p.8 #1 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
docusync wrote:
It looks like both raw and ProRes are 12bit on the Z8/9. The original R5 was also 12 bit I believe. 14 bit is basically a normal raw photo. If that's true - we're getting to the point when still grabs have the same quality as regular raw photos.
Not exactly true. Your shutter speed/angle in video will likely be quite different than what it would be for a still photo in the same conditions, meaning that if there's any panning or subject movement a grab wouldn't do the same trick as a dedicated still.
p.8 #3 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
goalerjones wrote:
Lighting rules are still the same regardless of the zebra feature. I shoot in brightly backlit, and underexposed shadows during horse races as the day comes to an end. For me, non-video zebras aren't helpful, I know I will need to expose for shadows regardless of the blown out backgrounds for proper exposure.
Well with ISO-invariant sensors there is not much benefit of blowing those highlights as the noise seen in the shadow areas once adjusted for brightness will be the same regardless of the ISO selected. Although, some cameras may AF better if the subject is properly exposed at the time of shooting.
I have a custom key set to toggle on/off the zebras and I do toggle them off occasionally if I'm shooting against a boring white sky and don't care if it blows out as the zebras are distracting. But otherwise I find them to be a killer feature in nailing exposure every time.
p.8 #4 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
RoamingScott wrote:
Not exactly true. Your shutter speed/angle in video will likely be quite different than what it would be for a still photo in the same conditions, meaning that if there's any panning or subject movement a grab wouldn't do the same trick as a dedicated still.
Correct, but you can get pretty much any shutter speed (below 1/8000) in video too, so it would be the same. I read somewhere that the R7 pre-shooting blob is actually a raw video clip.
The only concern is AF motor speed, which is slower in video (to create a smooth transition).
p.8 #6 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
arbitrage wrote:
I'm not sure when they started. I had it in my 2017 A9 and ever since in every Sony I've owned like A9II, A7RIV, A7RV, A1, A9III.
I did a quick google back to the original A7/A7R and they had it so I think it has been there since the beginning of FF E-mount.
I also did a quick search of the A6700 help guide and it has them also.
And yes the RX100VII has it.
I'm pretty sure every Sony MILC has had it.
Do you also have the RX100 VII?
Don't get me wrong, it would be great if Canon took all this time and made the R5 II definitively better than any other camera out there. It seems like the Panasonic GH7 may be slightly better for video if you don't care about 8K. I suspect whenever Sony releases the A1 II, it'll be the greatest thing to come out since sliced bread.
p.8 #8 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
lsquare wrote:
The Z8 can't shoot 8K in ProRes. Does it support Zebras?
Supposedly, C-LOG2 is very good and can capture a good deal of DR. The Z8 can only shoot at best 12-bit videos.
It's not that the Z8 "cant" it's that I don't think ProRES supports 8K RAW. I don't know of a camera in this class that shoots 14-bit RAW internally, perhaps you can fill me in. Not even a FX6 does that internally. The best any competitive mirrorless Canon or Sony thus far shot was 12-bit, and not internal in most instances, not the A7S III, FX3, etc....
p.8 #9 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
lsquare wrote:
Do you also have the RX100 VII?
Don't get me wrong, it would be great if Canon took all this time and made the R5 II definitively better than any other camera out there. It seems like the Panasonic GH7 may be slightly better for video if you don't care about 8K. I suspect whenever Sony releases the A1 II, it'll be the greatest thing to come out since sliced bread.
No I don't have an RX100. I just did a Quick Look into the online help guide to check if it had zebra feature.
Yes the A1II will likely be a great camera. Probably out Feb 2025.
p.8 #10 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
RoamingScott wrote:
Not exactly true. Your shutter speed/angle in video will likely be quite different than what it would be for a still photo in the same conditions, meaning that if there's any panning or subject movement a grab wouldn't do the same trick as a dedicated still.
If someone is shooting video for the intent purpose of extracting stills then they would use the same shutter speed for video as they would for stills.
p.8 #12 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
snapsy wrote:
If someone is shooting video for the intent purpose of extracting stills then they would use the same shutter speed for video as they would for stills.
You don't seem to have a solid grasp of how non-bench, real world shooting works
p.8 #13 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
Extracting stills from video works if the video settings are set to still shutter speed but video codecs manage to reduce bandwidth by doing time compression, which means that the image quality is compromised. There is no magic.
I noticed the LR AI denoise feature restores some pixel-level "crispness" though...
What a shame. Was hoping this would be the one to finally replace my 5DSR. Z8 intrigues me, but the dynamic range is quite bad for a modern FF sensor. Can't deal with Sony ergonomics. Guess I'll stick with my OM-1 until we get a good FF offering. The R5ii was so close.
p.8 #15 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
lighthound wrote:
How is this not competitive?
A1 $6500
Z9 $5500
R5II $4300
Errr isn’t r5ii competing with z8 rather than z9. Look at the body shape. For Sony, i think Sony is stupid with the a9iii and did not have something to compete in this space
p.8 #18 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
RoamingScott wrote:
You don't seem to have a solid grasp of how non-bench, real world shooting works
If someone is shooting video for the expressed purpose of extracting stills then why would using a video shutter speed equivalent to stills have any relation or dependency on my grasp of non-bench, real-world shooting?
p.8 #19 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
HicHic wrote:
What a shame. Was hoping this would be the one to finally replace my 5DSR. Z8 intrigues me, but the dynamic range is quite bad for a modern FF sensor. Can't deal with Sony ergonomics. Guess I'll stick with my OM-1 until we get a good FF offering. The R5ii was so close.
You are aware that the DR numbers of all recent Canon bodies is not representative of the actual sensor DR, right? Canon applies noise reduction to the shadows of their raw files to boast artificially the DR number while depriving the photographer from optimizing image quality by using the best NR available software instead of having to trust in camera NR.
The actual DR of the Z8 is most probably higher than anything Canon has on offer. We just don’t know by how much. Besides the gap btwn Z8 and Z7II is around 1/3 of a stop, completely irrelevant to actual photography.
p.8 #20 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
lsquare wrote:
I like that it's lighter than the Z8! As long as the DR is competitive with the Z8 at base ISO, then I'll be satisfied.
The R5 has about a 1-stop advantage over the Z8 at base ISO; hopefully going to the stacked sensor won't decrease the DR like it did on the Nikon cameras.
Errr isn’t r5ii competing with z8 rather than z9. Look at the body shape. For Sony, i think Sony is stupid with the a9iii and did not have something to compete in this space