Putting pressure on Canon, so they finally produce a Canon GH5 for Video fans.

telemaque

I'm New Here
Nov 30, 2019
12
0
Dear all,
If like me you are really hoping to see Canon finally producing an equivalent of the GH5 but with Canon colors and know how, you might want to write to Canon a letter like I did to their communication people on their website.

Here is the letter I had sent them:


Dear Canon leaders,

I am a typical "expert" amateur. I have invested, with great pleasure, on different lenses and bodies from Canon. On the photographic side, I am the happiest person on earth. I love the quality of your products. Pictures quality is outstanding. Thanks.

I own two bodies: 60D and 6D and one video camera XA-30.
I own several Canon lenses: 16-35 mm L IS f4, 24-70mm L f2.8, 70-200mm L IS f4; 135mm L f2, 35 mm IS f2 and two Rokinon lenses for Video 24mm T1.5, 85mm T1.5.

I am a bit surprised and SAD by Canon who is not offering an equivalent of a Lumix GH5 based on Canon system? I bought last year during Black Friday a Lumix FZ1000 at 500 Euros. The video quality of this bridge is WAY BETTER than the one I get from my XA-30 or my 60D or 6D...

This is a shame I think. Don’t you think also this should not be the case? A 500 Euros product offers better video quality than my 8000 Euros Canon products?

I have been waiting for the right reaction of Canon and saw nothing serious. Even the Canon C100 Mark I and Mark II were not competitive for people like me. Too expensive for an offer that was OK at best...but far from impressive.

The Lumix 4K video quality is outstanding. Maybe more for landscape/archictecture/beach/cities with large perspective than interviews. Indeed, a lot of details shown on the final video can be a problem for interviews. My XA-30 is perfect for interviews. However, I have filmed surfers in Biarritz with my XA-30 and the results are very disappointing, a complete lack of details, too soft image etc. Honestly it is a shame when I see the quality of image I get on pictures with my 6D or 60D which is perfect. Why is video quality not following the photographic quality?

I am afraid it is time for Canon to tell us if you care about customers like me on the video side or not? I am not a professional and I will not buy a Canon C200 or C300/500/700. Too expensive for me and not my need.

What I need is a Canon GH5, I don't need necessarily a Full Frame sensor. A good APS-C sensor with good low light capacity is enough, but I need a MENU in the body that looks like a GH5 menu with strong help on the focus side ( peaking etc), help on the light side (zebra). We need also details and punchy 4K video quality.
We want to see our surfers in Biarritz with details! Please.

I have a budget of roughly 2500 Euros for that body.
By the end of 2020, if Canon continue to ignore the need of customers like me, I will buy a Lumix GH5 + Speedbooster XL or a Lumix S1 + Adapter.

I would prefer to spend this 2500 Euros into a Canon body.
And sorry but the R body with a crop factor of 1.8 for 4K video is really not good enough.

I am writing to you because I really respect your company but Canon has to listen to people like me. If not, we will keep Canon for photography and move for video onto other brandnames.
 

Graphic.Artifacts

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 1, 2017
465
268
Canon doesn't seem interested in marketing a fully functional, low cost, interchangeable lens, video camera. I think they've made that very clear. Just how it is.

If you need something like that you should consider moving to another brand. Panasonic, FujiFilm and Blackmagic all make video cams that should meet your needs at a reasonable cost.

IMO Sony suffers from the same Cinema Cam overhang as Canon so I wouldn't go that direction. Panasonic has the opposite strategy. Panasonic offers a full portfolio that can appeal to any buyer. Canon hasn't embraced that concept.

That being said, most of Canon's offerings do offer a path to getting pretty good results. Canon usually allows one or two good high video workflow paths through their "Cripple-Maze". If you follow Canon's accepted path you can get good results. Those paths usually required some hoop-jumping and some questionable workflows but the end result can be excellent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: telemaque

telemaque

I'm New Here
Nov 30, 2019
12
0
Why not? The difference between that and a GH5 sensor is minimal although the R is still bigger.
To my understanding a GH5+ Speedbooster XL reduce the crop factor to 1.28 so equivalent to the one of a Canon 1D old version... so not bad at all AND the codecs, options, help for the video shooter that is alone is much larger on Lumix menu. Even the 'little' FZ1000 is just impressive on that side. I have being using it for a year now and was completely impressed by the menu of Lumix.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,105
543
To my understanding a GH5+ Speedbooster XL reduce the crop factor to 1.28 so equivalent to the one of a Canon 1D old version... so not bad at all AND the codecs, options, help for the video shooter that is alone is much larger on Lumix menu. Even the 'little' FZ1000 is just impressive on that side. I have being using it for a year now and was completely impressed by the menu of Lumix.
The sensor of a GH5+ is already cropped by a factor of 2X compared to a FF camera. Cropping a FF EOS R by a factor of 1.8X still leaves a slightly larger area of the sensor being used than with the full sensor of a GH5+, which means with the same focal length lens the EOS R will have a slightly wider angle of view.
 

telemaque

I'm New Here
Nov 30, 2019
12
0
The sensor of a GH5+ is already cropped by a factor of 2X compared to a FF camera. Cropping a FF EOS R by a factor of 1.8X still leaves a slightly larger area of the sensor being used than with the full sensor of a GH5+, which means with the same focal length lens the EOS R will have a slightly wider angle of view.
Hello Michael, the adition of a Speedbooster XL multiplies the crop factor 2 of the GH5 by 0.64, so the final crop factor is 1.28 quite less than 1.8. On top of it the speedbooster gives you one or two step aperture. So if you lens has f2.8, it works on GH5+Speedbooster a minimum like a f2. So for example my 135mm f2 will work like a f1.4 with a focal length of 173mm at f1.4 not exactly the worst option for a tele lens.

Today the price GH5+Speedbooster = Price of Canon R.
I will also need to buy an EF to R mount adapter with the R body.

Again I am giving the chance in 2020 to Canon to convince me that they will change their current approach of customers like me, but if what Graphic.Artifacts is wisely writing is confirmed then I will move to Lumix for Video. I love Canon quality and I have been a very fair customer of Canon, but if my type of customer is not a target for Canon on the video side, I will accept their decision and take my decision too...
and Video will become Lumix brandname on my side.

I wrote a letter to their people to make sure they realize what people like me have in mind. If their marketing strategy accepts such a choice, fine for me.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,963
1,176
119
Hello Michael, the adition of a Speedbooster XL multiplies the crop factor 2 of the GH5 by 0.64, so the final crop factor is 1.28 quite less than 1.8. On top of it the speedbooster gives you one or two step aperture. So if you lens has f2.8, it works on GH5+Speedbooster a minimum like a f2. So for example my 135mm f2 will work like a f1.4 with a focal length of 173mm at f1.4 not exactly the worst option for a tele lens.

Today the price GH5+Speedbooster = Price of Canon R.
I will also need to buy an EF to R mount adapter with the R body.

Again I am giving the chance in 2020 to Canon to convince me that they will change their current approach of customers like me, but if what Graphic.Artifacts is wisely writing is confirmed then I will move to Lumix for Video. I love Canon quality and I have been a very fair customer of Canon, but if my type of customer is not a target for Canon on the video side, I will accept their decision and take my decision too...
and Video will become Lumix brandname on my side.

I wrote a letter to their people to make sure they realize what people like me have in mind. If their marketing strategy accepts such a choice, fine for me.
The Speedbooster might change the lens numbers but it doesn't change the size of the sensor, which was my point when I first said "Why not?" Nothing bests sensor size, nothing, even if you emulate focal length and dof, a cropped R is larger than an uncrossed GH5, you say the R isn't good enough yet the GH5 is, I am trying to point out Canon already make the camera you say you want but you have bought into the influencer meme and can't see the specs for the bull.
 
Last edited:

bhf3737

---
Sep 9, 2015
480
518
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
I am a bit surprised and SAD by Canon who is not offering an equivalent of a Lumix GH5 based on Canon system? I bought last year during Black Friday a Lumix FZ1000 at 500 Euros. The video quality of this bridge is WAY BETTER than the one I get from my XA-30 or my 60D or 6D...
Good luck with the letter. I sincerely hope you get what you want.
But my guess is Canon would think that they have so many products for that tier, including but not limited to, G7XIII, M50, M6II, XF400, XA50, 90D, RP, 5DIV and R. If neither of those products satisfy your needs, then try finding another brand that does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: telemaque

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,105
543
Hello Michael, the adition of a Speedbooster XL multiplies the crop factor 2 of the GH5 by 0.64, so the final crop factor is 1.28 quite less than 1.8. On top of it the speedbooster gives you one or two step aperture. So if you lens has f2.8, it works on GH5+Speedbooster a minimum like a f2. So for example my 135mm f2 will work like a f1.4 with a focal length of 173mm at f1.4 not exactly the worst option for a tele lens.

Today the price GH5+Speedbooster = Price of Canon R.
I will also need to buy an EF to R mount adapter with the R body.

Again I am giving the chance in 2020 to Canon to convince me that they will change their current approach of customers like me, but if what Graphic.Artifacts is wisely writing is confirmed then I will move to Lumix for Video. I love Canon quality and I have been a very fair customer of Canon, but if my type of customer is not a target for Canon on the video side, I will accept their decision and take my decision too...
and Video will become Lumix brandname on my side.

I wrote a letter to their people to make sure they realize what people like me have in mind. If their marketing strategy accepts such a choice, fine for me.
The speed booster does nothing to change the size of the sensor. What it changes is the focal length of the lens, giving a wider angle of view with that lens.

It makes your 135mm f/2 lens an 86mm f/1.4 lens (not a 173mm f/2.8 lens, which is what a 1.4X teleconverter would do).

The sensor's size does not change. The pixel pitch does not get larger.

Thus with your 86mm f/1.4 lens on a 2X crop sensor you wind up with a field of view equivalent to 172mm and depth of field equivalent to f/2.8 on a FF sensor.

If you put the same 135mm f/2 lens on the EOS R to shoot 4K, you wind up with a field of view equivalent to 243mm and depth of field of f/3.6 on a FF sensor.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Isaacheus

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
Dear all,
If like me you are really hoping to see Canon finally producing an equivalent of the GH5 but with Canon colors and know how, you might want to write to Canon a letter like I did to their communication people on their website.

Here is the letter I had sent them:


Dear Canon leaders,
Your letter has a snowball's chance in hell of being read by Canon "leaders". However if it makes you feel better by writing to the company then keep your letter as short as possible, just one paragraph making the most salient points, with reference to hard facts, if you have any, and without expressing personal emotion.
 

telemaque

I'm New Here
Nov 30, 2019
12
0
Your letter has a snowball's chance in hell of being read by Canon "leaders". However if it makes you feel better by writing to the company then keep your letter as short as possible, just one paragraph making the most salient points, with reference to hard facts, if you have any, and without expressing personal emotion.
Interesting comments. Thanks
 

telemaque

I'm New Here
Nov 30, 2019
12
0
The speed booster does nothing to change the size of the sensor. What it changes is the focal length of the lens, giving a wider angle of view with that lens.

It makes your 135mm f/2 lens an 86mm f/1.4 lens (not a 173mm f/2.8 lens, which is what a 1.4X teleconverter would do).

The sensor's size does not change. The pixel pitch does not get larger.

Thus with your 86mm f/1.4 lens on a 2X crop sensor you wind up with a field of view equivalent to 172mm and depth of field equivalent to f/2.8 on a FF sensor.

If you put the same 135mm f/2 lens on the EOS R to shoot 4K, you wind up with a field of view equivalent to 243mm and depth of field of f/3.6 on a FF sensor.

Hello Michael,

I never wrote that a Speedbooster changes the size of a sensor, I don't see what make you think this? Maybe my English not being perfect?
FYI I am engineer and I am clear the sensor does not change size inside the body whatever you add front of it... :cool:
unless you put your body in an oven, the sensor size should remain physically stable...

I spoke about a crop factor 1.28 vs FF with FF being the reference 1.

To your point my calculation on the perceived aperture was wrong on the final max perceived aperture is equivalent to f2.8.
Thanks for that correction :)
 

telemaque

I'm New Here
Nov 30, 2019
12
0
A last remark from my side:

I understand some people thought I have my feelings about the current Canon offer based on vloggers from youtube.
Maybe these vlogers have had some influence on me? Possible.
However, my remarks were more based on my usage of the Lumix FZ1000 that delivers way better video quality than my 60D or 6D. This soft video quality that seems to be the typical approach from Canon has been a problem for me.

In conclusion, my feelings are much more based and what I see as video quality results on the different footages you can find on Vimeo or Youtube than on the comments made by the people producing these videos.

A good overview of the current video quality given by current bodies is in that link:
My comments on the videos shown in the above link:
Sony A6500 very cinematic but image quality is quite soft

Fujifilm XT3: quite impressive image quality, sharp but not too sharp and very cinematic

GH5: gives a good idea of what you get if you shoot handheld, impressive stabilized image due to IBIS.
This other link shows even better what you can achieve with a GH5:

Sony A7 III: very impressive image quality. The video at 2:50 shows clearly the difference in quality between 1080 and 4K.
4K video quality on that body is just impressive.

GH5S: image quality very good, but that video shows some serious lack of quality during panoramic movements that is a bit annoying.
GH5S has not IBIS, so for me less interesting than GH5.

Canon R: very cinematic colors and feeling. But I find the image quite soft for my taste.
Examples:
Video at 0.59 typical example of softness, the tree bark could be much more detailed.
Video at 1:48: the water look is bizarre, should be a detailled feeling.
Video at 2:56: the lights of the building are looking very bad, you can not even read the brandname on top of the buildings...
and the focus is ON the buildings with a CN-E 35mm T1.5 so one of the most expensive Canon lens !

This need to be compared with the video made with the GH5, link above and called "Handcut", video at 4:24, look at the precision of the details on the buildings...

This is in line with I have experienced with my Canon 6D and 60D, this softness used by Canon for their video, good for interviews or portraits video, is very annoying when you do landscape. The horizon is mushy even if focus is set at infinity... I have nothing like this with my Lumix FZ1000.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,105
543
Hello Michael,

I never wrote that a Speedbooster changes the size of a sensor, I don't see what make you think this? Maybe my English not being perfect?
FYI I am engineer and I am clear the sensor does not change size inside the body whatever you add front of it... :cool:
unless you put your body in an oven, the sensor size should remain physically stable...

I spoke about a crop factor 1.28 vs FF with FF being the reference 1.

To your point my calculation on the perceived aperture was wrong on the final max perceived aperture is equivalent to f2.8.
Thanks for that correction :)
"Crop factor" is a way of expressing sensor size on comparison to a 36x24 mm "full frame" sensor. When you say something changes the crop factor, you are saying the ratio of the sensor's size to a FF sensor's size has changed.