great video. watching it from Essen after spending a month in Germany, I will be heading back to the states next week where my new Mark II is waiting for me.
Great and extensive review. Regarding the read out speed being slower than expected. I presume the main reason is to preserve the DR performance. Slower reading usually means more DR
@@davision-entrue, i Wish companies would disclose more about those things. Someone said a good theory about the DR being the same but readout speed different could be due to a bit rate camera use at certain frame rates, I do not know if reading from 14bit and recording to 12bit could differ in DR much compare to doing 12bit to 12bit.
Thank you for your thorough indepth review for both these cameras. It just simply proved to me that keeping both would make a lot of sense. Especially as someone who loves portability and ability to have two photo cameras at my disposal in case it calls out for it during events and also the fact that R5C still shoot 4k 60fps downsampling and also better low light performance. There will be moments wheres each camera will still shine. Do you only use one camera for all your shoots?
Thank you so much for the fantastic comparison! Would it be possible for you to share the raw files as well? There are a few nuances in the raw format that I'd love to explore. I’d be happy to host the files if needed! Best wishes from a colorist in Estonia.
Not at all, I have seen Geralds Video and don't see anything what contradicts my findings but he just did take a look at the R5 II alone, not comparing with Other Cameras at all.
Hello, dis you try to adjust the sharpening in caméra via the cp file control, it is AT t'en normally but can be increase to 20 or lowered to 0 (there is also here a noise correction applied by default, and some other things, if you never found at)
How would you compare the 4k60 sraw vs the hevc lined skipped? I’m really disappointed there is no over sampling 4k60. In the CVP test the sraw looked pretty bad
I always prefer using the best possible bitrate for any framerate but the XF AVC S Codec seems to have more trouble playing back. Unfortunately HEVC Intraframe is for available for 4K.
Great video, thanks for this amazing work! For the high ISO comparison, did you try comparing the 3 cameras at ISO 8000, and ISO 16000 which might « better » steps for the R5II above the second base ISO of 4000? Just curious if R5II still lags behind on these steps (as opposed to the comparison you did on the traditional 6400, 12800, 25600 increments which make sense and favour a camera with a second base ISO of 3200). Thanks!
Why should it be better at this stops? There is no Tripple Base ISO here. It’s just one Step at 4000 and then it goes constantly downwards and gets more noise with every. I haven’t tested this because I Usually compare hole steps. Not every in between just the ones important for seeing the base ISO switch.
@@kardemummabullar the ISO Ladder starts at 100, I go full stops up from there. But there is reason in thinking hole stopps of 8000 or 16000 away from the second base ISO should be different. It just goes downwards from the second ISO, there is magical step again.
Line Skipping is leaving out information’s resulting in worse details and quality. Oversampling is using every information the sensor has to bake it into a lower resolution file with nearly same details as the original 8K.
About your answer. You didn’t understand, nothing to worry about. I explain you again. As I mentioned z9/8 either have same speed or slower sensor readout speed than r5 in video mode. I ask you to dig deeper into this question and if you want to be professional. z9/z8 (data absolutely the same) has same or slower readout speed for video and faster for photo compared to old r5. That’s the data compared with old r5 because video readout speed data for r5m2 is not available now. Readout speed 4k60 z9 14.46ms, r5 9.73 ms, 8k30 z9 14.42ms, r5 15.59, 4k24 z9 14.46ms, r5 15.53. For photos right, z9/z8 is faster. 3.73 ms vs 6.3ms for r5m2, but r5m2 has mechanical shutter up to 12fps where readout speed equal 0ms without any rolling shutter with even better dynamic range. In video canon has 8k60, clog2 and raw. That’s why z9/8 is much worse in photo and video modes. Readout speed for video and photos is completely different for all cameras. So if Nikon z9 faster for photos it doesn’t mean same for video.
First of all be polite! That’s my answer for your question. Because Canon did the miracle with r5 mark 2. Z8/Z9 sacrificed huge dynamic range drop for faster sensor compered to z7/2. But canon did almost same DR sensor but in 6.3ms. The reason you have to mention this is superior R5m2 characteristic not to old r5 but to z8/z9 main competitors.
