Canon EOS R5 C

[dreifish 353]

9 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

CineD results a different story:

https://www.cined.com/canon-eos-r5-c-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-latitude/[/url]

The Canon EOS R5 C shows a mixed bag in our lab test. Rolling shutter values are quite good (but not exceptional), the internally recorded Canon 12 bit Cinema RAW Light LT is super noisy – so you have to plan applying noise reduction in post.
 

Hmm, interesting additional data point. Looks like the A1 is still the one to beat for 8K image quality.. if 30p is sufficient.

 

Summary

The Canon EOS R5 C shows a mixed bag in our lab test. Rolling shutter values are quite good (but not exceptional), the internally recorded Canon 12 bit Cinema RAW Light LT is super noisy – so you have to plan applying noise reduction in post.

The internally recorded 10bit 8K H265 CLog3 (no CLog 2 available yet) shows a real improvement over the Canon EOS R5, but dynamic range is still quite average looking at the competition from Panasonic and Sony in that price bracket.

Latitude results show 7 stops, confirming the average dynamic range results. For a consumer full frame camera, 8 stops is the benchmark for now.

[Interceptor121 707]

4 hours ago, dreifish said:

Hmm, interesting additional data point. Looks like the A1 is still the one to beat for 8K image quality.. if 30p is sufficient.

 

No hardware will be able to decode 8k60fps 

This whole 8K idea is a bit too early considering the fact 4K is just now picking up and is only covered by online streaming and no broadcast

Obviously Tv is changing but the time until it becomes completely digital is very very long and anything that gets done needs to go on satellite and aerial

Phones support HDR though so we need to see who gets there first 

For me 4k60 is plenty to take and underwater output in 30p is totally fine things move slowly most times. If we talk about birds, squirrels rabbits ok even 120fps but fish is really slow in comparison

[Davide DB 414]

On 7/8/2022 at 9:57 AM, Interceptor121 said:

That is a definite mistake for the GH6 from Nauticam

The camera has the best codecs to record on card and instead no battery pack and the usual M24 big cable that makes the set up much less sturdy

I really do not understand the logic of doing a housing for a camera that is totally video orientated that is really for stills and for that reason I will not be investing in it despite I have the camera

If a manufacturer wants to have a chat with me on how to design a proper video orientated housing for the GH6 they can give me a call

I started discussions with aquatica but they too went out and made exactly the same mistake of nauticam

It is very disappointing the lack of understanding of housing manufacturers and this seems entirely to depend on who they talk to when they design a solution

So there is a battery pack for the R5C that has mediocre codecs on card but can record prores raw and then does not need the battery instead for the GH6 that has a relatively small battery pack and great codecs on card nothing

I wrote all of those things early march

https://interceptor121.com/2022/03/02/panasonic-gh6-my-preliminary-key-observations-for-underwater-use/

i totally agree with you: GH6 Nauticam housing is a total nonsense. It should have been a cinema camera housing since GH5.

I really don't understand who decide and design new products. One image says all on housing manufacturers design.

Who is the filmmaker who use a monitor underwater in this way? And this is how they thought about their product. A Babel Tower!

The harsh reality is that we are victims of photographers and WP is proof of that.

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by Davide DB

[Interceptor121 707]

2 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

i totally agree with you: GH6 Nauticam housing is a total nonsense. It should have been a cinema camera housing since GH5.

I really don't understand who decide and design new products. One image says all on housing manufacturers design.

Who is the filmmaker who use a monitor underwater in this way? And this is how they thought about their product. A Babel Tower!

The harsh reality is that we are victims of photographers and WP is proof of that.

 

I do not know

I had a long discussion on the handles that are bent forward and are useless but I was told this was the design feedback from 'experts'

I then asked why the A7S3 for example does not have handles angled forward and did not get an answer

You can of course use a longer arm and put the monitor back mounted the rig becomes elongated like a videocamera...

[Davide DB 414]

3 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

You can of course use a longer arm and put the monitor back mounted the rig becomes elongated like a videocamera...

No you can't or just partially because the cable length and bulkhead position are chosen with that design in mind

[Interceptor121 707]

No you can't or just partially because the cable length and bulkhead position are chosen with that design in mind

If the monitor has a mount top and bottom it is possible to put it behind the camera someone has done it already


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dreifish 353]

18 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

No hardware will be able to decode 8k60fps 

I can confirm that the Macbook Pro with M1 Max and 32 core GPU can play play back and edit 8k60fps Canon Cinema RAW LT footage perfectly smoothly.

I agree that 60p is fast enough for underwater footage. 120p is largely overkill. 30p is fine most of the time. As for whether 8k is needed.. no, not yet. But it's all about future-proofing stock footage for me for natural history purposes. There, 8k does indeed have value.

Btw, with custom manual white balance under a 50000 kelvin light -- A1 does produce slightly cleaner, less contrasty  files than the R5 C. Not that skin tones look great under such teal light..

File A

File B

[Interceptor121 707]

You are not going to produce those files as output of your process. You are likely to output x265 10 bits 420 with good level of compression or your files will be huge
Those output files won’t play on majority of machines out there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dreifish 353]

9 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

You are not going to produce those files as output of your process. You are likely to output x265 10 bits 420 with good level of compression or your files will be huge
Those output files won’t play on majority of machines out there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you mean 8k h.265 files in 10-bit, either 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, then yes, that's a challenging codec on most older machines. Newer generation processors and graphics cards though have dedicated decoder/encoder chips that make it manageable. Here's a good chart. You can also add M1 & M2 Macs to the list.. they actually have the fastest hardware decoders for h.265, both 4:2:2 and 4:2:0.

10 bit 4:2:0 files should play back fine on any machine from the past 3 years or so. 4:2:2 files are more troublesome. There you need a 11th or 12th generation Intel processor or an M1/M2 mac. 

Edited July 13, 2022 by dreifish

[Interceptor121 707]

2 minutes ago, dreifish said:

If you mean 8k h.265 files in 10-bit, either 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, then yes, that's a challenging codec on most older machines. Newer generation processors and graphics cards though have dedicated decoder/encoder chips that make it manageable. Here's a good chart. You can also add M1 & M2 Macs to the list.. they actually have the fastest hardware decoders for h.265, both 4:2:2 and 4:2:0.

It is a bit more complicated than this

Unless you play your file locally you will need to compress it. On wireless LAN you are looking at around 50mbps 

In order to get the file so compressed you will need to apply many settings that will fry the machine for the encode

When it comes to playback

As no laptop have 8K resolution you will look at a screen with HMDMI 2.1 currently over £3K as the bandwidth of uncompressed RGB is massive

For streaming to work reliably at 50 mbps it is also a very high requirement if you wanted to use an online service

So the only platform that will actually playback your 8K file is going to be a Tv either from USB or HDMI 2.1 or from a very strong LAN connection 

The rest of the devices will playback a scaled version of your file 

But then why exactly did you shoot 8K I guess it is my question

Today 4K works fine with Tv sets also in HDR bandwidth requirements are 15-20 mbps which is aligned to performance of most wireless LAN and internet connections

I do believe there may be a case of scaling down to 4K for delivery more pixels can help but then I am ok to have the camera doing it internally for me

[dreifish 353]

1 hour ago, Interceptor121 said:

But then why exactly did you shoot 8K I guess it is my question

I'm not shooting 8k video for personal consumption or to share with friends and family.. that's overkill. I don't have an 8k TV to display it on and no plans to purchase one in the next few years. I personally think the case for 8k resolution at standard TV sizes and viewing distances isn't really there. You're not going to notice a resolution difference between 4k and 8k sitting 10 feet away from a 65" TV. Maybe once we start getting 120" micro led TVs...

8k is for commercial work, and higher-end productions do absolutely want the higher resolution for natural history content.  Requirements are driven by commercial customers.

[dreifish 353]

On 7/6/2022 at 10:54 PM, dreifish said:

Haven't tested the power bank, but I think it's a non-issue. Reef Photo Video reports about 7 hours of run time with the power bank. Plenty to last you a full day of shooting.

For reference, the standard Canon  lp-e6nh battery is ~14 watt hours. The battery packs used in the nauticam housing are ~72wh. So you should be getting 6x the run time.

I finally got the 72WH Anker battery pack and ran some tests filming continuously in 4k60p h.265 with auto-focus continuous and face tracking enabled (with me moving around randomly throughout my work day as a target.

To no great surprise, the internal battery lasted 45 minutes. With the battery pack connected, the combined total recording time was 4 hours and 35 minutes. Just slightly over 6x. 

[Interceptor121 707]

10 hours ago, dreifish said:

I finally got the 72WH Anker battery pack and ran some tests filming continuously in 4k60p h.265 with auto-focus continuous and face tracking enabled (with me moving around randomly throughout my work day as a target.

To no great surprise, the internal battery lasted 45 minutes. With the battery pack connected, the combined total recording time was 4 hours and 35 minutes. Just slightly over 6x. 

I replied on your other thread

The internal battery appears to do a really poor job

Now Nauticam should consider a complete redesign of their GH6 housing to have the battery pack as I said since day 1 and then we have options as frankly not everyone needs a full frame camera and almost nobody needs 8K

[Davide DB 414]

I saw this test/comparison of R5 vs R5C.

Demo reels contains artifacts and are incredibly noisy. I would never buy a camera seeing those clips.

https://www.backscatter.com/reviews/post/Canon-EOS-R5-vs-R5C-Underwater-Review

@dreifish give me your opinion.

I know for sure these camera are better than that

Edited December 10, 2022 by Davide DB

[dreifish 353]

Hi Davide,

Which of the dome reels specifically did you think had a lot of noise? I didn't notice on quick scan through the backscatter review, and it wasn't mentioned as an issue in the text (which I thought was pretty fair overall in its observations and conclusions).

In my personal experience, the only codec that is noisy is the Raw codec, if and there if shooting above ISO800. I haven't tried applying noise reduction to know how well it cleans up, but straight out of camera with WB adjustments, raw is noisy. More noisy than the A1 h265 codecs (or the internal R5C h265 codecs, which are slightly noisier than the A1 in my view).

Andrei

[Davide DB 414]

The last two reels. Colors are amazing but a lot of noise. Really too much IMHO.

Yes several reviews states that RAW is noisy but I didn't think was so much.

The video seems not shot in RAW actually

[Davide DB 414]

2 hours ago, dreifish said:

 

In my personal experience, the only codec that is noisy is the Raw codec, if and there if shooting above ISO800. I haven't tried applying noise reduction to know how well it cleans up, but straight out of camera with WB adjustments, raw is noisy. More noisy than the A1 h265 codecs (or the internal R5C h265 codecs, which are slightly noisier than the A1 in my view).

Andrei

Do you have some clip online?

How is the trim of the housing?

[John Doe II 16]

Super interesting thread and details here on the 5C. This thread will be a reference to this camera underwater for years to come.

 

 I've just picked up the 1DC in unmarked condition with 2000 shutter clicks - like new and had a Seacam 1DC housing refurbished from the factory. The 1DC @ 4K : 422 has incredible colour rendering. But it seems like this setup is light years away from the 5DC. I also have a C200 housing but no cam yet - on the hunt for a good one. Looking at all the 5C stuff in this thread and online it seems like I have gone the right way - down the Canon rabbit hole for underwater.

For a while there it seemed like Canon had lost its way but they are back with a vengeance with the 5C. Its incredible how fast things are moving with video capture.  

 

[dreifish 353]

On 12/13/2022 at 8:25 AM, Davide DB said:

The last two reels. Colors are amazing but a lot of noise. Really too much IMHO.

Yes several reviews states that RAW is noisy but I didn't think was so much.

The video seems not shot in RAW actually

Hi Davide,

Did you mean this one from the R5C? I didn't really see much noise in it to be honest..

 

 

[Davide DB 414]

1 hour ago, dreifish said:

Hi Davide,

Did you mean this one from the R5C? I didn't really see much noise in it to be honest..

 

 

Seeing on a 4K monitor I see a lot of noise at 18" on the blue background on the left side. But maybe it's a crop.

Anyway.... Maybe it's me but I don't want to pass as a pixel peeper because I'm all the opposite 

I have seen other land videos and the quality is very high.
Perhaps, "having the budget" (I repeat: having the budget) and doing only video, I would go for the C70 which has the DGO sensor and for the deep Mediterranean would be a killer feature.
However, very personal consideration, when I watch these videos, as well as many others posted here or on Youtube, at first I am amazed but then a feeling of puzzlement always rises up.
The environment and water conditions are totally different from the Mediterranean where I dive and make videos every week. In Tuscany and Campania, where I dive mostly, in summer we have viz exceeding 30m. But it's hard to make comparisons because I have seen footage in a few meters of water, made with even more expensive systems not achieve anything like that here in our waters.
Last but not least, you also have to evaluate the skill of the operator and the person doing the post production (often but not always the same person).

P.S.

How did you trim your housing?

[Taylor 1]

Hi Davide,

I see the noise that you're talking about on that specific shot. The rest looks pretty clean. Maybe something was off with his settings on that specific shot and tried to recover it in post? It's hard to say.

I have a full R5c setup that I broke in on my Alor trip last October. After getting used to the camera, housing, WACP 1 and Canon EF 28-70mm f3.5-4.5 II lens, I can say that the camera can produce some beautiful video. I shot the entire trip exclusively in 8k/60 RAW.

As far as noise goes with the RAW, it's pretty clean if your shooting it with the correct settings and keeping your ISO on or near the base ISOs. I mostly shot at 800.

I've not seen a reason to even use noise reduction on most of the footage I shot.

I'll post some clips when I get a chance.

 

[Davide DB 414]

1 hour ago, Taylor said:

I'll post some clips when I get a chance

Looking forward to see some clips.

This along the C70 are the only two cameras caught my attention lately.

[dreifish 353]

On 12/16/2022 at 1:53 PM, Davide DB said:

Seeing on a 4K monitor I see a lot of noise at 18" on the blue background on the left side. But maybe it's a crop.

Anyway.... Maybe it's me but I don't want to pass as a pixel peeper because I'm all the opposite 

Just watched the video again on my 32" 4k monitor. The only place I see noise in the blue background on the left side is the macro shot at 0:15 seconds. My guess is that it's a macro shot at a tight aperture, meaning the ISO is probably higher.. 1600 or 3200? Even so, the noise is not particularly bad in my view.

In my own experience, shooting mostly at or below ISO 800, noise is fine even in RAW.

[Davide DB 414]

Still looking for underwater video shot with this camera