New reports about the next Cinema EOS camera have surfaced [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
This one feels weird to me. To me, the specs read like something left on the table during R&D for the R5C. It's too similar and not different enough enough from anything in the lineup imo.
Not that everything about it doesn't excite me. I just more agree with CanonGrunt that it feels like disgruntled wishful thinking. I was hoping for DGO and internal NDs in that camera, too.
That said, this camera could easily cost upwards of $8-10K, so... that would be one notable difference. Lol.
Not that everything about it doesn't excite me. I just more agree with CanonGrunt that it feels like disgruntled wishful thinking. I was hoping for DGO and internal NDs in that camera, too.
That said, this camera could easily cost upwards of $8-10K, so... that would be one notable difference. Lol.
Upvote
0
If the rumor is true then this camera will be positioned not as a hybrid but as a true Cinema EOS camera.
Square body which means more conventional video controls layout, no mechanical shutter, built-in ND and expandable battery compartment.
IMHO such a camera makes sense, and I do not see any confision in such a lineup:
R5 - stills camera which is also great for occasional short video clips;
R5C - hybrid 2-in-1 with well known limitations;
C5 - real Cinema EOS camera.
Square body which means more conventional video controls layout, no mechanical shutter, built-in ND and expandable battery compartment.
IMHO such a camera makes sense, and I do not see any confision in such a lineup:
R5 - stills camera which is also great for occasional short video clips;
R5C - hybrid 2-in-1 with well known limitations;
C5 - real Cinema EOS camera.
Upvote
0
Having a hard time believing that Canon would release a QPAF body just months after shipping the R3 without it. Doesn't make sense to me. If QPAF is better and it was omitted, ouch. If QPAF is worse, why put it on the new body?
This one might not pass the sniff test.
This one might not pass the sniff test.
Upvote
0
Internal ND for RF mount is overrated. If you want ND just get an EF-RF adapter with drop in filter and voila, problem solved for a few hundred bucks. Get a PL-EF adapter and you essentially have 'internal ND' compatibility with a vast majority of cine lenses since 1980s. Canon really did us a favor releasing the drop in filter adapter and I am suprised Nikon did not follow suit.
On the whole I agree with the C5 naming scheme being messed up. I would believe it if it was a rumor of C500 variant though, but pricing would likely be $18-20k with that BSI FF DGO sensor in tow.
On the whole I agree with the C5 naming scheme being messed up. I would believe it if it was a rumor of C500 variant though, but pricing would likely be $18-20k with that BSI FF DGO sensor in tow.
Upvote
0
22.5 MP ? the question then is : what size of sensor ? S35 or Fullframe ? Because if fullframe with 22.5MP that would be a neat low-light beast.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Not sure what they meant, probably lost in translation. EOS C300 III has mechanical ND filter assembly, and there is no way to fit it even into the slightly thicker R5 body because of shorter flange distance of RF compared to EF. RF would need a different construction.
Upvote
0
Built in is far from overrated. You can use any glass with filters with a touch of a button. The rf15-35 on a c70 is amazing and compact. Also for gimbal work the filters make the cameras more front heavy so it is less work balancing as well in real world usage. If you are a set with a ton of time or a team than maybe wasting time is more acceptable...
Upvote
0
I really like what Sony is doing but a proper cinema camera needs fixed ND filters to properly calculate T-stops.
That being said, I would love for Canon to make an electronic variable ND EF lens to RF mount adapter that the camera could control with autoexposure.
Upvote
0
