The Canon EOS M50 Will Shoot 4K [CR3]

[transpo1]

I read somewhere that if they dropped the optical low-pass filter on Canon cameras if would greatly improve image quality, lets hope they do this here.

As for 4k, well people have been asking for it for a long time but whether it's needed or not isn't really the issue, Canon not having it on new camera's they bring out has only gone on to upset consumers thus amplifying an issue were many now look at Canon as a company that likes to hold back tech from customers, we all know this has been an issue, it's a big problem with the 6dii, you pay all that money for that camera which has some top features for video, flip out screen, IS and yet we have poor video quality! And then there's that DR issue.... I welcome 4k to this camera and hope we see more tech like IS, weather proofing, in body USB charging etc

This.

 

[transpo1]

It suddenly occurred to me that the implementation of 4K on this camera could just be a 4K photo feature at 15-20 frames per second. That would be a cruel move, though.

 

[wildwalker]

The floodgates are about to open.

4K has become popular enough for the masses, so Canon cannot ignore it any longer.

Since this will be a relatively low price consumer model, they need to include that feature,
even if it's a watered-down version of 4K.

Try to see this small, entry-level mirrorless model as a gateway-drug to Canon's high end gear and lenses.

I can see how having low bitrate 4K makes sense in a relatively low-price consumer camera, but would be an embarrassment in a semi-pro/enthusiast model. When I shoot video with my iPhone, I always shoot 4K. It doesn't look half bad, and having all those pixels means I can crop down to make up partly for not having telephoto lenses on it, and still produce decent 1080p output.

I don't know where the tradeoffs are. There is likely some bitrate below which 1080p or 1080i/720p looks better than 4K, but I don't know whether that falls within the range of what is used today, and whether anybody sitting a normal distance away from a TV under 60" could tell a difference.

About 25Mb/s is the cut off. HEVC is generally 10 bit (but still can be 4:2:0). 10 bit adds a small overhead. If you think about it, 4K is 4xHD, and each quadrant at 25Mb/s would be a 6Mb/s HD stream (but HEVC as opposed to H264). While you could view 25Mb/s UHD quite happily, it would be useless for re-coding. But I guess that is not where the M series are aimed at, so that would be okay.

 

[wildwalker]

It suddenly occurred to me that the implementation of 4K on this camera could just be a 4K photo feature at 15-20 frames per second. That would be a cruel move, though.

I agree, also it is still a rumour, shouldn't forget that also. Unless the M5 is going to go end of life very soon, it seems unlikely a lower price model will have 4K, unless Canon either make the 4K very low spec (super low bit rate, really crappy framerate 15-25fps).

Or, this lower model (in M no.) will be more expensive, or about the same price as the M5, in which case as a consumer you buy the body that best suits you, M5 for photos, M50 for video?

I'm normally completely wrong on these things, so don't worry

 

[Canoneer]

Where is the M50 supposed to be competing price wise? Is this an entry-level 4K vlog camera at the $600 range? Or is this going up against the Panny GH5S/Sony a7S II in the enthusiast/semi-pro space?

 

[mkabi]

It suddenly occurred to me that the implementation of 4K on this camera could just be a 4K photo feature at 15-20 frames per second. That would be a cruel move, though.

lol... Technically that is true. It still makes it a 4K camera and stands as CR3.
Fuji did that with the X-A5:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1387598-REG/fujifilm_16568913_x_a5_digital_camera_with.html

Note how they tout the X-A5 as having UHD 4K recording and separately as having 4K burst mode up to 15fps.
Only after further investigation into the specs do you find out that 4K video recording is only 15p. lol.

 

[jedy]

I read somewhere that if they dropped the optical low-pass filter on Canon cameras if would greatly improve image quality, lets hope they do this here.

As for 4k, well people have been asking for it for a long time but whether it's needed or not isn't really the issue, Canon not having it on new camera's they bring out has only gone on to upset consumers thus amplifying an issue were many now look at Canon as a company that likes to hold back tech from customers, we all know this has been an issue, it's a big problem with the 6dii, you pay all that money for that camera which has some top features for video, flip out screen, IS and yet we have poor video quality! And then there's that DR issue.... I welcome 4k to this camera and hope we see more tech like IS, weather proofing, in body USB charging etc

This.

For the sake of complaining customers and the fact other companies have implemented 4K, Canon should too. Although this goes against my belief that 4K isn't necessary for consumers 'posting vids on YouTube' (aka non-professional content creators), Canon will get left behind if they don't have a usable 4K option - the 4K on the 5D IV really seemed like just an excuse to write 4K on the spec sheet. Even if 4K on the M50 isn't wildly impressive, at least it would be a start and something Canon can keep working on to improve for future cameras.

Also something to bear in mind, most professional cine cameras use a super 35mm sensor which is about the equivalent size to an aps-c sensor. The popular Panasonic GH* range are x2 crop (in 1080p mode). Until cameras have the technology to use the full sensor without overheating, I wouldn't see having cropped 4K as too big of an issue. Not sure how Canon will handle this in a crop camera though as the sensor size is already at equivalent super 35mm proportions. My Blackmagic 4K production camera has a 1.7 crop - not great but perfectly usable (if I avoid ultrawide focal lengths).

 

[Talys]

It suddenly occurred to me that the implementation of 4K on this camera could just be a 4K photo feature at 15-20 frames per second. That would be a cruel move, though.

I agree, also it is still a rumour, shouldn't forget that also. Unless the M5 is going to go end of life very soon, it seems unlikely a lower price model will have 4K, unless Canon either make the 4K very low spec (super low bit rate, really crappy framerate 15-25fps).

Or, this lower model (in M no.) will be more expensive, or about the same price as the M5, in which case as a consumer you buy the body that best suits you, M5 for photos, M50 for video?

I'm normally completely wrong on these things, so don't worry

If it is in the same format as m6 (external evf), the M5 should continue to sell just fine. If M5 and m50 were feature identical except one had built in evf and one had 4k, I think a lot of people would still buy M5.

If you're only interested in still photography, having a viewfinder AND a hot shoe at the same time is preferable to a video resolution you won't use.

If m50 had a built in RT controller, that might compensate some, but even so, it doesn't solve on camera flash requirements.

 

[wildwalker]

It suddenly occurred to me that the implementation of 4K on this camera could just be a 4K photo feature at 15-20 frames per second. That would be a cruel move, though.

I agree, also it is still a rumour, shouldn't forget that also. Unless the M5 is going to go end of life very soon, it seems unlikely a lower price model will have 4K, unless Canon either make the 4K very low spec (super low bit rate, really crappy framerate 15-25fps).

Or, this lower model (in M no.) will be more expensive, or about the same price as the M5, in which case as a consumer you buy the body that best suits you, M5 for photos, M50 for video?

I'm normally completely wrong on these things, so don't worry

If it is in the same format as m6 (external evf), the M5 should continue to sell just fine. If M5 and m50 were feature identical except one had built in evf and one had 4k, I think a lot of people would still buy M5.

If you're only interested in still photography, having a viewfinder AND a hot shoe at the same time is preferable to a video resolution you won't use.

If m50 had a built in RT controller, that might compensate some, but even so, it doesn't solve on camera flash requirements.

I am afraid for me that no viewfinder means I won't be buying the M50. I do hope it does have one, although I can't escape the feeling this will be a vloggers camera.

If not then I will probably either buy the Lumix DMC-TZ100, or save for an M5, who knows maybe the M50 will mean a price drop for the M5? (hears laughing in the background).

Ah well.

 

[The Fat Fish]

Finally some good news from Canon. The EOS M5 was a good camera but fell short of competitors offerings due to video functionality, lens lineup and DR. Competing in video knock another hurdle off the list. Add the same DR improvements in the 80D and 5DIV and that's another step closer. One huge issue for Canon is EF-M lineup. I'm not investing in anymore Canon lenses until I know where Canon are going. If they pick EF then it's fine, if they pick EF-M then I really need to see some solid glass before investing.

 

[wildwalker]

Finally some good news from Canon. The EOS M5 was a good camera but fell short of competitors offerings due to video functionality, lens lineup and DR. Competing in video knock another hurdle off the list. Add the same DR improvements in the 80D and 5DIV and that's another step closer. One huge issue for Canon is EF-M lineup. I'm not investing in anymore Canon lenses until I know where Canon are going. If they pick EF then it's fine, if they pick EF-M then I really need to see some solid glass before investing.

I'm pretty sure this will have the same 24Mpx sensor as the M5/M6. So don't expect any DR improvements. Remember, this body is 'rumoured' to sit between the M5/M6 and the M100. So don't expect it to trump the M5 in overall feature set.

As I have said before, I could be totally wrong, but a 4K enabled, increased DR M5 sounds like a pretty expensive bit of kit, and way outside of what the M50 is expected to be.

If the M50 is that good, then it's either going to be really expensive, or the rest of the M range is either going to have to come down in price, or be discontinued.

Here's hoping though

 

[The Fat Fish]

As I have said before, I could be totally wrong, but a 4K enabled, increased DR M5 sounds like a pretty expensive bit of kit, and way outside of what the M50 is expected to be.

I'd love to see Canon compete in terms of price vs features. Let's take the equivalent Sony and Fuji Cameras.

EOS M5:

DR - 12.4 EV
Video - (soft) 1080p
FPS - 7fps
Price - $930

Sony A6300:

DR - 13.7 EV
Video - 4K
FPS - 11fps
Price - $800

Fuji X-T20:

DR - 13.5 EV (roughly)
Video - 4K
FPS - 8-11fps
Price - $900

That's noticeably less of a camera for more money. This approach stretches across Canon's entire lineup but their mirrorless is where it's most clear because it has a far weaker lens lineup. I really like my 6D and would like to think I have a future with Canon but they really must do better.

I remain optimistic. They can't have another 6DII release and I think they now know this.

 

[Sharlin]

I remain optimistic. They can't have another 6DII release and I think they now know this.

Evidence points to the 6D2 selling quite well and all the crying on forums being just a tiny blip on Canon's radar.

 

[wildwalker]

As I have said before, I could be totally wrong, but a 4K enabled, increased DR M5 sounds like a pretty expensive bit of kit, and way outside of what the M50 is expected to be.

I'd love to see Canon compete in terms of price vs features. Let's take the equivalent Sony and Fuji Cameras.

EOS M5:

DR - 12.4 EV
Video - (soft) 1080p
FPS - 7fps
Price - $930

Sony A6300:

DR - 13.7 EV
Video - 4K
FPS - 11fps
Price - $800

Fuji X-T20:

DR - 13.5 EV (roughly)
Video - 4K
FPS - 8-11fps
Price - $900

That's noticeably less of a camera for more money. This approach stretches across Canon's entire lineup but their mirrorless is where it's most clear because it has a far weaker lens lineup. I really like my 6D and would like to think I have a future with Canon but they really must do better.

I remain optimistic. They can't have another 6DII release and I think they now know this.

Watch any review on the A6300 4K and the rolling shutter is laughable. I don't want to sound like a fanboy here, but I am looking at the A6300 myself as an alternative (along with the Panasonic TZ100) and all the reviews say the 4K is useless, unless its static shots on a tripod.

As video is not my focus, I don't care. But comparing specs is one thing, but real world use has shown that specs are not everything.

Also, the DR is about the same, specs are misleading. When you take real comparison shots, there is almost no difference. (look for comparisons on youtube).

Price point however is another story. If I had no kit, the Sony/Panasonic would be a really great deal. Already having the 18-55 and 11-22 EF-M lenses, makes me want a Canon to use those with (especially the 11-22)

I am being selfish here because video, and burst modes mean nothing to me, my landscape and architecture subjects rarely move

However, while the specs of the cameras you mention sound alluring, they do have their issues (overheating Sony A6300s are another issue).

That said, I would buy any of these as an alternative, especially the Panasonic TZ100 as it fits in the pocket.

I'm still hoping for the M50 to have the APS-C 24Mpx sensor with DPAF and a viewfinder for £500

 

[preppyak]

The idea that Canon's full frame 6dII didnt need 4k, but a mid-level APS-C mirrorless did is just inane thinking from Canon.

I assume the 90D will get it as will further cameras down the line, but this is still just laughable that they go so over the top to protect their own lineup, then make weird choices like this

 

[Talys]

The idea that Canon's full frame 6dII didnt need 4k, but a mid-level APS-C mirrorless did is just inane thinking from Canon.

I assume the 90D will get it as will further cameras down the line, but this is still just laughable that they go so over the top to protect their own lineup, then make weird choices like this

Why? There are plenty of people who want a full frame camera for photography and don't want to pay a premium for more video features.

Conversely, there are plenty of people who want 4k, but don't care about whether a camera is full frame or not -- and who just don't want to spend a few thousand dollars (including lenses).

 

[wildwalker]

The idea that Canon's full frame 6dII didnt need 4k, but a mid-level APS-C mirrorless did is just inane thinking from Canon.

I assume the 90D will get it as will further cameras down the line, but this is still just laughable that they go so over the top to protect their own lineup, then make weird choices like this

Why? There are plenty of people who want a full frame camera for photography and don't want to pay a premium for more video features.

Conversely, there are plenty of people who want 4k, but don't care about whether a camera is full frame or not -- and who just don't want to spend a few thousand dollars (including lenses).

I agree, the 6D range is a photographers camera first, as are all the DSLRs. Video has only been added due to pressure from competitors and the market, but it is not the primary function of any DSLR.

I would rather Canon spend all the development dollars on image quality for stills. Perhaps releasing a lower priced 'C' camera for video enthusiasts/vloggers.

Do people really need 4K? especially vloggers. I can see the use of having a larger frame to crop, so say a 2K size, but most content just doesn't justify 4K when it's amateur footage.

 

[Deleted member 380306]

Why does it take Canon so long to bring a camera out? I believe Nikon just get on with it like they did with 850, or are they just as bad?

We'll still be here next year and for those harping on 'to 4k or not to 4k' IMO the 6dii should have had a much better image quality compared to the 6d 2012 version that's the more important upgrade which just did not happen...

 

[Mikehit]

Why does it take Canon so long to bring a camera out? I believe Nikon just get on with it like they did with 850, or are they just as bad?

We'll still be here next year and for those harping on 'to 4k or not to 4k' IMO the 6dii should have had a much better image quality compared to the 6d 2012 version that's the more important upgrade which just did not happen...

How long do you think it took Nikon to design, develop, beta test and release the D850?
Many people who actually use the 6D2 say it does does have better image quality than the 6D, just not in the way people were predicting or in the way they hoped. Nikon sees buying in sensors as their route to gaining ground on Canon, Canon consider sensor quality to be lower down the list or priorities so are happy to keep manufacturing their own sensors.

I do wish people wold look on a camera as a tool rather than thinking it is all about the sensor.

 

[Deleted member 380306]

Why does it take Canon so long to bring a camera out? I believe Nikon just get on with it like they did with 850, or are they just as bad?

We'll still be here next year and for those harping on 'to 4k or not to 4k' IMO the 6dii should have had a much better image quality compared to the 6d 2012 version that's the more important upgrade which just did not happen...

How long do you think it took Nikon to design, develop, beta test and release the D850?
Many people who actually use the 6D2 say it does does have better image quality than the 6D, just not in the way people were predicting or in the way they hoped. Nikon sees buying in sensors as their route to gaining ground on Canon, Canon consider sensor quality to be lower down the list or priorities so are happy to keep manufacturing their own sensors.

I do wish people wold look on a camera as a tool rather than thinking it is all about the sensor.

Having purchased a 6d2 I can say it's poor in terms of image quality and hardly any change compared to my old 6d, I also own a Sony a7ii the DR is amazing(shame about the colours but it dose render amazing detail with lots of DR) so from my point of view after 6yrs it seems the bonus is that they added a very useful flip out screen plus some good focusing but failed to improve on the image side, for me it's more about the clarity of a portrait and rendering of detail in shots than thinking it's 'only a tool'...

Not sure how long Nikon took to develop the d850 but did they a spend along time talking about it, or did they just get on and release it? Hopefully Canon will give us something soon...