Archive 2020 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.51 #1 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Maxxus46 wrote:
I know was CIPA is and their ratings have been wrong before. Again im only interested in two world tests by non biased photographers in genres I'm interested in (wildife, birding etc) I never believe marketing hype. All manufactured over hype new products, that's almost always the case and a good reason to avoid new products until they've been field tested by real Pros
CIPA ratings don't match real world experience. That doesn't make them wrong, however. The standards are not designed to mirror real world experience but to provide a systematic way to compare cameras by testing them all the same way. By using the same testing procedure the numbers are meant to be comparable. It is a separate, interesting, and important question of how those numbers translate into real life use.
p.51 #2 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer wrote:
You do realize that CIPA (Camera & Imaging Products Association) had developed a standard for testing image stabilization. CIPA is an umbrella organization that: "is an international industry association consisting of members engaged in the development, production or sale of imaging related devices including digital cameras. The association's mission is to contribute to the business success of its members through various activities in securing fair business environments and by hosting events such as the world premier shows of camera and imaging devices, in addition to formulating worldwide industry standards to enhance the convenience of consumers." Sony, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic, and Sigma are all members of CIPA. A description of their industry standard for image stabilization can be found here:
Using that industry standard Sony's recent camera are rated as providing 5.5 stops of image stabilization. The Canon R5 is rated as providing 8 stops using that industry standard. Note the stops listed are for the industry standard testing described in the link above. People rarely are able to achieve such the full number of stops that are measured in the industry standardized testing--but how many stops you get is also dependent in the real world on how steady your hands are. In any event even though people don't typically get the number of stops measured in the industry standardized test, a higher number of stops in the CIPA testing generally translates in more stops in everyday life as well. So, there is some evidence that Canon has achieved better IBIS in the R5 than we have seen before and that evidence is in the industry standard CIPA testing.
Like you I want to see real world testing, but it isn't as if Canon just made up the number of stops for their IBIS. They had to use the industry standard testing.
As for what camera Scott uses, you can see a number of people's gear--including Scott's--by clicking on their profile. He uses a Sony A7r III, or at least that is what it says in his profile. Not sure why that matters, but the information is there for all to see....Show more →
How does CIPA testing prove out in real use? Does a 1.5 stop on the CIPA scale relate directly to a 1.5 stop in real world use. If we don't know...then they are just numbers.
p.51 #3 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
nhsonyshooter wrote:
Well kinda. Overheating and wobbling IBIS can be a problem obviously, not for everyone because each person will use the equipment differently. But cut to the 17:04 mark. This is a paid Canon ambassador doing his absolute best to still stay a paid ambassador yet at the same time trying to be honest. Which I respect by the way. Canon has put him in a very tough spot. And you can sense it.
&t=1276s
If you don't skip to the 17:04 mark, you hear them both talk about what an excellent stills camera it is. At and after the 17:04 mark, it sounds to me like he's speaking to how difficult it is for him to prove his objectivity when he's a paid ambassador. The best thing they both admit is that there is no perfect camera, and you have to be willing to work within the limitations of the camera you're using.
Aug 08, 2020 at 10:33 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.51 #4 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
chez wrote:
How does CIPA testing prove out in real use? Does a 1.5 stop on the CIPA scale relate directly to a 1.5 stop in real world use. If we don't know...then they are just numbers.
Whose real world use? You do realize that IS is dependent on how steady someone's hands are? You probably have steadier hands that I do (my hands shake a bit from a familial tremor) and therefore you will probably get more out of IBIS than I will. The CIPA standard tests cameras under the same testing conditions. Real world conditions between you and me are unlikely to be anything close to the same conditions. That's why they systematize (i.e., standardize the testing).
p.51 #5 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
The general consesus seems the R5 is a very nice stills camera but the A7sIII has nicer video capabilities. Since megapixels is not on my top 5 list, I’m not tempted and I do think Sony will respond wirh the Sony A7iv. I just need better EVF than my 2.36 MP dog and slight AF improvement which I’m sure A7iv will have.
p.51 #7 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
freaklikeme wrote:
If you don't skip to the 17:04 mark, you hear them both talk about what an excellent stills camera it is. At and after the 17:04 mark, it sounds to me like he's speaking to how difficult it is for him to prove his objectivity when he's a paid ambassador. The best thing they both admit is that there is no perfect camera, and you have to be willing to work within the limitations of the camera you're using.
I don't remember one comment here saying it's not a great stills camera? 45mp is nice for sure. I mean Sony had that basically 5 years ago but better late than never. The AF performance is impressive for sure if true (A9 speeds, we will see). That will help keep Sony honest if true. I personally think it seems like a great video camera, "depending" on how you use it of course. So not sure what your point is. Of course there is no perfect camera and of course they both will make that clear. Especially Peter as he is paid by Canon. Again that is not the point. The point originally was simply Canon misrepresenting what the capabilities of the camera really are in the real world. It's funny because Canon has removed a couple Quotes from their own website by their own product manager who basically said this is going to change the way film makers film and their work flow. Actually now that I read that I guess that is correct. Just not in the intended way I think he meant. Anyway, mysteriously these statements are now scrubbed from their site. Look all company's bend and warp the truth, Sony as well. That's the world we live in. But simply defending it to the death is just silly. So they lied alittle, it blew up in their face and everyone can move on They say bad press is better than no press. It appears company's including Canon believe that.
p.51 #8 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
A9 speed from an R5? Highly doubtful . That is wishful thinking
nhsonyshooter wrote:
I don't remember one comment here saying it's not a great stills camera? 45mp is nice for sure. I mean Sony had that basically 5 years ago but better late than never. The AF performance is impressive for sure if true (A9 speeds, we will see). That will help keep Sony honest if true. I personally think it seems like a great video camera, "depending" on how you use it of course. So not sure what your point is. Of course there is no perfect camera and of course they both will make that clear. Especially Peter as he is paid by Canon. Again that is not the point. The point originally was simply Canon misrepresenting what the capabilities of the camera really are in the real world. It's funny because Canon has removed a couple Quotes from their own website by their own product manager who basically said this is going to change the way film makers film and their work flow. Actually now that I read that I guess that is correct. Just not in the intended way I think he meant. Anyway, mysteriously these statements are now scrubbed from their site. Look all company's bend and warp the truth, Sony as well. That's the world we live in. But simply defending it to the death is just silly. So they lied alittle, it blew up in their face and everyone can move on They say bad press is better than no press. It appears company's including Canon believe that....Show more →
p.51 #9 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer wrote:
Whose real world use? You do realize that IS is dependent on how steady someone's hands are? You probably have steadier hands that I do (my hands shake a bit from a familial tremor) and therefore you will probably get more out of IBIS than I will. The CIPA standard tests cameras under the same testing conditions. Real world conditions between you and me are unlikely to be anything close to the same conditions. That's why they systematize (i.e., standardize the testing).
Let's take a variable out. Say I'm using both systems. Does CIPA's test results of say a 2 stop difference between cameras actually results in a 2 stop difference when I use the cameras in the same way? Do we know?
Does a CIPA camera with a battery rating of 25% more than another camera actually results in 25% more in real use?
Sometimes lab tests don't translate to real usage.
p.51 #10 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Chez, If you do not engage, it would be more entertaining to see the for and against arguments coming for every web measurement out there.
Aug 09, 2020 at 08:25 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.51 #11 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
chez wrote:
Let's take a variable out. Say I'm using both systems. Does CIPA's test results of say a 2 stop difference between cameras actually results in a 2 stop difference when I use the cameras in the same way? Do we know?
Does a CIPA camera with a battery rating of 25% more than another camera actually results in 25% more in real use?
Sometimes lab tests don't translate to real usage.
You can read the link I posted to see how CIPA image stabilzation testing is done. I would assume the CIPA rating gives you a rough guide to the effectiveness of IBIS much the way that EPA miles per gallon or liters per 100km gives us a rough guide to gas mileage in a car. Like that measure where most people don't get the mileage that EPA rated and the mileage you get depends on how drive the care, I would expect that most people will not get the CIPA listed stops of image stabilization and how much they get depends on how they use the camera including how shaky they are, how good their technique is etc. And like car mileage the CIPA ratings for image stabilization gives you a rough guide to how any two cars perform for gas mileage, but the difference for two cars may not be the same as the ratings if let's say you drive predominantly at 160 km/hr, yet you still would expect the car with the better gas mileage rating from EPA to get better mileage even at that extreme speed. In much the same way I would expect that a camera with a higher CIPA rating for image stabilization to have better stabilization across a wide range of shooting conditions but the exact amount better I wouldn't expect to be the same across all those conditions.
Suffice it to say the camera with a better CIPA rating for stabilization should have better stabilization, how much better will depend on the situation and of course there are lots of situations in which the shutter speed is fast enough so that even 2 or 3 stops stabilization will be enough to get almost all shots in tack sharp focus. Obviously in such situations a silghtly better IBIS won't make any difference, or as a more extreme example if I shoot an 85mm lens at 1/2000 the image stabilization of the camera of course isn't going to make any difference.
With the IBIS in Sony cameras we are already talking about very good IBIS, depending on how you shoot you may find that the better IBIS in the Canon R5 hardly ever matters. If you push to lower shutter speeds often, however, the difference may be meaningful. Personally, I don't push to such slow shutter hardly ever--I almost always have a tripod with me--so this difference in IBIS isn't very important to me at all. I am not going to try to deny that it exists, however.
p.51 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Fred Miranda wrote:
Some posts were deleted from this thread. Please keep it civil.
My my. I walk away for a few days and miss all the fun.
Not sure what the issues were, but I imagine they were derived from the usual polarized camps much like every other topic in the world these days.
Anyhow, I can't speak for everyone else. But I was never a cinematographer/videographer, am not now, and likely never will be. As such, I am still planning on picking one of the two new Canon bodies up to go alongside my Sony and Fuji rig for a plethora of reasons that are all tied to stills shooting.
After picking up the RP as a placeholder to use with a couple of the RF lenses I had been staring at for a while, I can honestly say that Canon has done a lot of things right and the RP is just a peek into the window of where they're going. I love the 28-70, the 50/1.2, and the function so far with all of my EF glass that I still have.
Nothing on the market replaces my A9 for what it does. None of my full frame stuff will ever be what my Fuji rigs are. But what (at least for now) the R5 will bring for my use case is a body that is likely better in the AF and ergo department than my now departed A7R3 and it will do so with the beloved EF mount lenses that I have been using on the Sony and Fuji rigs for quite some.
Just as a few quick examples, the Sigma 105/1.4, 20/1.4, and Canon 300/2.8 all operate with some mild to significant caveats when adapted to my Sony bodies. I have accepted those caveats and worked around them for a long time now since the pros outweigh what the negatives have been when using EF glass on an EF body. However, with the R5, there is now some level of parity in feature set with the Sony bodies, with the addition of a flawless adaptation of those lenses that I have retained which is precisely what I have been waiting for.
Again, this isn't about this or that being better or worse. Every system has it's up and downsides depending on the user. Personally, I think that the new Canon bodies are legitimate contenders in the market based on the information we have so far. No, they do not do everything everyone wants them to do. No, they are not the best at everything. No, they won't replace my other systems. Yes, they do compete on all the levels that matter to me and many others like me.
Side note, the in-cam raw processing on the RP is really nice to have. Not quite as good as what Fuji does. But definitely good enough and better than what my Sony's have offered in that department (which is nothing). The R5 appears to build on the in-cam processing significantly which is something I'm personally very excited to play with.
p.51 #14 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
After reading and seeing many reviews/previews etc my own conclusion on Canon R5/R6 is that they both are still very good cameras but Canon just lost this trust it has built over decades. Canon cameras were the ones people liked to use because they always worked and got job done. For personal use i would still get R6 or R5 but for pro work i just don't trust them.
p.51 #15 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
JohnDizzo15 wrote:
My my. I walk away for a few days and miss all the fun.
Not sure what the issues were, but I imagine they were derived from the usual polarized camps much like every other topic in the world these days.
Anyhow, I can't speak for everyone else. But I was never a cinematographer/videographer, am not now, and likely never will be. As such, I am still planning on picking one of the two new Canon bodies up to go alongside my Sony and Fuji rig for a plethora of reasons that are all tied to stills shooting.
After picking up the RP as a placeholder to use with a couple of the RF lenses I had been staring at for a while, I can honestly say that Canon has done a lot of things right and the RP is just a peek into the window of where they're going. I love the 28-70, the 50/1.2, and the function so far with all of my EF glass that I still have.
Nothing on the market replaces my A9 for what it does. None of my full frame stuff will ever be what my Fuji rigs are. But what (at least for now) the R5 will bring for my use case is a body that is likely better in the AF and ergo department than my now departed A7R3 and it will do so with the beloved EF mount lenses that I have been using on the Sony and Fuji rigs for quite some.
Just as a few quick examples, the Sigma 105/1.4, 20/1.4, and Canon 300/2.8 all operate with some mild to significant caveats when adapted to my Sony bodies. I have accepted those caveats and worked around them for a long time now since the pros outweigh what the negatives have been when using EF glass on an EF body. However, with the R5, there is now some level of parity in feature set with the Sony bodies, with the addition of a flawless adaptation of those lenses that I have retained which is precisely what I have been waiting for.
Again, this isn't about this or that being better or worse. Every system has it's up and downsides depending on the user. Personally, I think that the new Canon bodies are legitimate contenders in the market based on the information we have so far. No, they do not do everything everyone wants them to do. No, they are not the best at everything. No, they won't replace my other systems. Yes, they do compete on all the levels that matter to me and many others like me.
Side note, the in-cam raw processing on the RP is really nice to have. Not quite as good as what Fuji does. But definitely good enough and better than what my Sony's have offered in that department (which is nothing). The R5 appears to build on the in-cam processing significantly which is something I'm personally very excited to play with....Show more →
Well, it depends on what you consider fun
Since you use Canon RP already, could you tell me what are you thoughts on operatiing the camera / menu responsiveness/ typical usage which includes taking photos, diving to playback/review or menu to change some setting, getting back to taking photos, etc. ? I mean general usage which involves something more than only pressing the shutter .
I'm wondering if the experience is similar to what what we have in Sony or different in any way...
An interesting look at the guts, and at the suspect layout/cooling design around the CPU.
Wow!
"Houston we have a problem". Okay let's crack it open and see what's going on...and post pictures.
EOSHD opinion:
"Everything I’ve seen points to overheating being avoidable." - Andrew Reid
"I cannot in any sense imagine any Canon engineer thought that arrangement of circuit board blocking the CPU, and no thermal pad would satisfy the criteria of good electronic design. So the only conclusion I can come to is that it’s intentional. All the signs, in my opinion, point to Canon crippling the EOS R5 to segment it from Cinema EOS." - Andrew Reid
An interesting look at the guts, and at the suspect layout/cooling design around the CPU.
Thanks for the link, interesting read indeed. It looks to me that Canon at last moment either run into supply issue with thermal pads and other materials but decided to rush products anyway or someone not on engineering level very likely management made a quick call to cheap out on materials to save on overall cost.
The reason is irrelevant now. It will be interesting to see how Canon is going to deal with it. Firmware is not going to fix all unless they completely disable 8k, and leave 4k with very low settings available. That's no go since they have advertised camera as 8k capable. So Canon can either stop production, work on quick fix and come with excuse they have nothing left in stock since demand is very strong or just recall all units and offer updated fixed model within a few months.
p.51 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
patotts wrote:
Leave it to a Swedish engineer to explain why he is switching from Canon to Sony for video :-)
I don't think I will be an A7sIII or R5 customer, but I really liked this video. A very organized approach to evaluating both as Video cameras . Thanks for posting.
p.51 #20 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
freaklikeme wrote:
If you don't skip to the 17:04 mark, you hear them both talk about what an excellent stills camera it is. At and after the 17:04 mark, it sounds to me like he's speaking to how difficult it is for him to prove his objectivity when he's a paid ambassador. The best thing they both admit is that there is no perfect camera, and you have to be willing to work within the limitations of the camera you're using.
So..the big take away for me... is Pete indeed, as a paid ambassador, mention R5 overheating and wobble in his paid EOS R5 First Time Vlogging Video. Maybe the only ambassador to do so, thus far.
According to Pete, Canon did review his video only corrected some specs. Over heating and wobble comments were allowed.
They say bad press is better than no press. It appears company's including Canon believe that.
