October 25, 2014, 06:32:18 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - peederj

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 20
On the topic I can confirm that the C100's HDMI output is clean uncompressed 8 bit 422, with timecode and record start/stop control. So with the Ninja 2, the ProRes 422 HQ 220Mbit is a very high quality image to my eyes, the noise floor does show the one dimension of chroma subsampling (444 would be better) but is fine and very even without much banding and no macroblocking.

The C100's compressed internal video is fairly ugly in comparison, I'm just using the SDXCs as safeties and doing all recording onto the Ninja. I strictly use Canon Log gamma to get the 12 stops of dynamic range this way, I don't notice banding in color gradients as 12 stops over 8 bits is still very high fidelity even though 10 bit would be optimal for 12 stops. ISO 20000 is quite usable...I think I will use the NDs instead of going below the native ISO of 850, but going below that does crush out the noise floor at the expense of recoverable dynamic range. I'd rather use NR in post to taste.

I would say the C100 is at least a stop better low light than the 5D3 video, though I will want to see what the Ninja does with the 5D3 clean HDMI output, which Canon said would be uncompressed 8 bit 422. Noise is a very complex thing for a codec to handle of course, and chroma subsampling makes color edges the other main concern. I have great hopes for the 5D3's clean HDMI out, it will still not be as comfortable a video camera as the C100, nor will the downsampling be as sharp. But it will have the full frame look and DOF and be free of moire and aliasing, and the noise floor should be quite fine and color edges resolved well. The dynamic range might be OK with Cinestyle gamma in that case, right now I don't use that because of the codec. Canon Log is still going to be better I predict...would be nice if Canon released Canon Log for the 5D3 along with the clean HDMI.

I'm sure Canon delayed the 5D3 clean HDMI till April just so people interested in doing films would give the C100 a try...I think the C100 will be my A cam workhorse for years even if the 5D3 video lives up to my greatest hopes. But I do want the good B cam, and I don't mind picking up a second Ninja if in April things work as I hope. Enjoy your shooting, Canon is being less and less evil these days, and the C100 + Ninja + Canon Log is a dream come true for me anyway.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 5dm3 picture style for video
« on: November 02, 2012, 09:53:27 AM »
I shot the typical Neutral 0, -4, -2, 0 for a year but really Neutral is quite brown and dingy compared to Faithful that has the same dynamic range benefits but a warmer and richer skintone. I also don't think -4 contrast is so good an idea, so I currently shoot Faithful 0, -3, -2, 0 and then add a bit of sharpening in post, a bit of desaturation usually, and a bit of contrast if needed.

The important thing is to get as much as you can through the codec while not requiring tons of manipulations in post. I tried Cinestyle but that's not so good an idea, you only have 8 bits to work with, and 4:2:0 until clean HDMI appears. The most important things are white balance and exposure...I set custom or kelvin white balances religously. To minimize burned in noise, I use the pull-down ISOs a third stop below the standard ISO (e.g. 5000 instead of 6400) and NEVER use pull-up ISOs (a third stop above standard). I never use HTP but some noise reduction is up for debate.

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake
« on: October 22, 2012, 02:23:00 PM »
I'm doing the standard thing of using it as a body cap so I can grab quick impromptu shots as needed. It's not truly great but it's better than missing the shot or burdening a group with preparation. I wouldn't rely on it as a primary but it's handy.

Lenses / Re: A very dumb view
« on: October 19, 2012, 09:18:09 PM »
Is there a site that scientifically tests and ranks filters? I would enjoy such a site. Certainly the anecdotal reviews we get from people trying to justify their spending are unlikely to be reliable.

Let's discuss the heat theory.

First of all, the 1DX already shoots video at the same frame rates of the 1DC. The 1DX also does full resolution stills at roughly half the speed of that video. And as Canon's flagship stills camera it's unlikely they crippled the 1DX still image any with Nikon breathing down their back.

If Canon is doing additional things to cool the sensor for 4K video, to reduce noise and improve low-light performance, why wouldn't they do that also for the 1DX? I doubt it is sensor cooling.

The 1DX video does not line skip but instead reads the entire sensor at runs the result through a downsampling algorithm. Unlike the 5D3 it does not do pixel binning or any other shortcut. So the 1DX, sensor-wise is going to be the same in its operating heat as the 1DC.

The 1DC otoh doesn't downsample the sensor readout but instead crops it for 4K resolution. This is the computationally easiest operation resolution-wise, as easy as line-skipping was on the 5D2. Just discard information out of the frame.

It's conceivable that Canon improved rolling shutter performance for the 1DC over the 1DX by increasing readout speed. They haven't mentioned this, but if so, it will be very easy to test (mount both cameras on the same fluid head, pan back and forth and compare the distortion angles of vertical lines). Canon has the tech in-house as the rolling shutter performance of the C300 is excellent.

If that is not the case, then the only other matter is whether the DIGIC chips and CF cards will get significantly hotter processing 4K at 30fps than they do processing 18MP RAW+JPEG at 15fps (forgive and correct me if I don't have these specs memorized right). It's conceivable but I don't think it's so very likely.

They haven't added a fan to the body, they may have tweaked the heat sink approach a bit on the processor chips, but I have doubts that they could do much to improve a fundamentally passive design without visible modifications (such as metal fins or something).

So I call BS to the heat theory. Where is this additional heat coming from, and more importantly, where's it going?

It's just firmware dude. They may put something in there to make you think otherwise but there are so few of these being made at that price that I doubt it will be much.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 14, 2012, 04:30:47 PM »
The conspiracy theorists would suggest DxO is waiting the completion of "sponsorship negotiations" as to what the final score will be.  :o

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 13, 2012, 07:51:31 PM »

FWIW, you're even more nuts.

Hugs and Kisses...  :-*

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unholy Trinity of Non-L Primes?
« on: October 13, 2012, 07:50:16 PM »
The 50/1.4 and 100/2.8 Macro are my picks for non-L primes in the Canon lineup. I ended up liking the 40 shorty a lot and have it as my body cap and shoot more with it than I should. On the wide end, potentially the new 24 or 28 IS versions are good, but I haven't tried them. I have the Zeiss 25/2 in that range, which makes sense as I do a lot of video. With stills I am usually using zooms (Canon 16-35 II, 10-22) on the wide end, fast apertures aren't so very crucial there but proper framing is (want to maximize resolution).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1dx, or d800e?
« on: October 13, 2012, 07:42:22 PM »
Rent the D800e for a weekend and see if it's all that.

If I'm you and money is this much of an object, I'd get the 200/2, maybe selling off the 7D and picking up a used T2i as a backup if you feel you need one.

Having to juggle two completely different systems and mounts would drive me nuts personally. If you're leaving Canon, leave completely.

The D800e has a better sensor and Nikon has the 14-24 and that is certainly a nice landscape kit. You don't have the money it sounds to play in that tool-for-the-job field, so stick with what you have and get more wedding$ till you do.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon EOS-1D X DXOMark Sensor Scores
« on: October 13, 2012, 03:36:12 PM »
I've come to the conclusion that the 1DX is worth paying double for vs. the 5D3. With Big Megapixel Talk on the horizon though, and Canon needing an answer to the D800e (which has a damn fine sensor and that's about it), maybe it's better I wait a bit before trading in this camera that I only got this year.

If Photographer B intentionally lobotomized Photographer A, ruining their photographic and earning ability for the remainder of their useful life, Photographer B would at minimum be immoral and unethical.

OK, we're getting a bit beyond the pale, but there are valid arguments that this behavior is immoral and unethical in that there exists some degree of compact between consumer and manufacturer that one won't unfairly take advantage of the other. The fact of transition costs from system to system (lenses etc.) mean that this can indeed rise to the level of betrayal. You can say that we should have known there was such a possibility beforehand, but that's like saying Photographer A should have known Photographer B might have been a sociopath.

It is possible that this has veered so far off-topic that there is no getting it back on, but...

It occurred to me it's ironic and hypocritical for photographers to even be having this argument.

Photographer A and Photographer B both shoot a wedding. Photographer A charges $800 and Photographer B charges $8,000.

Photographer A's images are out of focus, improperly exposed, mundane and uninspiring. Photographer B's pictures are not only technically perfect, but they are absolutely luminous, capture the moments perfectly and positively soar.

But wait, Photographer B admits that he USED THE EXACT SAME CAMERA as Photographer A. All of the difference is in the software holding the camera.

Clearly Photographer B is immoral and unethical.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: How canon charges 6000$ for firmware upgrade
« on: September 21, 2012, 04:34:46 PM »
Any software development types here that can give the masses an idea of how different the code would have to be to handle the 4K video stream?  It seems like the general thought is that its easy/free to 'turn on' this feature, but I'm guessing there is more to it than that.


It may in fact involve doing _less_ rather than more in the pipeline. If they use the native resolution of the sensor for their 4K (which they do, it's simply cropped to native res) you won't have to do a downsampling step. The rest of your processing can be the same pipeline as stills as long as the processors can handle the throughput without power or heat problems. The codec at the end will have more data to process, but the codecs can handle that and are industry standards. In both cases, the 1DC proves that the stock 1DX hardware is capable of the feat.

If that is the case, then the 1DX is exactly a _crippled_ version of the 1DC: resolution-destroying code is inserted into the firmware of the 1DX that is left out of the 1DC. This might not be terribly hard to hack; I can think of two approaches off hand instantly.

Software & Accessories / Re: Aperture 3.4 Issues
« on: September 21, 2012, 12:05:07 AM »

Roll over, Steve!   :-[

By making their products more exclusive based on price they are...

...charging what the market will bear (in their estimate) and thus maximizing profit, which in turn maximizes shareholder value, which is their obligation as a publicly held corporation.

...against the democratizing liberation of the independent filmmaker that made them so much money with the 5D2.

Democratic liberation of independent filmmakers isn't their goal or responsibility (see above).  Besides...those indies that were successful using 5DII's can now afford 1D C's, right?  :P  If not, they should just buy used 5DII's from the ones that have moved up...   :P :P

1) For products that don't obey scarcity economics (such as firmware/software) the "price that the market will bear" is difficult to determine as it is the maximum revenue that can be extracted from all customers optimizing for price. A million copies sold at $1 is more profitable than 90 copies sold at $10,000 etc..

2) Maintaining brand equity is more important to shareholders than short-term profits. The future value of the company is what is speculated on; a price to earnings ratio of 20 or more is common. If investors were just interested in dividends they may as well buy bonds. Canon had a coup with the 5D2 and its message of universal empowerment; if I was a shareholder I would demand an explanation why the company had ceded this strategic advantage to Panasonic with only firmware differences as a cause.

I would be fine if the camera was an open platform like a computer and had open access to the internals and allowed different firmware vendors to provide their own codecs and features; right now we have to rely on unauthorized hacker groups to do this for us. Fine, power to the hackers, but I created a lot of Canon shareholder value buying all that EF glass and I would like a company that strives to make that investment pay off rather than dangle mere firmware in front of me at enormous cost.

Canon refuses to price and sell the firmware upgrade. 1DX owners are SOL and treated like dirt even though they shelled out for Canon's flagship DSLR.

It is gruesome bad PR for their brand. It's simply arrogant mistreatment of the customer. And to pay for the programmers, the economies of scale they are forgoing by overpricing the thing would have taken care of that.

When Sony released the FS700 they promised futureproofing with 4K output. RED has a camera upgrade policy. Blackmagic cripples nothing intentionally, they are just starting out but they give you RAW video for $3,000. Canon could let us record RAW to SSD just the same for $3,000 and make a tidy profit and pay all their programmers too. By making their products more exclusive based on price they are acting elitist and fully against the democratizing liberation of the independent filmmaker that made them so much money with the 5D2.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 20