This is probably the best camera review I’ve ever watched – Gerald Undone with the Canon EOS R5 and Canon EOS R6

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Also, couldn't Canon lean into 8K video as a big opportunity for stills shooters?

Wouldn't 8K stills frame grabs still be rather high res? Couldn't you use 8K for very hard to time stills work -- like timing the bat hitting the baseball, capturing lightning strikes, etc.?

I haven't seen all the collaterals. So if this is somethign they did push, please forward thx.

- A
 

twoheadedboy

EOS R5
CR Pro
Jan 3, 2018
192
280
Kenosha, WI
Also, couldn't Canon lean into 8K video as a big opportunity for stills shooters?

Wouldn't 8K stills frame grabs still be rather high res? Couldn't you use 8K for very hard to time stills work -- like timing the bat hitting the baseball, capturing lightning strikes, etc.?

I haven't seen all the collaterals. So if this is somethign they did push, please forward thx.

- A
It has been. Roughly 35 MP, though in 16:9 format. The dynamic range is not quite the same as a true still IIRC.

Gordon Laing's is the review you're looking for:
 

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
300
116
As he stated, HIS focus is on video. His photo review didn't contain nearly the level of detail his video review did. If you're looking for a review of the photo capabilities, there are better reviews (and reviewers) to follow.
Plus, his video review basically said that they are perfect cameras for photography only. He had nothing to pick apart from a still standpoint, even if you compare it against the A7R IV. And despite other reports, he never was able to make it overheat in the stills mode.

For those wondering about the photography review portion, here's the transcript.

Okay, regarding photography these days, I don't fancy myself much of a photographer. but it wasn't that long ago, my partner and I ran a sports photography business that used canon cameras, and i can tell you this, having either of these cameras then would have been an absolute dream. I literally have nothing to say about these cameras from a photographic capability standpoint. And as someone who naturally finds problems with everything, take that to mean the highest praise the R5 easily trades blows with the sony A7R IV, which II call the best photo camera for the money.

These canons are fun to use, offer great handling, have terrific lenses, focus reliably, they're just fantastic. When the EOS R came out, you had a decision to make between it and the 5D Mark IV, and in many ways the DSLR was better with these two cameras. There's no decision to make anymore, they're better than the EOS R, and they're better than pretty much every other canon camera say for maybe the 1DX III. But it looks like the R6 might even be using the same sensor as the 1dx Mark III. So you really are getting canon's best here.

Of course, if you're all about photography and can afford the bigger price tag, the R5 is the better camera, it drives just as fast as the R6, but with more detailed images, a nicer LCD screen, and a higher resolution viewfinder. And a lot of the complaints that i made about video don't carry over when you toggle a photo mode. Now you do have two card slots, now your ibis is very good, I was getting four to five stops of improvement on an 85 millimeter manual lens. And although taking photos affects your record time due to heat, I couldn't get the camera to overheat while in photo mode. So i don't think that'll be an issue even if you're firing high burst for long duration.
 

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
300
116
It has been. Roughly 35 MP, though in 16:9 format. The dynamic range is not quite the same as a true still IIRC.

Gordon Laing's is the review you're looking for:
Plus, you deal with rolling shutter. Still not a bad tool to use if it's needed. Just good to know the limitations. Usually rolling shutter isn't a big deal, but I think for the use of the high speed photography example made, it'd likely not be ideal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ahsanford
Aug 5, 2020
4
0
I'm not sure if the dynamic range was really measured properly - only 11? Really? Because the DR in photo mode is on par with sony and even in 400ISO it is slightly better. In waht exact video mode and what exact ISO did he measure it?
 

Starting out EOS R

EOS R5 - RF24-105mm F4L, RF70-200mm f2.8L
Feb 13, 2020
289
312
I've never seen a 'Gerald Undone' review before and wow, this guy is thorough and has verbal diarrhoea. He has to as he packs so much information and statistics in, it's mind blowing.

His review probably mirrors my own initial experiences of the R5. It's great for photographers and occasional video shooters which for me is ideal.

I'll be honest when he gets into the technical details, it's so above my level of knowledge, I get oxygen starvation lol.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: WriteLight
Mar 29, 2019
4
7
I agree with CanonRumors 100%. He is one of the YouTube reviews I don't have to skip or playback at x1.5 speed. I know everybody has different needs and preferences but for me, he is one of the best camera reviewers in any medium for sure!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bart

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
I'm not sure if the dynamic range was really measured properly - only 11? Really? Because the DR in photo mode is on par with sony and even in 400ISO it is slightly better. In waht exact video mode and what exact ISO did he measure it?

Video and stills bit depth are quite different, are they not?

But I think you can ID the ISO in his screenshots. It varied a bit, but perhaps he was running every ISO and these were just selections of screen caps.

- A
 

koenkooi

EOS R
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,450
1,247
I'm not sure if the dynamic range was really measured properly - only 11? Really? Because the DR in photo mode is on par with sony and even in 400ISO it is slightly better. In waht exact video mode and what exact ISO did he measure it?
He measured it using CLOG in the 10-bit 4:2:2 mode, so that's already shoving 11 stops of DR in a 10-bit format. As he says in the review, if Canon would add support for CLOG3 you could stretch it to the 12 stops you'd get when using 12-bit RAW.
Since all e-shutter modes are capped at 12-bit, you won't get more than 12 stops. The recent C300 model has all kinds of hardware and software tricks to get that 15+ stops value that the R6/R5 lacks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark
Aug 5, 2020
3
9
I second the Gordon Laing video if you want a stills review.

For folks who think the coverage of the R5 is too video-centric, I agree, but realize that Canon came very close to giving serious video people the tools they wanted, and I think it's this "almost" aspect that has led to all the hand-wringing. If Canon had merely put out an iteration on the R5's video, they would have said "meh, not for me" and moved on without all the noise. This points to a market that for Canon is not well-addressed - some class of solo videographers who "should" use cinema cameras and who expect hybrid cameras to keep up with much more expensive rivals (and value-priced Sonys). If Canon were to take this exact camera (all the same components), put it in a body optimized for heat dissipation... that would be an interesting camera, no? I hope Canon watches this review: it gives them very specific advice as to how to make videographers happy. I think Canon wouldn't be so eagerly cannibalizing its own cinema features if it weren't for Sony - I think Sony has done a great service to photographers with that.

One thing that is lost in all the video reviews, though, is that it appears the non-HQ 4K is perfectly usable - yes it's not as good as HQ as amply demonstrated here, but I understand it's better than the R's, and lots of people have been using that successfully. There is also the crop 4K mode which appears to be quite competitive in performance if you can live with a crop. These are unacceptable to video purists, yet a stills-centric shooter may find their needs are met without ever overheating.
 

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
935
2,014
Agree this is an excellent review, but he should have flipped the topics with still photography first followed by the 85-90% review of the video features and why you should buy/not buy the camera. That is from the perspective of a stills photographer.
He should have opened the review with the statement that ”the following video will be of no interest to anyone who buys this camera for its primary purpose...”

I want my 23 minutes back.

The only reason I watched him at all was because of the headline ”best camera review ever....”

Wow.
 

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
935
2,014
Also, couldn't Canon lean into 8K video as a big opportunity for stills shooters?

Wouldn't 8K stills frame grabs still be rather high res? Couldn't you use 8K for very hard to time stills work -- like timing the bat hitting the baseball, capturing lightning strikes, etc.?

I haven't seen all the collaterals. So if this is somethign they did push, please forward thx.

- A
I read a very interesting review of this capability yesterday.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,734
2,732
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...The issue is that Canon was trying to either claim new business or make a big splash with an industry-first. That approach drove right past an absolute murderer's row of stills upgrades we have been asking for for years.

Had they led with stills -- or at least put all these systemic upgrades (DPAF II, tilty-flippy, IBIS, sensor quality, etc.) on parity with video in the initial materials, perhaps some luster coming off / reality sticking to their video performance wouldn't drag the camera so publicly right now...

... Canon appears to have made the narrative principally about video, and that decision may have backfired on them.
I generally agree. But, I have a problem with any company that offers any feature that isn't ready for prime time. I think it was more than a bad marketing decision. I think it was a bad engineering and design decision. No matter how many disclaimers you offer, it's no substitute for having a product that works. If they couldn't make these ridiculously high resolution and frame rate modes work, they should have just left them off.

My perspective is different that the majority on this forum, but I see this as a case where they let the engineers and designers drive the marketing. "Ooh lookey what we can design! Never mind that it's non-functional in the real world, people should just adapt." No. You should engineer the product to work or not include the feature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: quilatoo

marathonman

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Aug 29, 2016
127
644
I generally agree. But, I have a problem with any company that offers any feature that isn't ready for prime time.
I guess you missed the last 10 years where Canon have been chastised for playing it safe, not innovating enough and protecting other products in their line-up. The cardinal sin has also been committed by not giving the YouTube Vloggers what they demanded! ;)
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,670
2,062
Alberta, Canada
I generally agree. But, I have a problem with any company that offers any feature that isn't ready for prime time. I think it was more than a bad marketing decision. I think it was a bad engineering and design decision. No matter how many disclaimers you offer, it's no substitute for having a product that works. If they couldn't make these ridiculously high resolution and frame rate modes work, they should have just left them off.

My perspective is different that the majority on this forum, but I see this as a case where they let the engineers and designers drive the marketing. "Ooh lookey what we can design! Never mind that it's non-functional in the real world, people should just adapt." No. You should engineer the product to work or not include the feature.
Why leave off something that can be used to great advantage within a certain realm. A brief 8k pan and zoom for 4k could be very impressive and useful. It gives a taste of the future. I would never leave something like this off but that's just my way of viewing life. The massive data associated with 8k tells me that no average Joe would ever be recording longer clips anyway, so why complain? I think most of the hate is based on envy.

Jack