Gordon Laing from Camera Labs has completed his review of the Canon EOS R5. Instead of reviewing the video performance of the camera, his review focuses on stills photography. The Canon EOS R5 looks to be a great one.
From the autofocus to the competitive dynamic range, the Canon EOS R5 will likely find its way into a lot of photographers' bags.
Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.
I was convinced the R6 would be the right entry point for me in to the mirrorless realm. But these R5 reviews are tempting. I need to see some more R6 reviews to change my mind back! :) Its more financially my speed too.
-Brian
I remember hearing that the algorithm changes at ISO 400
Ehm, it's not RAW any longer then.
You can apply arbitrary amount of NR on raw files depending on your taste and target image dimensions, so the noise comparison is most valuable if done on raw files before any noise reduction is applied.
Out of camera jpegs have some unknown amount of NR applied in camera, so noise comparison on jpegs actually shows how nice NR algorithms are in different cameras.
I don't have the camera yet but I downloaded some raw samples and they really look fantastic in the shadows even at ISO 400-800, compared to 5DIV.
It may (and most likely is) very moderate amount of NR. Interestingly it's only applied up ISO 640.
Sony also tamper with the raw files (see star eater effect).
Yes, raw sometimes isn't completely raw but slightly cooked.
that makes zero sense, a raw file is not completely raw? sure, ok
Now add the specs (top AF, IBIS, 12/20fps, 8k Raw, 4k HQ), RF Glass and the colors Canon provides and then come and tell me that Canon has not the the best hybrid system out there!! Expect a few firmware updates that will extend record times and reduce cooldowns. Im telling this mostly to myself who cancelled the preorder and now I have to wait for sometime...
It's as raw as you can get. Whatever processing the camera may or may not do is a black box to the user. Complaining that CR3 is not "raw" is just semantic masturbation as long as it's not possible to make the camera output anything more raw than what we already get.
Depends. If the camera can actually have a measure of actual sensor noise and subtract it from the data the image is still RAW, in many ways a better RAW.
Anything not based on real noise measurement but on algorithms trying to detect what is noise and what is not is a different thing.
Set to Bulb, dial in your calculated exposure time, set self-timer and Bob's your uncle. No crappy IR remotes or cable remotes or mobile phone apps.
No, the measurebation is on Canon's part for messing with RAW in order to come out better than Sony in NR comparisons.