More information about the upcoming RF mount Cinema EOS series of cameras [CR2]

[WhatDoesMStandsFor]

This isn't even interesting without Raw. Raw to an external recorder would have been worth looking at. But for an RF version of the C200 (with a C200 style price tag), to not have Raw rules out a decent percentage of the potential audience.

Not really. A lot of potential C200 users didn't got the camera due to it only offering RAW recording. This new camera could fulfill that gap, although it's kind late to the game.

 

[WhatDoesMStandsFor]

Any modern Sony has all three log profiles +HLG and no record limit. A7Siii has raw, there are plenty of 4k60 cameras but s1h and the new Sony come to mind first.

Yes, they do have log profiles but they are pretty much useless since, apart from the A7s III, they are 8bit cameras. Some even said that the S Log on those cameras were more like a gimmick than something really useful.

 

[WhatDoesMStandsFor]

I need to understand the differences between the C300 III and this "R300" other than physical size, SDI, & RAW light ( Which may come later to R300?). Like what is the road map for an early adopter of such a camera?

I've recently grabbed a C300 Mk III and I got say it's an amazing camera, even when shooting in XF-AVC. If this new camera has the same sensor, same processor and a RF mount, it will be more than enough to be a B cam camera for C300 Mk III / C500 Mk II users or a perfect A cam for those who don't shoot RAW at all.

The SDI output is something desirable but not really needed by some people. There's a lot of P4K/P6K/C100 users out there that didn't care less about it. Even RAW is kind debatable due to the fact that not a lot of people would want to shoot in RAW anyway.

 

[landon]

I've recently grabbed a C300 Mk III and I got say it's an amazing camera, even when shooting in XF-AVC. If this new camera has the same sensor, same processor and a RF mount, it will be more than enough to be a B cam camera for C300 Mk III / C500 Mk II users or a perfect A cam for those who don't shoot RAW at all.

The SDI output is something desirable but not really needed by some people. There's a lot of P4K/P6K/C100 users out there that didn't care less about it. Even RAW is kind debatable due to the fact that not a lot of people would want to shoot in RAW anyway.

The last R300 rumour says no Raw at shipment. So perhaps RAW firmware later, or have Canon changed their mind to protect C300iii, and no RAW internal at all. But perhaps RAW external.

 

[Twinix]

SD Express standard and there are none of them.

̶*̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ ̶b̶i̶g̶ ̶e̶n̶o̶u̶g̶h̶ ̶f̶o̶r̶ ̶l̶o̶n̶g̶e̶r̶ ̶r̶e̶c̶o̶r̶d̶i̶n̶g̶s̶.̶
̶S̶o̶n̶y̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶t̶w̶o̶.̶
I mixed SDexpress and CFexpress.

 

[Arod820]

So is this camera going to crop beyond the 1.6x or so of the S35? Like is it going to go down to an M4/3 crop in some specific frame rate or something or is going to use the whole sensor for every frame rate and resolution? I hate that the Reds crop down the sensor to shoot 1080.

 

[jam05]

Smaller would be amazing! I'm curious about how well this will do against a RED Komodo at the same price point. It also makes me wonder if perhaps the reason the Komodo doesn't currently support RF lenses is because Canon wants to be the first to launch an RF cine camera?

You guessed it.

 

[Arod820]

Isn't the RED Komodo RF mount? Just making sure your up to date on the latest.

It is, it’s just not autofocus yet.

 

[jam05]

S35 is the cinema standard, so a cinema camera with a standard cinema sized sensor is perfectly acceptable. Plus, the DGO sensor is a highly desirable feature, so I can’t see anyone complaining about getting that sensor in a much smaller body.
I would normally say this camera is an instant buy, but after the mess that was the R5, and now with talk of “silent recalls”, as an R5 owner I’m left feeling like... Canon WFT?... Really?

YES, it was mostly all MESS. Most people are happy with their product. I wouldn't give credence to the internet folly with mostly non owners and competitor fanboys. After all the redo's and undo's many discovered much was all overblown yes MESS. One would be a fool to send their camera back for a so called recall when it works perfectly well. Don't give a flip about and additional firmware or a Sony like overide option either. My R5 works as advertised. I now how to use the manual and I don't need 40 minutes of 4K 120 either.

 

[jam05]

So is this camera going to crop beyond the 1.6x or so of the S35? Like is it going to go down to an M4/3 crop in some specific frame rate or something or is going to use the whole sensor for every frame rate and resolution? I hate that the Reds crop down the sensor to shoot 1080.

Exactly what is the industry standard for motion picture and film anyway? You guessed it.

 

[jam05]

I had the same thought about the S35 size sensor. I mean, objectively it makes sense that this is the native size of the media this camera is aimed at making. I get it. But the internet's response to any hybrid camera with any type of video crop is overwhelmingly bad. Perhaps its an issue with workflow and how the average v-blogger doesn't have as much glass or space to get the framing they need, or want to spend as much time setting up to get it right with the options they have? Or perhaps its just more random internet warriors looking for something to unleash on. Or a misunderstanding about what is really a limitation and what is only a perceived one. Who knows. The internet is a rough place. I'm glad the real world isn't like the internet.

-Brian

The internet? The same internet that can't read owner manuals and use thermometers? The same internet that measures the termperature of an electronic device with the palm of their hand? That internet?

 

[privatebydesign]

Any modern Sony has all three log profiles +HLG and no record limit. A7Siii has raw, there are plenty of 4k60 cameras but s1h and the new Sony come to mind first.

So buy one of them and be happy. That was my point, there is a camera out there to suit everybody and need, why try to force something that simply doesn't work for you?

 

[PureClassA]

Small light cinema camera ... and no IBIS?

No cinema camera has IBIS. And Canon is one of the only ones who have AF. (might be THE only) I think you're also imagining a MILC. This is going to be more like a small C100, which means it will probably look like a Z-Cam. A Small cube box. Probably wont even have a monitor built in. In other words, this is a camera designed to be built into a pro rig with rails and cages and accessories etc... Meaning exterior stabilization just like all pro cinema cameras. Also we are getting the existing sensors from the C200 and C300 current models. Which is awesome. But those sensors were designed without IBIS.

Perhaps some future generation of RF cinema cams will employ IBIS, but not yet. And that's just fine. Again these are meat to be RIG cameras. Not an all in one Run and Gun option. Viewfinders, touchscreens, handles, grips, batteries... all these things are modular attachments on Cinema cameras now.

 

[Deleted member 384473]

yes, I have:
1. I am not your mate.
2. I am not a kid
3. I am not your Bro...
4. your posts add no value to CR forum apart from noise, negativity and Boganville styled humor.
5. ++++ Bro... You need to take some time off the forums. Very distasteful name calling with those you disagree with. Not sure you even understand who or what you’re arguing.

A.M.: I believe that you are the one who needs to take some time off the forum. and the longer the better. here you have it..

Bit defensive and hypocritical are we? Neither you or your mate have had anything of value to add to this thread except, “then go buy that camera.” Also, don’t believe I called you bro, bruv. At least not on this thread.

 

[PureClassA]

I've recently grabbed a C300 Mk III and I got say it's an amazing camera, even when shooting in XF-AVC. If this new camera has the same sensor, same processor and a RF mount, it will be more than enough to be a B cam camera for C300 Mk III / C500 Mk II users or a perfect A cam for those who don't shoot RAW at all.

The SDI output is something desirable but not really needed by some people. There's a lot of P4K/P6K/C100 users out there that didn't care less about it. Even RAW is kind debatable due to the fact that not a lot of people would want to shoot in RAW anyway.

Yeah I think if you want/need to use a RAW workflow, you're accustomed to buying higher end production cameras. But the SDI thing isn't a deal breaker, however I really wish this would be a standard feature on ALL pro cinema cameras regardless of tier. It's a simple cheap feature that should be relegated just to higher end bodies. It's purely a basic safety/reliability component vs. an HDMI port.

 

[DBounce]

YES, it was mostly all MESS. Most people are happy with their product. I wouldn't give credence to the internet folly with mostly non owners and competitor fanboys. After all the redo's and undo's many discovered much was all overblown yes MESS. One would be a fool to send their camera back for a so called recall when it works perfectly well. Don't give a flip about and additional firmware or a Sony like overide option either. My R5 works as advertised. I now how to use the manual and I don't need 40 minutes of 4K 120 either.

Remember what you said if a recall is issued.

 

[Deleted member 384473]

YES, it was mostly all MESS. Most people are happy with their product. I wouldn't give credence to the internet folly with mostly non owners and competitor fanboys. After all the redo's and undo's many discovered much was all overblown yes MESS. One would be a fool to send their camera back for a so called recall when it works perfectly well. Don't give a flip about and additional firmware or a Sony like overide option either. My R5 works as advertised. I now how to use the manual and I don't need 40 minutes of 4K 120 either.

You don’t update your camera’s firmware?

 

[Rocksthaman]

So buy one of them and be happy. That was my point, there is a camera out there to suit everybody and need, why try to force something that simply doesn't work for you?

Because the capabilities are there in the camera. I don’t understand why so many “photographers” want to limit what a camera can do. The camera is capable of shooting all of those except for raw. There’s not as much photography work as there used to be, so when you get a camera you want
It to be a versatile as possible. It used to be physical details of a camera where the clear differentiations of a camera. It’s just not the case and canon is artificially segmenting.

if I prefer to shoot Canon and shoot video and photo. How hard is it to understand I want to have TWO cameras that are redundant. Not 4.However I’m sure you do understand and just want to be a jerk about it.

I have a couple of Sony’s that I use for paid work, I just enjoy shooting the R more. There’s a clear difference in reliability in the two. Card slots, auto focus, dynamic range, but they are not fun to use. Is it so much to ask that the fun one is also functional.

 

[jvillain]

No cinema camera has IBIS. And Canon is one of the only ones who have AF. (might be THE only)

Sony's FX9 has autofocus and the Sony auto-focus is about equal to Canon so I expect to see it roll out in more cameras. Black Magic has a form of auto focus though let me be clear it is not at all in the same league as DPAF. Basically you press the button and it focuses on the center of the frame once. If your subject isn't in the middle of the frame tough lucjk and it isn't continuous auto-focus. So it exists pretty well in name only.

I recently watched a Mark Bone video that shows Sony appears to be taking a different aproach to image stabalization from IBIS in the cinema cameras. They are using metadata collected from the IS in the lens and using it in post software to stabalize the image and it looks like it works pretty good. But it does bring up the fact that both Sony and BMD have control of a greater part of the stack, BMD through Davinci Resolve and Sony through Catalyst, and so are able to do things that Canon can't. The Sony approach would be great if cine lenses had IS but they don't.

Blah, blah, blah ...

Can you two start your own thread to spam each other and leave the rest of us out.

 

[Deleted member 384473]

Sony's FX9 has autofocus and the Sony auto-focus is about equal to Canon so I expect to see it roll out in more cameras. Black Magic has a form of auto focus though let me be clear it is not at all in the same league as DPAF. Basically you press the button and it focuses on the center of the frame once. If your subject isn't in the middle of the frame tough lucjk and it isn't continuous auto-focus. So it exists pretty well in name only.

I recently watched a Mark Bone video that shows Sony appears to be taking a different aproach to image stabalization from IBIS in the cinema cameras. They are using metadata collected from the IS in the lens and using it in post software to stabalize the image and it looks like it works pretty good. But it does bring up the fact that both Sony and BMD have control of a greater part of the stack, BMD through Davinci Resolve and Sony through Catalyst, and so are able to do things that Canon can't. The Sony approach would be great if cine lenses had IS but they don't.




Can you two start your own thread to spam each other and leave the rest of us out.

Can you learn to accurately quote someone?

Let me add to this...

Sony FX9 AF gets handicapped when overexposing log, which is very popular with SLOG.

The FX9 image stabilization metadata adds a lot of time to post work flow and many times you have to readjust the intensity and run the entire Catalyst program again... Depending on your PC/Mac you will spend a lot of time waiting for this to do its job depending on the file size and resolution but definitely can get some smooth footage with it... But then again you can get smooth footage with Canon's electronic IS... And lets not forget Canon's form factor on the C300III & C500II and how easy it is to throw it on a gimbal or steadicam.