Check out my latest video and you'll see, the video quality of this camera is so crisp and good. The end is the best part :) And those colors! (sorry can't share link; youtube won't let me share or my comment wont show -_-)
i thought the same. canon is a reliable brand with good quality products. i bought the eos r and i'm more than happy with it. also if you check those outraging peoples yt channels there are mostly no vids on it ...kinda funny...
To watch any RUclips 4K content I have to physically go into my office, open Chrome and watch it, but I use my iPhone/iPad most of the time. I think in some 2-3 years we can stream real 4K to our devices while 16K resolution cameras are out by then...
Everyone's still ripping on the lack of 4k when it's not that much of an issue atm. The only time when it will actually become a reality is when 1080 screens phase out like crt monitors, and cell phone providers actually give enough bandwidth for people to stream 4k to their 4k phones. I have a 10gb plan and still have to throttle my watch time on youtube at 1080p, I don't even want to know what would happen if it was 4k. And with a cell phone screen, 1080p or 4k, who tf cares. I have a 4k tv in my living room, do I use it for youtube? NOPE. Still watching YT on my 1080 screen while I edit. Only use 4k watching sports or movies where you want to be in the action.
:D this video proves only that the 4K in the EOS R is kinda bad... Plus the detail is not always the case when you use 4K. For example I use it when I want less noise in low light and I want to scale or slide the video to create effect.
I saw a video where two youtubers compared the eos r and a7iii and the eos r had sooo much nicer looking images comming out of it, both in 4k, super 35 and fhd. So no, thats not right.
The Canon EOS R has terrible 4K quality though. You should check out the 4K quality on the Sony or Panasonics instead. _That_ is what sharp 4K looks like.
I think the cropped movie mode in HD is sharper than full frame HD. Maybe this is due to the lack of line skipping in the cropped mode? When I tested 4K vs full frame HD on my EOS R, it was very obvious that the 4K mode was way sharper.
I think you are right. The cropped mode 1080P is internally downscaled 4K, thus pretty sharp. Notice or not, we no longer have 60FPS option available in that mode! And when it comes to Full-frame 1080P, Canon keeps doing its stupid shitty line-skipping 1080P array and de-bayer after that, gives you 720P-ish resolution.
Why shoot in 4K? 1. More color information, scale it to 1080p and you have 4x times the Color information per pixel 2. You can zoom in 2x times and dant have a quality loss when downscaled to 1080p
Color information has nothing to do with resolution, those are 2 completely different things. You can shoot 4K at 8bit 4:2:0 (basically all Sony cameras) vs 1080P 10bit 4:4:4 and the 1080P version will have way more color information for grading than the 4K 8bit 4:2:0 video file.
TrickedGaming perhaps they were talking about a specific camera? I know some cameras do offer a better codec in 4K than 1080P in that could have been the case?
@@heutemalnicht That's because it usually holds true. Armando is absolutely right, but if you shoot at 4K and 1080p with the same chroma subsampling (unless there isn't any) and then downscale the 4K footage then you will get more color information. Still isn't worth it for RUclips by a long shot.
I also think it‘s in peoples minds. They see a perfectly composed scene with stunning lighting and colours recorded on a wide open sharp lens. People see it‘s shot in 4k and many will think it‘s just that. What percentage of people watch RUclips on their phone? It‘s one more point why you wouldn‘t need 4k.
Buddy, if you have to ask the question, you should definitely get the 3-times cheaper camera. In fact, if you know how to use it right, you would barely be able to notice a difference in quality between my 6 year old Canon T3i and a newer camera. It has ridiculously beautiful image, if you know how to light your set properly and how to use the camera. I am by no means saying it is an equally good camera, because it lacks a lot of features that these newer cameras have, but at the end of the day, it won't matter what camera you use, but how you use it. Don't even ask the question. I'd even consider buying the lower Canon 200D, because you have a wider selection of lenses available for it at a lower price. Additional EF-M lenses will cost you 300 and more Euros, while you can get the EF-S 50mm f/1.8 lens that is excelent for only 100, the 24mm f/2.8 for like 150.
i think the problem there will not be the quality itself (pixelation) but the ability to edit it, for example sharpness and color grading. I have an M50 and a 5d MkIV (similar to R, kinda worse) and even without C-log, I'm not able to get a super smooth image on the M50 as I do on the full frame. Maybe it's just my settings, but either way, if you're starting, the M50 is a battle horse.
Tomas Roggero, yes, this would also be my point. People that are spending 2k+ on a camera should only be the people that truly know, what difference they are paying for. For the vast majority of people, the M50 will satisfy every conceivable need they might have. The Canon 5D mark 2, a really old camera, was used to shoot an entire episode of house, was used for scenes in Mad Max and so on. Timelapses in Breaking Bad were made with the 5D mark 2. The M50 is a more capable camera than that, except for the fact it is not full frame, so you should definitely get that and will be happy with it for the next 5 years.
While it's interesting to see how little difference there is between the 4k and 1080p output on the EOS R, the general consensus is that the 4k output from the EOS R is incredibly soft when compared to it's main competitors (A7(R) III, Z6/7, GH5(s), Fuji X-T3). I suspect you might see more of a difference if you were doing this comparison with one of those cameras.
Hey Blue - thanks for this I have two M50's and am still toying wiht the idea of a EOS R and would love to see a film from the best RUclipsR on planet earth comparing these two (by the way that best RUclipsr is you !) - thanks as always for helping us to grow and learn on our channle woudl love your views and comments on our if you have a spare 5 mins !
I totally agree with you that there is no visible difference between 4K and FHD. But for reframing or stabilizing in post 4K is very helpful, so I often shoot in 4K and downscale it to FHD to be able to do that in post.
YES! - uploading / upscaling High bitrate 1080P to 4K makes the difference barely noticeable - especially with shallower DoF shots... Clean hi-bitrate 1080P will beat lower bitrate 4K a lot of the time once upscaled... the key is uploading / upscaling final output to 4K in the timeline - exactly like you did (RUclips forces lower bitrate on 1080p files - so even if finishing in 1080p - upscale + export a 4K file so you get maximum youtube bitrate encode / better quality.) Saying that though - Canon's 1080P/4K video in general is softer than competitors - you can see the extra detail in the C100 shot around the beard / shirt at 5:26 - Canon always impairing video on DSLRs/Mirrorless :( Hope they give us better quality in the Pro R version... ps plenty of Hollywood features have been done in 1080P with high quality glass / codecs / color science - resolution is one of the last things that matters, case in point: AVATAR :)
I genuinely think that this brings up a crucial point for content creators. RUclips's compression codecs here are definitely having an impact on the quality of the video - because the difference is crystal clear when they're locally stored and viewed. It's like night and day. And I should note I was able to pick out the good, better best of the three side-by-side videos ... so I'd like to think I can spot subtle differences. Good job, man.
Okay I get that 4k it's not needed in every situation. But doesn't this prove that the Canon's 4k isn't that good vs it's 1080p? With other camera's I can easily see what's 4k and what not
The first time i saw 4k in my 2k monitor, i was blown away by it's sharpness. I don't know what's wrong with this comparison or maybe something wrong with the camera.
The problem is with Canon's codec, NOT with 4k vs HD. You should have done the same test with your Canon M50 (that I also own), and you will see that the minimal difference between 4k and HD, is also there too. You can barely see the difference between the two .The problem is with ALL Canon cameras, because of how they have optimized their codec. It doesn't resolve between a certain resolution. The differences between HD and 4k are WAY more pronounced in Sony and Panasonic cameras that use different versions of h.264. If manufacturers move to h.265 HEVC, which is more optimized for 4k and 8k resolutions (and for 10/12 bit as well), the differences will be more apparent in all cameras, not just Canon.
it proves canon eos-r 4k is very bad compared to competition who are providing over sampled 4k from 6k readout. also dynamic range and iso performance on other cameras are vastly better in 4k,since they are using the full width of the sensor.
What a crazy world I can get up to speed with Potato Jet even tho I am riding on a train in Japan. Comforting to watch this because I purchased the R for this 3 week trip to Asia and had no time to test before I left. Day 2 realized 4K took way too many cards, so I switched to 1080p and I have not been able to view my footage. I have been nervous but was trusting in Canon as they have always done me no harm... Great test Mr Potato!
@@deborahgallegos5334 bought the EOS R as a C100mkII B camera match, and tbh i find the eos R HD footage really bad compared to the C100. If you really want to match quality you should be filming at 4K cropped mode which sucks due to the enormous file sizes.
@@orfeaskalafatis Hi there...I too need a B camera for my C100 mk2-most of my work is in 1080p. My main lenses are a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 and a Sigma 50-100mm f1.8 but I have tons of EFS lenses I would like to continue to use. I don't want to buy full frame lenses or change cameras (if I do I would then try a Sony or a GH5s)... did the EOS R work for you as a b camera? did you find the 1080p footage from the EOS R that bad? I just bought a Canon 90d to test it and it's ok (even if only in IPB standard) and I don't use 24fps but I'm not sure is a good B camera for my C100mk2, so I'm looking at the EOS R...any issues if i want to use my EFS lenses? I hear that I can't record in 60fps? I know the 120fps is only 720p!! wow....any issues I should know? The files are really huge...are they any better? Thanks for listening...didn't mean to overwhelm you!
Fun fact - if you Upscale FHD into 4k for youtube, that FHD will be better than just uploading an FHD file, because the 4k one gets less compressed by RUclips. So it does make a difference. LinusTechTips did a video on it a couple of years ago
there is a new speed booster for the m50 that performs really good, I just review it in my channel, it gives almost the same field of view as a full frame and with an extra stop of light, I think the m50 with the speed booster would be a perfect comparison for the eos R
Nope. The difference was massive. But uncompressed 1080 to 4k, not so much. At normal viewing distance, somewhere around 2k the individual pixels become too small for our eyes to resolve individually. So whats the point in dividing each 'invisible' pixel into 4 tinier ones? No point unless you're zooming or stabilising your footage heavily. ASC cinematographer Steve Yedlin explains it pretty thoroughly here ruclips.net/video/PaeasJiqLlM/видео.html
when the shot wasn't simple (like a building, it's mostly 1 colour and lines) then I had no problems immediately seeing the difference between 1080p and 4k even with youtube compression.
@Potato Jet Funny to hear the quote at 1:30 after hearing about all the overheating issues with the EOS R5, Lol
6 лет назад+20
I think it is because of the old "5D sensor", if you compare this to similarly priced A7 III. - in 4K it will blow our monitors: D (i have A9 and im blow away with 4K output)
It's not because of the "old" 5d sensor. It's because that's actually 4k while most sony cameras shoot 5k or 6k and just downsample it to 4k in camera which just is a lot sharper than just 4k (also 1080p on canon cameras is pretty damn good so yeah, comparing sony 1080p to sony 4k would probably be a way bigger difference)
@@gregtockner except Sony's 1080p is just as sharp as canons from all the eos vs A7iii videos I've seen. Plus Sony 120p is much better than canons which is only 720p vs Sony's 1080p. And it's a big difference.
I don't know anything about the a7iii in particular but from what I've seen the 1080p on canon cameras that shoot all-i is better than what you'd find on an a6500 or a7sii.
You should do a comparison of the old Canon's 1080P (for example, a dirt cheap 5dii) vs the latest model's. It would be interesting to see how much better quality we got over the decade.
Its horrible in 4k. Andrew reid has a video on his channel related to the same. Thats probably why they did a 1 to 1 readout instead of using the entire sensor.
@@billymurphy3 Its worse than the a6300. That puts things into perspective. I understand as a pro that you wouldnt randomely move the camera like a madman. but from the tests done by andrew you can see that those were simple pans. As for the rest of the issues, as someone said in a video recently, its not that we have a problem with the limitations of the camera. Its the price that you have to pay for those limitations. If you look at a someone who would use this for professional use, shooting in 4k has a lot of flexibility. This camera has 4k all i with clog, If the 4k was not cropped, this camera would have ripped the market in terms of value for money. Having a higher bitrate isnt just about sharpness. When you color grade the footage usually low bitrate footages will fall apart within minutes. Especially if you are going for something stylistic. I did a music video with the GH5 shooting in All i 4k and the flexibility I had with the codec was amazing. I am used to working with the a6300 and if I would have attempted similar grading with the a6300 footage, it would have completely fallen apart.
This video is just a testament to how bad Canon’s 4K really is...compare to Sony A7mk3 or GH5 and see the difference. Plenty of people already said that Canon’s 4K is soft as hell.
5:13 the moment i wanted to start to cy since i am going to pickup the eos R tomorrow and the c-log is basically the whole reason i jumped over to a system camera (and other obvious spec reasons) . so excited!!!!
After six months I'm totally in love with PHOTOS taken with the EOR R, but the video quality (using a lens adapter) is just satisfactory. It's not so different from my 6D
nicely done, hate when people always talk about going 4K etc. 6k and this and that, but don't know actually what is behind all that quality and resolution stuff, but only youtube upload 1080p at high bitrate is still awesome
It depends on the clarity of the lens I guess. It's pretty easy to see the difference between HD and 4K when the source footage is actually clear and sharp, but example of the windows shows that lens isn't that great for 4k. When you look at 4k animation next to 1080p animation the difference is usually night and day for me. 4k on cameras usually isn't anything special unless the camera is super expensive.
If you're looking for a camera good in low light, you won't fond that in canon. Research 1. Sony A7iii 2. Panasonic Gh5s 3. Fuji X-T3 All for half the price of canon and the new lens. Plus 2 & 3 shoot 4K in 60fps.
Ok there is one really great advantage with 4K for YT.. when you're a one man crew you can add digital pans and stuff in post.. at least this is my use case with 4K
I'm shooting all of my videos at FHD 😅, i used to use 4K on some projects, but now i use only HD ( Quality HD is Better than average 4K ) I'm talking about a video shoot for clients not my poor home video at my apartment 😂
I was wanting it for full frame photography and some low light video. Also I should be able to bypass the 30 minute time limit with an external recorder and film interviews without having to stop. Also 10bit 4:2:2.
99% of the time 4k, extra pixels, faster frame per seconds etc is needed for only spec sheets and marketing the camera. Its needed to sell the camera but not needed when you use it. Great video.
Yes please do an M50 vs R video. I have an M50 and 1DX2 and would like to see if it’s worth upgrading to the R. Carrying around the 1DX2 gets to be a pain sometimes.
Watching it in 4k on a 1080p display, I was still able to spot the difference each time, but it's true, it's not that much of a difference for the price gap. Tho one thing it probably helps a lot for is for streaming website like youtube to have a better compression. For instance it is proven that on youtube your video will look way better in 1080p setting if it is originaly a 4k video, than if it's a straigh up HD video, and this because of RUclips's compression algorIthm.
my shining moment!
You totally blowing it away!
Check out my latest video and you'll see, the video quality of this camera is so crisp and good. The end is the best part :) And those colors!
(sorry can't share link; youtube won't let me share or my comment wont show -_-)
Let's see if this works
ruclips.net/video/F_g9rl7RdcM/видео.html
lol 1:28 - famous last words! LOL!!!
people should stop saying that you look like that kid from the movie Up
😂
Hmm ya he looks like the kid from up; you're right...
I love that movie
Lollllll. Just realized it.
I didn't notice before your comment now I can't unsee it
Can we all 'UP'vote this video?
Here's mine, you deserve it bro lol
Lets get him lol
I hope that doesn't cause an "up"roar
W reditor
hah I love this man! People are so outraged at the funniest things and you just proved that it really doesnt matter as much as they think
i thought the same. canon is a reliable brand with good quality products. i bought the eos r and i'm more than happy with it. also if you check those outraging peoples yt channels there are mostly no vids on it ...kinda funny...
To watch any RUclips 4K content I have to physically go into my office, open Chrome and watch it, but I use my iPhone/iPad most of the time. I think in some 2-3 years we can stream real 4K to our devices while 16K resolution cameras are out by then...
Everyone's still ripping on the lack of 4k when it's not that much of an issue atm. The only time when it will actually become a reality is when 1080 screens phase out like crt monitors, and cell phone providers actually give enough bandwidth for people to stream 4k to their 4k phones. I have a 10gb plan and still have to throttle my watch time on youtube at 1080p, I don't even want to know what would happen if it was 4k. And with a cell phone screen, 1080p or 4k, who tf cares. I have a 4k tv in my living room, do I use it for youtube? NOPE. Still watching YT on my 1080 screen while I edit. Only use 4k watching sports or movies where you want to be in the action.
Collab please Matti and PJ 👌
The main issue is a crazy rolling shutter.
:D this video proves only that the 4K in the EOS R is kinda bad...
Plus the detail is not always the case when you use 4K. For example I use it when I want less noise in low light and I want to scale or slide the video to create effect.
If you watched other video the HD from Sony is soft, Canon is better. It's equal to Canon if down sample from 4K.
Watch this and delete your comment: ruclips.net/video/XciTNl0HYPw/видео.html
Arthur Rosa that’s with an external recorder.
Holy shit the Canon has the shittiest 4K ever! Compared to Sony's 4K it's not sharp at all.
it's almost like its an entirely inferior camera to an A7iii that costs less than it XD
Canon 4K = upscaled 2.5K. Aloha.
Sharp???
I saw a video where two youtubers compared the eos r and a7iii and the eos r had sooo much nicer looking images comming out of it, both in 4k, super 35 and fhd. So no, thats not right.
9 minutes? Just curious, usually you make it to 10 so that you can give the ad breaks.. it's so close, why? 😀
dr. Ray Leonard Judijanto Lmao shoulda started talking about chapstick again 💄👀
The Canon EOS R has terrible 4K quality though. You should check out the 4K quality on the Sony or Panasonics instead. _That_ is what sharp 4K looks like.
Athaeus
All 4K sucks coz my 4K camera sucks. Haha.
Yep, ridiculous.
Even Canon's Cinema line can't do proper 4K unless you shoot in RAW.
@@DennisSchmitz
RAW doesn't make your image any sharper.
Unless your camera puts a strong blur filter and lots of sharpening onto your footage - like the C200 and EOS R does.
The 5DMKIV didn't do it.
@@allansh828 It does if you're shooting 4:2:0 H.264 vs 4:4:4 RAW.
I think the cropped movie mode in HD is sharper than full frame HD. Maybe this is due to the lack of line skipping in the cropped mode?
When I tested 4K vs full frame HD on my EOS R, it was very obvious that the 4K mode was way sharper.
I think you are right. The cropped mode 1080P is internally downscaled 4K, thus pretty sharp. Notice or not, we no longer have 60FPS option available in that mode!
And when it comes to Full-frame 1080P, Canon keeps doing its stupid shitty line-skipping 1080P array and de-bayer after that, gives you 720P-ish resolution.
Thanks - a lack of sharpness at full-frame 1080 is my #1 complaint about EOR R video
To be honest, EOS's 4K is way inferior that others. If you do 4K vs 1080p in GH5, it'll be day and night. or day and morning (?)
thats because of how the gh5 gets its HD. It does a shitty job. Its not down scaling internal from the 4k.
alexa is even softer than the EOS R in 4k, sharpness doesn't mean it's a good image quality
@@AllThingsKen no the eos r just has terrible 4k
Why shoot in 4K?
1. More color information, scale it to 1080p and you have 4x times the Color information per pixel
2. You can zoom in 2x times and dant have a quality loss when downscaled to 1080p
3. Digital stabilisation.
Color information has nothing to do with resolution, those are 2 completely different things. You can shoot 4K at 8bit 4:2:0 (basically all Sony cameras) vs 1080P 10bit 4:4:4 and the 1080P version will have way more color information for grading than the 4K 8bit 4:2:0 video file.
Hey Armando, thanks for clearing that up. I heard that from another camera related channel.
TrickedGaming perhaps they were talking about a specific camera? I know some cameras do offer a better codec in 4K than 1080P in that could have been the case?
@@heutemalnicht That's because it usually holds true. Armando is absolutely right, but if you shoot at 4K and 1080p with the same chroma subsampling (unless there isn't any) and then downscale the 4K footage then you will get more color information. Still isn't worth it for RUclips by a long shot.
It's good to see that Hollywood kid actors have a great future ahead in cinematography, good work Russell! 👏🙌
Edit: (kid from the movie "UP")
I also think it‘s in peoples minds.
They see a perfectly composed scene with stunning lighting and colours recorded on a wide open sharp lens.
People see it‘s shot in 4k and many will think it‘s just that.
What percentage of people watch RUclips on their phone? It‘s one more point why you wouldn‘t need 4k.
Can you compare Full HD 60p between Canon R and M50, if they are not that different I will save a lot of money. Thank you very much.
Buddy, if you have to ask the question, you should definitely get the 3-times cheaper camera. In fact, if you know how to use it right, you would barely be able to notice a difference in quality between my 6 year old Canon T3i and a newer camera. It has ridiculously beautiful image, if you know how to light your set properly and how to use the camera. I am by no means saying it is an equally good camera, because it lacks a lot of features that these newer cameras have, but at the end of the day, it won't matter what camera you use, but how you use it. Don't even ask the question. I'd even consider buying the lower Canon 200D, because you have a wider selection of lenses available for it at a lower price. Additional EF-M lenses will cost you 300 and more Euros, while you can get the EF-S 50mm f/1.8 lens that is excelent for only 100, the 24mm f/2.8 for like 150.
i think the problem there will not be the quality itself (pixelation) but the ability to edit it, for example sharpness and color grading. I have an M50 and a 5d MkIV (similar to R, kinda worse) and even without C-log, I'm not able to get a super smooth image on the M50 as I do on the full frame. Maybe it's just my settings, but either way, if you're starting, the M50 is a battle horse.
Tomas Roggero, yes, this would also be my point. People that are spending 2k+ on a camera should only be the people that truly know, what difference they are paying for. For the vast majority of people, the M50 will satisfy every conceivable need they might have. The Canon 5D mark 2, a really old camera, was used to shoot an entire episode of house, was used for scenes in Mad Max and so on. Timelapses in Breaking Bad were made with the 5D mark 2. The M50 is a more capable camera than that, except for the fact it is not full frame, so you should definitely get that and will be happy with it for the next 5 years.
If you are interested in video buy a Panasonic GH5.
Save money, buy M50 if all you're looking for is 1080p 60p.
While it's interesting to see how little difference there is between the 4k and 1080p output on the EOS R, the general consensus is that the 4k output from the EOS R is incredibly soft when compared to it's main competitors (A7(R) III, Z6/7, GH5(s), Fuji X-T3). I suspect you might see more of a difference if you were doing this comparison with one of those cameras.
Hey Blue - thanks for this I have two M50's and am still toying wiht the idea of a EOS R and would love to see a film from the best RUclipsR on planet earth comparing these two (by the way that best RUclipsr is you !) - thanks as always for helping us to grow and learn on our channle woudl love your views and comments on our if you have a spare 5 mins !
A comparison would be ace !
Thanks for sharing this one again Hieth - just subbed him - he is ace !
I totally agree with you that there is no visible difference between 4K and FHD. But for reframing or stabilizing in post 4K is very helpful, so I often shoot in 4K and downscale it to FHD to be able to do that in post.
You look like that juvenile human named Russel from Pixar’s 2009 animated feature film.
Best comment
Dafuq, 2009? You mean, like NINE years ago? I should check if my hair has turned grey already.
YES! - uploading / upscaling High bitrate 1080P to 4K makes the difference barely noticeable - especially with shallower DoF shots... Clean hi-bitrate 1080P will beat lower bitrate 4K a lot of the time once upscaled... the key is uploading / upscaling final output to 4K in the timeline - exactly like you did (RUclips forces lower bitrate on 1080p files - so even if finishing in 1080p - upscale + export a 4K file so you get maximum youtube bitrate encode / better quality.) Saying that though - Canon's 1080P/4K video in general is softer than competitors - you can see the extra detail in the C100 shot around the beard / shirt at 5:26 - Canon always impairing video on DSLRs/Mirrorless :( Hope they give us better quality in the Pro R version... ps plenty of Hollywood features have been done in 1080P with high quality glass / codecs / color science - resolution is one of the last things that matters, case in point: AVATAR :)
I genuinely think that this brings up a crucial point for content creators. RUclips's compression codecs here are definitely having an impact on the quality of the video - because the difference is crystal clear when they're locally stored and viewed. It's like night and day. And I should note I was able to pick out the good, better best of the three side-by-side videos ... so I'd like to think I can spot subtle differences. Good job, man.
Okay I get that 4k it's not needed in every situation. But doesn't this prove that the Canon's 4k isn't that good vs it's 1080p? With other camera's I can easily see what's 4k and what not
Either the EOS R's 4K is soft, or the 1080p is RIDICULOUSLY good quality. I'm guessing it's the former.
The problem seem to be the lens if anything. Watching this video I was surprised how soft the image was.
The first time i saw 4k in my 2k monitor, i was blown away by it's sharpness. I don't know what's wrong with this comparison or maybe something wrong with the camera.
The problem is with Canon's codec, NOT with 4k vs HD. You should have done the same test with your Canon M50 (that I also own), and you will see that the minimal difference between 4k and HD, is also there too. You can barely see the difference between the two .The problem is with ALL Canon cameras, because of how they have optimized their codec. It doesn't resolve between a certain resolution. The differences between HD and 4k are WAY more pronounced in Sony and Panasonic cameras that use different versions of h.264. If manufacturers move to h.265 HEVC, which is more optimized for 4k and 8k resolutions (and for 10/12 bit as well), the differences will be more apparent in all cameras, not just Canon.
it proves canon eos-r 4k is very bad compared to competition who are providing over sampled 4k from 6k readout. also dynamic range and iso performance on other cameras are vastly better in 4k,since they are using the full width of the sensor.
Yes 1000% percent, on Sony anyway, downscaled 4K looks so crisp and nice
What a crazy world I can get up to speed with Potato Jet even tho I am riding on a train in Japan. Comforting to watch this because I purchased the R for this 3 week trip to Asia and had no time to test before I left. Day 2 realized 4K took way too many cards, so I switched to 1080p and I have not been able to view my footage. I have been nervous but was trusting in Canon as they have always done me no harm... Great test Mr Potato!
I think more EOS R vs. C100 Mk II would be interesting.
Bastian Worrmann , VERY much interested in this as well. My C100 MKII is my workhorse and think the EOS R would be a good B cam
@@deborahgallegos5334 bought the EOS R as a C100mkII B camera match, and tbh i find the eos R HD footage really bad compared to the C100. If you really want to match quality you should be filming at 4K cropped mode which sucks due to the enormous file sizes.
@@orfeaskalafatis Hi there...I too need a B camera for my C100 mk2-most of my work is in 1080p. My main lenses are a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 and a Sigma 50-100mm f1.8 but I have tons of EFS lenses I would like to continue to use. I don't want to buy full frame lenses or change cameras (if I do I would then try a Sony or a GH5s)... did the EOS R work for you as a b camera? did you find the 1080p footage from the EOS R that bad? I just bought a Canon 90d to test it and it's ok (even if only in IPB standard) and I don't use 24fps but I'm not sure is a good B camera for my C100mk2, so I'm looking at the EOS R...any issues if i want to use my EFS lenses? I hear that I can't record in 60fps? I know the 120fps is only 720p!! wow....any issues I should know? The files are really huge...are they any better? Thanks for listening...didn't mean to overwhelm you!
Fun fact - if you Upscale FHD into 4k for youtube, that FHD will be better than just uploading an FHD file, because the 4k one gets less compressed by RUclips. So it does make a difference. LinusTechTips did a video on it a couple of years ago
Why YT advertise as 4k and yet keeps lowering the quality? I thought guuugre already has enough problems...
You are genuinely one of the best channels on youtube regardless of genre, thank you for the world class education.
there is a new speed booster for the m50 that performs really good, I just review it in my channel, it gives almost the same field of view as a full frame and with an extra stop of light, I think the m50 with the speed booster would be a perfect comparison for the eos R
Rage Studios just got mine too, lovely with m5 and 50 1.8 stm :)
This channel is gold, I love your reviews man it's very honest and informative.
So glad this video is UP
Rewind to 1998 and people were probably asking “can you really see the difference between 1080p and 480i?”
Nope. The difference was massive. But uncompressed 1080 to 4k, not so much. At normal viewing distance, somewhere around 2k the individual pixels become too small for our eyes to resolve individually. So whats the point in dividing each 'invisible' pixel into 4 tinier ones? No point unless you're zooming or stabilising your footage heavily. ASC cinematographer Steve Yedlin explains it pretty thoroughly here ruclips.net/video/PaeasJiqLlM/видео.html
when the shot wasn't simple (like a building, it's mostly 1 colour and lines) then I had no problems immediately seeing the difference between 1080p and 4k even with youtube compression.
Very informative. Thank You.
@Potato Jet Funny to hear the quote at 1:30 after hearing about all the overheating issues with the EOS R5, Lol
I think it is because of the old "5D sensor", if you compare this to similarly priced A7 III. - in 4K it will blow our monitors: D (i have A9 and im blow away with 4K output)
It's not because of the "old" 5d sensor. It's because that's actually 4k while most sony cameras shoot 5k or 6k and just downsample it to 4k in camera which just is a lot sharper than just 4k (also 1080p on canon cameras is pretty damn good so yeah, comparing sony 1080p to sony 4k would probably be a way bigger difference)
@@gregtockner except Sony's 1080p is just as sharp as canons from all the eos vs A7iii videos I've seen. Plus Sony 120p is much better than canons which is only 720p vs Sony's 1080p. And it's a big difference.
I don't know anything about the a7iii in particular but from what I've seen the 1080p on canon cameras that shoot all-i is better than what you'd find on an a6500 or a7sii.
You should do a comparison of the old Canon's 1080P (for example, a dirt cheap 5dii) vs the latest model's. It would be interesting to see how much better quality we got over the decade.
You should do some rolling shutter tests
Its horrible in 4k. Andrew reid has a video on his channel related to the same. Thats probably why they did a 1 to 1 readout instead of using the entire sensor.
@@ascari100 Yeah? I saw one test go very badly already lol. I just wanted to see what the boy from UP thought about the issues 👍
@@billymurphy3 Its worse than the a6300. That puts things into perspective. I understand as a pro that you wouldnt randomely move the camera like a madman. but from the tests done by andrew you can see that those were simple pans. As for the rest of the issues, as someone said in a video recently, its not that we have a problem with the limitations of the camera. Its the price that you have to pay for those limitations. If you look at a someone who would use this for professional use, shooting in 4k has a lot of flexibility. This camera has 4k all i with clog, If the 4k was not cropped, this camera would have ripped the market in terms of value for money. Having a higher bitrate isnt just about sharpness. When you color grade the footage usually low bitrate footages will fall apart within minutes. Especially if you are going for something stylistic. I did a music video with the GH5 shooting in All i 4k and the flexibility I had with the codec was amazing. I am used to working with the a6300 and if I would have attempted similar grading with the a6300 footage, it would have completely fallen apart.
Yeah, it sounds like it's not that Canon didnt want to do better. They just COULDNT do better with their current sensor technology.
@@ascari100 you have any opinions on the a7iii?
Love your videos! Just starting watching you this week!!
This video is just a testament to how bad Canon’s 4K really is...compare to Sony A7mk3 or GH5 and see the difference. Plenty of people already said that Canon’s 4K is soft as hell.
Very interesting! Did not expect to see such minor differences.
You make the best videos! super talented!
Another great video from Russell. And you know what the only way you're going is literally UP because of your amazing content!
I don’t follow a funnier guy on RUclips who talks about useful stuff😂 love your stuff man
5:13 the moment i wanted to start to cy since i am going to pickup the eos R tomorrow and the c-log is basically the whole reason i jumped over to a system camera (and other obvious spec reasons) . so excited!!!!
You planning on reviewing the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K? I'd love to hear your opinion on it.
I was debating whether to upgrade my M5 to the R, your video helped, time to upgrade, thanks Boss.
Did you ever considered the EOS 6D Mark II, for your full frame needs?
The comment about canon and overheating did not age well 😂
Still happy with my EOS R
This is one of the few 4K vids that my PC was actually capable of playing LOL! As always, great job :)
thanks ☺️i was filming 1080 for along time because i didnt really see the difference , but this confirmed to stay filming at 1080 .
After six months I'm totally in love with PHOTOS taken with the EOR R, but the video quality (using a lens adapter) is just satisfactory. It's not so different from my 6D
Does it have moire like the 6d?
Yes! M50 vs. Eos R!!!
I genuinely enjoy your video. Thanks for the awesome content!!
nicely done, hate when people always talk about going 4K etc. 6k and this and that, but don't know actually what is behind all that quality and resolution stuff,
but only youtube upload 1080p at high bitrate is still awesome
It depends on the clarity of the lens I guess. It's pretty easy to see the difference between HD and 4K when the source footage is actually clear and sharp, but example of the windows shows that lens isn't that great for 4k.
When you look at 4k animation next to 1080p animation the difference is usually night and day for me. 4k on cameras usually isn't anything special unless the camera is super expensive.
Can you do it the other way around? Shoot 4k and downsize it to a Full HD output?
YES, was wondering when you'd picked up the R. Love you Potato Jet!
This video really helped me with my 4k hang-up. Thanks.
im UP for that next video!
watching this comparison video at 480p but still manage to see the different. how the hell is this even possible
4:24 kinda creepy how accurate that is.
Yes, please, M50 vs EOS R low light. I bet its noticeable, but not break the bank of a difference.
If you're looking for a camera good in low light, you won't fond that in canon.
Research
1. Sony A7iii
2. Panasonic Gh5s
3. Fuji X-T3
All for half the price of canon and the new lens. Plus 2 & 3 shoot 4K in 60fps.
Ok there is one really great advantage with 4K for YT.. when you're a one man crew you can add digital pans and stuff in post.. at least this is my use case with 4K
Are you still getting royalties from starring in UP?
Dude, thanks for doing this video! I've been struggling with "to buy" or "not to buy" a 4k camera. Will wait now!
Learned a new word today: SPONTINUITY ; I will now be using this word. thank you Mr. Potato.
You're awesome dude. Please do a vid on what is living in LA/nearby areas like.
Thanks Potato Jet good information. Nice to see Chris Rollins
Please make a video about your editing workflow, codecs and encoders you use etc.
1:28 - famous last words! LOL!!!
That low light was actually pretty impressive, just one candle with not s horrible amount of noise
I heard that the EOS R can do Jello Shots with that 4k Rolling Shutter. It's a party animal! 😜
I LOVE YOUR VIDEOS Keep Up The Great Work You Just Earned Yourself a New Subscriber
I knew there was a small difference, but I didn't think it was that small. Thanks for the video, Up kid.
I'm shooting all of my videos at FHD 😅, i used to use 4K on some projects, but now i use only HD ( Quality HD is Better than average 4K ) I'm talking about a video shoot for clients not my poor home video at my apartment 😂
Great to someone taking a shoot at the 4K elephant in the room! I like your work!
welcome to FF my friend! still loving my 6dii, dunno if i can give up IBIS to upgrade to this
Gene, You don't tell the internet to stop doing something; that only fuels the fire. You just have to let it die...Russell
Great video, glad I subscribed.
Did you use the yeti blue mic to get the audio indoors or the camera's mic?
7:36 dude whats your setup? GTX, RTX?
A Full Frame camera to vlog? Or even to take video in the first place? That camera has a high crop at 4K.
great video!
4:21 she's like dude get a breath mint. Great video. Wish I had found it sooner.
Great video! How do you see Sony A7III as a competitor to EOS R?
Do the same on a7iii
“Keep flexing foo” then just walks away 🤣 You live in GTA land!
I was wanting it for full frame photography and some low light video. Also I should be able to bypass the 30 minute time limit with an external recorder and film interviews without having to stop. Also 10bit 4:2:2.
Hey "Kid from up" can you do a video where you rent the most expensive red cam to show why its worth that much?
99% of the time 4k, extra pixels, faster frame per seconds etc is needed for only spec sheets and marketing the camera. Its needed to sell the camera but not needed when you use it. Great video.
Best endings of any channel!
Yes please do an M50 vs R video. I have an M50 and 1DX2 and would like to see if it’s worth upgrading to the R. Carrying around the 1DX2 gets to be a pain sometimes.
How will you compare when his whole sequence is 1080p rendered
Yay!!! new video , oh yeah !😜🤟
Love the shot of LAFD STATION 9!
I actually got it right every time even though I'm on a phone, but it was absolutely not obvious more like a tendency.
Watching it in 4k on a 1080p display, I was still able to spot the difference each time, but it's true, it's not that much of a difference for the price gap.
Tho one thing it probably helps a lot for is for streaming website like youtube to have a better compression.
For instance it is proven that on youtube your video will look way better in 1080p setting if it is originaly a 4k video, than if it's a straigh up HD video, and this because of RUclips's compression algorIthm.
“Canon doesn’t really release anything until they’re fully capable of doing so without any issues.”
The days when Canon Cameras is known for not overheating