Here are more specifications for the Canon EOS R5

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,291
2,173
Kentucky, USA
If you use adapted EF glass, you have a variable ND filter adapter working with all lenses, it is the best compromise.

Can't have built-in ND that can turn on or off without making the camera twice the size and remove the shutter like those cinema cameras. Those are a lot bigger and also very expensive, so the economics and functions make them feasible to do.

It makes no sense for stills cameras, unless they are practically made into video cameras and cost 6000$+ as well.

Even the RED Komodo has no built-in NDs but it has the same RF-mount so with EF lenses it can use that same ND filter adapter.
Why does an internal ND filter have to be an actual physical filter? Look at the Olympus EM1 III - it has a software based ND filter, and LiveND. It merges multiple images and adjusts the readouts accordingly. It works fine - and certainly better than no ND at all.

If you're happy putting physical filters on & off all the time, have at it. But I'd rather enable a menu item or button on/off to get one to work in an instant!
 
Upvote 0

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,280
950
Why does an internal ND filter have to be an actual physical filter? Look at the Olympus EM1 III - it has a software based ND filter, and LiveND. It merges multiple images and adjusts the readouts accordingly. It works fine - and certainly better than no ND at all.

If you're happy putting physical filters on & off all the time, have at it. But I'd rather enable a menu item or button on/off to get one to work in an instant!
Yes I have, computational photography is getting better but it's still filled with artifacts. Also completely useless for video.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

AccipiterQ

EOS RP
Sep 11, 2014
210
315
Low pass filter on a 45 Mpx sensor. Maybe good for some but I so much prefer to ditch the filter as I rarely have problems with Moire and the filter does give image degradation.

Yeah same...didn't see anything on this list that moves the needle for me. I wonder what the 'additional secrets' were that hadn't been revealed yet....
 
Upvote 0

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,291
2,173
Kentucky, USA
Yes I have, computational photography is getting better but it's still filled with artifacts. Also completely useless for video.
For stills photography, a physical ND filter will require a longer exposure (that's the whole point of it) which will have the same subject motion and artifacts as the software ND technique. But neither have false artifacts if on a rigid tripod. For stills photography the R5 should have a LiveND/software ND feature, period.

For video, you are absolutely correct! ;) And good call to mention it, as I wasn't thinking about it at all (I'm a stills person mainly).
 
Upvote 0

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,291
2,173
Kentucky, USA
Interesting article posted on CNet Japan that was removed shortly afterwards;

I'm assuming the 8-stops is IBIS + in lens IS?
I'm soooo glad Canon will now have IBIS to join their lens IS! :)

But to even mention 8 stops :rolleyes: is way too hard for me to believe! When someone does a real technical test of dual IS stabilization and mentions every single thing in the test and the results with proof, then I'll believe it.
 
Upvote 0

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,280
950
For stills photography, a physical ND filter will require a longer exposure (that's the whole point of it) which will have the same subject motion and artifacts as the software ND technique. But neither have false artifacts if on a rigid tripod. For stills photography the R5 should have a LiveND/software ND feature, period.

For video, you are absolutely correct! ;) And good call to mention it, as I wasn't thinking about it at all (I'm a stills person mainly).
I did my own tests with manually merging images, and it's not the same in my opinion, I use a 10-stop ND filter instead and create single images. Yes, it is not that easy to focus when it darkens the image that much.
ymmv.
By the way the EM1 III already has a 3-stop disadvantage compared to FF with the native ISO 200 and two stops of extra depth-of-field, so FF cameras have the edge there (medium format even better still)
I am sure there is a good reason why no FF camera has even implemented that live ND feature (they could have already made it with any DSLR, as long as there is live view), so it's pointless to point the finger at Canon specifically.

There is a FF camera that has a similar trick up its sleeve, it is the Sigma fp that can emulate ISO 6 (that would be a 4-stop ND compared to ISO 100), I don't know how it compares to the Olympus.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,291
2,173
Kentucky, USA
I did my own tests with manually merging images, and it's not the same in my opinion, I use a 10-stop ND filter instead and create single images.
ymmv.
By the way the EM1 III already has a 3-stop disadvantage compared to FF with the native ISO 200 and two stops of extra depth-of-field, so FF cameras have the edge there (medium format even better still)
I am sure there is a good reason why no FF camera has even implemented that live ND feature (they could have already made it with any DSLR, as long as there is live view), so it's pointless to point the finger at Canon specifically.
The EM1 III ND feature does not go all the way to 10 stops, but that doesn't mean other camera's software couldn't. Of course, the small sensor has major disadvantages vs FF, and that's why I'm transitioning out of my EM1 II to the R5. But there's no reason at all why Canon can't add a pure software firmware update to implement a good version of this for stills use.

I'm not pointing the finger at Canon specifically - after all I'm going to get the R5. I think that all camera makers in the future will realize that they have to get smarter and include smart software algorithms (like LiveND) just like they had to eventually implement other features that someone else implemented first.
 
Upvote 0

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,280
950
The EM1 III ND feature does not go all the way to 10 stops, but that doesn't mean other camera's software couldn't. Of course, the small sensor has major disadvantages vs FF, and that's why I'm transitioning out of my EM1 II to the R5. But there's no reason at all why Canon can't add a pure software firmware update to implement a good version of this for stills use.

I'm not pointing the finger at Canon specifically - after all I'm going to get the R5. I think that all camera makers in the future will realize that they have to get smarter and include smart software algorithms (like LiveND) just like they had to eventually implement other features that someone else implemented first.
With the E-M III or EM-1X you are paying for that feature (but they still go very cheap on other important things, like the ancient, low quality EVF).
With the EOS R5 you are paying for other features.
It has to be a processor specific thing as all the other Olympus cameras with the same sensor do not have this feature. It's a very niche thing as others don't complain about it. It's also seems limited in terms of how much ND it can emulate, so still not quite the same as a physical ND, but it can be down in software as well.
If the Digic X is not compatible by hardware, it is probably an unreasonable request, maybe in the next generation and even then they only bother with it if everybody else does and it is deemed important.
 
Upvote 0

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,291
2,173
Kentucky, USA
With the E-M III or EM-1X you are paying for that feature (but they still go very cheap on other important things, like the ancient, low quality EVF).
With the EOS R5 you are paying for other features.
It has to be a processor specific thing as all the other Olympus cameras with the same sensor do not have this feature. It's a very niche thing as others don't complain about it. It's also seems limited in terms of how much ND it can emulate, so still not quite the same as a physical ND, but it can be down in software as well.
If the Digic X is not compatible by hardware, it is probably an unreasonable request, maybe in the next generation and even then they only bother with it if everybody else does and it is deemed important.
It is not a processor specific thing in the EM1 line. It's just that they decided to implement it in their EM1X and then in their EM1 III. I would bet you any amount of money that it they wanted to write a firmware update for the EM1 II (and they were still in business - ha!) then they could do it. It's doesn't need hardware to do it - it's just software.

Now, if you need to put a 10(or more) stop ND filter on because you're taking a picture of the sun, or something that intense to damage a sensor, then of course software can't avoid that. So you can still use a filter then.

But to think that a LiveND feature is 'niche' is to insult every photographer who's ever taken photos with moving water that they want to smear into a beautiful image, or those that take landscapes with a graduated ND filter to darken the sky - and there are lots of those people! It's just a friggin software update, and not that hard to do.
 
Upvote 0

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,280
950
It is not a processor specific thing in the EM1 line. It's just that they decided to implement it in their EM1X and then in their EM1 III. I would bet you any amount of money that it they wanted to write a firmware update for the EM1 II (and they were still in business - ha!) then they could do it. It's doesn't need hardware to do it - it's just software.

Now, if you need to put a 10(or more) stop ND filter on because you're taking a picture of the sun, or something that intense to damage a sensor, then of course software can't avoid that. So you can still use a filter then.

But to think that a LiveND feature is 'niche' is to insult every photographer who's ever taken photos with moving water that they want to smear into a beautiful image, or those that take landscapes with a graduated ND filter to darken the sky - and there are lots of those people! It's just a friggin software update, and not that hard to do.
How do you know unless you work for Olympus? Maybe the processing would be so slow on other older cameras, it would make it a very frustrating feature to use.

I called it niche, because it just seems quite limited as opposed to having the access to several minutes of long expose or more.
It's a similar thing with IBIS having so many stops, but with a good tripod, the range can become unlimited.
It is a good add-on, but not a full substitute (but having IBIS is extremely handy).
And again, nothing that can't be done in software and do it better with practise, it is just simply more convenient doing it in-camera in some cases. I don't consider these features essential, and unless enough people do, I don't think it is worth bothering with from Canon's viewpoint.

It's similarly insulting (or funny, depending on the viewpoint) to tell others when they "can" or "can't" use physical ND filters. No need to be patronising towards others.
 
Upvote 0
I'm soooo glad Canon will now have IBIS to join their lens IS! :)

But to even mention 8 stops :rolleyes: is way too hard for me to believe! When someone does a real technical test of dual IS stabilization and mentions every single thing in the test and the results with proof, then I'll believe it.

Great to see IBIS on CANON. Here's hoping, CANON's IBIS is more like NIKON's IBIS, and when the camera is powered OFF, it PARKS and locks in-place (read: it doesn't RATTLE around as you move the camera).
 
Upvote 0

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,291
2,173
Kentucky, USA
How do you know unless you work for Olympus? Maybe the processing would be so slow on other older cameras, it would make it a very frustrating feature to use.

I called it niche, because it just seems quite limited as opposed to having the access to several minutes of long expose or more.
It's a similar thing with IBIS having so many stops, but with a good tripod, the range can become unlimited.
It is a good add-on, but not a full substitute (but extremely handy).
And again, nothing that can't be done in software and do it better with practise, it is just simply more convenient doing it in-camera in some cases. I don't consider these features essential, and unless enough people do, I don't think it is worth bothering with from Canon's viewpoint.

It's similarly insulting (or funny, depending on the viewpoint) to tell others when they "can" or "can't" use physical ND filters. No need to be patronising towards others.
How do I know? I know because I was a professional high-speed video programmer my whole career. What did you do? Did I work for Olympus? No, but I did work for Sony! In fact, I worked on the internal high speed graphics code for their Playstation 3. What did you do?

A ND feature in a camera is not niche. If it was then we wouldn't have this conversation. And who says you can't use it for several minutes of exposure? That's an easy thing for it to do.

And I'm not telling people when they can or can't use physical ND filters. You can screw on anything you want anytime you want. But when a user is given the choice to hit a button or a menu feature and instantly have a ND feature or graduated ND feature without fumbling with/carrying/paying for filters, then they're going to be happy Canon offered it.
 
Upvote 0