exactly what I am saying, its still a RAW file, the comment "its not completely raw" that I was responding too is whats laughable.
It's blood rare then.
Upvote
0
exactly what I am saying, its still a RAW file, the comment "its not completely raw" that I was responding too is whats laughable.
Here's a thought I haven't seen mentioned yet:I feel the camera should be price more around $3299 like the 5D mk4 was.
it's still a RAW file from a format perspective with an unknown amount of post processing (noise reduction) applied to it. so RAW vs Cooked RAW.exactly what I am saying, its still a RAW file, the comment "its not completely raw" that I was responding too is whats laughable.
I believe the $3899 price reflects the 8k and 4k 120 video features. Both of these have turned out to be a failure in the eyes of videographers as far as I can tell. Canons only hope is that photographers, like myself, will buy the camera to replace there 5D mk4's. I feel the camera should be price more around $3299 like the 5D mk4 was.
it's still a RAW file from a format perspective with an unknown amount of post processing (noise reduction) applied to it. so RAW vs Cooked RAW.
Yes, R5 sounds like a great stills camera, given the competition is that worth $3900? Not to me at least. Will wait for the price to drop below $3k mark.
I agree 100% on the pricing but I don't understand why you say "It's a nice camera but it's no 5D4, and the 5D4 is no R5." Could you elaborate a bit from your perspective because never having owned a 5 series and looking to get a R5 I am interested in where you see the distinctions.The EOS-R, aside from the sensor, is not a 5D4 replacement in any regard in my book and I own both cameras. It's a nice camera but it's no 5D4, and the 5D4 is no R5.
If you're asking me if the R5 @ $3700 is worth $1700 more than the R my answer is absolutely. Ditto if you had to pay $3899 retail. If you're asking me if the R5 is worth the same money as the 5D4 at launch my answer is absolutely and without hesitation.
I bought the 5D4 at launch and wasn't "stopped in my tracks" by the price nor was I "stopped in my tracks" to pay the same money for a drastically improved camera four years later.
If people just "can't afford it" I can understand that, but I don't agree with the idea that the camera is overpriced. Even if you remove all the video features you're paying 5D4 money for a camera that outperforms it in every single way.
It isn't "at a higher cost..." Given inflation it's roughly the same price, and it's a bargain considering there isn't a camera that comes close to its feature set and execution at any price.
I agree 100% on the pricing but I don't understand why you say "It's a nice camera but it's no 5D4, and the 5D4 is no R5." Could you elaborate a bit from your perspective because never having owned a 5 series and looking to get a R5 I am interested in where you see the distinctions.
5D IV and R5.Between the EOS-R and the 5D4, or the 5D4 and the R5?
I can give you my perspective on whichever you’re asking about, but I’m a little slow on the uptake and don’t want to waste your time.
5D IV and R5.
I think I misunderstood your initial comment, that is a list of things that make the R5 more appealing than a 5D IV, I thought you were fans of both and the 5D IV did things the R5 didn't. Given that list I don't see how anybody can say the R5 isn't a 5D IV replacement, and a very worthy and complete one at that.Specifically what appeals to me about R5 over 5D4:
Higher FPS
EVF
Tilty Flippy
FV
Video
Sensor Size
Better ISO
IBIS
Buffer Size
Animal/Eye AF
WiFi
RF Glass (specifically 100-500L for me, and possibly the 600 and 800mm)
Fv mode
Touch and Drag
Auto Focus System as a whole
I like my 5D4 but got used to a few things on my EOS-R that won my heart. The R5 seems to capture the best of both while also improving on both. I won’t know for sure until it’s in my hands but it doesn’t look to disappoint.
I a bit upset that I won’t be able to film Gladiator II in one take in 8K, but I got over it.
No but if you'd taken the cards out and used a $599 Atomos you could have filmed 1917 in 8k in one shot...I a bit upset that I won’t be able to film Gladiator II in one take in 8K, but I got over it.
No but if you'd taken the cards out and used a $599 Atamos you could have filmed 1917 in 8k in one shot...
The hilarious part about all this is in the much discussed Armando 'production' scenario he was actually using an Atomos, the only mistake he made that impacted his ability to shoot 8k 100% reliably was he should have removed the CFexpress card, so where is the equal time and energetic correction?No, you couldn't have because the damn actors would have flubbed their lines too much.
I think I misunderstood your initial comment, that is a list of things that make the R5 more appealing than a 5D IV, I thought you were fans of both and the 5D IV did things the R5 didn't. Given that list I don't see how anybody can say the R5 isn't a 5D IV replacement, and a very worthy and complete one at that.
The sensor size is the same.
So I don't understand why you list that as a positive of the R5 over the 5D IV.....Yes, it is the same SIZE.
Yes, it is the same SIZE.
The hilarious part about all this is in the much discussed Armando 'production' scenario he was actually using an Atomos, the only mistake he made that impacted his ability to shoot 8k 100% reliably was he should have removed the CFexpress card, so where is the equal time and energetic correction?