Men, I was looking at your content and is clear to me that you deserve more subscribers, good job!

@AshvonChamier

Жыл бұрын

Much appreciated.

Hey Love that you took the R into the tests🤙🏼 thx 😉

@AshvonChamier

2 жыл бұрын

You got it! Yeah, was curious to see how it stacked up and it can still hold up pretty darn well. In a more forgiving outdoor scenario or in a controlled lighting situation, the original R can still match to either camera very well. But no doubt, the new R5 C is continually impressing me. I did not expect it to grade out better than the RED. More test will have to be explored.

I just realised that the R5C RAW has a bit too much gain in the RED channel and the blue channel is pulled down, adding that reddish/yellowish hue to the image.

@AshvonChamier

4 ай бұрын

It could just be how I test graded it. Not sure. Also did not black balance before this test and the temperature was HOT outside that day!!! Definitely different from the my indoor studio I brought it out from.

@shueibdahir

4 ай бұрын

@@AshvonChamier oh so you did grade it? Even tho you did grade it still seems to look like what I said. If you compare the R5C RAW to 5D mark III raw video you'll immediately notice what i'm talking. The r5c has bad color accuracy

Super helpful tests! I've never even used RAW on my R5C. I thought the XF-AVC was mainly the way to go. Will have to give it a shot and see.

@AshvonChamier

Жыл бұрын

The XF-AVC is super impressive. But man, the RAW when given some good lighting, it's got a magic, depth, and color flexibility that makes me smile every time I go to grade.

R5c kills it. Just a great image. I have an R5c and 2 C70s. The more I shoot and the more I from other creatives the happier I am with my choices. There’s a lot to choose from nowadays so being happy with what you picked is a blessing. The battery was the only disappointment with the R5c and that’s an easy workaround. Good work bud. Oh, and I have an eosr too. Funny. Dependable.

@AshvonChamier

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed! R5C is just continuing to impress me. C70 is a great cam I had my eye on for a long time. Just worked out were the R5Cs bump in resolution and image, just couldn't resist adding one to my odd camera family. I also have some old sonys that still prove to be super powerful with the Odyssey 7Q recorder. That BEACH SHOT ("Dariya") in this video was the FS700 w/ the 7Q recorder in 4K RAW. Still love that camera too. Insane something so old still competes. The R is has been a great little B-Cam for me on many shoots.

@bobby.palacios

8 ай бұрын

100% today any camera will be a good camera. It just comes down to personal preference and what specific features work best for you.

Am I seeing crop from Eos R5C fx avc 4k? At 8k it seems wider.

@romankuhler

2 жыл бұрын

Check out earlier videos😉👍 there he shows the crop with and without digital IS, 8K and so on😉

@AshvonChamier

2 жыл бұрын

Roman is pointing you in the right direction of the unexpected journey I went on trying to figure out why my 4K XF-AVC was cropping the FULL FRAME image. I had DIGITAL IMAGAGE STABILIZATION ON. Had no idea it was cropping in that much till a video I made after having already filmed this one. Here is the direct link if curious to see examples of Digital IS on and off. Canon R5C Digital IS Has Crazy Huge Crop (Beware) kzread.info/dash/bejne/c6CJs8WMmcTHoc4.html&t

@AshvonChamier

2 жыл бұрын

@@romankuhler THANKS!

@manojkvarma_films

Жыл бұрын

@@AshvonChamier you are so much underrated just dont forget that we all love and wait to watch yur vids from Around the Globe -luv from india

Hey Ash, really enjoying your R5c content! I've been shooting on it this past week and had to record a continuous walk through a woods similar to your background here. In general how are you exposing your footage? Are you preserving the highlights and lifting shadows in post? I found I over-exposed at times. The walk through the forest was tough as there were really dark spots and really bright spots.

@AshvonChamier

2 жыл бұрын

Great to hear! Thanks! Well, the woods truly are the hardest dynamic range situation you can put a camera through. At mid-day, there is inevitably going to be some clipping somewhere. I too have found I consistently seem to be OVER-EXPOSING slightly. It has not necessarily been intentional. The monitor on the R5C when judging by eye can be a bit deceiving as it is just not that bright. I just got a PORTKEYS 5.5 LCD I will be testing with the camera. MUCH BRIGHTER. As a general rule of thumb, Canon has always been a "Film slightly underexposed and bring shadows back up in post" camera brand due to it's smaller window of dynamic range. But through this test and more shooting situations I have been in, even since having posted this video, the R5 C just really handles the highlights well, even when clipping. There is more experimenting I need to do with underexposing to decide if I officially think over-exposing a bit is the right way to go for this camera. What I will say though is that the ONLY WAY TO REALLY GET THE MAXIMUM DYNAMIC RANGE out of your image is going to be some color correction decisions in post where you bring down highlights, boost shadows, then add back some contrast, and then do a second pass where you create masks around your subject and either bring their exposure back up some or invert the mask and take the exposure of the surrounding environment down a bit more. Do some really large feathering on the masking to sell the look as feeling naturally shot. But individual adjustments on some key SECTIONS of the image is the game changer rather than adjusting the entire image as a whole with every move. You don't have to do that, but that is the only way to see how much dynamic range you can squeeze out of the data/image your R5 C has captured. Or any camera for that matter. The RAW seems to have an additional full stop of DR over the XF-AVC as well.

@alankennedy5236

2 жыл бұрын

​@@AshvonChamier Appreciate the detailed reply Ash! Like you, I'm working in Premiere at the minute. I found the AMIRA_Default log to rec709 the best base for now but will try a few more external luts in time - but want to see what I can eek out first. I'm with you on the LCD display, it proved difficult to really guage what I was getting in camera (on a sunny day) but was also concerned with how the autofocus was working at the same time having had so little time to prep before shooting. I'd be interested to see how you find the monitor. But from the day I think preserving the highlights worked best for me when NOT in extreme dynamic range conditions, like what you said about Canons. The image did get a bit crushed when, say, there was an opening of sky but the majority of the image / details were in the shade, so had pushed it probably too far the other way. Then you find those "happy medium" type shots (dynamic range) where you think "actually the image is lovely here!". Another thing I'm finding is on shots that were slightly overexposed, if you pull down the highlights too much you start to increase the saturation / contrast in an unpleasant way on certain colours, specifiaclly red/pinks (in my case) but a shot similar with maybe a stop less light you get away with it. There seems to be a middle ground that gets you to where you want to be. I'm enjoying shooting with it though. Just trying to find the strenghts and weaknesses going forward. I did record for about an hour in XFAVC so it wasn't feasible to shoot in RAW, that'll be my next port of call.

Nice

@AshvonChamier

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks. Glad ya came across it.

Looks like the R5C had more dynamic range than the RED in the shed?

@AshvonChamier

2 жыл бұрын

That part of the test is still throwing me off, lol. The test was done with unmanned cameras. As light changed in the time of me hitting record and hoping in front of the cameras, the sun got brighter and overexposed where the RED was set. With the RED being OVERXPOSED, it should have even better SHADOW DETAIL because the exposure is set higher, lifting shadows. Whereas on the R5 C that was filming simultaneously, the sun got brighter, there was not highlight clipping, and the shadows have significantly more detail in them. So yeah, it beat it on dynamic range!?!?! I thought, it must be how I color graded it, but it is not. The original REDLOG FOOTAGE has highlight clipping in it and no matter what I did, the details in the shadows just were not there.

@hendrikpot7143

Жыл бұрын

@@AshvonChamier howdy! I think your lighting and/or exposure matching may have been a bit off with the shed test. I did a similar test recently in a controlled outdoor environment with my epic dragon and the R5C, and the dragon blew the R5C out of the water in DR. I shot in clog2 8k raw on the R5C, using false colors to correctly expose for either highlights and shadows (did both for individual tests). Exposed for the same highlights with the dragon and it reached way further into the shadows.

@AshvonChamier

Жыл бұрын

@@hendrikpot7143 Very interesting! What color space and gamma did you grade your R3D files in? What DSMC1, 2, or 3? Thanks for sharing.

@AshvonChamier

Жыл бұрын

@@hendrikpot7143 Very Interesting! What color space and gamma did you grade your R3D files in? Was this a DSMC 1, 2, or 3 brain? Thanks for sharing.

@hendrikpot7143

Жыл бұрын

@@AshvonChamier No problem!! I shot it on the DSMC1 Epic Dragon, setting were 6k 5:1. Although the DSMC1 doesn’t support internal IPP2, you can convert the footage in davinci- so the settings I used for color grading were: IPP2, LOG3G10, REDWideGamutRGB. I’ve been able to easily match the colors out of Komodo or other dsmc2 this way, and I have noticed better debayer detail and DR. For my color transform I just did CST to Rec709. For the R5C I did CST with the recommended settings (Clog2, Canon Cinema Gamut > Rec709 gamma 2.4)

I am getting disappointed in how people judge film cameras. Yes the R5C has better resolution and , but the RED clearly looks like a Cinema Camera. It just looks more Filmic. There is extra processing to look more filmic. I am a film snob. I love silver nitrate.

@AshvonChamier

Жыл бұрын

Interesting point about the silver nitrate. I love the RED. I don't think this particular quick video is a good example of what I am achieving for my real work with either camera. I do feel strongly I can get the Canon to look very filmic, but it does naturally want to gravitate to super clean digital look. That look has been perfect for particular client. But, when I need it to grade out super filmic to match the RED, I can get it so darn close, it's kind of ridiculous. Please glance at my professional work to see what I really do. This was a quick test done for a specific technical purpose I was trying to see. Not trying to make either look like film here. The shots all look not up to my end product quality standards. Here is my website, just a quick glance is all I ask. Projects shot on RED, Canon, and Sony. Cameras are mixed throughout within each video. I would bet money you can't name which camera manufacturer is for what shot in MOST shots. Not all, but most. www.RoughCutProductions.com

Hm... I am on the fence on how you made these comparisons, it would be better if you could simply show full zoomed in spots of all the cameras at the same shot to show us which camera did the best and which did the worst and why and show us spots of noise that some cameras did better than others and also add text to the video when doing comparisons instead of just talking the info because we get lost trying to figure out which is which and which did better all while you are in there doing a hand dance distracting us :D. No shade really, I am saying this because you have the gear and if you want you can make a hell of a video comparing the footage that most people can't.

@AshvonChamier

Жыл бұрын

I will not argue that the test could most definitely be executed a lot more scientifically. But I will say, the R5 C, now that I have been using it for over half a year, has consistently impressed me with it's dynamic range ability in my edits with the RED.

This is stupid made... sorry, but

@AshvonChamier

Жыл бұрын

LOL, thanks! I know its far from scientific, just the results I ended up with under rough dynamic range conditions.