Messages

76

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 50mm f/1.2L good for video?

« on: August 30, 2012, 07:28:55 AM »

The 50mm 1.2L is, no doubt, a great lens. I also have the 5D Mark III and use it for video. I do not have the 50mm 1.2L, but I do have the 24mm 1.4L, Canon 50mm 1.4, and the 70-200mm 2.8L IS USM II (among others).

I and others prefer Zeiss lenses for video. The advantages of Zeiss lenses over the Canon lenses are mainly in usability for video, noting that most video users manually focus:
1. Zeiss lenses have hard focus stops. The focus ring will stop at infinity and at the minimum focus distance. The Canon's that I have will rotate past infinity and min (you can feel it, but the ring still moves easily).
2. Zeiss lenses have long focus throws. My Zeiss 85mm 1.4 will go about 270 degrees from min to infinity (my Canon 24mm 1.4L has about 180 degrees or a little less), and the 70-200 feels even less, making precise focus manually a little difficult (not impossible, just not as easy).
3. Zeiss have all metal build, including most of the hoods. For some, this may be a negative, as Zeiss lenses are heavy - though it isn't clear that this isn't due to the glass.

Finally, the image quality is arguably better on one or the other. I personally prefer the look of the Zeiss lenses, which makes the decision easy for me. In fact, our Canon 24mm will be going on the selling block soon, to be replaced with a Zeiss.

Now, for photos, that's possibly a different story, as the Zeiss are manual focus. Having said that, the 5D Mark III will confirm focus with the Zeiss ZE lenses.

77

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon Announces EOS C100 Professional Video Camera

« on: August 29, 2012, 09:51:06 AM »

I want to love this camera. But, a this price, I think I'll have to love it from afar.

I do like the form factor. It looks very close to the size of a DSLR, and perhaps easier to use with video. I suspect the image will be beautiful.

At a small premium over the Sony FS100, this camera would probably keep me away from the FS100. But, at nearly twice the current price of an FS100, I will have a hard time justifying the C100 over the FS100.

78

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon-launches-Cinema-EOS-System-flagship-camera

« on: August 29, 2012, 09:30:42 AM »

If I read this right, you can use these new lenses on crop cameras. Another good reason to buy the 650D. Also, 15,5-47 is a really nice span for a crop.

Thanks for giving me a good laugh this morning! A $24,000 lens on a sub-$1000 DSLR. Reminds me of some cars I see around my neighborhood with wheels worth more than the car. Whether you meant this tongue-in-cheek or not, it is quite a good commentary on what Canon thinks this market will buy into.

79

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Does Zeiss glass ever go on sale?

« on: August 26, 2012, 03:42:44 PM »

Michael,

Thanks for posting the link to the comparisons. I downloaded the blind comparison (part 1) before watching the second. I'm glad that my preference for Zeiss held up to the blind test. I preferred the Zeiss in each test.

80

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Does Zeiss glass ever go on sale?

« on: August 26, 2012, 02:35:31 PM »

The reason I am be-laboring all of this, is to remind folks: Please reward good customer service with your repeat business! 

I agree. I'll stay a little off topic here, but since I started the thread... 

I have taken the advice on this thread and sought out a used Zeiss lens from LensRentals.com. I'm almost sure to buy one from them in the next week or so - just deciding exactly which one(s). I e-mailed them Friday with a question and they replied within a couple of hours. I had rented from them before and was very pleased with their approach. This prompt response to my query further increases my confidence in them.

But, the experience with Helen/Adorama on this thread got me to thinking just now. I've not shopped with Adorama, though I've known of them and even thought of them as a company I'm willing to do business with. The reason I haven't shopped with them is that I've always had great service and an excellent experience with B&H. Given how much I shop with B&H, I'm even willing to forgive a minor slip-up - but to be clear, I've not ever had one slip up frpm them. (side note: B&H had a used Zeiss for sale on Friday that someone was apparently quick to snap up). No business is perfect and all suffer from the unforeseen circumstances, growing pains, third party restrictions, etc.

My point is, I feel fortunate that I think we actually enjoy quite a bit of good service/selection in this industry (photo and video). There is no other industry that I must deal with regularly in which I feel as though I have several good retail providers from which to choose. I think the reasons for this are probably pretty clear. The margins are decent. The retailers understand that we are a demanding (I almost said, "needy") bunch, we're passionate about what we do, and we're loyal to those who treat us with respect and fairness. In short, like any relationship, both parties bear some responsibility for its success.

Therefore, I'll echo Michael's sentiment. Reward good service with your loyal business. It is what maintains the incentive for such service.

81

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Does Zeiss glass ever go on sale?

« on: August 24, 2012, 08:05:37 PM »

Thanks for the replies. I think I'll probably go for a used Zeiss. I have the 85mm 1.4 and it is built like a tank. From a reputable dealer, I suspect that a used lens will work quite well for my purposes. I shot video with a Zeiss 50mm 1.4 on a 5D Mk III recently and fell in love with the lens. I had been satisfied (not exactly happy) with the Canon 50mm 1.4. But there is just something about the Zeiss that feels good and looks good. I have the Canon 24mm 1.4L II that is beautiful for photos, but I don't love it for video. I hope I haven't just developed a Zeiss fetish. 

82

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Audio on 5D Mark III - noisy in-camera pre-amp?

« on: August 22, 2012, 07:25:59 AM »

Thanks again, Paul!

83

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Audio on 5D Mark III - noisy in-camera pre-amp?

« on: August 21, 2012, 10:17:08 AM »

Paul, et al. Thanks again for the comments and tips. Keep 'em coming. Very helpful as I continue to learn.

We were using a Sony ECM-673 (shotgun) on a boom and, as suggested, getting as close to the talent as shots permitted. The problems we had were with the settings on and between the 5D3 and the Beachtek. The tips here will undoubtedly help fix those issues.

Since the 5D3 has manual audio control, I'm not going to address AGC in the below.

Not disregarding the suggestions for mic placement, etc... Just focusing on settings, here is my understanding of the suggestions for settings so far (I'm even listing the rather simple ones, just to make sure - I know, this all looks like common sense to many here).
- Connect the Beachtek to the 5D3 via the Beachtek's line out (not the headphone out)
- Monitor using good headphones from the 5D3 headphone output, with headphone level set high
- Set the Beachtek to stereo mode (as channels can be isolated in post to be made mono or panned, if desired)
- Set the Beachtek mic levels as hot as possible (unless there is clipping) (if there were just an "11"! )
- Set the 5D3 pre-amp audio levels as low as possible to get a good signal at about -12db (or perhaps even -18db with gain added in post)
- If 5D3 is at its lowest setting and the signal is still too hot (i.e., clipping is likely), back off on the Beachtek mic levels

I agree that the internal recording sounds very good with the proper signal and settings... Good enough not to need to bother with an external recorder. I'm getting there!

Would the NTG-2 be a worthwhile step up from the Sony? The Sony uses phantom power (supplied by the Beachtek, of course). Does the use of phantom power usually result in less signal? In other words, is it better to have a mic that has its own power supply, as a general rule?

84

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Audio on 5D Mark III - noisy in-camera pre-amp?

« on: August 20, 2012, 07:44:06 PM »

Axilrod - thanks for the helpful reply and information. I agree that setting the levels low seems to reduce the noise significantly and result in very nice quality sound. At this point, I don't need to attenuate the signal from the line out of the Beachtek. Rather, I need the boost in it that I get from the headphone out so that I can keep the 5D3's levels set low.

John - as always, thanks for the information. Question: are you using the aux out or the headphone out from the Sound Devices?

The thing I'm still unsure of is whether there are any "gotchas" that I might be missing by resorting to using the headphone out from the Beachtek rather than its  line out. Using the line out just requires too high a setting in the 5D3, which brings the 5D3's pre-amp noise in. So, I'm hoping that someone can say to me, "It is okay to use a headphone signal into the 5D3." Again, it sounds on my tests like it is fine, but I wonder if I'm missing something.

If that's kosher, then I'm thrilled, because the tests in the video really sound great to me at this configuration.

85

EOS Bodies - For Video / Audio on 5D Mark III - noisy in-camera pre-amp?

« on: August 20, 2012, 10:20:55 AM »

It seems that the 5D3's pre-amp can be quite noisy, at least when combined with my Beachtek DSA-XLR pre-amp. So, I sat down to try to see how to get the best results.

Here's a video I made of my tests. https://vimeo.com/47819373

The solution seems to be to set the 5D3's pre-amp as low as possible using the manual audio (microphone) controls. At zero, the audio is off. So, I set it to +1 click above off. To get a signal, though, I had to use the headphone out on my Beachtek, rather than the line out. The apparent (I don't know how to test this technically) signal-to-noise ratio defintely seems good, or at least better, in this configuration.

To get the same signal using the line out (rather than headphone out) on the Beachtek, I had to have the 5D3 set to about +1 or +2 clicks above center (50%). As you see (or hear) in the video, the pre-amp noise is really high at that setting.

Oddly, the pre-amp noise gets WORSE as you lower the manual control from +2 to +1 clicks above center.

My takeaway is to use as low a 5D3 audio setting as possible. However, I wonder if the unconventional headphone out from the Beachtek could cause problems that I haven't thought of or that don't show up (or sound off) in this test.

Any thoughts? Experiences? Suggestions for a better configuration?

86

Third Party Manufacturers / Does Zeiss glass ever go on sale?

« on: August 14, 2012, 07:57:35 AM »

I don't think I've ever paid the "normal" retail price for Canon glass, as it seems like they run rebates or sales a few times per year - and I rarely need to purchase a lens under a deadline.

I'm looking to buy a new Zeiss lens, but haven't seen them go "on sale" (e.g., rebates, etc.), but haven't been watching prices too long. Has anyone ever seen Zeiss glass go on sale?

87

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Recording time cornfuzion?!

« on: August 06, 2012, 08:46:29 AM »

Paul has given you some very nice advice. Having used DSLRs to record live events, I can say that it can be done. However, I think you should definitely consider Paul's advice to consider the XF100 (or the more expensive XF300) series.

My assumption is that you will have camera operators and that the you would prefer an editing workflow that is relatively straight-forward.

I have the Canon 5D Mark III and have used it for live event recording. It will record 29 mins continuously (and as Paul said, across mutliple files, but without any gaps). After 29 minutes, the recording will stop and then automatically start back up. The pause between those two clips is about 5 seconds in my experience.  Magic Lantern installed on a 550D/T2i or 600D/T3i (or 60D or 5D Mark II) can be set to restart recording after those camera's 11 minute segments. The gaps between clips for ML seem shorter to me than the 5D3 (and, presumably the 650D/T4i's). If target is TV, I don't recommed cutting the bitrate via ML to lengthen the recording time. It takes planning to make sure that these gaps do not overlap.

You could mix-and-match an XF100 or XF300 with 3 DSLRs. I've done this using a Sony PMW-EX1, a 5D3, and 600D/T3i. But, this makes post-production quite a challenge. The nice thing is that you have a continuous A-camera, with no drops in sound, off of which you can sync the other cameras. The downside is having to color-correct in post-production to make the cameras match. In the church's case, assuming limited windows in the church, the lighting should be constant from week to week. Thus, some color presets could be set after a lot of testing and these would presumably not stray to much. The only main post work is to sync and then edit (my recommended workflow).

Set far enough back and framed with enough zoom, you should have a fairly shallow depth of field with a good video camera such as the XF100 or XF300 (or the Sony PMW-200), provided there is some distance between the subject and the video screen, as Paul mentions. For other cameras, such as one focused on the congregation, you don't need (and perhaps don't want) shallow depth of field for the projection screen reason anyway. Same might hold if you place the other B cameras at angles that exclude the projection screen (e.g., to the side of the speaker, one on the choir, if any).

I love DSLR's for the shallow depth of field and look they get. But, I only shoot live events with them (along with my EX1 as the primary camera) because I can't afford additional proper video camera just for live events - and I don't shoot that many live events. In a way, I pay for this in post-production time. Many wedding videographers use DSLRs. But, they might only have a couple of cameras for an event that is relatively short and the artistic quality or look matters a lot to them. And, they have a lot of skill in shooting with them - and probably would not dream of relying on the DSLR's autofocus. Add in autoexposure and the good sound you will get (without spending extra money) with proper video cameras. I wonder how much skill you can expect from 4 camera operators, week in and week out?

Finally, as has been documented and discussed here, DSLR's do not have full HD resolution. This might or might not matter to you, depending on whether you are delivering HD for broadcast. But, at some point in the next few years, it might matter to someone. The Sony PMW-EX1 that I spent a fortune (to me) on 5 years back is still delivering a nice picture in good light and, as mentioned above is still a capable workhorse for its intended use.

In the end, I would not rate this situation as one in which a DSLR is the right tool. Again, it can be done as I've laid out above. But, I'm not sure you're really setting things up for the best result. If the budget and other considerations dictate, then so be it. But, having 4 identical cameras all with the same profiles and white balance and continuous recording would make delivering a program for broadcast each week much more efficient and, probably, with better quality.

88

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Magic Lantern v2.3

« on: July 27, 2012, 11:09:28 AM »

Anyone wanting to try it, just pay the $10 its worth every penny. 

I don't begrudge anyone that doesn't pay or chooses to pay the least amount. I just wanted to put in a word for the ML folks to encourage people to donate and to consider donating more than the minimum.

The more support they get, the more features and support we as a community of Canon users get.

I'll add that, unlike "free" sites that we use on the web or apps that we use on our smartphones, there is no ad support model that ML can rely on (and they certainly aren't getting support from Canon).

I e-mailed one of the external recording device companies recently to encourage them to "donate" a 5D3 to the ML team - making the argument that their sales would likely increase dramatically if ML could hack a clean HDMI out for the 5D3 (I know I'd buy the external recorder). Their response was effectively, "Gee, we'd really like to, but we can't support something would need to be installed on a camera when it isn't officially sanctioned by Canon." Fair enough. Just goes to show that ML really needs us to support it and not just by using it.

In short, the generosity of ML users is needed to keep the ML ball rolling.

89

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 5D II or wait for new entry level FF camera

« on: July 27, 2012, 11:02:46 AM »

The obvious (and best, I think) answer is to wait, since you're asking people to compare a 5D2 with an unknown.

I'm considering the same thing. Of course, you might be in a much more time-sensitive position than I. Fact is, I don't NEED a new camera.

But, in the sport of these types of discussions, I'll give you some thoughts that I've considered.

Do you use Magic Lantern?

Key argument for me in favor of 5D2: If you use Magic Lantern and rely on its peaking and histogram functions in video a lot (and perhaps its timelapse and myriad other functions), then I think this argues in favor of the 5D2. Magic Lantern is available for the 5D2 today and is unlikely to be available for the new camera, if at all, for another year (just speculating here) after release. Some might say to wait to see if Canon puts any of these features on the new camera. I simply don't see that happening, given Canon's track record.

Do you struggle against moire/aliasing, or have you adapted your shooting style to minimize it to an acceptable level for you?

Key argument for waiting: The new FF camera MIGHT have some of the improvements of the 5D3 with regard to moire/aliasing. My wife has a 5D3 that she lets me use from time to time. The lack of moire/aliasing is really nice and the image is nice to work with in post. This is the only thing that has really caused me to wait, other than simply not wanting to spend more money on a camera. Then again, you might wait and find the new camera's image is essentially the same as the 5D2. It isn't clear that anything will be lost, since the price is rumored to be about the same as the current 5D2 and there are so many 5D2's out there that you should be able to pick one up used, should the new FF lack some features that you really want/need.

Heck the new FF camera MIGHT even have more apparent sharpness or resolution than the 5D3. But, I find this possibility far less likely. If it did, Canon would have a hard time keeping them on the shelf.

90

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Video Resolution Comparison: 5D Mark III vs. Nikon D800

« on: July 24, 2012, 06:00:52 PM »

To record 1080p, you need the ninja 2 with the latest firmware and remove the CF card. Otherwise the D800 will throw 720p or 1080i. So if you were recording that, you need to re-do your test This information is in the manual too.

No, I didn't record on an external recorder. I was monitoring on an external monitor that reported dropping to 720p when I hit record. Internal recording from each camera is used (internal quality set to "best" for the Nikon and IPB for the Canon). Apples-to-apples.

I was actually surprised at how similar these two were. The moire from the D800 is just plain disappointing. Resolution of both is disappointing, too. In the end, it is the entire package that matters. I still find myself using my 5D3 and have not picked up my EX1 since - and the EX1 resolves full 1080p. In fact, I will be putting my EX1 up for sale. For a buyer who must have full 1080p and likes the look of the EX1, they will be getting a great bargain.