Canon first teased an 8K Cinema EOS camera back in 2015 at the Canon EXPO, we’ve also seen some other sightings at various tradeshows over the years. Now that we have 8K capability in the Canon EOS R5, the next step for Canon will be to introduce a Cinema EOS camera with 8K capture.



I have been told that Canon will introduce not one, but two 8K Cinema EOS cameras in 2021. One of the cameras will be a flagship camera with “A camera” aspirations, likely in the form factor of the Canon Cinema EOS C700.



The second one I have been told will be a more modular camera in the same vein as the Cinema EOS C300 Mark III and Cinema EOS C500 Mark II. Where it exactly fits into the Cinema EOS ecosystem is unknown at this...

Click to expand...

Continue reading...

Canon first teased an 8K Cinema EOS camera back in 2015 at the Canon EXPO, we’ve also seen some other sightings at various tradeshows over the years. Now that we have 8K capability in the Canon EOS R5, the next step for Canon will be to introduce a Cinema EOS camera with 8K capture.



I have been told that Canon will introduce not one, but two 8K Cinema EOS cameras in 2021. One of the cameras will be a flagship camera with “A camera” aspirations, likely in the form factor of the Canon Cinema EOS C700.



The second one I have been told will be a more modular camera in the same vein as the Cinema EOS C300 Mark III and Cinema EOS C500 Mark II. Where it exactly fits into the Cinema EOS ecosystem is unknown at this time.



I don’t expect an announcement until around the NAB 2021 timeframe, which usually...

Click to expand...

Continue reading...

If anyone is looking for the non-control rind adapter (2971C002), Amazon UK has 11 in stock.
Total cost with shipping to California was $128.83.

Hi all, I’m not much of a videographer, but I’ve been playing with the 4K Fine and 8K RAW on the R5. For the 4K footage the LUT that I downloaded from Canon looks great, but I can’t seem to find a good LUT for 8K. Any recommendations?

Chig said:

Perhaps could use an external CF express recorder using the hdmi cable but the micro size is fragile and who wants cables if you can avoid them ?
Can the hot shoe connection be used for data transfer?

Click to expand...

If you really want to use the HDMI or USB C connectors a lot then just plug in the cable holder that comes with the R5. I've done that and it's makes the cable connection quite safe & secure for both of those cables. It's easy to put on & off if you leave your cables in the cable holder and just screw/unscrew it from the side of the camera.

will have to try slower, probably should have at the time but I was so happy with the results I packed up and continued my climb.

Hi all,
Watching a "tech gear talk" video on youtube and he mentioned he had heard about 5 new M lenses being announced this year.
Was wondering if anyone else had heard that ?
15mm toneh 2, 52mm toneh 2, 62 macro toneh 4, 18-45 toneh 2.8-4, 100-300 no toneh

I think the primes are well covered already by Canon and Sigma i would hope they might bring us some HQ zooms ?
10-18 toneh 2.8 , 18-50 toneh 2.8, 50-200 toneh 2.8
this would make "baby Jesus" trinity !

Anyone know anything about these, or thoughts on what you'd like.

tpatana said:

Next item I'm wondering if that bit depth really does anything, like is the dynamic range still same but the resolution is just one bit less (on 14 vs 13), or does it also drop dynamic range by 1 bit. My sports shooting is always on the dark side so I need to push and having good dynamic range helps.

Click to expand...

As R5 has roughly twice as many pixels per area as R6, 13 bits per pixel for R5 is roughly equivalent to 14 bits per pixel for R6, given the same exposure for both.

On R5 alone, the difference between 12, 13, and 14 bits per pixel should be unnoticeable at ISO 800 and up, as there is just not enough meaningful data coming from the light to fill all that extra bits.

Joules said:

Yes, I do.

I am well aware that there are legitimate reasons to be disappointed in Canon's recent product launches and especially the way the communcation around them, though.

But this is also the internet, and it knows no boundaries when it comes to outrage and general sillyness. Some of the recent discussions on this site have been great reminders for that. Having a little laugh about it seems to be the best one can do at this point.

Returning to actually helpful and productive topics - On the subject of auto, is it possible to set ISO to auto when an external flash unit is attached to the camera? On my cameras, doing that results in the ISO being effectively set to 400. What I would like to be able to do occasionally is have the camera just meter the scene as it usually does, and use a little bit of fill flash without affecting the other exposure settings. It may well be that despite looking I just haven't found the option that allows this - or it is just an arbitrary software limitation. If it is the latter, I am curious if the new RF generation still shows this behavior. That's really just a curiosity though, don't worry if you don't share it or nobody has the time to test it

Click to expand...

with 5D4: Auto ISO settings with an external flash attached will result in ISO 400 settings by default.. that's to conserve flash power. in the AV mode, Camera will use flash as a fill by default (ETTL II).
as a side note: with R5 dual gain sensor, ISO 400 settings for flash makes perfect sense. you save on power flash and ensure that the noise levels are as low as at ISO 100.

reefroamer said:

Well, you got me there. I appreciate your feedback. But all those footnotes are really ugly, like a pharma ad. If that many are needed, it would be worthwhile to consider rewording a bit, IMHO. But my spear was a little over sharpened in my comment. Canon could have avoided a lot of the thrashing by pro-actively handling it at announcement. EG, “We decided to include these amazing video modes even though their use is time-constrained by thermal factors. It was our primary goal to create a high-resolution sensor in a compact, weather-sealed camera body desired by so many of our customers.” Something like that. Best to acknowledge the issue and get your own spin on it first. Hope for a soft landing. This one landed pretty hard.

Click to expand...

That I agree with you. Absolutely.And thank you for writing back on this issue. As I previously posted: in my opinion, Canon did went a bit Gung Ho with this press release and in particular high end production readiness references. The language they used is questionable in some parts of the text, as you pointed out. So.., thank you!

BeenThere said:

I vote for a hot pixel. The magenta color is wrong for reflected light. Also, i think geostationary distance is something like 22K miles out, so pretty small source to show up on a wide angle lens.

Click to expand...

See my post on the last page. I ran another 24min exposure with a body cap on. Sure enough it's still there. It's a hot pixel.

SecureGSM said:

I guess, shooting with electronic shutter at 20FPS and dropping every fourth frame you get 15FPS and dropping every second frame you get 10FPS. I am sure that can be implemented in firmware

Click to expand...

You would think so. But so far both the EOS R and the R5 have only one burst speed in electronic shutter mode. Like I said, I'm not gonna complain.

Maybe once the data flow is opened up between the sensor and the buffer memory of the camera, that's just a freight train that you can't slow down.

Bundu said:

The Zebras were particulary dark. And darker stripes running through or right next to the eye. But the camera did pick up the eye of birds with black heads, so I do not know why it dont work on Zebra.

Click to expand...

We're going to end up with a third choice for subject of eye focus. Humans, zebras, and all other animals.

Though perhaps we'll have to wait for the R5Z for that.

AlanF said:

At least the R6 has a dial on the top left.

Click to expand...

I meant left of the hot shoe (assuming the on off switch could be somewhere else or different).

(I am still not fully used to EOS R controls.)

I would like the full 5D4 handling experience !

EDIT: AND I know I will not get it!

spyder93090 said:

Heads-up, my credit card was charged today for my order with Canon USA (EPP, Body Only, placed on 7/20/20 @ 2am). Hopefully it doesn't have anything to do with the site maintenance.

Please update/add yourself to the Unofficial R5 Pre-Order Tracker (in my sig) if you haven't done so already.

Click to expand...

I assume you verified it was the correct amount, or I would be worried since their sites are still down.

Jack Douglas said:

I can't imagine the R6 actually being as bad as all this preliminary chatter but I empathize. My guess is you could be happy with it unless it's really a video camera you're looking for. I agree with the previous post and would add that there could be some good value in used but of course you're not up to date buying used. However in a year or two the R6 will not be up to date so you need to decrease your emphasis on this being a once and only earth shattering purchase and focus on just how adequate many present cameras are. Cameras are becoming outdated so fast but that doesn't mean they are useless by any means.

Jack

Click to expand...

Gordon Laing of Cameralabs has done a nice review of the R6. It seems a thoroughly decent camera wiith excellent AF and the sensor performing well.

I haven't had much BIF since getting the camera, but I've been doing a lot of high-velocity, spastic kid shots from very close range. The angle of view movement in many of these cases is greater than that of a bird moving across the frame. I am now coming to expect that all shots outside of 5 feet from the camera will be in focus on the eye when using eye tracking. I was never one for eye tracking - even on the Sony A9II - but I'm a believer now.

I think the limiting factor is more the lenses now. I see this with the 600mm f/11. Its focus isn't speedy. So when tracking a kid running toward me, it'll get it in focus for a couple shots, then fall behind, then jump back into focus, and then fall behind again, etc. The RF 70-200 and all the other L lenses are zippy enough that it just works. Not 15 minutes ago, I took a series of my little girl learning to bike on the lawn. She was coming at me as fast as her little legs could push her (not very fast at all), but the camera kept focus as she passed me until she was within 2-3 feet away, and I was panning rapidly.

Yesterday I was photographing a leopard frog on a log looking away from me. Was surprised to see the little blue square indicating it had found an eye - even when I had the camera set to look for people.

The settings were: tracking; eye tracking on; people; H+; all the various silly file modifying "features" like DLO turned off.

Also, of note: sensor read is too fast for jello effect to show up. It's exactly these close passes where I'd expect to see it.

I'd be extremely happy with something similar to the R with 60+mp, no AA, and a stop improved DR. No high end video, etc. Just pure high res

Joules said:

The PDR at PTP does take sensor size and resolution into account, based on my understanding. That's what is meant by the statement about the 8 X 10 inch print held at arm's length being used as the base for comparison, as far as I know.

Click to expand...

Yes, PDR is of course normalized, which is why we don't see a stop of difference between the R6 and R5's ISO performance. But what SecureGSM linked was specifically raw non-normalized read noise measurements in (log) DN aka Digital Numbers, which is a post-ADC representation of the analog readout from a photosite. Smaller photosites means more gain needed means more noise per photosite.

I would be more inclined to get an EF or RF camera than the Leica for black-and-white. I'd want something I could fit a tilt-shift lens on so I could do pseudo Ansel Adams shots, like I did when I rented the 24mm TS-E. But for that purpose, a color camera works well, giving me the chance to choose virtual filters in post. The sliders in ACR and Lightroom give adjustments to make a wide variety of looks to the B&W shots produced.

AlanF said:

Selfies?

Click to expand...

Nah, they are the street bunnies that have moved in up the council estate(At least it looks like a council estate, all the houses are bricks instead of carved stone or rubble). The one at the top particularly likes to play a game where I get the camera ready, he runs away, when when I don't follow him he scoots back a bit to see why I am not following him.

DrToast said:

Then where's the lost detail from the NR? Also, what does the 1DXIII have to do with it? It's a different sensor?

Click to expand...

As Bill Claff points out at such low ISO it is impossible to calculate the loss in resolution without a RAW file that doesn't have NR applied, and you currently can't get one of them. The larger point being at those low iso's it becomes an engineering difference not a visible one.

The relevance of the 1DX III is that it is the same generation and technology sensor but the RAW file is not cooked, it is the best indicator of where the PDR would be for an uncooked R5 RAW, sure the EDR will be different but that doesn't matter as we can still use the PDR as a normalized comparison.

Viggo said:

The 1ds3 wasn’t as hopeless as it’s sporty brother 1d3, I’ll give you that one, I bought one of the VERY first in my country and it was a nightmare.

it was a good write up from the engineers at Canon about the EF 85 f1.4 L IS, loads of people said this and that, and they answered everything.

time is one thing, the price point another. And a few hundred other factors.

since the 1d3 the only other thing I can recall was that light leak they fixed with tape,pretty much smooth sailing since that.

Click to expand...

Right, and that is why a lot of people are concerned. On the one hand, great that Canon is being less conservative with their product development, on the other hand offering video modes which may not be available if you shoot stills a lot (which probably represents a decent size of the community here and the target community for Canon), is just plain "out of character" for Canon...

Faced with that, lots of people want to try and figure out whether they can fix it. I don't think all of it is malicious intent at Canon, I think lots of people here just like to try and solve problems.

There is no doubt in my mind Canon did a lot of design iterations, testing, changing. And yes, the constraints would be a long list, but doesnt mean they take all into consideration. Ultimately they thought they had the trade-offs at an acceptable position - and bar the cool down time & shooting stills then video, they have.

I think it is tough for Canon right now - how do they get insight into how much of this is genuine, how much is internet clickbaiting / growing your subscribers, much more difficult for Canon. We may all go ignore the YT crowd, it is just noise, but they're influencing potential buyers. Difficult for Canon to find what are the realistic issues being faced.

If mine arrives and I experience issues with video having taken stills, then I do intend to contact them. It's ok for people to vent here, but unless you have a massive following, then for us mere mortals contacting Canon is the best solution.

Re 1Ds III - I have 2 of them, but long after they launched, and all the fixes were in place. No doubt that experience influenced future designs a lot.

jwflowersii said:

I don't think anyone replied to you, but the issue is focus breathing, so when trying to do any pull focus shots it sucks

Click to expand...

Ah. Thank you. Are EF lenses free of focus breathing?

VegasCameraGuy said:

" I am also wondering about the WFT Grip and using it rather than a card reader. At $1000 rather than $350 for the battery grip, its a big penalty, I probably would not use most of the features, but if the wi-fi of the R5 is not fast enough, its a option at closer to GB speeds. I wonder if it helps to heat sink the camera "

I'd guess that the grip wouldn't be that useful unless you have an ethernet cable to plug it into. Also if you're shooting RAW keep in mind that your image files will be somewhere around 50 Mb each and transferring that over WiFi will be slow.

Click to expand...

Its not slow when using gigabit wi-fi speeds, slightly slower than ethernet, WFT has gigabyte speed, close to ethernet speed. I copied six 31 MB CR3 files over ethernet to my NAS, it took maybe 2 or 3 seconds. A more accurate measure would be copying 1 or 2 hundred, but I could live with the speed for photos. For 8K video, it would be a problem. If the WFT transferred them via FTP to my NAS as I took the photos, I'd probably never even notice the download speed.