Canon announces more mind blowing specs for the Canon EOS R5
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
With at least five Canon factories closed in Japan, I seriously doubt if Canon are building up inventory of the R5 or that they even know when they will release the camera.
Upvote
0
For the no budget filmmaker looking at Canon cameras, I think it really takes the gloss off of the C500MKII as the camera to own. But the R5 isn't really competing in the market the C500 is targeting. The lack of XLR, timecode, dual slot recording, button controls, SDI, etc. are all things that make it unfeasible for a person who might actually be considering a C500. Or a C300.
Upvote
0
For what it is worth, Lensrentals has the R5 available for pre-order at $271/week, which is significantly more than the 5DIV, Sony A7RIV, etc but less than the 1DX III. Usually, they are 5-7% of the asking price, so that would be $3,871 to $5,400. For direct comparison, the 1DX III rental price of $347/week is 5.34% of the asking price, which would put the R5 at $5,075.
Based on this, how about $4,999 initial price?
Based on this, how about $4,999 initial price?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
If you’re really using this for video, then it’s worth the extra $600 for the Atomos Ninja V. Then the internal codec becomes a non issue anyway and makes post production orders of magnitude easier. Not to mention the cost of CFExpress vs. a decent SSD. Of course you have a few tecording modes that are internal only but for most folks I’m guessing they will be far more seldom used.
Upvote
0
How many people will actually use the 8K or high bitrate 4K modes? I still shoot everything in 1080p for my youtube channel for ease of editing and uploading. I can understand for professional productions for Netflix, etc. but for not for amateurs and youtubers. Are people mostly excited to have internet bragging rights even if they will never shoot anything in those modes?
Upvote
0
Yep, although it is kind of funny that finally there is 10-bit 4:2:2 internal recording but it is just not practical at all to use (for now).
Upvote
0
I do some goofy internal stuff for work on my 5D4, and I shoot it in 4K. Because I only do it occasionally the codec isn't a huge issue for me, and the quality is fantastic. First thing people say when they see the footage is "wow, it's so sharp!" Gives it a professional 'look' which can go a long way. Usually I'm projecting on huge screens (event venue stuff), and even though I deliver in 1080, the downsampled 4K looks way nicer. MJPEG gets a bad rap for valid reasons, but image quality sure isn't one of them.
If I had a daily or weekly workflow, my tune would likely change.
Upvote
0
https://www.techradar.com/news/canon-eos-r5 writes:
"As for the price tag, we can only presume it would be competing with the 45.7MP Nikon Z7, or perhaps even the 61MP Sony Alpha A7R IV. If that's the case, be prepared to shell out something well over the $3,500 / £3,500 / AU$4,500 mark. "
I hope not more....
"As for the price tag, we can only presume it would be competing with the 45.7MP Nikon Z7, or perhaps even the 61MP Sony Alpha A7R IV. If that's the case, be prepared to shell out something well over the $3,500 / £3,500 / AU$4,500 mark. "
I hope not more....
Upvote
0
Filming at 8K has nothing to do with delivering at 8K. I will use 8K for many occasions just like I currently use 4K for all occasions; for pan, crop, zoom, and stabilization purposes. I deliver in 1080P but always shoot in 4K. Since 8K uses so much storage I foresee shooting in 8K to be a more rare occurrence than 4K but there could definitely be situations where 8K would be useful such as when your longest lens does not zoom in close enough to the speaker, or your camera is on a tripod yet you want to add a slide, tilt, dolly in, dolly out or some combination of these to the shot for effect.
Like I have been saying for months..the Panasonic S1H is priced at $4K, this has better specs than the S1H, no way this will be less than $3999.00.
Upvote
0
I don't think this will be priced above what the 5D IV was at its release date. The specifications are great, but cell phones have been doing 4k 120fps for years now. Compared to a lowly cellphone Canon is playing catch up on specs. Plus, look at the camera body, it is very similar to the R. Doubling the price on it seems like wishful thinking without going to a fully new camera body. And of course this isn't a 1 series body so it won't be anywhere near that price. Finally, there is a mirrorless discount to consider. Canon is already leveraging the reduced costs of mirrorless bodies with the R and RP, I expect that to continue. All this tells me the price will be right around $3,000.
Upvote
0
I still use my 5DM3 professionally and refused to jump ship. I wouldn't switch to Sony if you paid me. Canon was the sleeping tiger and when I saw the amazing first-class RF lenses it was putting out, I knew (ok, really hoping) they were going to come out with a stellar pro-level RF body. They did not disappoint.
If the real-world performance matches what Canon is advertising, I may finally make the switch to the R5. I'm hoping for decent battery life.
Upvote
0
Well, unless the sensor native aspect ratio is wider than 3:2. But in that case either you'd need a sensor physically larger than FF (with the corners, outside the FF image circle, being cropped out whether in movie or stills mode) or the stills mode would have a crop which really is not going to happen given that this is marketed as a FF camera.
Upvote
0
The more I've thought about it over time the more I just figure Canon would rather offer the best quality internal codec possible you can also use to grab stills from. It's not like Canon is ever going to pay Apple their fee to use ProRes internally. I dont think any such camera does. And if someone is bothering to shoot in a LOG gamma, then Canon also assumes this person is an experienced user, who knows what they are doing, and get the fact you're going to have to do some re-encoding in post (maybe) or you're probably using a Ninja or some other external ProRes and Log capable recorder. I think otherwise, the more casual user will just use the simple IPB mode and be perfectly happy with it. (Again, speaking only for HD and 4K modes here as nothing else besides Canon's software can even properly read its 8K yet)
Upvote
0
I wonder how much money it would save if they split the line. One camera without video capability and one with. With all the Canon DSLR’s I have owned, I have never once taken a video. I would love to save some money and buy a R5 without the video capabilities. I guess that will never happen. R&D probably costs the bulk, and they would use me to pay for that even though I don’t use it. Still, would be nice.
Upvote
0
