most). And when I do that, I know I'm not shooting stills, or I have to carry a 2nd body to do so (generally I'm prioritizing video over stills and taking a few snaps with my high-end phone), therefore it's not a "hybrid" situation. A hybrid scenario would be if I was taking candids at a wedding reception and recorded the cake cutting to video (R5 has no issues accommodating this situation, even with 8K or 4K120); if I was the staffed videographer recording the whole wedding, I would not be doing so on my stills body! This is basically the same argument about the EOS R not having 2 card slots...not an issue for most people, definitely not an issue for the intended audience. I shot that body with no issues for 3 years, though I appreciate having 2 card slots on my R5 now.
> 
> It's not "ludicrous" though, because if it was, you wouldn't be on a Canon forum having this argument, you'd just be shooting Sony, which you indicate has what you want. There's a difference between what's ideal and what's possible, vs. what Canon might be interested in bringing to the market. They have never not had the 30 min cap so you're not encumbered by something that did not previously exist, and if it's that important to you (and others), then dollars will do the talking, Sony will start to overtake Canon, and they'll have to change course. I don't see that happening though, because MOST stills and hybrid shooters are not blocked by the 30 minute limit, and those that are probably have a cine body or a Ninja anyway, and are choosing to work around Canon's limitations because they prefer the other features the platform has, rather than shoot Sony solely because they don't impose a video limit on their stills bodies.



This is what "hybrid" means to me: that it is capable of doing both jobs, but might compromise on premium features. The R5 is a great stills camera, but the record time limit for me means that it is not suited for any kind of professional work that I do, which is shooting interviews. With that in mind, the R5 isn't even a second angle B camera. 

The R5 isn't a hybrid because it literally cannot do even the most basic function of my work.

For the R5 to be a "hybrid" to me, it should be able to shoot unlimited 1080p and non-upscaled 4k. The premium features in my mind are things like high fps slow motion modes, internal NDs, etc. Those I expect to pay more for, not a basic recording mode offered in the same and cheaper price brackets by Sony and Panasonic.

You say that I should just move to Sony, but as I said earlier in this very thread I already have a decent amount of Canon lenses and I'd like to avoid moving systems if I can. 

The question you should really be asking is this: why does Canon think that unlimited record length is a premium feature while Sony and Panasonic see it as a basic feature?

Doesn't it bother you that Canon forces customers to pay way more out of pocket for something that both costs them nothing _and_ that their competitors offer already?


----------



## twoheadedboy (Dec 27, 2021)

Sampetra said:


> For the R5 to be a "hybrid" to me, it should be able to shoot unlimited 1080p and non-upscaled 4k. The premium features in my mind are things like high fps slow motion modes, internal NDs, etc. Those I expect to pay more for, not a basic recording mode offered in the same and cheaper price brackets by Sony and Panasonic.
> 
> You say that I should just move to Sony, but as I said earlier in this very thread I already have a decent amount of Canon lenses and I'd like to avoid moving systems if I can.
> 
> ...


You bought your Canon cameras and lenses without unlimited 1080p and non-upscaled 4k. Canon has never suggested they would offer these features in a stills or hybrid body, whether at time of sale or through firmware upgrades. So you either invested in "a decent amount of Canon lenses" when you didn't need these features, or you did so without properly understanding how important they were to your work. Or you are playing devil's advocate now - you STILL haven't described what it is you do that necessitates both 1. An R5 that shoots > 30 min video 2. An R5c (as-speculated) *not* being an adequate solution for that requirement.

I don't know why Canon separates > 30 min videos away from their stills/hybrid-oriented bodies, but it impacts me little, which is why I own and enjoy my R5, and I later purchased a Ninja V+, as a choice to enhance my video capture abilities without buying a 2nd body of any kind to do so. And though it's not just about me, as previously stated, I do not see how this decision impacts a large number of legitimate hybrid workflows - you have not illustrated anything to the contrary, just your arbitrary definition of what YOU think is a "premium video feature" and what's not.


----------



## Sampetra (Dec 27, 2021)

twoheadedboy said:


> I don't know why Canon separates > 30 min videos away from their stills/hybrid-oriented bodies, but it impacts me little, which is why I own and enjoy my R5, and I later purchased a Ninja V+, as a choice to enhance my video capture abilities without buying a 2nd body of any kind to do so. And though it's not just about me, as previously stated, I do not see how this decision impacts a large number of legitimate hybrid workflows - you have not illustrated anything to the contrary, just your arbitrary definition of what YOU think is a "premium video feature" and what's not.



_Translation: I have no idea why Canon continues this absolutely awful business practice but since it only affects people who are not me I not only don't care but will also spend extra money on additional hardware to get that feature that I say I don't care about._

You say "I do not see how this decision impacts a large number of legitimate hybrid workflows - you have not illustrated anything to the contrary, just your arbitrary definition of what YOU think is a "premium video feature" and what's not."

First off, my definition of "premium video feature" is just as arbitrary as yours. According to me, 4k slow-mo and internal NDs are premium. According to you, unlimited record times featured on competitors cameras in the same and lower price brackets are premium. I'll throw myself upon the mercy of more expensive cinema cameras having the features I listed as evidence on which feature is actually premium.

Second, my hybrid workflow is absolutely impacted by the recording time limit. I use a C100 as my main camera for interviews, but it would be nice to reliably have the R5 as a not just a stills/b-roll camera, but a genuine second angle camera. However, since you say "I do not see how this decision impacts a large number of legitimate hybrid workflows - you have not illustrated anything to the contrary", I guess that my workflow is illegitimate.



twoheadedboy said:


> You bought your Canon cameras and lenses without unlimited 1080p and non-upscaled 4k. Canon has never suggested they would offer these features in a stills or hybrid body, whether at time of sale or through firmware upgrades. So you either invested in "a decent amount of Canon lenses" when you didn't need these features, or you did so without properly understanding how important they were to your work.



I bought my Canon lenses years ago for stills, but I've been looking to get a new camera body to supplement my video work. It'd be nice if I didn't need to change camera systems to get a hybrid camera that is _actually_ hybrid. Your condescension to my process for purchasing gear however, is noted. 

You're right, I didn't purchase those items at the time with video in mind. That said, it's nearly 2022 and Sony and Panasonic both have cameras in the same and cheaper price brackets that have the (in my apparently arbitrary opinion as opposed to your legitimate opinion) basic feature of unlimited record time. 

The R5 is an excellent stills camera and should be commended for its stills ability. However, Canon promoted it as the ultimate hybrid camera, which in my opinion was a straight up lie. If it can't perform the most basic video function for me, it's a toy and not a tool. Canon should never have advertised it as such.

If the R5c has unlimited record times, I'm absolutely a potential customer as I'd like to have to avoid changing systems.


----------



## jam05 (Dec 27, 2021)

peters said:


> I think its the sensor and processor, not so much the card. This guy build a cooling unit for the chip. He goes into great detail =)


The memory card gets hot. However the processor get about 3 x hotter. I measured both using an infrared FLUKE meter and FLIR ONE. Use a bit more research than that one Youtube video


----------



## jam05 (Dec 27, 2021)

robotfist said:


> I've mentioned it before, but I'd really rather have the R5C sensor use less megapixels and be better in lowlight than have unlimited 8k. For shooting video, I find better light sensitivity to be a much more useful feature than more resolution.


All that about less megapixels = better in lowlight is mostly a pure myth when it comes to modern digital cameras. And has been disproven countless of times. There are numerous new cameras with more pixels than the supposedly those "lowlight monster" low pixel count cameras with equal or better lowlight capabilities. And low resolution images displayed on a modern high resolution display *will most often not look better*.








DPReview TV: Why lower resolution sensors are not better in low light


A common belief in the camera world is that lower resolution cameras – and larger pixels – perform better in low light. In this video we illustrate why you should question that bit of conventional wisdom.




www.dpreview.com


----------



## SNJ Ops (Dec 28, 2021)

peters said:


> I think (depending on budget) the best landscape options right now are in this order the Canon R5, Sony a7R IV and Fuji GFX 100s. The sensor is incredible, expecialy at this pricepoint. And btw, many EF lenses cover the GFX 100s sensor!


Going from what I have seen on reviews the Nikon Z7II or A7RIV give the best image quality on FF with the R5 behind both.

As for the GFX 100 Mark Denney reported in one of his videos that he is having to stack multiple images to get the required DOF that he could get in 1 shot on his APSC and FF systems. That tilt and shift lens Fuji announced earlier in the year will be eagerly awaited by GFX shooters.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 28, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> Going from what I have seen on reviews the Nikon Z7II or A7RIV give the best image quality on FF with the R5 behind both.
> 
> As for the GFX 100 Mark Denney reported in one of his videos that he is having to stack multiple images to get the required DOF that he could get in 1 shot on his APSC and FF systems. That tilt and shift lens Fuji announced earlier in the year will be eagerly awaited by GFX shooters.


The GFX system has a 0.79 crop factor from FF. All you need to do to get exactly the same DOF as FF from the same spot is to divide the focal length and aperture by 0.79.

So for example, if i had an R5 and a GFX 100S and I wanted to make a fair comparison of image quality by getting exactly the same shot from the same place and the R5 was set at 24mm, f8, 100iso. I’d use a 30mm, f10, iso 126 on the GFX. No tilt needed.

This would give me a very similar fov (it would be different because they have a different aspect ratio) but the same depth of field and the same noise. It would also show me that there is no substitute for sensor size and the FujiFilm pisses over anything and everything else. The subtlety of tonality and resolution, plus the very high quality of color rendition and the multitude of film profiles you get from the FujiFilm basically makes a mockery of anything else in the landscape arena.

If you want ‘the best’ landscape camera and are comparing it to FF then the very similarly priced GFX 50S II pisses over everything, if you really do want to print BIG then the GFX 100S is the tool to get you there for a couple of thousand dollars more.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 28, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> As for the GFX 100 Mark Denney reported in one of his videos that he is having to stack multiple images to get the required DOF that he could get in 1 shot on his APSC and FF systems. That tilt and shift lens Fuji announced earlier in the year will be eagerly awaited by GFX shooters.


@privatebydesign summarized the reason for my guffaw. I don’t know who Mark Denney is, but I now know to ignore anything I happen to come across from him, as he clearly doesn’t understand some important aspects of photography.

Would you like to quote some information from the Flat Earth Society next? You seem gullible enough to do so.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 28, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> @privatebydesign summarized the reason for my guffaw. I don’t know who Mark Denney is, but I now know to ignore anything I happen to come across from him, as he clearly doesn’t understand some important aspects of photography.
> 
> Would you like to quote some information from the Flat Earth Society next? You seem gullible enough to do so.


He, Denny, also says he brackets for exposure far less with the GFX 100S than he had to with his XT 4. So even given his compromised physics understanding of dof and aperture he is still taking approximately half the number of shots he did with the XT 4 with his GFX on any given trip.





 @ 7:54


----------



## SNJ Ops (Dec 29, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> @privatebydesign summarized the reason for my guffaw. I don’t know who Mark Denney is, but I now know to ignore anything I happen to come across from him, as he clearly doesn’t understand some important aspects of photography.
> 
> Would you like to quote some information from the Flat Earth Society next? You seem gullible enough to do so.


Have you used the GFX system on a regular basis yourself to refute what he has said? In the comment section of his video others are discussing that they too have come across the very same issue.

You made a conclusion based on something I wrote on the internet yet I’m the gullible one?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> Have you used the GFX system on a regular basis yourself to refute what he has said? In the comment section of his video others are discussing that they too have come across the very same issue.
> 
> You made a conclusion based on something I wrote on the internet yet I’m the gullible one?


I made a conclusion based on knowledge of the principles of depth of field and equivalence.

The comments section merely shows that there are several people who lack a technical understanding of photography. You can find many posts on this forum from people claiming they choose to use APS-C cameras instead of FF because they want more DoF. The fact that many people make the same mistake doesn’t make them correct. The Flat Earth Society has many members, does that mean their belief is correct? No, it just means there are a lot of idiots out there.

As to your first question, I haven’t used the GFX. I have a large collection of 645 negatives from back in the day when medium format meant more than ‘a bit larger than FF’.


----------



## SNJ Ops (Dec 29, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> I made a conclusion based on knowledge of the principles of depth of field and equivalence.
> 
> The comments section merely shows that there are several people who lack a technical understanding of photography. You can find many posts on this forum from people claiming they choose to use APS-C cameras instead of FF because they want more DoF. The fact that many people make the same mistake doesn’t make them correct. The Flat Earth Society has many members, does that mean their belief is correct? No, it just means there are a lot of idiots out there.
> 
> As to your first question, I haven’t used the GFX. I have a large collection of 645 negatives from back in the day when medium format meant more than ‘a bit larger than FF’.


People are reporting that the issue of too shallow depth of field on the GFX100 for landscape is being magnified both by the nature of it being digital and that its 100mp.

If you haven’t used the camera you can’t claim all of those people lack an understanding of the technical aspects of photography. Some things which are true for film aren’t always true for digital.

Your flat earth society analogy doesn’t apply, Mark demonstrated the issue he found in his video with proof. Tell him that he and all the others in his comment section are wrong but you are right but you haven’t shot with that camera.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> Have you used the GFX system on a regular basis yourself to refute what he has said? In the comment section of his video others are discussing that they too have come across the very same issue.
> 
> You made a conclusion based on something I wrote on the internet yet I’m the gullible one?


Anybody that refutes the physics simply hasn’t done the comparison. It isn’t rocket science or a personal opinion, it is simple physics.

You could refer back to this post from 2013...





__





Can the 70-200 2.8L II IS replace my 100L and 135L?


Again, I already sold my 100L, kept the 135L and bought the 70-200L. Version II of course. I also bought a 500D close up lens for the little macro work I wanna do, sure I don't get 1:1 but easily the double of what the 70-200 can natively do. Anywho, if I find myself in need of a macro anytime...




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> People are reporting that the issue of too shallow depth of field on the GFX100 for landscape is being magnified both by the nature of it being digital and that its 100mp.
> 
> If you haven’t used the camera you can’t claim all of those people lack an understanding of the technical aspects of photography. Some things which are true for film aren’t always true for digital.
> 
> Your flat earth society analogy doesn’t apply, Mark demonstrated the issue he found in his video with proof. Tell him that he and all the others in his comment section are wrong but you are right but you haven’t shot with that camera.


Can you point to a single example of an actual normalized comparison (uprez the ff to 102mp or downrez the FujiFilm to the same as the FF) where equivalence has been respected at exposure? I can’t find one.

This leads me to believe that people, however well intentioned, do not understand equivalence.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> People are reporting that the issue of too shallow depth of field on the GFX100 for landscape is being magnified both by the nature of it being digital and that its 100mp.
> 
> If you haven’t used the camera you can’t claim all of those people lack an understanding of the technical aspects of photography. Some things which are true for film aren’t always true for digital.
> 
> Your flat earth society analogy doesn’t apply, Mark demonstrated the issue he found in his video with proof. Tell him that he and all the others in his comment section are wrong but you are right but you haven’t shot with that camera.


The example is relevant. The Flat Earth Society offers ‘proof’ as well. I don’t need to have walked the circumference of the earth to know their ‘proof’ is wrong.

Recently, @DBounce posted a link to a video that offered ‘proof’ the R3 couldn’t achieve 30 fps shooting in the real world and claimed based on that video that the spec was marketing hype that somehow only paid reviewers could achieve. It turned out the guy that made the video didn’t understand the technicalities involved (he was using too slow a shutter speed to support 30 fps). I pointed that out to @DBounce who proceeded to defend the guy (but later, the YouTuber admitted he didn’t use the proper settings…surprise, surprise). 

My conclusion is based on an understanding of the relevant factors affecting DoF. It’s abundantly clear from perusing this forum that many people lack that understanding, as does Denning, the commenters on his video, and apparently you.

Tell me, does the ‘proof’ in Denning’s video involve mural-sized prints of his work viewed at arm’s length?


----------



## SNJ Ops (Dec 29, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> The example is relevant. The Flat Earth Society offers ‘proof’ as well. I don’t need to have walked the circumference of the earth to know their ‘proof’ is wrong.
> 
> Recently, @DBounce posted a link to a video that offered ‘proof’ the R3 couldn’t achieve 30 fps shooting in the real world and claimed based on that video that the spec was marketing hype that somehow only paid reviewers could achieve. It turned out the guy that made the video didn’t understand the technicalities involved (he was using too slow a shutter speed to support 30 fps). I pointed that out to @DBounce who proceeded to defend the guy (but later, the YouTuber admitted he didn’t use the proper settings…surprise, surprise).
> 
> ...


In his video he demonstrates 2 scenes shot at around 32mm at f16 (ff equivalence of 25mm and f13) and he still had to stack multiple images to get everything in focus in the final photo. So where did he go wrong?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> In his video he demonstrates 2 scenes shot at around 32mm at f16 (ff equivalence of 25mm and f13) and he still had to stack multiple images to get everything in focus in the final photo. So where did he go wrong?


What were the viewing dimensions and distance of the ‘final photo’?


----------



## SNJ Ops (Dec 29, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> What were the viewing dimensions and distance of the ‘final photo’?


He demonstrated this on his monitor. Even before he magnifies the image in LR the background looks soft, afterwards it’s completely out of focus. Even a moderate sized print would only show this even more.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> He demonstrated this on his monitor.


As I suspected. Any ‘issue’ with 32mm f/16 on the GFX would have occurred on a FF camera with FF equivalent focal length and aperture. In other words, it’s not a ‘problem’ with the larger, higher MP sensor.

Now, it could be a problem with the lens. In early DSLR days, people complained about the EF 17-40L having soft results after moving from an APS-C DSLR to a 5-series, and blamed the larger sensor. The problem was actually that the lens is soft away from the center, even stopped down, and using more of the image circle revealed the softness. No idea if that’s what is going on here, but I do know that going from a FF sensor to the GFX isn’t the problem here.


----------



## SNJ Ops (Dec 29, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> As I suspected.


Printing larger will only make that softness in the foreground even more noticeable.

So either he and others don’t understand the principles of DOF or it’s necessary to focus images when using the GFX 100s that otherwise wouldn’t be necessary on FF or APSC.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> So either he and others don’t understand the principles of DOF


As I said, that’s quite common. Even high-profile photographers (and I have no idea if he is one) are not immune to ignorance of technical considerations.


----------



## SNJ Ops (Dec 29, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> As I said, that’s quite common. Even high-profile photographers (and I have no idea if he is one) are not immune to ignorance of technical considerations.


While I’m sure that is true it doesn’t mean that’s what’s happened in this case. Again he was at 25mm f13 in FF equivalence terms yet still needed to stack multiple images to get everything in focus, why do you think that is? Stop down further and the exposure time increases which might not always be desirable.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> While I’m sure that is true it doesn’t mean that’s what’s happened in this case. Again he was at 25mm f13 in FF equivalence terms yet still needed to stack multiple images to get everything in focus, why do you think that is? Stop down further and the exposure time increases which might not always be desirable.


Then you raise the ISO instead of increasing exposure time, because _equivalence_. Also, if focus stacking is a solution then how is increasing exposure time a problem?

How do you not grasp that if he’d shot the image on FF at 25mm f/13 and used the same output/viewing conditions, what was in focus in that image would be in focus in his 32mm f/16 MF image? Is it because you don’t understand equivalence?

If there is less depth of field with the MF shot then something else has changed, e.g. viewing conditions. If you compare a 100 MP image at 100% to a 30 MP image at 100% on the same display, perceived sharpness will differ, of course.


----------



## SNJ Ops (Dec 29, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Then you raise the ISO instead of increasing exposure time, because _equivalence_. Also, if focus stacking is a solution then how is increasing exposure time a problem?
> 
> How do you not grasp that if he’d shot the image on FF at 25mm f/13 and used the same output/viewing conditions, what was in focus in that image would be in focus in his 32mm f/16 MF image? Is it because you don’t understand equivalence?
> 
> If there is less depth of field with the MF shot then something else has changed, e.g. viewing conditions. If you compare a 100 MP image at 100% to a 30 MP image at 100% on the same display, perceived sharpness will differ, of course.


Raising ISO and stopping down the lens beyond f16 introduces noise and possibly the lens will show the effects of diffraction.

On a windy day with moving elements a longer exposure time is no good or if you simply want to freeze even slow moving action.

I have an understanding of equivalence, yet he did precisely that, shot his scene at 32mm f16 on the GFX yet he needed to focus stack as his DOF was too shallow to get the background and foreground in focus in one shot. Watch his video and you can see for yourself.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 29, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> Raising ISO and stopping down the lens beyond f16 introduces noise and possibly the lens will show the effects of diffraction.
> 
> On a windy day with moving elements a longer exposure time is no good or if you simply want to freeze even slow moving action.
> 
> I have an understanding of equivalence, yet he did precisely that, shot his scene at 32mm f16 on the GFX yet he needed to focus stack as his DOF was too shallow to get the background and foreground in focus in one shot. Watch his video and you can see for yourself.


Please read about equivalence. Diffraction and noise (and aperture) are all related to ultimate subject magnification. With a ff camera you have to enlarge the captured medium more than you do the medium format capture so the impact of noise and diffraction is more from the smaller format.

As I said earlier, if you divide the aperture, focal length and iso by the crop factor, in this case 0.79, you get two images with identical framing, depth of field (and diffraction) and noise if the two sensors were made identically. Well the truth is the larger sensor will always display slightly less noise but that's another rabbit hole for another time.

This link might help but it really pisses off some members because I link to it quite often. http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/

The biggest issue that most people run into when they are looking at different sensor outputs is to compare them on a monitor at the same magnification, typically 100%. This is fallacious as you are enlarging the higher mp image more. There is a way to view images with different mp numbers at the same magnification in PS but it can be a bit fiddly and I have never seen a single YouTuber actually do it correctly.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 30, 2021)

SNJ Ops said:


> *Raising ISO *and stopping down the lens beyond f16 *introduces noise* and possibly the lens will show the effects of diffraction.
> 
> On a windy day with moving elements a longer exposure time is no good or if you simply want to freeze even slow moving action.
> 
> *I have an understanding of equivalence*, yet he did precisely that, shot his scene at 32mm f16 on the GFX yet he needed to focus stack as his DOF was too shallow to get the background and foreground in focus in one shot. Watch his video and you can see for yourself.


Raising ISO…introduces noise…you understand equivalence. Except that if you did understand equivalence, you’d know that raising the ISO to maintain shutter speed with a narrower aperture is noise-neutral when comparing a smaller to a larger sensor size. So evidently you don’t understand equivalence.

As for watching the video, if you’re referring to the one @privatebydesign linked, I saw nothing relevant in there. Fortunately I was moving my bowels while watching, so it wasn’t a total waste of time. He lost me at, “Crop mode extends any lens you have attached.” That clearly shows his technical understanding of photography is crap (sorry, the metaphor was topical), so whether it was the wrong video or not is immaterial.

In a debate between your opinion or the opinion of some YouTuber and physics, I will trust physics to win. Every time.


----------



## Tarepanda (Dec 30, 2021)

I really feel conflicted about this camera.. at first I really want to buy it but now it really needs to fall into the rice price range.. as far as rumors go it's basically a slight improvement over the R5 (a welcomed one though) but I wouldn't put too much money to basically remove a software limit (30min) and software capabilities (logs) that could (but won't) be pushed through firmware updates and a fan.. 
considering they're tagging their camera with a C though makes me think that canon will go crazy on the price as it's a "C" line afterall.. 
we shall see soon enough I guess but I'm not paying 5 or 6k for a slightly improved R5


----------



## tomislavmoze (Dec 30, 2021)

iheartcanon said:


> Has this actually happened to you?
> 
> I have never heard about any overheating in 1080p.
> 
> Perhaps there were other factors involved (wrong video C3 settings etc) as I cannot see this being normal.


Unfortunately yeah, it's happend every time. If you own one push it to overheat and try to film in 1080p 100p or 120p, you will see, other 1080 modes will work. When they announced that the update will offer 120p in 1080 I was so happy but at the end it suffers the same overheating as in 4k. To bad cause there is no way to film 120 frames without overheating problem. And it's not about the settings. It was movie mode, manual in c-log with Sandisk cfexpress 256 card.


----------



## Finn (Jan 2, 2022)

Tarepanda said:


> I really feel conflicted about this camera.. at first I really want to buy it but now it really needs to fall into the rice price range.. as far as rumors go it's basically a slight improvement over the R5 (a welcomed one though) but I wouldn't put too much money to basically remove a software limit (30min) and software capabilities (logs) that could (but won't) be pushed through firmware updates and a fan..
> considering they're tagging their camera with a C though makes me think that canon will go crazy on the price as it's a "C" line afterall..
> we shall see soon enough I guess but I'm not paying 5 or 6k for a slightly improved R5


Is it really a "C" camera though? Same photo-centric sensor as the R5. Based on the rumors it sounds like they added more mount points and a fan. No rumors about waveforms, false colors, or any other video assist tools.


----------



## fathergll (Jan 2, 2022)

This camera will be needed to really support the 5.2MM VR lens because of the overheating in the current R5 at 8k.


----------



## Pixel (Jan 4, 2022)

I haven’t read thru all the pages here…but is it safe to say as far as a stills camera, the R5c is no different than the R5?


----------



## cayenne (Jan 5, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> I made a conclusion based on knowledge of the principles of depth of field and equivalence.
> 
> The comments section merely shows that there are several people who lack a technical understanding of photography. You can find many posts on this forum from people claiming they choose to use APS-C cameras instead of FF because they want more DoF. The fact that many people make the same mistake doesn’t make them correct. The Flat Earth Society has many members, does that mean their belief is correct? No, it just means there are a lot of idiots out there.
> 
> As to your first question, I haven’t used the GFX. I have a large collection of 645 negatives from back in the day when medium format meant more than ‘a bit larger than FF’.


I own a GFX100, and can confirm your posts. 

You just have to adjust by the 0.79 to get things the same as a full frame camera as far as DOF, etc.

Lol, these guys would really freak trying to figure out when adapting "real" medium format lenses, like the old V system Hasselblad lenses with a focal reducer on the GFX.....

At one time I did calculate what the V system 80mm would be on a FF camera when attached to the GFX sensor...but I lost that bar napkin, and my heads still hurting from NYE celebrations to try to redo that math.



cayenne


----------



## bergstrom (Jan 9, 2022)

"The announcement might come between January 11, 2022, and January 18, 2022"

Getting close. But if the price isn't right, I'll wait for RP successor.


----------



## ag25 (Jan 11, 2022)




----------



## jayli (Jan 18, 2022)

twoheadedboy said:


> Probably should share the more contemporary link, covering CLog3 and the Ninja V+: https://www.cined.com/canon-r5-external-8k-prores-raw-dynamic-range-lab-test-8k-without-overheating/


It's still the same. The limitation is the sensor and the 12bit ADC


----------

