Canon mirrorless

Jules

I have a C200 and I can tell you its great, but the form factor doesn't suit gimbal work or when you need to be less discreet. So no, it wouldn't necessarily be worth it.

At the moment, (I think) there really are only 3 full frame cameras that can be sensibly attached to a gimbal and deliver sharp 4K footage with good autofocus.... the Canon 5D Mark IV, Canon 1DX Mark II, and the Sony A7III.

- Like the EOS R, the 5D Mark IV (which I also own) would be ok if it wasn't for the stupid crop, which takes it outside the wide angle range normally used with gimbal work.

- The 1DX II is just too damn heavy (not to say expensive).

So that leaves only the Sony A7III... which is easily the cheapest of the bunch.

Canon have the technologies, they just choose to spread them about their models.
But worst of all, there's always a 'gotcha'.   You think you have the right camera after loads of research, and suddenly you find a function that doesn't work or is handicapped in certain circumstances.

At one time I owned a C100 Mark II... great camera advertised as having face detection dual pixel autofocus.... except they didn't tell you it only worked with 3 slow / crappy zoom lenses.
All those nice prime lenses?... Nope, didn't work!
Then the waveform monitor wouldn't appear in the viewfinder... it was on the screen only!

I've stuck with them because of the lenses I own, but I'm tired of being screwed over and honestly I think the additional lens investment in a different system would pay off in the end.

I'm not alone, far from it, and Canon are losing a vast amount of good will with their constant 'crippling' that does not happen with other manufacturers.

They've become a name to poke fun at.  In the short term you can get away with it, but consumers don't stay stupid for long, and reputations spread.
No company is too big to fail, and Canon seam to be pointing in the direction of Blackberry, Nokia, Kodak etc.  Maybe it doesn't look like that's possible right now, but only fools ignore their competition.  History is a good teacher.

The decision makers at Canon should fall on their swords.

doug56hl

Thanks but I've read it and the associated posts on their forum. You may have missed I quoted from that site. I guess EOSHD is the only opinion that matters though...

Lets ignore though the positive reviews it's getting elsewhere from those to whom 4K video is not the be all and end all.
Which long and pointless post would that be? I've done so many. Did I write six posts or only five? To to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself...

If it's pointless to counter a lot of negative FUD so be it. but I can see when a glass is half full rather than half empty. If you want to believe that's brand loyalty that's up to you.

This week I 'ave mostly been writing long and pointless posts. There was me stupidly thinking this was a thread to discuss the positives and negatives of a new camera but I see it is only a thread to mention the negatives. Any mention of positive aspects is pointless and, it appears, merely indicates brand loyalty.
The R is a stills camera which, as a bonus, can do video; not a video camera which, as a bonus, can do stills. Like the 5DIV it's better suited to users for whom video capture is a secondary (rather than primary) requirement. If the R is intentionally crippled so was the 5DII, 5DIII and the 5DIV; didn't hurt their sales though...

Jules

It didn't because the competition was not as strong at the time.  Different landscape now.

Nokia failed to predict the changing landscape and became incapable of competing.

Canon are ignoring the changing landscape and will-fully not competing.  That's super dumb.

snerkler

I think Nikon might disagree with you

snerkler

I have to say that providing you don't need a lot of FPS or continuous silent shooting it actually looks like a pretty good camera (if we forget the price for a second ). Also, the lens adapter seems to work a lot better than when he tried the Nikon version on the Z7 review.

wysinawyg

I did find it a bit funny when he talks about "no viewfinder blackout" which I'm pretty sure is just that its gone into "slideshow" mode (as do the Nikons and A7s) where at the higher FPS it just stops giving you any kind of live view through the EVF and just shows the photos you've taken in succession.  Not really what I'd call an improvement over a DSLR blackout for the shutter...

Also the Northrups have a video up - they managed to get some corrupted files on the press trip thereby losing footage that might not have been the case if they'd been shooting on a Sony / Panasonic with dual recording.

snerkler

Pretty unlucky to get a card failure, and nothing to say it wasn't the actual writing to the card so he could have ended up with two cards or corrupted files Don't get me wrong, I like to have dual slots but it's pretty unlucky.

I don't know about the blackout, he did say even under single shot there was no blackout didn't he?

doug56hl

He was shooting using the mechanical shutter: 6.35 on. "Keep in mind I was using the mechanical shutter".

snerkler

Yeah, but you said that if you go into the high FPS it goes into slideshow mode, but he said whenever he used the mechanical shutter it didn't have blackout which I took to mean during single shot mode as well in which case it wouldn't go into slideshow mode?

Clearly there's something odd going off as you would expect to be able to see the shutter blackout.

doug56hl

It wasn't me that said that...