Ron Wilk

The R5c's "color science" remains an unknown at the present time, but for those of us who shoot log gamma or RAW and grade in post, it isn't really an issue. I agree that the rear protrusion might be awkward at first, but it is reminiscent of the Fuji GFX50s that I still own, along with all of the the other GFX cameras (50r, GFX100, GFX100s) and I don't anticipate that it will be problematic. Remember, this not being marketed as a stills camera, and I doubt that it will reach the level of a Swiss Army Knife in terms of its utility, it is first and foremost video camera. And as a video camera it will most likely spend most of its time on a tripod, monopod or other supportive devices. "If you're gonna always throw it on a tripod, there are better video cameras in my opinion, for much less money." I would be interested to hear about those video cameras. I was not aware that the firmware update for the R5 has negated the overheating issue. I'm not sure, however, how that could have been accomplished, and if I had to guess I would say that they reset the software time-out for overheating. But overheating is not only a factor of the camera's internal components, it relates as well to atmospheric conditions. And here in S Florida it gets hot, and so does a camera sitting out in the sun. Anyway, I will reserve my opinion of the R5c until I actually have it in hand and have had a change to put it through its paces. I have no intention of using it as a stills camera, despite its apparent capability, and would relegate that function to the R5, with IBIS.

I own a C300 MK III and I often plug a Rode NTG 3 into an XLR input and have not noticed the noise floor that you've described, unless I inadvertently set the gain too high. If the #3 setting is workable, you might consider a more sensitive microphone.

Be aware, that neither of the two suggested cameras have an integral EVF, nor is there an OEM option to add one. Depending upon how and where you intend to use the camera, that omission could present a challenge, particularly when trying to shoot in bright sunlight. But if "small" is your goal, an A7sIII might be a better choice.

I believe that you'd overstated the price differential between the R5 and the R5c ... it's only a $600 difference. And the fan isn't the only added feature, in fact, it will have many elements of the feature set seen in the larger cine cameras, like the C300 MK III and C500, and that includes the menu system, vector-scope, WFM and much more. However, it's not my intention to denigrate the R5, which is a fine FF stills camera, but I had one on hand that I'd returned due to the overheating issues with high FR 4k video which is real, not imagined. The only issue I anticipate that might make grading video from the R5c and the C300 together somewhat problematic is the absence of Log2, which the C300 MK III does have and I tend to use, rather than Log3. As for form factor, I prefer larger cameras, and I suspect that I will have to add the battery grip to achieve a comfortable and stable hold when shooting handheld, the rest of the time the camera will reside on either a monopod or a tripod. All that said, if you think that the R5 is "already big and heavy" then MF or true cine cameras would be out of the question. I find that very small and light cameras—whether for general photography or video—are not only difficult to hold, but are hard to keep steady. But those are my personal feelings, and everyone has their own likes and dislikes.

Definitely will, but despite the fact that I'd pre-ordered the morning that such had become available, given my past experience with pre-orders I don't expect to see the camera anytime soon.

The R5c's internal fan is allegedly the same as that found in the C300 MK III. I own a C300 MK III and I can truthfully say that, with the fan set to auto, I have never heard it running, even in a quiet studio. That said, I have pre-ordered an R5c to compliment the above C300, so we'll see how that goes.