# More information about the upcoming RF mount Cinema EOS series of cameras [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 19, 2020)

> There is a lot of conflicting information hitting my inbox in regards to the previously rumored RF mount Cinema EOS series of cameras.
> While two cameras have been rumored, I have now been told multiple times that only one of them will be announced in late August or early September, with the others coming a bit later. There could obviously be some manufacturing or supply chain issues that may delay products.
> I am told that the first camera announced will be the Cinema EOS R300, which will be the higher-end camera of the two rumored RF Cinema EOS cameras.
> *Canon Cinema EOS R300 *(Name not confirmed)
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Kjsheldo (Aug 19, 2020)

Smaller than the C100 and C200?! I assumed it would be close to that size and much smaller than the new C500 II and C300 III. But man, smaller than the C100 is amazing.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 19, 2020)

Hmmmm.... Sounds like a Z Cam body type.... interesting. And while I was hoping for SDI, I can live without it. Wonder if no RAW means no RAW at all or just no RAW internal...


----------



## spomeniks (Aug 19, 2020)

Smaller would be amazing! I'm curious about how well this will do against a RED Komodo at the same price point. It also makes me wonder if perhaps the reason the Komodo doesn't currently support RF lenses is because Canon wants to be the first to launch an RF cine camera?


----------



## Nathan Phillips (Aug 19, 2020)

Definitely an A cam for my two R5’s.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2020)

The thing that gets me about these various video specs, Canon have been beaten up about cropping their ff sensors in their hybrid cameras yet when a video camera is announced it has a S35 sensor and people think it’s fantastic. Same with the smaller still sensor in the GH5 and even more so the GH5s, best thing ever; if you ignore the three quarter crop!

What gives? You either ‘need’ a 135 format sensor for that ‘cinematic look’ or you don’t, if you don’t go back and make amends for the bullshit you spewed about crop video modes.


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 19, 2020)

Craig, any more input about the price?


----------



## DBounce (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The thing that gets me about these various video specs, Canon have been beaten up about cropping their ff sensors in their hybrid cameras yet when a video camera is announced it has a S35 sensor and people think it’s fantastic. Same with the smaller still sensor in the GH5 and even more so the GH5s, best thing ever; if you ignore the three quarter crop!
> 
> What gives? You either ‘need’ a 135 format sensor for that ‘cinematic look’ or you don’t, if you don’t go back and make amends for the bullshit you spewed about crop video modes.


S35 is the cinema standard, so a cinema camera with a standard cinema sized sensor is perfectly acceptable. Plus, the DGO sensor is a highly desirable feature, so I can’t see anyone complaining about getting that sensor in a much smaller body.
I would normally say this camera is an instant buy, but after the mess that was the R5, and now with talk of “silent recalls”, as an R5 owner I’m left feeling like... Canon WFT?... Really?


----------



## jvillain (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The thing that gets me about these various video specs, Canon have been beaten up about cropping their ff sensors in their hybrid cameras yet when a video camera is announced it has a S35 sensor and people think it’s fantastic. Same with the smaller still sensor in the GH5 and even more so the GH5s, best thing ever; if you ignore the three quarter crop!
> 
> What gives? You either ‘need’ a 135 format sensor for that ‘cinematic look’ or you don’t, if you don’t go back and make amends for the bullshit you spewed about crop video modes.



FF is a photographers obsession where it is much easier to keep things in focus. If you are shooting a 50 1.2 wide open it will have to be locked off on sticks and that is boring. Imagine trying to keep a 50 1.2 wide open on a FF camera while shoulder rigged running down a country path. If this camera comes with R5 class IAF it could be an absolute game changer in that respect. But this is canon so I am not holding my breath.

Some one asked why RED doesn't have an RF mount. Becuase people that can afford a RED can afford cinema lenses and a crew. And the same reason they don't have an L mount. No one uses them. It will be interesting to see if Canon brings any RF mount cine glass with this camera and if there will be any new adapter options like RF to PL. The RF 50 1.2 would probably be a $30,000 lens if done as a cine lens.


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The thing that gets me about these various video specs, Canon have been beaten up about cropping their ff sensors in their hybrid cameras yet when a video camera is announced it has a S35 sensor and people think it’s fantastic. Same with the smaller still sensor in the GH5 and even more so the GH5s, best thing ever; if you ignore the three quarter crop!
> 
> What gives? You either ‘need’ a 135 format sensor for that ‘cinematic look’ or you don’t, if you don’t go back and make amends for the bullshit you spewed about crop video modes.


I had the same thought about the S35 size sensor. I mean, objectively it makes sense that this is the native size of the media this camera is aimed at making. I get it. But the internet's response to any hybrid camera with any type of video crop is overwhelmingly bad. Perhaps its an issue with workflow and how the average v-blogger doesn't have as much glass or space to get the framing they need, or want to spend as much time setting up to get it right with the options they have? Or perhaps its just more random internet warriors looking for something to unleash on. Or a misunderstanding about what is really a limitation and what is only a perceived one. Who knows. The internet is a rough place. I'm glad the real world isn't like the internet. 

-Brian


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2020)

DBounce said:


> S35 is the cinema standard, so a cinema camera with a standard cinema sized sensor is perfectly acceptable. Plus, the DGO sensor is a highly desirable feature, so I can’t see anyone complaining about getting that sensor in a much smaller body.
> I would normally say this camera is an instant buy, but after the mess that was the R5, and now with talk of “silent recalls”, as an R5 owner I’m left feeling like... Canon WFT?... Really?


I know S35 is sort of a cinema standard, it hasn't really been a video 'standard' until relatively recently because lets face it, what does the widest picture you can fit on a 135 format film between the perforations when run through a gate vertically have to do with anything in the digital realm? But that does nothing to address my point about Canon being unmercifully criticized for hybrid camera ff video crops that still equate to larger than S35 sensors when M4/3 cameras with sensors smaller than S35 are applauded for their 'cinematic output'.

If you are disappointed in your R5 you only have yourself and unrealistic expectations to blame. The camera does exactly what Canon said it would do, I can understand if that isn't what you as an individual might need, but that doesn't change the fact that Canon did not say the R5 would do something it couldn't. Though most of the 'limitations' are rather easily and cheaply negated by normal video gear anyway, but meanwhile tell me what it is you do need and tell me what other cameras can do that for well under $4,000.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2020)

jvillain said:


> FF is a photographers obsession where it is much easier to keep things in focus. If you are shooting a 50 1.2 wide open it will have to be locked off on sticks and that is boring. Imagine trying to keep a 50 1.2 wide open on a FF camera while shoulder rigged running down a country path. If this camera comes with R5 class IAF it could be an absolute game changer in that respect. But this is canon so I am not holding my breath.
> 
> Some one asked why RED doesn't have an RF mount. Becuase people that can afford a RED can afford cinema lenses and a crew. And the same reason they don't have an L mount. No one uses them. It will be interesting to see if Canon brings any RF mount cine glass with this camera and if there will be any new adapter options like RF to PL. The RF 50 1.2 would probably be a $30,000 lens if done as a cine lens.


Then why have all the videonazi's been criticizing everything Canon make that relies on crop ff sensor video? I haven't heard a single photographer complain about it...


----------



## padam (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The thing that gets me about these various video specs, Canon have been beaten up about cropping their ff sensors in their hybrid cameras yet when a video camera is announced it has a S35 sensor and people think it’s fantastic. Same with the smaller still sensor in the GH5 and even more so the GH5s, best thing ever; if you ignore the three quarter crop!
> 
> What gives? You either ‘need’ a 135 format sensor for that ‘cinematic look’ or you don’t, if you don’t go back and make amends for the bullshit you spewed about crop video modes.


The crop factor itself is not really the problem. Being significantly different to stills images, using different lenses for stills and video etc. that is annoying to deal with.

With video cameras, there is no issue because they are not for taking stills, e.g. one purpose only.

By the way Canon is not the only one, the Panasonic S1 series cameras also have a 1.5x crop with 4k60p, which is not ideal if one is shooting 4k30p in FF mode. The A7IV and Nikon Z6s may have similar recording modes as well, which will be just as annoying as overheating on the Canon R6.

Or the older Canon video cameras there was a crop on the 1080p120p slow motion recording as well (with significantly reduced quality)
Now with these new S35mm sensors, is 4k120p without any crop, big upgrade. And of course there is that Speed Booster option to reduce the crop factor (with a FF stills camera, it is not really worth it because it is only usable in the 4k crop mode, and all the rest becomes disabled)


----------



## DBounce (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> a 2If you are disappointed in your R5 you only have yourself and unrealistic expectations to blame. The camera does exactly what Canon said it would do, I can understand if that isn't what you as an individual might need, but that doesn't change the fact that Canon did not say the R5 would do something it couldn't. Though most of the 'limitations' are rather easily and cheaply negated by normal video gear anyway, but meanwhile tell me what it is you do need and tell me what other cameras can do that for well under $4,000.



Where/when did Canon mention that after the overheat restriction took place, it would take from 2 hours to as much as 6 hours to cool down?
I’ll answer... they didn’t. It’s not in any official statement and it’s not in the owners manual. That’s pretty significant oversight.
I’m not giving them a pass. I’ll gladly return this camera if Canon failed to address these concerns very soon.


----------



## marathonman (Aug 19, 2020)

DBounce said:


> S35 is the cinema standard, so a cinema camera with a standard cinema sized sensor is perfectly acceptable. Plus, the DGO sensor is a highly desirable feature, so I can’t see anyone complaining about getting that sensor in a much smaller body.
> I would normally say this camera is an instant buy, but after the mess that was the R5, and now with talk of “silent recalls”, as an R5 owner I’m left feeling like... Canon WFT?... Really?



Why is the R5 a mess? What did I miss?


----------



## mpmark (Aug 19, 2020)

I really can’t get over he amount of junk ads on this site, seriously annoying, has to be one of the worst sites that I visit. Seriously pathetic, especially on a phone where they jump your text as they load.


----------



## mpmark (Aug 19, 2020)

DBounce said:


> S35 is the cinema standard, so a cinema camera with a standard cinema sized sensor is perfectly acceptable. Plus, the DGO sensor is a highly desirable feature, so I can’t see anyone complaining about getting that sensor in a much smaller body.
> I would normally say this camera is an instant buy, but after the mess that was the R5, and now with talk of “silent recalls”, as an R5 owner I’m left feeling like... Canon WFT?... Really?



you’re an individual that complains about a prodimantly photo camera to meet your expectations of a 12-15k cinema camera actually meant to do video, SO GO BY THE CINEMA CAMERA Einstein!


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 19, 2020)

A native Canon Speedbooster on these RF Cinemas is really outstanding should that rumor bear out. You can shoot lenses with the S35 or get an effective 35mm FF image area with a huge library of EF glass.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2020)

DBounce said:


> I’m not giving them a pass. I’ll gladly return this camera if Canon failed to address these concerns very soon.



I didn’t ask you to give Canon a pass, I asked you specifically what is it in the R5 you need and what other cameras can you buy that do that for under $4,000.


----------



## sanj (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Then why have all the videonazi's been criticizing everything Canon make that relies on crop ff sensor video? I haven't heard a single photographer complain about it...


Alexa and Red are also not the 'full frame' you mention


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 19, 2020)

sanj said:


> Alexa and Red are also not the 'full frame' you mention


Well to be fair, both Alexa and Red make FF sensor cameras for the last couple years, but Super 35 is STILL the far away most used format.  A full frame Alexa Mini LF was used to shoot 1917 for example. But again, most films are still shot in Super35


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 19, 2020)

marathonman said:


> Why is the R5 a mess? What did I miss?


You didn't miss anything. People are upset that a "Cupcake of the Month Club" membership wasn't included in the purchase price... even though Canon never said there would be cupcakes.


----------



## marathonman (Aug 19, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> You didn't miss anything. People are upset that a "Cupcake of the Month Club" membership wasn't included in the purchase price... even though Canon never said there would be cupcakes.


Couldn't they put a cupcake in the space vacated by the mirror? They probably could also include a little heater as well to keep the cupcake warm until you want to eat it? I mean nobody wants to eat cold cupcakes do they....


----------



## Famateur (Aug 19, 2020)

mpmark said:


> I really can’t get over he amount of junk ads on this site, seriously annoying, has to be one of the worst sites that I visit. Seriously pathetic, especially on a phone where they jump your text as they load.



So...maybe use a browser with ad blockers? I haven't seen an ad on this site (or YouTube videos, or anywhere) in years. You could try Brave on its own or Firefox with Ad-Block Plus, like I do. Takes about the same effort to install as writing a post criticizing a forum website.


----------



## Rocksthaman (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I didn’t ask you to give Canon a pass, I asked you specifically what is it in the R5 you need and what other cameras can you buy that do that for under $4,000.


No record limit, C-Log 2/3, no overheating in 4k60, 4K raw ( I know it’s not possible but I’d like it).


----------



## preppyak (Aug 19, 2020)

padam said:


> The crop factor itself is not really the problem. Being significantly different to stills images, using different lenses for stills and video etc. that is annoying to deal with.
> 
> With video cameras, there is no issue because they are not for taking stills, e.g. one purpose only.


Yep, this is the correct answer. The crop is basically a problem for two reasons

1. It makes you shift fields of view between different modes, which is annoying; workable, but annoying. And when competitors do it without crops (a7III, GH5, etc), it stands out.

2. People will accept it if it means the sharpest possible video as a result. So, for example you dont really see people complaining that the FUJI XT cameras crop in some modes, because they are class leading video. Almost nobody complained that the GH4 cropped in 4k60 because no other cam had 4k60.

Canon's problem was bringing weak video performance AND having weird items that were crippled


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2020)

Rocksthaman said:


> No record limit, C-Log 2/3, no overheating in 4k60, 4K raw ( I know it’s not possible but I’d like it).


And yet again you didn't answer the second part of the question, what can you currently buy for well under $4,000 that does that?


----------



## marathonman (Aug 19, 2020)

preppyak said:


> Canon's problem was bringing weak video performance......



Gotta love keyboard warriors.... 
As far as I can tell from the clickbait YouTubers and this pointless discussion since the release of R5.... the 8K and 4K HQ quality is superior to a great camera like the Sony A7s iii. Canon also has "standard quality" 4K which most people can't tell the difference between vs 4K HQ etc. Once you add sharpening to the standard 4K, it's virtually indistinguishable from the 4K HQ even if you pause it, zoom in to 300% and pixel peep. Once you bring movement in to the frame the difference is also negligible.
Plus the AF and IBIS is phenomenal. 

So weak video performance.... 

If the device isn't for you, then buy something else that is. There are so many amazing options out there. What a time to be alive and filming cats....


----------



## BakaBokeh (Aug 19, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Some one asked why RED doesn't have an RF mount. Becuase people that can afford a RED can afford cinema lenses and a crew. And the same reason they don't have an L mount. No one uses them.



Isn't the RED Komodo RF mount? Just making sure your up to date on the latest.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The thing that gets me about these various video specs, Canon have been beaten up about cropping their ff sensors in their hybrid cameras yet when a video camera is announced it has a S35 sensor and people think it’s fantastic. Same with the smaller still sensor in the GH5 and even more so the GH5s, best thing ever; if you ignore the three quarter crop!
> 
> What gives? You either ‘need’ a 135 format sensor for that ‘cinematic look’ or you don’t, if you don’t go back and make amends for the bullshit you spewed about crop video modes.


You generalize a lot... It's not entirely about the sensor size ( Though some may want you to think different ). There are different camps of folk with different equipment and needs. Yes, some buyers absolutely want FF because that is what they've been told and then there are those that don't mind an S35 sensor because A) its an easy compromise when you're getting that clean DGO sensor & B) if you're already in the line of video work w/ cine cameras then there is a high chance you already have a set of S35 primes. I like FF for easier composition and because I believe the industry is moving in that direction but I also can't afford to personally own the FF cine cameras I want at ~$40K and I don't want to give up other features for the sake of FF. There is an array of different tools the GH5 & GH5s gave you that were reasons they're so beloved... Not all about crop.. So many factors.. So many use cases. You can't generalize.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 19, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Smaller than the C100 and C200?! I assumed it would be close to that size and much smaller than the new C500 II and C300 III. But man, smaller than the C100 is amazing.


I need to understand the differences between the C300 III and this "R300" other than physical size, SDI, & RAW light ( Which may come later to R300?). Like what is the road map for an early adopter of such a camera?


----------



## pmjm (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And yet again you didn't answer the second part of the question, what can you currently buy for well under $4,000 that does that?



A7SIII has entered the chat.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> You generalize a lot... It's not entirely about the sensor size ( Though some may want you to think different ). There are different camps of folk with different equipment and needs. Yes, some buyers absolutely want FF because that is what they've been told and then there are those that don't mind an S35 sensor because A) its an easy compromise when you're getting that clean DGO sensor & B) if you're already in the line of video work w/ cine cameras then there is a high chance you already have a set of S35 primes. I like FF for easier composition and because I believe the industry is moving in that direction but I also can't afford to personally own the FF cine cameras I want at ~$40K and I don't want to give up other features for the sake of FF. There is an array of different tools the GH5 & GH5s gave you that were reasons they're so beloved... Not all about crop.. So many factors.. So many use cases. You can't generalize.


Then why have all the naysayers generalized that Canon video specs in their hybrids are DOA because of a crop factor that is now seen as largely insignificant?


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2020)

pmjm said:


> A7SIII has entered the chat.


The Sony doesn't record RAW internally at all, let alone 8k. Try again.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The Sony doesn't record RAW internally at all, let alone 8k. Try again.



And, if I recall correctly, it overheats, and when it overheats, it totally bricks (rather than just letting you switch to other modes) until it cools down, AND it will trash what's on your card as it does so.

All this, and as an added extra bonus, it's 12 whole megapixels!!!


----------



## SteveC (Aug 19, 2020)

SteveC said:


> And, if I recall correctly, it overheats, and when it overheats, it totally bricks (rather than just letting you switch to other modes) until it cools down, AND it will trash what's on your card as it does so.
> 
> All this, and as an added extra bonus, it's 12 whole megapixels!!!



I mean it's just_* farcical*_ that anyone thinks the A7Siii is a better camera than the R5, though admittedly it might be better for some very specific use cases.


----------



## pmjm (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The Sony doesn't record RAW internally at all, let alone 8k. Try again.



Not internally, no. But the previous poster never mentioned internal, and they even said 4k raw was not a requirement just a pipe dream. But to get decent 4k out of the R5 you need an external recorder ANYWAY. The R5's 8K mode is, for all intents and purposes, a gimmick.

I own an R5 and have personally tested what it can do, and I'm willing to jump through the hoops I need to in order to use it as a video camera because I'm already so invested in the EF lens ecosystem. But at the end of the day I concede that the Sony is a far better video camera. If the EF-E mount adapters worked as well as Canon's EF-RF did, I would jump ship in a heartbeat.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Then why have all the naysayers generalized that Canon video specs in their hybrids are DOA because of a crop factor that is now seen as largely insignificant?


I don't know who these "naysayers" are and it makes little difference to me... Just understand that sensor size is not the ultimate decider when other features are on the line. You were generalizing that all buyers were throwing fits about it. This is a post about cinema cameras, which historically have largely been S35 until recent. So when you see a new cinema camera that has people excited about specs, you need to understand the field before you complain and get grouped with the same people that generalize that you so loathe.


----------



## Profit007 (Aug 19, 2020)

This isn't even interesting without Raw. Raw to an external recorder would have been worth looking at. But for an RF version of the C200 (with a C200 style price tag), to not have Raw rules out a decent percentage of the potential audience.


----------



## NorskHest (Aug 19, 2020)

jvillain said:


> FF is a photographers obsession where it is much easier to keep things in focus. If you are shooting a 50 1.2 wide open it will have to be locked off on sticks and that is boring. Imagine trying to keep a 50 1.2 wide open on a FF camera while shoulder rigged running down a country path. If this camera comes with R5 class IAF it could be an absolute game changer in that respect. But this is canon so I am not holding my breath.
> 
> Some one asked why RED doesn't have an RF mount. Becuase people that can afford a RED can afford cinema lenses and a crew. And the same reason they don't have an L mount. No one uses them. It will be interesting to see if Canon brings any RF mount cine glass with this camera and if there will be any new adapter options like RF to PL. The RF 50 1.2 would probably be a $30,000 lens if done as a cine lens.


It also doesn’t help that the whole fly by wire thing is a real pain in the ass for focusing, RF lenses will not be great cinema lenses because of this. Now if they do a cinema series of RF lenses that’s a different story. And full frame is a pain in the ass to pull focus at those wide-open aperture‘s but if you have a really good focus puller you would never know any difference, the Netflix series Altered Carbon was shot using large format Arri’s mostly with canon cinema glass and The cinematography is epic


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 20, 2020)

I'm not sure about the specs for the 4K120. The R5 doesn't allow SD cards to record 4K100/120 (8 or 10 bit)- I assume because of sustained write bit rates. Someone else can do the maths 
UHS-II specs has max 300MB/s half duplex speeds but there are roughly only 8 cards that get over 200MB/s with 3 or 4 hitting over 250MB/s (Angelbird, Prograde, Lexar, ProSony SF-G). 128GB is not a long recording time. Only a couple of 256B cards and no 512GB UHS-II cards that I can find.
UHS-III hits 624MB/s full duplex but I don't think that there are any on the market yet and they will probably be bypassed by SD Express standard and there are none of them.
I assume that external recorders will be most used for these cameras as there are a lot of limitations from SD cards.


----------



## Th0msky (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And yet again you didn't answer the second part of the question, what can you currently buy for well under $4,000 that does that?


Apart from c-log since its another manufacture, bmpcc ?


----------



## Th0msky (Aug 20, 2020)

Why wont they release the “R200” first?  
I really need a run and gun cine camera for around 3000 euro’s. And C100 is just a little outdated for me with the lack of 4K


----------



## DrToast (Aug 20, 2020)

mpmark said:


> I really can’t get over he amount of junk ads on this site, seriously annoying, has to be one of the worst sites that I visit. Seriously pathetic, especially on a phone where they jump your text as they load.



Wow. I came to post exactly this. It's not so much the ads, but the fact that the page doesn't fully load for about 5 seconds while all the ads are loading and moving things around.

I don't mind the ads, but can we at least get the layout to load immediately?

Or even a subscription membership to support the site and turn ads off. 

It's pretty horrendous lately. I'd pay to support this site and get rid of the ads.


----------



## Etienne (Aug 20, 2020)

Small light cinema camera ... and no IBIS?


----------



## jvillain (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Then why have all the videonazi's been criticizing everything Canon make that relies on crop ff sensor video? I haven't heard a single photographer complain about it...



It is driven by the Youtube crowd like Peter McKinnon and Matti H... . YT amplifies their opinions beyond what mere humans can accomplish. Both the guys seem like nice people (on camera) and Peter's "This is the R5" was just amazing. But here is the thing. They all whine incessantly about needing FF for greater DOF. But how often are they shooting video wide open? Take a look at their videos. Not very often.



preppyak said:


> Yep, this is the correct answer. The crop is basically a problem for two reasons
> 
> 1. It makes you shift fields of view between different modes, which is annoying; workable, but annoying. And when competitors do it without crops (a7III, GH5, etc), it stands out.
> 
> ...



Agreed. The fact that Canon was sluffing off their upscaled 2.8K as 4K and then doing truly bizarre things with the crop with the 'R' didn't help. Here is the thing Canon messed up bad. They just went to sleep for a decade and then realized they had messed up and tried to massively over compensate and that came back and bit them in the arse as well. They need to shake up management over there.



Profit007 said:


> This isn't even interesting without Raw. Raw to an external recorder would have been worth looking at. But for an RF version of the C200 (with a C200 style price tag), to not have Raw rules out a decent percentage of the potential audience.



Which is one of the reasons why I jumped ship on the cinema side. There were a number of things that added into that decision but that was on of the biggest.

This is off topic but there are some hard core camera people in here so if you want to see some stills from the new Ursa 12K you can find them here. It runs a different kind of sensor from the standard Bayer and it does some interesting things to the image.
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=118862


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Then why have all the videonazi's been criticizing everything Canon make that relies on crop ff sensor video? I haven't heard a single photographer complain about it...


Bro... You need to take some time off the forums. Very distasteful name calling with those you disagree with. Not sure you even understand who or what you’re arguing.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 20, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> Bro... You need to take some time off the forums. Very distasteful name calling with those you disagree with. Not sure you even understand who or what you’re arguing.


Jim Jim, anybody that has been here for any amount of time knows how much grief and how disproportionate the whingefest from the ‘video’ crowd has been at each and every Canon stills orientated body release basically since the 5D II. Not one of them has had a good word to say about any Canon product until about six months after release, it’s been sickening in it vitriol and predictability, and ultimate reversal. Though the last always done much more quietly.

If you were lucky enough to get an R5 in the first batch and it doesn’t do what you need it to then sell it for over $1,000 more than you paid for it and put that towards something that will. I am so sick and tired of people moaning about the most accomplished stills orientated hybrid Canon have ever made because it isn’t a C700, or it doesn’t have 12mp and the compromises that would bring. Compare like for like and use it for what its intended and specc’ed, or sell it for an unheard of profit in a mass market camera model and get something that will, then send us a link of your masterpiece because I’m not seeing much, just hearing a load of whinging.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Jim Jim, anybody that has been here for any amount of time knows how much grief and how disproportionate the whingefest from the ‘video’ crowd has been at each and every Canon stills orientated body release basically since the 5D II. Not one of them has had a good word to say about any Canon product until about six months after release, it’s been sickening in it vitriol and predictability, and ultimate reversal. Though the last always done much more quietly.
> 
> If you were lucky enough to get an R5 in the first batch and it doesn’t do what you need it to then sell it for over $1,000 more than you paid for it and put that towards something that will. I am so sick and tired of people moaning about the most accomplished stills orientated hybrid Canon have ever made because it isn’t a C700, or it doesn’t have 12mp and the compromises that would bring. Compare like for like and use it for what its intended and specc’ed, or sell it for an unheard of profit in a mass market camera model and get something that will, then send us a link of your masterpiece because I’m not seeing much, just hearing a load of whinging.


But this post is about two RF S35 cinema cameras... Not a FF DSLR or mirrorless hybrid. Not the R5. Not the C700 ( Keep in mind we could grab a C500 II for $16k but I’m personally interested in that DGO sensor). 

We’re excited that Canon might be positioning this DGO sensor at this price. It’s a real clean image and easy to expose. Need more info as how R300 differs from C300 III though... As a C300 II user (S35... always has been and always will be) I am excited about the new cinema cameras.

And there you go generalizing all video shooters again. And now prejudging people’s work and art. Man... Very negative. Bad energy. I’m sending positive vibes your way: I hope you love the R5 when you get your copy. I hope you love what you make because that’s what matters.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 20, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> But this post is about two RF S35 cinema cameras... Not a FF DSLR or mirrorless hybrid. Not the R5. Not the C700 ( Keep in mind we could grab a C500 II for $16k but I’m personally interested in that DGO sensor).
> 
> We’re excited that Canon might be positioning this DGO sensor at this price. It’s a real clean image and easy to expose. Need more info as how R300 differs from C300 III though... As a C300 II user (S35... always has been and always will be) I am excited about the new cinema cameras.
> 
> And there you go generalizing all video shooters again. And now prejudging people’s work and art. Man... Very negative. Bad energy. I’m sending positive vibes your way: I hope you love the R5 when you get your copy. I hope you love what you make because that’s what matters.


And it took three posts for somebody to mention the R5 and six posts until somebody moaned about the R5. My first comment (fourth post) wasn’t related to either of them. My second comment in the thread was a reply to the sixth post.

My first post asked a simply question directly related to the S35 sensor size, my second railed against yet another dig at the R5 from a video context. Yet you imply I am out of order?


----------



## skp (Aug 20, 2020)

I wonder if this rumor is related to this patend https://www.canonrumors.com/patent-lens-mount-adaptor-for-different-flange-distances/


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 20, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> But this post is about two RF S35 cinema cameras... Not a FF DSLR or mirrorless hybrid. Not the R5. Not the C700 ( Keep in mind we could grab a C500 II for $16k but I’m personally interested in that DGO sensor).
> 
> We’re excited that Canon might be positioning this DGO sensor at this price. It’s a real clean image and easy to expose. Need more info as how R300 differs from C300 III though... As a C300 II user (S35... always has been and always will be) I am excited about the new cinema cameras.
> 
> And there you go generalizing all video shooters again. And now prejudging people’s work and art. Man... *Very negative. Bad energy. I’m sending positive vibes your way*: I hope you love the R5 when you get your copy. I hope you love what you make because that’s what matters.


after like 200 super negative "R5 is an overheating drama" posts you now in a positive vibe sending mood and criticising someone else being negative and bad energy? Okaaay.. well, PBD remains one of the most helpful forum members. I am confident that his input is well appreciated. whether your input is questionable to say the least.

++++ Bro... You need to take some time off the forums. Very distasteful name calling with those you disagree with. Not sure you even understand who or what you’re arguing.

A.M.: I believe that you are the one who needs to take some time off the forum. and the longer the better. here you have it..


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> after like 200 super negative "R5 is an overheating drama" posts you now in a positive vibe sending mood and criticising someone else being negative and bad energy? Okaaay.. well, PBD remains one of the most helpful forum members. I am confident that his input is well appreciated. whether your input is questionable to say the least.
> 
> ++++ Bro... You need to take some time off the forums. Very distasteful name calling with those you disagree with. Not sure you even understand who or what you’re arguing.
> 
> A.M.: I believe that you are the one who needs to take some time off the forum. and the longer the better. here you have it..


You construct a false narrative with my overheating comments. I had issues with the marketing but not the camera and if you look at those forums I told many stills photographers that I sincerely hope they loved their camera and that it was top of its class but I guess you choose to overlook those since it doesn’t feed your narrative I haven’t seen anything constructive from you or your buddy in this thread. So save your breath.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And it took three posts for somebody to mention the R5 and six posts until somebody moaned about the R5. My first comment (fourth post) wasn’t related to either of them. My second comment in the thread was a reply to the sixth post.
> 
> My first post asked a simply question directly related to the S35 sensor size, my second railed against yet another dig at the R5 from a video context. Yet you imply I am out of order?


Am I looking at the right thread? The first few posts are about SDI, size, price? In fact, your comment is the first I see complaining about video shooters? I imply that you’re on an RF S35 cinema post generalizing that all video shoots whine about FF (and the R5 too apparently?)
Theres even someone saying this would be a great A cam for their two R5s! Like bro..

N E G A T I V E


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 20, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> You construct a false narrative with my overheating comments. I had issues with the marketing but not the camera and if you look at those forums I told many stills photographers that I sincerely hope they loved their camera and that it was top of its class but I guess you choose to overlook those since it doesn’t feed your narrative I haven’t seen anything constructive from you or your buddy in this thread. So save your breath.


I am referring to your overall forum input being so far extremely non-productive. I learned a ton from PBD. I learned none reading your post criticising flaws in Canon EU marketing messages. You are not being helpful..


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> I am referring to your overall forum input being so far extremely non-productive. I learned a ton from PBD. I learned none reading your post criticising flaws in Canon EU marketing messages. You are not being helpful..


I’m glad you’ve partaken in my Canon Rumors catalog, I’m flattered... but hate to break it to you, kid... My intention was never to teach you, especially not with posts that criticized Canon’s marketing. My intention was to criticize Canon’s marketing.

Now I’m criticizing PBD’s complaints and generalizations on video shooters in this RF cine thread... An RF camera I’m interested in since it shares the sensor to a camera I’m impressed by - C300 III.

It’s odd... Your feelings seem hurt more than PBD‘s... Wait... PBD? Is that you?....

Hah. Jokes. Anyways mate, you have anything to add about these cine cameras?


----------



## PhotoGenerous (Aug 20, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Agreed. The fact that Canon was sluffing off their upscaled 2.8K as 4K and then doing truly bizarre things with the crop with the 'R' didn't help. Here is the thing Canon messed up bad. They just went to sleep for a decade and then realized they had messed up and tried to massively over compensate and that came back and bit them in the arse as well. They need to shake up management over there.



Did they sleep for a decade? I'm pretty sure Canon wouldn't be where it is with the R5 if they didn't start with the original EOS M in 2012. (Which I'm sure they began working on at least a year or two prior to release, which would take us to a decade ago). And all their work with DPAF starting with the 70D released in 2013 plays a big role as well.

They only assembled the full frame mirrorless recently, but they've been working and waiting for enough of the individual pieces to be ready before putting it all together.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 20, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> I’m glad you’ve partaken in my Canon Rumors catalog, I’m flattered... but hate to break it to you, kid... My intention was never to teach you, especially not with posts that criticized Canon’s marketing. My intention was to criticize Canon’s marketing.
> 
> Now I’m criticizing PBD’s complaints and generalizations on video shooters in this RF cine thread... An RF camera I’m interested in since it shares the sensor to a camera I’m impressed by - C300 III.
> 
> ...


yes, I have:
1. I am not your mate.
2. I am not a kid
3. I am not your Bro...
4. your posts add no value to CR forum apart from noise, negativity and Boganville styled humor.
5. ++++ Bro... You need to take some time off the forums. Very distasteful name calling with those you disagree with. Not sure you even understand who or what you’re arguing.

A.M.: I believe that you are the one who needs to take some time off the forum. and the longer the better. here you have it..


----------



## Rocksthaman (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And yet again you didn't answer the second part of the question, what can you currently buy for well under $4,000 that does that?



Any modern Sony has all three log profiles +HLG and no record limit. A7Siii has raw, there are plenty of 4k60 cameras but s1h and the new Sony come to mind first.


----------



## WhatDoesMStandsFor (Aug 20, 2020)

Rocksthaman said:


> No record limit, C-Log 2/3, no overheating in 4k60, 4K raw ( I know it’s not possible but I’d like it).



Grab a C200B then ($ 3,999). Cinema RAW Light up to 4K60, no overheat issues, no record limits, Canon Log & Canon Log 3 (Canon Log 2 if you convert the raw file to that gamma in post).


----------



## WhatDoesMStandsFor (Aug 20, 2020)

Profit007 said:


> This isn't even interesting without Raw. Raw to an external recorder would have been worth looking at. But for an RF version of the C200 (with a C200 style price tag), to not have Raw rules out a decent percentage of the potential audience.


Not really. A lot of potential C200 users didn't got the camera due to it only offering RAW recording. This new camera could fulfill that gap, although it's kind late to the game.


----------



## WhatDoesMStandsFor (Aug 20, 2020)

Rocksthaman said:


> Any modern Sony has all three log profiles +HLG and no record limit. A7Siii has raw, there are plenty of 4k60 cameras but s1h and the new Sony come to mind first.


Yes, they do have log profiles but they are pretty much useless since, apart from the A7s III, they are 8bit cameras. Some even said that the S Log on those cameras were more like a gimmick than something really useful.


----------



## WhatDoesMStandsFor (Aug 20, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> I need to understand the differences between the C300 III and this "R300" other than physical size, SDI, & RAW light ( Which may come later to R300?). Like what is the road map for an early adopter of such a camera?


I've recently grabbed a C300 Mk III and I got say it's an amazing camera, even when shooting in XF-AVC. If this new camera has the same sensor, same processor and a RF mount, it will be more than enough to be a B cam camera for C300 Mk III / C500 Mk II users or a perfect A cam for those who don't shoot RAW at all.

The SDI output is something desirable but not really needed by some people. There's a lot of P4K/P6K/C100 users out there that didn't care less about it. Even RAW is kind debatable due to the fact that not a lot of people would want to shoot in RAW anyway.


----------



## landon (Aug 20, 2020)

WhatDoesMStandsFor said:


> I've recently grabbed a C300 Mk III and I got say it's an amazing camera, even when shooting in XF-AVC. If this new camera has the same sensor, same processor and a RF mount, it will be more than enough to be a B cam camera for C300 Mk III / C500 Mk II users or a perfect A cam for those who don't shoot RAW at all.
> 
> The SDI output is something desirable but not really needed by some people. There's a lot of P4K/P6K/C100 users out there that didn't care less about it. Even RAW is kind debatable due to the fact that not a lot of people would want to shoot in RAW anyway.


The last R300 rumour says no Raw at shipment. So perhaps RAW firmware later, or have Canon changed their mind to protect C300iii, and no RAW internal at all. But perhaps RAW external.


----------



## Twinix (Aug 20, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> SD Express standard and there are none of them.


 ̶*̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ ̶b̶i̶g̶ ̶e̶n̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶l̶o̶n̶g̶e̶r̶ ̶r̶e̶c̶o̶r̶d̶i̶n̶g̶s̶.̶
̶S̶o̶n̶y̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶t̶w̶o̶.̶
I mixed SDexpress and CFexpress.


----------



## Arod820 (Aug 20, 2020)

So is this camera going to crop beyond the 1.6x or so of the S35? Like is it going to go down to an M4/3 crop in some specific frame rate or something or is going to use the whole sensor for every frame rate and resolution? I hate that the Reds crop down the sensor to shoot 1080.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 20, 2020)

spomeniks said:


> Smaller would be amazing! I'm curious about how well this will do against a RED Komodo at the same price point. It also makes me wonder if perhaps the reason the Komodo doesn't currently support RF lenses is because Canon wants to be the first to launch an RF cine camera?


You guessed it.


----------



## Arod820 (Aug 20, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> Isn't the RED Komodo RF mount? Just making sure your up to date on the latest.


It is, it’s just not autofocus yet.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 20, 2020)

DBounce said:


> S35 is the cinema standard, so a cinema camera with a standard cinema sized sensor is perfectly acceptable. Plus, the DGO sensor is a highly desirable feature, so I can’t see anyone complaining about getting that sensor in a much smaller body.
> I would normally say this camera is an instant buy, but after the mess that was the R5, and now with talk of “silent recalls”, as an R5 owner I’m left feeling like... Canon WFT?... Really?


YES, it was mostly all MESS. Most people are happy with their product. I wouldn't give credence to the internet folly with mostly non owners and competitor fanboys. After all the redo's and undo's many discovered much was all overblown yes MESS. One would be a fool to send their camera back for a so called recall when it works perfectly well. Don't give a flip about and additional firmware or a Sony like overide option either. My R5 works as advertised. I now how to use the manual and I don't need 40 minutes of 4K 120 either.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 20, 2020)

Arod820 said:


> So is this camera going to crop beyond the 1.6x or so of the S35? Like is it going to go down to an M4/3 crop in some specific frame rate or something or is going to use the whole sensor for every frame rate and resolution? I hate that the Reds crop down the sensor to shoot 1080.


Exactly what is the industry standard for motion picture and film anyway? You guessed it.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 20, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> I had the same thought about the S35 size sensor. I mean, objectively it makes sense that this is the native size of the media this camera is aimed at making. I get it. But the internet's response to any hybrid camera with any type of video crop is overwhelmingly bad. Perhaps its an issue with workflow and how the average v-blogger doesn't have as much glass or space to get the framing they need, or want to spend as much time setting up to get it right with the options they have? Or perhaps its just more random internet warriors looking for something to unleash on. Or a misunderstanding about what is really a limitation and what is only a perceived one. Who knows. The internet is a rough place. I'm glad the real world isn't like the internet.
> 
> -Brian


The internet? The same internet that can't read owner manuals and use thermometers? The same internet that measures the termperature of an electronic device with the palm of their hand? That internet?


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 20, 2020)

Rocksthaman said:


> Any modern Sony has all three log profiles +HLG and no record limit. A7Siii has raw, there are plenty of 4k60 cameras but s1h and the new Sony come to mind first.


So buy one of them and be happy. That was my point, there is a camera out there to suit everybody and need, why try to force something that simply doesn't work for you?


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 20, 2020)

Etienne said:


> Small light cinema camera ... and no IBIS?


No cinema camera has IBIS. And Canon is one of the only ones who have AF. (might be THE only) I think you're also imagining a MILC. This is going to be more like a small C100, which means it will probably look like a Z-Cam. A Small cube box. Probably wont even have a monitor built in. In other words, this is a camera designed to be built into a pro rig with rails and cages and accessories etc... Meaning exterior stabilization just like all pro cinema cameras. Also we are getting the existing sensors from the C200 and C300 current models. Which is awesome. But those sensors were designed without IBIS.

Perhaps some future generation of RF cinema cams will employ IBIS, but not yet. And that's just fine. Again these are meat to be RIG cameras. Not an all in one Run and Gun option. Viewfinders, touchscreens, handles, grips, batteries... all these things are modular attachments on Cinema cameras now.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> yes, I have:
> 1. I am not your mate.
> 2. I am not a kid
> 3. I am not your Bro...
> ...



Bit defensive and hypocritical are we? Neither you or your mate have had anything of value to add to this thread except, “then go buy that camera.” Also, don’t believe I called you bro, bruv. At least not on this thread.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 20, 2020)

WhatDoesMStandsFor said:


> I've recently grabbed a C300 Mk III and I got say it's an amazing camera, even when shooting in XF-AVC. If this new camera has the same sensor, same processor and a RF mount, it will be more than enough to be a B cam camera for C300 Mk III / C500 Mk II users or a perfect A cam for those who don't shoot RAW at all.
> 
> The SDI output is something desirable but not really needed by some people. There's a lot of P4K/P6K/C100 users out there that didn't care less about it. Even RAW is kind debatable due to the fact that not a lot of people would want to shoot in RAW anyway.


Yeah I think if you want/need to use a RAW workflow, you're accustomed to buying higher end production cameras. But the SDI thing isn't a deal breaker, however I really wish this would be a standard feature on ALL pro cinema cameras regardless of tier. It's a simple cheap feature that should be relegated just to higher end bodies. It's purely a basic safety/reliability component vs. an HDMI port.


----------



## DBounce (Aug 20, 2020)

jam05 said:


> YES, it was mostly all MESS. Most people are happy with their product. I wouldn't give credence to the internet folly with mostly non owners and competitor fanboys. After all the redo's and undo's many discovered much was all overblown yes MESS. One would be a fool to send their camera back for a so called recall when it works perfectly well. Don't give a flip about and additional firmware or a Sony like overide option either. My R5 works as advertised. I now how to use the manual and I don't need 40 minutes of 4K 120 either.


Remember what you said if a recall is issued.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

jam05 said:


> YES, it was mostly all MESS. Most people are happy with their product. I wouldn't give credence to the internet folly with mostly non owners and competitor fanboys. After all the redo's and undo's many discovered much was all overblown yes MESS. One would be a fool to send their camera back for a so called recall when it works perfectly well. Don't give a flip about and additional firmware or a Sony like overide option either. My R5 works as advertised. I now how to use the manual and I don't need 40 minutes of 4K 120 either.


You don’t update your camera’s firmware?


----------



## Rocksthaman (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> So buy one of them and be happy. That was my point, there is a camera out there to suit everybody and need, why try to force something that simply doesn't work for you?



Because the capabilities are there in the camera. I don’t understand why so many “photographers” want to limit what a camera can do. The camera is capable of shooting all of those except for raw. There’s not as much photography work as there used to be, so when you get a camera you want 
It to be a versatile as possible. It used to be physical details of a camera where the clear differentiations of a camera. It’s just not the case and canon is artificially segmenting.

if I prefer to shoot Canon and shoot video and photo. How hard is it to understand I want to have TWO cameras that are redundant. Not 4.However I’m sure you do understand and just want to be a jerk about it.

I have a couple of Sony’s that I use for paid work, I just enjoy shooting the R more. There’s a clear difference in reliability in the two. Card slots, auto focus, dynamic range, but they are not fun to use. Is it so much to ask that the fun one is also functional.


----------



## jvillain (Aug 20, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> No cinema camera has IBIS. And Canon is one of the only ones who have AF. (might be THE only)



Sony's FX9 has autofocus and the Sony auto-focus is about equal to Canon so I expect to see it roll out in more cameras. Black Magic has a form of auto focus though let me be clear it is not at all in the same league as DPAF. Basically you press the button and it focuses on the center of the frame once. If your subject isn't in the middle of the frame tough lucjk and it isn't continuous auto-focus. So it exists pretty well in name only.

I recently watched a Mark Bone video that shows Sony appears to be taking a different aproach to image stabalization from IBIS in the cinema cameras. They are using metadata collected from the IS in the lens and using it in post software to stabalize the image and it looks like it works pretty good. But it does bring up the fact that both Sony and BMD have control of a greater part of the stack, BMD through Davinci Resolve and Sony through Catalyst, and so are able to do things that Canon can't. The Sony approach would be great if cine lenses had IS but they don't.








JIM JIM said:


> Blah, blah, blah ...



Can you two start your own thread to spam each other and leave the rest of us out.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Sony's FX9 has autofocus and the Sony auto-focus is about equal to Canon so I expect to see it roll out in more cameras. Black Magic has a form of auto focus though let me be clear it is not at all in the same league as DPAF. Basically you press the button and it focuses on the center of the frame once. If your subject isn't in the middle of the frame tough lucjk and it isn't continuous auto-focus. So it exists pretty well in name only.
> 
> I recently watched a Mark Bone video that shows Sony appears to be taking a different aproach to image stabalization from IBIS in the cinema cameras. They are using metadata collected from the IS in the lens and using it in post software to stabalize the image and it looks like it works pretty good. But it does bring up the fact that both Sony and BMD have control of a greater part of the stack, BMD through Davinci Resolve and Sony through Catalyst, and so are able to do things that Canon can't. The Sony approach would be great if cine lenses had IS but they don't.
> 
> ...


Can you learn to accurately quote someone?

Let me add to this...

Sony FX9 AF gets handicapped when overexposing log, which is very popular with SLOG.

The FX9 image stabilization metadata adds a lot of time to post work flow and many times you have to readjust the intensity and run the entire Catalyst program again... Depending on your PC/Mac you will spend a lot of time waiting for this to do its job depending on the file size and resolution but definitely can get some smooth footage with it... But then again you can get smooth footage with Canon's electronic IS... And lets not forget Canon's form factor on the C300III & C500II and how easy it is to throw it on a gimbal or steadicam.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 20, 2020)

jvillain said:


> FF is a photographers obsession where it is much easier to keep things in focus. If you are shooting a 50 1.2 wide open it will have to be locked off on sticks and that is boring. Imagine trying to keep a 50 1.2 wide open on a FF camera while shoulder rigged running down a country path. If this camera comes with R5 class IAF it could be an absolute game changer in that respect. But this is canon so I am not holding my breath.
> 
> Some one asked why RED doesn't have an RF mount. Becuase people that can afford a RED can afford cinema lenses and a crew. And the same reason they don't have an L mount. No one uses them. It will be interesting to see if Canon brings any RF mount cine glass with this camera and if there will be any new adapter options like RF to PL. The RF 50 1.2 would probably be a $30,000 lens if done as a cine lens.


FF is where the cinema industry seems to heading. 

Many aren't using a lens that fast in video unless for special use cases and most def would need a dedicated focus puller. 

RED Komodo is RF. All REDs can be build with either EF/PL mounts. Popular are the Sigma Cine Zooms that aren't expensive at all. 

What is the logic behind thinking an RF CIne 50 1.2 would be $30K?


----------



## Juangrande (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I know S35 is sort of a cinema standard, it hasn't really been a video 'standard' until relatively recently because lets face it, what does the widest picture you can fit on a 135 format film between the perforations when run through a gate vertically have to do with anything in the digital realm? But that does nothing to address my point about Canon being unmercifully criticized for hybrid camera ff video crops that still equate to larger than S35 sensors when M4/3 cameras with sensors smaller than S35 are applauded for their 'cinematic output'.
> 
> If you are disappointed in your R5 you only have yourself and unrealistic expectations to blame. The camera does exactly what Canon said it would do, I can understand if that isn't what you as an individual might need, but that doesn't change the fact that Canon did not say the R5 would do something it couldn't. Though most of the 'limitations' are rather easily and cheaply negated by normal video gear anyway, but meanwhile tell me what it is you do need and tell me what other cameras can do that for well under $4,000.



Probably has everything to do with the fact that when cameras transitioned to digital they kept the lenses from the film era rather than reinventing the format anew which would’ve allowed them to come up with the best solutions since they wouldn’t have been constrained by older parameters. 
This execerpt below explains the pitfalls of building upon older constraints perfectly.....


“The US standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That's an exceedingly odd number.

Why was that gauge used?
Well, because that's the way they built them in England, and English engineers designed the first US railroads.

Why did the English build them like that?
Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the wagon tramways, and that's the gauge they used.

So, why did 'they' use that gauge then?
Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they had used for building wagons, which used that same wheel spacing.

Why did the wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing?
Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break more often on some of the old, long distance roads in England . You see, that's the spacing of the wheel ruts.

So who built those old rutted roads?
Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (including England ) for their legions. Those roads have been used ever since.

And what about the ruts in the roads?
Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match or run the risk of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome , they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing. Therefore the United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot. Bureaucracies live forever.

So the next time you are handed a specification/procedure/process and wonder 'What horse's ass came up with this?', you may be exactly right. Imperial Roman army chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the rear ends of two war horses. (Two horses' asses.)

Now, the twist to the story:

When you see a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory in Utah . The engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line from the factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains, and the SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is about as wide as two horses' behinds.

So, a major Space Shuttle design feature, of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system, was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of a horse's ass. And you thought being a horse's ass wasn't important? Ancient horse's asses control almost everything and....

CURRENT Horses Asses are controlling everything else.”


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 20, 2020)

Rocksthaman said:


> Because the capabilities are there in the camera. I don’t understand why so many “photographers” want to limit what a camera can do. The camera is capable of shooting all of those except for raw. There’s not as much photography work as there used to be, so when you get a camera you want
> It to be a versatile as possible. It used to be physical details of a camera where the clear differentiations of a camera. It’s just not the case and canon is artificially segmenting.
> 
> if I prefer to shoot Canon and shoot video and photo. How hard is it to understand I want to have TWO cameras that are redundant. Not 4.However I’m sure you do understand and just want to be a jerk about it.
> ...


You can ask for anything you like, to feel let down by a product that breaks new ground on specs because it doesn't do a few of the things you personally want when it does practically everything much better than any previous model (particularly the model it is replacing) seems childish. But I get it, I'm the _"jerk"_!


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 20, 2020)

Juangrande said:


> Probably has everything to do with the fact that when cameras transitioned to digital they kept the lenses from the film era rather than reinventing the format anew which would’ve allowed them to come up with the best solutions since they wouldn’t have been constrained by older parameters.
> This execerpt below explains the pitfalls of building upon older constraints perfectly.....
> 
> 
> ...


A great tale to be sure, but it doesn't really stand up to closer scrutiny, indeed most of it breaks down rather easily including the twist...

_"...when Thiokol was building the solid rocket boosters (SRB) for the space shuttle, they had to keep shipping considerations in mind, but they didn’t have to alter their design because any particular tunnel that lay between their plant and the Florida launch site wasn’t large enough."_

As for the lenses, there has been a wide variety of lenses available in numerous formats for a long time, including high quality video camera lenses based on much smaller tube based measurements. Not saying that historical considerations aren't a reasonable consideration, but I would argue it isn't _the_ reason.


----------



## Rocksthaman (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> You can ask for anything you like, to feel let down by a product that breaks new ground on specs because it doesn't do a few of the things you personally want when it does practically everything much better than any previous model (particularly the model it is replacing) seems childish. But I get it, I'm the _"jerk"_!



It literally doesn’t need to have a record limit. The tax is gone. But there is one 

The camera has more dynamic range but the log profiles isn’t there to use it.

The camera is overheating” but it’s not hot.

These are not Specs, they are merely software limitations. If you have thousands of dollars in glass in a system, the hope is that you get the most out of it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 20, 2020)

Rocksthaman said:


> It literally doesn’t need to have a record limit. The tax is gone. But there is one
> 
> The camera has more dynamic range but the log profiles isn’t there to use it.
> 
> ...


And what has changed since my last post? You are crying because the camera doesn't have specs you want and feel would be trivial to include, Canon don't want to sell you those specs for $3,899, get over it.

It is Canon's product and they can put any software or hardware "limitations" on it they want, you as a consumer get to choose if you feel the product is worth your money, that is the deal. Constantly whining like a spoilt child over what you feel you are owed or deserve is pathetic.


----------



## Rocksthaman (Aug 21, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And what has changed since my last post? You are crying because the camera doesn't have specs you want and feel would be trivial to include, Canon don't want to sell you those specs for $3,899, get over it.
> 
> It is Canon's product and they can put any software or hardware "limitations" on it they want, you as a consumer get to choose if you feel the product is worth your money, that is the deal. Constantly whining like a spoilt child over what you feel you are owed or deserve is pathetic.



No, “Mr Photographer”, your below post notes you’re not giving Canon a pass and you want to know what Canon is not featuring in a $4000 camera.

I noted what they where. That point is simple.

In turn went into your own little issue with people wanting more from their cameras. It’s clearly a thing for you that video shooters would like to have more features in their DSLR/Mirrorless cameras. Just look at your posts. I hope you work for canon the way you defend it. Fair enough that’s your own little internal war.

Canon has great lenses that I have a shelf of. They have capable hardware. They just reserve certain features for the cinema line, but the lines between photo and video have clearly blurred. If I needed different capabilities, I would just go buy them, I already did go by two Sony bodies. No issue there. The cameras are very functional. I enjoy shooting Canon much more, However they have always seemed to be behind on the tech side (ibis, crops, Mirrorless bodies, WiFi), they finally catch up and now seems just as good as the competition and they self cripple .

If you know anything about business the market will set itself.Any consumer not wanting the most value out of their purchases has undervalued their purchasing power. You don’t want to hear about video, stop reading. You know who knows video is important , Canon. They haven’t stopped talking about it since announcing the camera.

Video is the frontier and going to be from here on out a part of the Mirrorless purchasing decision.

Get used to it.


Rocksthaman said:


> No record limit, C-Log 2/3, no overheating in 4k60, 4K raw ( I know it’s not possible but I’d like it).


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 21, 2020)

Rocksthaman said:


> No, “Mr Photographer”, your below post notes you’re not giving Canon a pass and you want to know what Canon is not featuring in a $4000 camera.
> 
> I noted what they where. That point is simple.
> 
> ...


That line of criticism always makes me smile, clearly Canon know more about business than you, they sell more cameras than Sony and Nikon combined, and they have been the best seller for 20 years straight, at what point is your mythical market shellacking going to take place because I have been here since the beginning and I've seen that posted every week for the last >10 years.

As for video, sure video is a aspect of hybrids, that's why they are called hybrids, but just like any other market different product lines will have different emphasis on the compromises inherent in either mode, manufacturers also have differing outlooks to their own product lines and product cannibalism. The Sony a7RIII is as video focused a hybrid as the R5 is a stills focused hybrid, anybody looking for a stills orientated camera would be as ill advised to purchase that particular Sony as a video centric shooter would an R5. Why does that have to mean Canon should give you more in the R5? The two are not linked in any way.


----------



## Dantana (Aug 21, 2020)

JIM JIM said:


> FF is where the cinema industry seems to heading.
> 
> Many aren't using a lens that fast in video unless for special use cases and most def would need a dedicated focus puller.
> 
> ...


I guess it all depends on what you mean by the "cinema industry."

Nobody making feature length narrative content or episodic content on the studio level is worried about equipment cost. Reliability, look, capability, sure. But camera and lens are the least of the costs for what I would call the "cinema industry." Most equipment is rented and the real cost in making a film at that level is all people.

And I haven't seen any data on a move toward FF sensors there. Spectacle films have often used large formats, while the bulk of everything seen in a theater up until now has been the width of a Super 35 frame.


----------



## Deleted member 384473 (Aug 21, 2020)

Dantana said:


> I guess it all depends on what you mean by the "cinema industry."
> 
> Nobody making feature length narrative content or episodic content on the studio level is worried about equipment cost. Reliability, look, capability, sure. But camera and lens are the least of the costs for what I would call the "cinema industry." Most equipment is rented and the real cost in making a film at that level is all people.
> 
> And I haven't seen any data on a move toward FF sensors there. Spectacle films have often used large formats, while the bulk of everything seen in a theater up until now has been the width of a Super 35 frame.


Fair enough. That was pretty vague of me. 

I agree but my answer had context behind it. 

Going based on Camera manufacturers introducing new large format cameras over the last 5 years, but yes, since high quality large FF cameras weren't around like they are now, S35 has been the standard.


----------



## MaxDiesel (Aug 21, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> A native Canon Speedbooster on these RF Cinemas is really outstanding should that rumor bear out. You can shoot lenses with the S35 or get an effective 35mm FF image area with a huge library of EF glass.


Metabones has already made one you can use on current RF bodies.


----------



## B_Mourning (Aug 22, 2020)

Hmm I wonder if canon is releasing this to compete against RED and there new komodo camera...i mean besides the 6k vs 4k the offerings seem close


----------



## andrewtowecreative (Aug 25, 2020)

DBounce said:


> Where/when did Canon mention that after the overheat restriction took place, it would take from 2 hours to as much as 6 hours to cool down?
> I’ll answer... they didn’t. It’s not in any official statement and it’s not in the owners manual. That’s pretty significant oversight.
> I’m not giving them a pass. I’ll gladly return this camera if Canon failed to address these concerns very soon.


They did, in the announcement video with a development member and 3 youtubers that claim they're in the "cinema" space. And there's documentation, just a single page. They don't state those times. It's something like wait 30 mins and you can use it for 4 more minutes. Something bogus like that. You're wrong to be mad at the initial reason but that after effect reason you're in the right.


----------



## DBounce (Aug 25, 2020)

andrewtowecreative said:


> They did, in the announcement video with a development member and 3 youtubers that claim they're in the "cinema" space. And there's documentation, just a single page. They don't state those times. It's something like wait 30 mins and you can use it for 4 more minutes. Something bogus like that. You're wrong to be mad at the initial reason but that after effect reason you're in the right.


Which is the point. The extremely long artificial cool down time, which is apparently not based on actual internal temperature... at all, makes this camera unusable for video in any of the headline shooting modes. No one really cares about line skipped 4K. So while I understand that the lower quality mode continues to function, it is of little consolation.
If Canon based the overheat/recovery off of actual internal temps, there would be no issue at all. Because this camera does in truth, not overheat. I run it 8 hours straight in 4KHQ external. It warms up to it normal operating temperature and never goes beyond that. Image quality remains consistent. The body never gets hot to the touch.


----------

