This is the great irony here. The R5 has video performance that's on par with everything else in it's class—Z7, A7R4, Leica, etc. That is, soft/aliased full frame and great S35 performance. The IBIS is a bit aggressive for wide angle shooting, but it's got great AF. There are a few issues though:
- First, Canon screwed up with the release here. Hindsight is 20/20, but they should have shoved half the video modes into a custom function and not hyped up this being all things to all people.
- Second, folks want the R5 to be that "be all end all" camera because Canon doesn't have an answer here other than spend 2x as much for a cinema body. It's again making it look like canon either "can't" do these things or "doesn't want" to do these things to protect a cinema cam line.
- Lastly, the R6 is in a really tough spot. It's low res for 2020, but that could be forgiven if it was hitting the DR and rolling shutter performance of the A7SIII. And because of the body construction, it's got some thermal issues.
--
Took a quick break to watch Gerald's video. Canon really needs to stay on their toes here. Sony continues to make inroads on every complaint area—menus, EVF, ergonomics, autofocus, and they are clearly continuing to work hard on sensor fabs. If I'm Canon, I'm very concerned about what an A7R5 starts to look like.
--
The issue here is that everyone is in a total state of flux with the new mounts. If I'm a hybrid shooter on an A7R4 and need video capabilities, I know I can pick up a second body that tucks into my bag and uses the same cards, batteries, accessories. An R5 shooter doesn't have that option right now. In the past, you could do lean on Canon stills and Sony video, all using EF. But as EF shooters move to RF, that flexibility is gone. You start to look a lot more locked in to your system, and the Sony system is finally looking attractive.