p.27 #1 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Mike_5D wrote:
Sure looks like it. I don't believe it has any restrictions with a 1Dx3 doing 16 fps mechanical, or does it? I also see the 100-400 II can handle 12 fps.
Odd that the 24-70 II made the cut but the 70-200 II didn't? What's the max FPS going to be then for the 70-200 II?
p.27 #2 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Awilson18 wrote:
Odd that the 24-70 II made the cut but the 70-200 II didn't? What's the max FPS going to be then for the 70-200 II?
It will drop to H which is 8FPS din EFCS and 6FPS in MS. But it will still do 20FPS in ES (probably?).
FWIW, the same list on Canon Japan does include the 70-200 II, 400 f.2,8 IS II and the 400DOII so I don't know what is going on with these lists and I guess we will need to wait for some to test??
p.27 #3 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
arbitrage wrote:
It will drop to H which is 8FPS din EFCS and 6FPS in MS. But it will still do 20FPS in ES (probably?).
FWIW, the same list on Canon Japan does include the 70-200 II, 400 f.2,8 IS II and the 400DOII so I don't know what is going on with these lists and I guess we will need to wait for some to test??
p.27 #4 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
arbitrage wrote:
It will drop to H which is 8FPS din EFCS and 6FPS in MS. But it will still do 20FPS in ES (probably?).
FWIW, the same list on Canon Japan does include the 70-200 II, 400 f.2,8 IS II and the 400DOII so I don't know what is going on with these lists and I guess we will need to wait for some to test??
p.27 #6 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
arbitrage wrote:
It will drop to H which is 8FPS din EFCS and 6FPS in MS. But it will still do 20FPS in ES (probably?).
FWIW, the same list on Canon Japan does include the 70-200 II, 400 f.2,8 IS II and the 400DOII so I don't know what is going on with these lists and I guess we will need to wait for some to test??
I thought I read over at Canon Rumors or the thread at DPR that the lists seem wacky because they're based on the speed at which the lens can open the aperture blades rather than the speed of the AF motors. So there must be a difference with how the aperture blades have to operate in mechanical versus ES – probably something to do with the timing of the sensor scan rate, aperture blade movement, and mechanical shutter positions.
p.27 #9 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
padam19 wrote:
The more I see of the R6, the more I'm leaning towards it over the R5. Yes, it's "only" 20 MP, but they look to be really good pixels. I can put the extra $1400 to better uses, like possibly upgrading my 100-400 II to a 100-500.
p.27 #10 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Mike_5D wrote:
The more I see of the R6, the more I'm leaning towards it over the R5. Yes, it's "only" 20 MP, but they look to be really good pixels. I can put the extra $1400 to better uses, like possibly upgrading my 100-400 II to a 100-500.
Yes, for me it looks like the R5 is actually a lot more significant upgrade for video use.
Not necessarily because of the headline-grabbing 8K, but because it has a normal 4K mode with a lot less rolling shutter than the R6 it does shoot 4k120p if needed, and it also doubles as a 1.6x crop 4K60p camera as well, much better flexibility and feature set overall, it is probably worth the extra money for video.
I've already looked at 1DX II or III files before and really didn't get the outcry at all about the 20 MP vs 30 MP.
5472 over 6720 pixels wide, the latter is better of course, but in absolute terms, it really does not add a whole lot more compared to going with the 500mm reach instead of the 400mm.
That being said, even the EOS R is still very good at doing a lot of things very well, for an even more reasonable price.
p.27 #11 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
padam19 wrote:
Yes, for me it looks like the R5 is actually a lot more significant upgrade for video use.
Not necessarily because of the headline-grabbing 8K, but because it has a normal 4K mode with a lot less rolling shutter than the R6 it does shoot 4k120p if needed, and it also doubles as a 1.6x crop 4K60p camera as well, much better flexibility and feature set overall, it is probably worth the extra money for video.
I've already looked at 1DX II or III files before and really didn't get the outcry at all about the 20 MP vs 30 MP.
5472 over 6720 pixels wide, the latter is better of course, but in absolute terms, it really does not add a whole lot more compared to going with the 500mm reach instead of the 400mm.
That being said, even the EOS R is still very good at doing a lot of things very well, for an even more reasonable price....Show more →
p.27 #14 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
Jesse Evans wrote: he says you need 4k30 HQ to get "usable" footage. He has been uploading 1080p video from the EOS RP for months.
I couldn't even tell a difference with his mushy 1080p footage with his test setup. Why doesn't he record real footage and show us how unusable 4k30 is?
p.27 #15 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
tifa3 wrote:
I couldn't even tell a difference with his mushy 1080p footage with his test setup. Why doesn't he record real footage and show us how unusable 4k30 is?
I had to do a triple take because he compared the R5 video to the A7r IV and did not compare the 4k non-HQ video to the 4k from the A7rIV.
This is just ludicrous.
Literally the only comparison people anywhere are showing is the quality of 4k non-HQ vs 8k oversampled footaga (otherwise known as the best quality video available).
p.27 #16 · Canon R5 R6 Reviews LIST/HUB, see 1st post // review hands on specs
You have to take it easy on the Northrups... Covid has slowed things way down, so there just isn't the customer base there once was (no events to shoot, wedding planning is way down, etc) and this is the first real piece of interesting camera news in a long time, so they have to rush to capitalize on clicks. I am sure their tools and training revenue is down quite a bit at this point.
If Canon had done their normal thing by flying people to some remote island and setting them up with gear and test subjects, their reviews would have been much better I think.
he says you need 4k30 HQ to get "usable" footage. He has been uploading 1080p video from the EOS RP for months.