With stills cameras encroaching more and more on dedicated video camera territory, the lines are becoming blurred, and the choices are no longer straightforward.
My work has taken me in the direction of video in recent months and that trend looks set to continue. Fortunately for me, my stills camera also doubles as an excellent mirrorless video camera too. While it's not perfect for high-end productions, it does more than well enough for most projects.
In this video, Sidney Diongzon compares the Sony a7 III with the Canon C200. The former is primarily a stills camera than can also do video, the latter is a dedicated cinema camera. In most regards, for video, the C200 comfortably wins. However, if you also have the desire to shoot stills, weight is a consideration, or your budget isn't the best part of $10,000 for a body and lens, then the a7 III starts to creep into frame.
As of now, I'd say that if you're creating primarily video, the solution is still heavily weighted towards the C200. But with the announcement of the R5 and its staggeringly high spec, these decisions are going to become less straightforward. The R5 seems to be aiming at having it all and the answer to the question "do you need a production video camera for high-end video?" isn't necessarily "yes." It's already the case that with bodies from almost all manufacturers, you can create great quality video content. Which then raises the question of how much of an impact the R5 might have on C200 sales.
What do you think?