Anyone Ordering The R5C?

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

Anyone else considering?  The R5C was not the road I anticipated taking, but I'm tired of waiting and since this body doesn't overheat, I am more confident about it over the standard R5.      

Although I am a stills shooter, the Cinema EOS side of the body is intriguing.  Its so much smaller than a C70.  I'm not serious enough about video that I'd miss Clog2.  The body has 16 14 stops so plenty of DR for my use.  Its also not limited to Super35 or 16 (which isn't so much a limitation), but Canon has really stepped up here.  I don't care about ibis.  All of my lenses except 1 are IS and the body has digital IS built in.  I have purchased a bunch of accessories.  Control Ring Adapter, 2 512GB CF ExpressB, 2 128GB UHSII, 2x Watson batteries (Canon was out of stock), and I've not tried Manfrotto batteries yet.  

Going to try the AngelBird CFExpress cards and ProGrade for the XD Cards.  I've always used SanDisk so going to try something else.  Both are highly rated.

I also contacted EasyCover in the Netherlands and my contact there has said they do not plan to make a skin for the R5C.  Was hoping for this, but am more excited about a new body.  Haven't pulled the trigger quite yet.  I have a quick business trip and wanted to be back for the arrival.  Plan to wait a week.  If nothing glaring is reported, I will finally move to mirrorless.

[wobbleman99]

Hi Rick,

Thank you for the link, I will have a look.

Regards,

Ron

[shadowsports]

I think sfogel2 might join us.  He's got the Tascam XLR and just noticed the dimmed inputs in his menu.

[wobbleman99]

Hi Rick,

I finally took the opportunity to shoot some MP4 8k clips with the R5c, and it immediately became apparent that even with my maxed out 2019 Mac Pro Tower I would have to work with proxies. 8k is nice, but I had purchased the R5c to mate with my C300 Mk III, so I will be primarily shooting in 4k.

[sfogel2]

MP4 is very compressed so your CPU has to work harder during editing. Try 8K XF-AVC. 

[wobbleman99]

I don't believe that 8k XAVC is an option on the R5c, and other than RAW, all I could find was MP4 8k.

Add: I've just checked, and there is no XAVC 8k option on the R5c, it's either one of the RAW options or MP4.  That means that editing 8k via proxy may be the best option in Resolve.  Some have claimed that Apple's M1 processor does a better job with 8k, but that would mean editing from a laptop, and I need my 31" 4k monitor and various other accessories that are connected to the Mac Pro.  While I am certain that Apple will eventually update the Mac Pro Tower with an M1 or its equivalent, I'll save the anticipated huge upgrade cost and, for the rare instances that I choose to shoot 8k, edit with proxies.

[shadowsports]

Hey Guys,

I've read and watched youtube and heard much of the same.  Indeed mp4 would not be my preferred codec as the file sizes and encoding is very taxing, even on the most robust of systems.  

I'd probably shoot in XF-AVC as well.  TBH and as I have always said.  Canon didn't need to go 8K, (with the R5 either) but I understand why they did.  They were trying to crush it.  I'll shoot primarily in 4K for all of the reasons mentioned.  File size and no need for proxies even on a nicely appointed, 1~5 yr old system.  The 8K down sampling is awesome in its own right.  4K will provide the fidelity I need.  I'm not a video first buff anyway, so this body is going to open new doors for me.    

We're heading to Hawaii without an R5C unfortunately.  If the rumors about the second batch becoming available (around) 5/28 are true I'll have it hopefully around my birthday.  I'm taking my 6D2, 24~70 and 70~300 on the trip. 

Gerald Undone recently had some great things to say about the R5C.  At this point its down to battery, ibis and AF on the cine side which are mostly non-issues for me.  I saw a guy who had put a smaller PD on his Black Rapid strap (my preferred carry) and he gets like 6hrs of shooting.  I'll take the lighter weight and smaller from factor of the R5C over the C70 any day, and I get a fantastic stills camera too.  I'm also fine with digital IS.  Ibis is a non-issue since I'm getting a cine camera with 90%+ of the R5's functionality.  Dual pixel AF (1) on the cine side, another one I can overlook.  All of Canon's cine cameras C70 and up are superb.

Starting to get hyped up again and excited if Canon does in fact release another batch of R5C's. 

The other thing I saw which is very cool was the Meike  Variable ND filter.  Dial adjustable ND and 100% functionality for less than 50% of Canon's version.  Only caveat, the dial doesn't have click so you don't have a way to know how much +/- EV you are actually getting.  Not sure if Canon's does this either.    

These types of things further enhance and solidify the R5C's value proposition.  I haven't been excited about anything mirrorless from Canon for years.  I briefly considered the R3 and if it had 33~36 MP's probably would have gone that route, but its hard to go back to less resolution once you've had more.  Granted it not all about MP's, but the detail is addictive.

[AtticusLake]

Have a great time in Hawaii!

Re 8k, my opinion is that the 8k on the R5 is great.  And you basically get all the benefit of it by shooting 4kHQ.  Like you say, the file size is way more manageable; but with the 8k sensor and oversampling, you get a true 4k pixel resolution, which you won't get on a 4k camera (like the C70).  I've been comparing the two, and the difference in detail is pretty strong.

Of course detail isn't everything in picture quality... but it is a thing.

[wobbleman99]

I have seen a difference between 4k out of the R5c and the 4k output from my C300 Mk III, but I get the feeling that the C300 output is more 'cinematic'.  What does that mean? I'm not sure that I can put it into words, other than to  say is that it is less clinical.  But, in the end, I can put both on the same timeline without issue, and I doubt that anyone would notice that there are two different cameras in the mix.

[AtticusLake]

That's interesting... I have -- not always but sometimes -- been getting the same feeling about the R5 versus the C70; the C70 seems "richer", I guess, and the R5 more "video-ey" (though more detailed).  But only sometimes.  When I go and shoot something to prove it to myself, the R5 looks just as good!

Like you say, the difference seems subtle in any case.  But I still think of my R5 as the B cam.  So really, detail isn't everything in picture quality -- not by quite a way.  (I'm also thinking of the recent video by CVP about the Alexa.)

[wobbleman99]

Hello,

I haven't seen the Alexa video you've referenced but, I agree, that detail is not the end all for picture quality.  The difference between the R5c 4k and that from the C300 becomes most visible when performing the equivalent of pixel peeping, but at normal viewing magnification the difference is less obvious. But, in the end, they are all—C70, C300, R5c—great video cameras, with each serving perhaps a different purpose for different videographers.  Like you, the R5c is the 'B' cam for my MK III.