p.19 #1 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
If Tony meant his limited experience with the camera i wonder how he can tell it is better than Sony. I just cannot believe it tracks better than e.g. an a9. But maybe miracles do happen and Canon designed this wonder of technology, we'll have to see...
p.19 #2 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
therealthings wrote:
If Tony meant his limited experience with the camera i wonder how he can tell it is better than Sony. I just cannot believe it tracks better than e.g. an a9. But maybe miracles do happen and Canon designed this wonder of technology, we'll have to see...
from hearing him in the video, it does not seem that he means the limited experience with the camera, but since English is not my language I am not in a position to stand firm about that.
p.19 #3 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
NissanPatrol wrote:
from hearing him in the video, it does not seem that he means the limited experience with the camera, but since English is not my language I am not in a position to stand firm about that.
Any of these early "reviews" or "previews" or first impressions are by definition based on limited experience. But that doesn't mean they don't have merit. If something has a definite performance advantage, you can often times tell that very quickly.
And let's not get into this mentality somehow with limited experience with this new equipment, that only the negative impressions count, and not the positive? So we take someone's word with limited experience using the camera about a potential problem, but not about a potential strength?
p.19 #4 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
What Tony said, I believe, is that animal tracking is much better than Sony. He said that the camera locked onto a bird in the branches with animal eye AF better and faster than he was able to even see the bird. That is pretty impressive. Does Sony track eyes of birds, turtles, or lions, while being in almost complete darkness? I might have missed that announcement if so.
I would be surprised whether Canon people eye AF is better than Sony though.
p.19 #5 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Ralph Conway wrote:
It is his responsibility to be informed about the equipment he is using. There are no limitations when filming in full HD/30fps, as far I remember (I am not a film maker). All higher resolutions/framerates have runtime restrictions to save the camera (his investment) the R6. This is the same with R5 (8K/4K120 etc.). Those video specs are gimmicks for hobby videographers to play around and and experiment with.
It's a review, the purpose of which is to learn about the equipment he's using and impart that knowledge to others, which he did a good job on. Canon didn't present the 4K/8K support as gimmicks so it's not clear why customers should expect that to be the case.
p.19 #6 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
keema wrote:
I just saw the video from cinema5d. the documentary was really good. but it kinda sucks what he said at the end, what he experienced using the r6.. well it is really meant for photographers not a hybrid camera.. just my opinion..
I agree the documentary was good. But him showing the camera covered with an ice bag was really telling—who goes to shoot an interview with a single camera?
p.19 #7 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Atlasman2 wrote:
I agree the documentary was good. But him showing the camera covered with an ice bag was really telling—who goes to shoot an interview with a single camera?
p.19 #8 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
NissanPatrol wrote:
True
But I am talking contrast wise, it is obvious the z7 has more contrast between the color.
I think the Z7 has a little warmer white balance in that first shot. I don't see the contrast difference as much as a little more saturation and slightly warmer WB. I think either one in that shot could easily duplicate the other.
p.19 #9 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Tom_W wrote:
I think the Z7 has a little warmer white balance in that first shot. I don't see the contrast difference as much as a little more saturation and slightly warmer WB. I think either one in that shot could easily duplicate the other.
Maybe
For me with no brand loyalty, I liked the z7 from the first impression without knowing which is which.
p.19 #10 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
TeamSpeed wrote:
What Tony said, I believe, is that animal tracking is much better than Sony. He said that the camera locked onto a bird in the branches with animal eye AF better and faster than he was able to even see the bird. That is pretty impressive. Does Sony track eyes of birds, turtles, or lions, while being in almost complete darkness? I might have missed that announcement if so.
I would be surprised whether Canon people eye AF is better than Sony though.
Did you have a look at the photo in Tony's vid, was taken at 5000 Iso on a green background.
p.19 #13 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Someone else mentioned on DPR that although we see a blue box telling us that the camera is locked on the eye of the subject, the actual focus of the lens might not be. So you get the idea that you will get all images in focus but in reality when examining the images on a monitor after they have been transferred to your pc or tablet, only 50% has critical focus on the eye.
Have we seen sequences of critically focused eye shots yet like we have seen from the a9? I'm interested to see.
p.19 #15 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Ralph Conway wrote:
Does not look like the focus hits the eye.
Surely the beak and not the eye is the subject...
There are a lot of things right about this shot. The choice of aperture and shutter speed is appropriate, especially given the ISO required. The bird is doing something.
p.19 #16 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
melcat wrote:
Surely the beak and not the eye is the subject...
There are a lot of things right about this shot. The choice of aperture and shutter speed is appropriate, especially given the ISO required. The bird is doing something.
Does the eye-AF know it’s meant to focus on the beak?
p.19 #17 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
therealthings wrote:
Someone else mentioned on DPR that although we see a blue box telling us that the camera is locked on the eye of the subject, the actual focus of the lens might not be. So you get the idea that you will get all images in focus but in reality when examining the images on a monitor after they have been transferred to your pc or tablet, only 50% has critical focus on the eye.
Have we seen sequences of critically focused eye shots yet like we have seen from the a9? I'm interested to see.
This is my experiance with the z7
While shooting I feel bery confident that I nailed the subject every thing perfect.
But the disapointment comes when I review the photos. Nothing like what I seen in the VF
p.19 #18 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Pius Sullivan wrote:
I'm impressed with that...
It is just slightly, slightly front focused off the eye....Topaz would easily save it and no one would know but just like all cameras (even the A9) you still need some insurance shots when shooting that narrow a DOF because just the tiniest shifts front or back can render the critical eye just slightly off.
p.19 #20 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
@ all:
I have to correct myself. I am impressed about this one, too (the bird pictures two posts above). It looks razor sharp. The first one above looks like blown u (resized) to me and loosing sharpness compared to the last two images.
Not me. Does not look like the focus hits the eye.
