What do you get when you take
an excellent photo camera, add important improvements
to the video functionality over the previous release,
and then market it terribly focusing on novelty features
that don't perform reliably? You get the Canon EOS R5 and,
to a lesser extent, the R6. Let's get undone. [offbeat music] ♪ Gerald Undone ♪ ♪ He's crazy ♪ What's happening, everybody? I'm Gerald Undone, and
you're now manually breathing. Alright, this video's gonna be a
little different than my others. I want to focus on
the user here and make sure the right people
are buying these cameras, because for the correct
customers, these cameras give a wonderful result
and handling experience. But for the wrong customer,
they're incredibly frustrating, borderline useless devices. And I blame a lot of this
on the initial marketing and the specs that were
highlighted early. But before we get into that,
a couple of disclosures. First off, these are
full production cameras. And they were
lent to me by Canon just for the duration
of this review. I also borrowed
some accoutrements from Camera Canada
to help with my review. That's a retailer that I highly
recommend if you're Canadian and looking for some Canon gear. This video is not
endorsed by Canon, and they do not get
to see it before I publish. However, this video does have
a sponsor, Storyblocks. But rather than just cut
to a normal sponsor read, let's record it
on these cameras so we can see how they sound. [light scratching sound] Have you ever found
yourself in a situation where you could really use some
footage but shooting it yourself was either budgetarily
or logistically unfeasible? Well, Storyblocks
has you covered with an impressive collection
of stock footage covering a wide range
of subjects with unlimited downloads
and 4K video. They're also amply supplied
with backgrounds, overlays, and after effects
templates and the interface is easy to use and navigate
and the clips are royalty-free for both personal
and commercial use, so you can use them as much
as you want, wherever you want. So, if you think you could take
advantage of a fantastic library of quality stock footage
and effects, check out Storyblocks
using the link in the description below. OK, so let's start with
what these cameras are not and then move into
what they do extremely well. These are not video
production workhorses. At least not in any
of the exciting new modes. Armando Ferreira made
a great video about this, but basically, do not buy
this camera thinking you're getting
an 8K video camera. Not only is the storage and
post production not optimized for that on this camera,
but it'll quickly overheat and then become increasingly
difficult to use. I've spent nearly 40 hours thoroughly testing
the record times in each mode on both
the R5 and the R6 to see how long they last
before overheating. Feel free to pause the video
here to examine this table but this only tells part
of the story. First off, one thing
I'm quite pleased with is how accurate Canon
was when they released their own overheating table. It's pretty similar
to the results I got when in a similar environment
to their testing. But it's also the same as when
I did my tests in a 16°C room and when I did them in
a 32°C outdoor environment. So, I like how consistent
the camera is in this regard and that it doesn't seem to be
impacted by ambient temperature much, but that also
leads to its biggest flaw. You can't improve
your cool-down times. I've tried taking the lens off,
memory cards out, battery out, leaving all the ports open and
blowing an air conditioner on it at full blast and it still took
two hours to recover completely. So, there's nothing you're
going to be able to do on set to get your precious record
minutes back other than to wait. And that can mean
upwards of 20 minutes, just to get a few minutes
of record time back in the oversampled
or high frame rate modes. And I did this test on a tripod,
on a metal slab, with a battery grip on the
camera, using a dummy battery, and also even without
having a lens installed and nothing made
a noticeable difference. And this problem persists beyond
just internal recording. If you record externally to an
Atomos, you'll extend your time by about 50%, but it will
still shut down to overheating even if you turn on every single power saving feature
on the camera. And, the same is even true if you're just taking
pictures with the camera. If you like to mix
some photo and video, make sure you do
the video first, because after you've shot photos
for about an hour, you'll likely be unable
to shoot any of the oversampled or high frame rate video because the camera builds up
heat just from being on. Now, there was one surprising but positive result
to my testing. On the R5, the 4K60
full readout mode didn't overheat
when recorded externally. So this is good news
for people who do long-form 60p content like
live streaming or event work. The R6, however,
cannot make the same claim as all of its 4K60 modes
are heat-limited. The R6 can be used
externally at 4K24, though, without overheating issues. This will give you a nice
5.1K oversampled image as well, making it the best
choice for unencumbered 24p video recording. Also, I should specify that
these results are the same if you switch to PAL timings, so 25, 30p and 24p
are all the same, and then 50p and 60p
are the same as well. Now, the R5's non-HQ modes
do not overheat internally or externally,
except for the 4K60, which is heat-limited
internally, but be mindful of the 4K60
crop mode on the R5. Activating the crop on the R5 takes you out of the
full-frame line skipped mode and puts you into a 5.1K
oversample mode with a crop, so you get similar image
fidelity to the R6 unless your record times
are lowered in 4K60 with a crop. The R5 can also do 4K24 in that
5.1K cropped, oversampled mode without overheating issues, but considering that the camera
costs a lot more than the R6, and to get that result, you need
to switch to an APS-C crop, it seems like the worse option compared to shooting
full-frame externally on the R6. Also, let's talk a bit
about that non-HQ line skipped option on the R5. From what I can gather,
it's not truly line skipped, but it also isn't a nice
pixel binned readout either. It's some new
combination of the two with a very subtle AA filter. When I first read that,
I thought, why would you put an AA filter
on a 45 megapixel camera? Seems like a good way
to make your photos worse right out the gate. Luckily, it didn't
ruin the photo mode and the camera produces
incredibly sharp images, but you can definitely see
why they included the AA filter when you look at
the line skipped video. It's better than some
of the line skipping we've seen in the past and it's a little
better than the EOS R as well, but it's not perfect. It's noticeably softer
than the 4KHQ or even the 5.1K
oversampled mode. It also suffers from
issues we'd normally see with line skipping,
like increased noise and reduced clarity in areas
with tight patterns resulting in moiré, stair-stepping
and unwanted artifacts. And I found, when I
compared it to the a7S III, that the line skipped Canon
was noticeably softer than even your basic 1:1 4K
readout on the Sony and substantially softer
than the 5.1K modes on the R6, which unfortunately means that
the only camera from Canon that has unlimited
4K60 externally, the R5, is also the camera
with the worst 4K60 image. Now, as Armando illustrated,
if you have a scene that's free of problem areas, you can
pull off some very nice shots even when shooting in
this line skipped mode, but it's certainly not
as versatile and not something you'd want to pay big money
for in a video camera. Then, there's also
the issue of dynamic range. It's not great, but again,
surprisingly consistent, and pretty much every mode
on both of these cameras, the best you can get
is around 11 stops, and that's only
when using C-Log. This score places it below
most cameras you could consider competition-
the Blackmagic Pocket, Fuji XT3 and XT4,
Sony a7 III, etc. In fact, it's pretty much the
same dynamic range as the EOS R, which wasn't very good and it's
vastly below the dynamic range of something
I'd brand as a video camera, like the C300 and C500,
or even the new Sony a7S III, which all get you closer
to 13 clean stops, and we're not talking about
visible stops or advertised stops,
but actually measured, usably clean stops. Now, the reason why these
results are so consistent on these Canons
is because of Canon Log 1. That log curve
is limited in dynamic range right out the gate. I've heard rumours
of Canon possibly adding CLog3 to these cameras,
so I decided to test out some theoretical advantages
we could see with that. First, I shot 8K raw
on the R5, which can be changed
to CLog3 in post. Doing that gained
about 2/3rd of a stop which brought it more in line with those other mirrorless
cameras I mentioned earlier. Then, I took some raw photos,
which have more dynamic range than CLog and attempted
to create a few curves that I thought would
give us some conservative projections for possible
video dynamic range based on CLog2
and CLog3 curves. I got around the high-11s
to eventually 12 stops flat with one of my tests. So, while we currently have
mediocre dynamic range, it's possible we could achieve
a noticeably better result if Canon put some better
profiles on these cameras. Another area where the 8K
and 4K HQ modes suffer is in rolling shutter. Now, to be honest,
it's not terrible even in 8K. Again, it's definitely
worse than what you'd want from a workhorse video camera,
but it's noticeably better than the older Sony a7 III, which has problematic
rolling shutter. But, you do see
an improvement when cropping or switching
to the line skipped modes. You get results closer to,
but not quite as good as, the Sony a7S III
which is decent and above the threshold
of concern in my opinion. And since we're
comparing cameras, it's important to realize
that overheating, in and of itself,
isn't the issue. Other cameras overheat. I've seen videos showing
the a7S III overheat in certain conditions as well. I couldn't get
my Sony sample to overheat doing the same tests
I did on the Canon, despite trying
for hours and hours to get the Sony to overheat, but again,
that's not the key issue here. The big issue is recovery times. I don't want people to see my
table of record times and say, "I'm fine, I only need to record
ten minutes at a time anyway." You need to keep in mind
that on other cameras, you can turn it off
for a couple of minutes, and then you're back
in business. On the Canons, even if you
turn it off for 20 minutes, you likely won't get
your ten minutes back and you'll look like a complete
fool if you have a client, a team or talent waiting
for your camera to cool off for 30-40 minute periods. And also, consider setting
up shots, the only way to get these cameras to cool down
is to have them off. That means no framing
up the next shot, no checking focus, no monitor to check
for blocking, nothing. You can't do anything between
recordings, just sit and wait. Or, switch to one
of the non-oversampled, non-high frame rate modes
that aren't limited by heat, but keep in mind that
switching to those modes will not help you recover
from overheating. You're still going to need
to turn the camera off to use 4KHQ again. So, you can immediately switch to the line skipped mode
and start rolling again, but you never will be able
to switch back to 4KHQ unless you turn the camera off
for, like, half an hour. Okay, hopefully I've driven
that point home well enough. I just don't want
anybody spending money for the wrong reasons. I think, in the marketing
for these cameras, too much emphasis was put on
how many Ks they have or how many megapixels,
and this is something we on social media
need to do better to manage our
excitement for as well. As we've seen with the R5, 8K doesn't necessarily
mean anything good. There's phones that do 8K,
and they look like garbage, and ARRI teaches us that
resolution isn't everything. It's disappointing
how many responses I saw on the Sony a7S III
focused on 12 megapixels, or as The Verge obtusely put it,
"A camera that doesn't do 8K." Those numbers mean very little
when it comes to image quality and performance
and we need to remember that when companies push products
so that we can reward the features that do matter. Otherwise, they're going
to keep trying to drive sales by making unstable cameras
with too much resolution. Now, let's shift gears
to some lesser talked about aspects that Canon has done
right on these cameras. If you think of these
cameras from the perspective of a customer who already has
Canon Glass and is looking for an upgrade over the EOS R,
these cameras have you covered. Unlike the EOS R,
these now shoot full-frame 4K with slightly better detail
in line skipped modes and without that
absurd 1.8 times crop. They now have Zebras and better
ergonomics by bringing back the joystick in place
of that annoying Touch Bar. The rear dial is now
a proper wheel, like classic Canon,
instead of a D-pad and the buttons
are easy to reach with smaller thumb movements. And the autofocus
is a lot better. The EOS R only had the option to turn the video autofocus
on or off and the detection algorithm
often misidentified objects and it wasn't too sticky. Well, the R5 and R6 have way
better face and eye detection that is very reliable
and you can now also control the speed and responsiveness
to a similar degree as you can on the C300 Mark III
and C500 Mark II, which is incredibly useful
if you rely on autofocus. Collectively, these are
huge upgrades to the EOS R and these are what Canon
should have been focusing on. They're not perfect, of course. There's a bunch of things
that I think still needs work, for example, the 4K120 Mode
on the R5 is half-baked. It's only available
as in-camera slow motion, and you can't change
the sub-frame rate. It'll only produce a 30p 25%
speed file with no sound, but it does have autofocus,
which is nice. The white balance tool
is still abysmal. The only way to set a custom
white balance for these in video is to switch
the camera to photo mode, take a picture of your target,
then switch back to video to scan the image and
apply the custom white balance. And since white balance
is so crucial to getting a good image, this desperately needs
an update. You can still
only see your remaining battery life percentage by going
to a specific page in the menu. I'd much rather see this
right beside the battery icon. Speaking of battery life,
I've actually gotten completely different experiences
out of these two cameras. On the R6, I've been
getting about an hour and 45 minutes of 4K24 on full
charge with the new batteries, but disappointing performance
from the USB-C port. You can use it
to charge the batteries, but using it to keep
the battery charged while running
is not very effective. It does extend your runtime
but I was still losing about 20% battery life
every 30 minutes. On the R5, not only was
the battery life better out of the gate,
giving me just over two hours on a full charge,
which was surprising considering it has higher
resolution displays, the top LCD and more intense
recording modes, but the USB-C performance
was stellar. I only lost 1% battery
after an hour with USB-C power delivery
connected to the R5. Now, I'm not sure
if my R6 is defective, but I made sure every setting
in the menu was identical and again, these are both
full production cameras. Also, neither camera can run
on just USB power alone. I wasn't expecting them to, but you guys often ask me
about that in the comments. They still need
the batteries installed, but I'm happy to report
that using USB-C does not seem to negatively
impact your overheating times in any noticeable way. Another minor disappointment
was the new IBIS system. Now, I will admit that it works
really well for photos and I'd much rather have it in its
current form than have nothing like in the EOS R, but there
are some quirks to work out. Most people already know that
it has a warpy-wobbly problem in the corners, but you should
also be careful to turn it off when using a tripod,
or possibly even a gimbal. Something I noticed is that
when you change record modes, power cycle the camera
or even open the card door, the IBIS will shift
the image in a way that can actually
kill your framing or possibly even rotate your image
to unlevel your horizon. And, control over
this function is limited when using an RF lens
with stabilization because the camera removes
the menu option and instead diverts control
to the lens selector switch which is not sufficient
in choosing the best stabilization method
for the job at hand. I think they might be adding
this option in firmware, so hopefully
that addresses that. Again, I'd rather
have IBIS than no IBIS and this is still an important
upgrade over the EOS R, but I just think there's some
growing pains to work out before I can be too excited
about this feature. But, I still really
enjoy manually focusing with these Canon cameras. You have the option
to make your RF lenses linear in response and Canon's
focus guide is terrific. Now, I don't want to talk
too much about colour, because one,
I'm someone who thinks that "Canon colour science" is
one of the most misunderstood and overhyped terms
in this game, but also,
colour is so subjective that it's borderline
pointless to review. All we can ever truly
evaluate is accuracy, not what you might find
personally pleasing. That being said, some
of the full contrast profiles on these Canon cameras
are not very colour accurate, so if you want the best colour you can get out
of these cameras, choose Log and then
set the matrix to Neutral. If you do this,
there's a lot provided by Canon that you can download
from the EOS R support page that will give you
extremely accurate colour with nice gradations and your
final result will look better now that these cameras
can do 10-bit internal when shooting log; another way that they're
a major upgrade over the EOS R. So basically,
don't shoot Canon standard or something similar
if you don't have to. It's 8-bit
with inaccurate colour. Shoot Canon log
with a neutral matrix for 10-bit with good colour. And now,
with two sets of zebras, it's quite easy to expose
your Canon log on these cameras versus the EOS R as well. You can place
one set of Zebras at 95%, which is a good
clipping point indicator for overexposure with Canon log
and set the other to 35% +/-5 to help expose
for middle grey. The last aspect of image quality
I want to touch on is noise. Both of these cameras
very usable and improved over the EOS R, but it'll
depend on which mode you're in. The oversampled images
have better noise performance than the non-oversampled modes, so the modes that don't overheat
have worse noise, but I still think
you can get up to ISO 6400 without much concern. However, even though
the distance is probably smaller than people would have hoped, the R6 is a bit cleaner
than the R5 when comparing their
corresponding oversampled modes, but the R5 is a tad sharper, unless you put the R5
in cropped mode, in which case it matches the R6 except for the fact
that it's cropped. So, I'd say the sweet spot
on these cameras is that 5.1K oversampled mode
which balances a detailed image with a good signal-to-noise
ratio and allowing for unlimited external recording
in certain frame rates. Now, I want to focus
a bit more on the internal and external file acquisition. Something that might seem
like an advantage over the EOS R is that these cameras
now have dual card slots and for photography,
it certainly is an advantage. You can write to both cards
simultaneously for backup, but you can't do this in video. You can't do it on the R5
even when recording in a mode that both cards
are fast enough for and you can't do it on the R6 even though
both card slots are the same. You also can't record
both internally and externally at the same time on the R6,
but you can on the R5, but there are some things to be
mindful of when doing this. There's two HDMI output options. You can either put everything
on the external display including menus
and onscreen info or you can keep your LCD going
and just put out a clean feed to the external recorder. Doing the clean feed route disables the overheat control
function because it assumes you want to capture the highest
quality image possible, but this makes the camera
heat up faster. And, if you press
Menu on the camera, the menu still shows up
on the external clean feed. This makes no sense. This means you could
potentially ruin your take if you accidentally
press menu on the camera, because it will replace
your subject with a big, fat menu screen
in the external recording. And, when recording internally,
these cameras still have that 30 minute time limit even though
I though the taxation or law that required
that has been abolished and that shouldn't be
on new cameras, maybe I'm mistaken
on that, though? But either way, 30 minute
record limits are lame. So, effectively,
these cameras are still single card slot cameras
for video and they still have the 30 minute limit
when recording internally. And the advantage
I mentioned earlier about Log giving you
10-bit internally, unfortunately forces you to use
H.265 even if shooting ALL-I, which means you're going
to require transcoding, because editing these files
is not smooth at all, which is disappointing because
one of the main advantages of All-Intra codecs
is smoother editing performance. I also hate that the very act
of opening the card door seems to turn off the camera, so relay recording
is not an option, and as I mentioned earlier,
depending on your settings, opening the card door
can change your focus, move your IBIS around and even shut off
your external recording. But something that I get
asked about a lot when it comes to codecs,
All-Intra, internal vs. external, etc. is
is there a quality difference? The answer is no. Up to 4K60, it doesn't really
matter whether you record internally or externally
or whether you choose IPB or ALL-I,
you're going to get pretty much exactly the same dynamic range,
colour, noise and sharpness. The only time it changes is
if you change from oversampled to not or to cropped,
as we mentioned earlier. There's also two little
bug reports that I want to make. The first one is that
my clock doesn't seem to work correctly on the R5. The recording time
in metadata always seems to be one hour ahead
of my camera clock. I've tried changing time zones, turning daylight savings time
on and off, it doesn't seem to matter. The second one is that
sometimes my ISO changes when swapping batteries. This is weird and intermittent
but perhaps Canon can try and reproduce it
and fix it in future firmware. Something quirky I really like
about these cameras, though, is that you can set your f-stop
adjustment to smaller increments down to 1/8th stops
and then you can assign that to be your lens control ring
on the RF lenses which really makes it feel
like you have a precision iris adjustment
like on a cine lens. The only drawback is that
these control rings are clicked, but apparently Canon offers
a service to declick that ring for you if you want, so you
really could get a smooth, precise iris control
on these RF lenses. Fun feature. Now, when it comes to audio,
while it's annoying that Canon doesn't offer any kind of XLR
module for these cameras, I do like that they've included
a built-in attenuator that allows me to feed the line-level
signal from my Zoom F6 right into the camera
which is what you heard during the Storyblocks segment
at the beginning of the video. I think in terms
of mirrorless camera preamps, it offers a good,
clean sound and I like that
it offers uncompressed, linear PCM
as a recording option. My only gripe would be that
when monitoring with headphones, I don't like how it mutes
and unmutes the headphones as you navigate the different
sections of the menu. I'd prefer that they
just kept the headphones monitoring the entire time. It would be more useful and less
jarring when they turn back on. But, both cameras have a mic and
a headphone jack and overall, I'm happy with the audio quality
and functionality. Okay, regarding photography,
these days I don't fancy myself much of a photographer,
but it wasn't that long ago my partner and I ran a sports
photography business that used Canon cameras. I can tell you this. Having either of these
cameras then would have been
an absolute dream. I literally have nothing
to say about these cameras from a photographic
capability standpoint. And, as someone who naturally
finds problems with everything, take that to mean
the highest praise. The R5 easily trades
blows with the Sony a7R IV, which I called the best
photo camera for the money. These Canons are fun to use,
offer great handling, have terrific lenses,
focus reliably. They're just fantastic. When the EOS R came out, you had a decision to make
between it and the 5D Mark IV and in many ways,
the DSLR was better. With these two cameras, there's
no decision to make anymore. They're better than the EOS R
and they're better than pretty much
every other Canon camera, save for maybe
the 1DX Mark III, but it looks like the R6 might
even be using the same sensor as the 1DX Mark III, so you really are
getting Canon's best here. Of course, if you're
all about photography and can afford
the bigger price tag, the R5 is the better camera. It drives just
as fast as the R6 but with more detailed images, a nicer LCD screen and
a higher resolution Viewfinder and a lot of the complaints
that I made about video don't carry over
when you toggle to photo mode. Now, you do have two card slots. Now, your IBIS is very good. I was getting four to five
stops of improvements on an 85mm manual lens
and although taking photo affects your video
record time due to heat, I couldn't get
the camera to overheat while in photo mode. So, I don't think
that will be an issue even if you firing high bursts
for long durations. Okay, so when you put
all of this together, I think it paints a clear
picture of how these cameras should have been positioned
and who should buy them. If you have Canon Glass
and you want a quality mirrorless body for photography,
buy these cameras. If you have the money,
buy the R5 specifically but don't be worried about
the R6, it's great too. Are you a hybrid Canon shooter? And you're happy
with the quality of the EOS R, you just wish
it wasn't cropped in 4K and had more refined controls
for video or 10-bit colour? Buy these cameras. They fix all of your concerns. Are you mainly video focused
but prefer to stick with Canon and just want a nice 24p, 4K image without time
or heat limitations? Get the R6
with an Atomos Ninja V. You can record oversampled 4K
up to 30fps without limits. If, however, you need
unlimited 4K up to 60fps and still want
to stick with Canon, and you don't care
if the image is line skipped, get the R5
with an Atomos Ninja V. You can record the regular
4K on that camera up to 4K60
without limits externally. Do you need 8K? Do not buy these cameras. Do you need high quality 4K without limit
at high frame rates? Do not buy these cameras. Do you need a video camera that can excel without
an external recorder? Do not buy these cameras. And is dynamic range
more important to you than resolution or ergonomics? Do not buy these cameras. For the last three points, I would recommend either
a Canon cinema camera like the C300 Mark III
or C500 Mark II or the Sony a7S III. In the end, I don't really
care which brand you go with or what camera you buy
as long as you're happy with it. What I do care about is you
buying the wrong camera because of bad marketing
wasting your hard-earned money and feeling stuck in a system
that isn't doing what you need, and so I hope this video helps prevent that
from happening to you. But that's
going to be it for me. I hope you found
this video entertaining or at least helpful.
And if you did, make sure you
leave it the old thumbs up and consider subscribing
if you haven't already. But if you did not find this
video helpful or entertaining, try setting
the playback speed to 75%. Alright... I'm done.
How is the weather sealing on the R6? I read that it's similar to the 6DM2, but what does that mean? What can I expect from it? Can I for example use it in heavy rain? Snow? Or can I read about somewhere (didn't find anything specific on google).
A very thorough video and I appreciate the comments made around the 09:20 mark where Canon marketing has been terrible.
Canon imaging profits are down, what is their response?
Raise prices/increase margins
Increase competitive features
For the last several years I feel Canon has skated the edge of acceptable marketing techniques in promoting their cameras to consumers while simultaneously raising the pricing to an extreme level versus what usable features buyers actually get.
Examples:
Canon 200D / SL2 as a 4K camera while nesting the actual heavy crop "Make 4K movie magic. In addition to Full HD (60p or 30p selectable) and HD (30p), you can create stunning 4K movies u/25p" and 4K time lapses with the EOS 200D Mark II."
Canon 6DMkII with wide autofocus coverage when in reality it is very limited through the OVF "Focus on what matters. The advanced 45 point all cross-type auto focus system with wide coverage helps you pin point the exact part of the frame you wish to focus on". Interestingly, the highest price I could find for the 6DMkII was $1999 on Oct 04, 2018 and within one and a half years it had dropped to $1199 by April, 2020.
For the R5, Canon has reached a new milestone on their release price AUD$6588 in Australia. This is significantly higher than any prior Canon mirrorless camera. The features are flagship grade by Canon standards.
Where did they go wrong? Why the controversy? By hyping the 8K features as the headline of their marketing it has become a recurring theme of style over substance with each new product release.
Canon marketing, ambassadors, leaks, pre production reviews were all about how wonderful and first in the 8K feature is most did not mention or glossed over the overheating limitations. The fact that you could be using this camera for a day shoot for both stills and video in warm weather and the former would have an affect on the duration of the latter. The long, long cool down periods between each shoot. The impact of overheating on stills or video quality.
"Oh, it's not a professional 4K/8K video camera and if you are shooting such you should be paying for a cinema camera that costs a lot more". This does not matter. Canon deserves the critical reviews they are currently receiving for heavily marketing the camera the way they are. Production reviews are now informing whether there are limitations or not, is this a usable 8K/4K camera or just a very good (and higher priced) stills camera. I find the backlash against reviewers investigating the performance to be laughable and anti-consumer at the same time.
"Canon has been forthright in their 8K limitations". The specifications were nested in the documentation, not advertising material. Controlled room environment does not equal actual real world usage.
I have no issue with Canon increasing pricing. All camera manufacturers will have to do so to survive in a shrinking market. Where I take issue is bad marketing that hype catchy, headline features to justify price increases to consumers.
Nice review