Just out of curiosity, did anyone take the challenge from my previous post about looking up the other existing options one can currently use to record full frame 8k raw video?
I highly recommend everyone do so and then report back here to see if their perspectives have changed at all about being able to do it for any amount of time on a rig that costs less that $4,000 at the R5 size and dimensions (along with IBIS, DPAF II equivalent, etc).
I'll wait.
Just a hint. You could buy a crate of R5 bodies for the equivalent amount of money and they could conversely, do a lot of things that the exorbitantly expensive gigantic dedicated rigs couldn't.
Also, I think this is a semantics/perspective issue and not so much a reliability issue as I would imagine Canon will be completely up front about recording times/overheating once definitively determined on their end.
As such, I look at it as Canon offering a body that is capable of recording full frame 8k raw video for up to 10, 15, or 20 minutes at xx degrees/specified conditions and not a camera that could potentially arbitrarily shut off/fail.
Unreliable, to me, would be if the R5 failed to do (at a minimum) what Canon states. Nothing more, nothing less.
Also, a better car analogy would be Honda producing a car for $39,000 that is advertised as being able to match what the fastest exotic sports car in the world can do at its top end but only for a fraction of the time.
Just out of curiosity, did anyone take the challenge from my previous post about looking up the other existing options one can currently use to record full frame 8k raw video?
I highly recommend everyone do so and then report back here to see if their perspectives have changed at all about being able to do it for any amount of time on a rig that costs less that $4,000 at the R5 size and dimensions (along with IBIS, DPAF II equivalent, etc).
I'll wait.
Just a hint. You could buy a crate of R5 bodies for the equivalent amount of money and they could conversely, do a lot of things that the exorbitantly expensive gigantic dedicated rigs couldn't.
Also, I think this is a semantics/perspective issue and not so much a reliability issue as I would imagine Canon will be completely up front about recording times/overheating once definitively determined on their end.
As such, I look at it as Canon offering a body that is capable of recording full frame 8k raw video for up to 10, 15, or 20 minutes at xx degrees/specified conditions and not a camera that could potentially arbitrarily shut off/fail.
Unreliable, to me, would be if the R5 failed to do (at a minimum) what Canon states. Nothing more, nothing less.
Jul 13, 2020 at 12:18 AM
Previous versions of JohnDizzo15's message #15281704 « Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6 »
