5D MkIII vs D800 for video

[traveller]

I don't know if anyone has seen this article yet, I'm not a video user so I cannot form a judgement.  Their assessment seems very preliminary and full of caveats, but it may interest you video guys:

http://www.eoshd.com/content/7311/canon-5d-mark-iii-vs-nikon-d800-for-video

[psolberg]

I read that the other day. But the problem with that analysis is that the owner of that site is totally tilted towards canon (or I should say against Nikon) so I can't really take most the author says without feeling like I'm watching the fox news channel talk about democrats vs republicans  I tend to avoid sites titled towards one manufacturer for this very reason.

I also saw his evaluation of the D800 came from that motorcycle video that was released on the web, and not an actual MOV from the camera. I was hoping to get an unbiased more scientific opinion of the D800's video strenghts, but I guess I'll have to wait for that to come from another source that is more objective.

For me, the thing that I find appealign of the D800 is the uncompressed video over HDMI at full 1080p. You can feed it external capture devices and pick your choice of bitrate and codec instead of beign tied to the camera defaults.
according to Philip Bloom, he was told that HDMI on the 5DIII is 720P and not clean or uncompressed
http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/02/mk/

So while dissapointing, it is not a deal breaker. But I'll want to see a capture of a D800 at a high bitrate from an external recorder versus whatever the highest quality output of a 5DIII is before deciding. I find macro blocking from the 5DII to be annoying and I'll be looking for that in 5DIII footage. I understand the 5DIII doesn't do line skipping like the 5DII does and that in this regard the D800 may be behind and have the same moire issues of the 5DII. For me, moire hasn't been an issue, and I've seen so much amazing footage from the 5DII that I think it will never be an issue for me. So while I welcome the reduction of it,  I was looking more towards clean video out of the HDMI.

I guess I'll wait for both cameras to ship and for some unedited MOVs to start making the rounds. It seems to me the majority of opinions right now are formed on speculation and guesswork instead of actual footage. So I'll wait.

[sublime LightWorks]

I read that the other day. But the problem with that analysis is that the owner of that site is totally tilted towards canon (or I should say against Nikon) so I can't really take most the author says without feeling like I'm watching the fox news channel talk about democrats vs republicans  I tend to avoid sites titled towards one manufacturer for this very reason.

I also saw his evaluation of the D800 came from that motorcycle video that was released on the web, and not an actual MOV from the camera. I was hoping to get an unbiased more scientific opinion of the D800's video strenghts, but I guess I'll have to wait for that to come from another source that is more objective.

For me, the thing that I find appealign of the D800 is the uncompressed video over HDMI at full 1080p. You can feed it external capture devices and pick your choice of bitrate and codec instead of beign tied to the camera defaults.
according to Philip Bloom, he was told that HDMI on the 5DIII is 720P and not clean or uncompressed
http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/02/mk/

So while dissapointing, it is not a deal breaker. But I'll want to see a capture of a D800 at a high bitrate from an external recorder versus whatever the highest quality output of a 5DIII is before deciding. I find macro blocking from the 5DII to be annoying and I'll be looking for that in 5DIII footage. I understand the 5DIII doesn't do line skipping like the 5DII does and that in this regard the D800 may be behind and have the same moire issues of the 5DII. For me, moire hasn't been an issue, and I've seen so much amazing footage from the 5DII that I think it will never be an issue for me. So while I welcome the reduction of it,  I was looking more towards clean video out of the HDMI.

I guess I'll wait for both cameras to ship and for some unedited MOVs to start making the rounds. It seems to me the majority of opinions right now are formed on speculation and guesswork instead of actual footage. So I'll wait.

Actually the HDMI is 1080p, as answered by Chuck Westfall in an interview on Planet5D:

Planet5D: Of all the questions, the biggest on my list is finding out if the Canon EOS 5D Mark III has fixed the problem of switching to SD on the HDMI output when recording.
CW: the resolution does not drop when you are connected to an external monitor and hit record. It does still have all of the overlays and the signal is not meant to be recorded.

This has been verified by a 3rd party:

http://blog.planet5d.com/2012/03/questions-answered-for-the-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-hdmi-video/

See further down in that link for the Vimeo video showing this.  So while it's 1080p, it not clean, all the overlays are still present.  They only went half way in their update.

[Policar]

Unless you're doing extensive vfx or aren't very good at exposing (or need a really flat look for whatever reason), clean HDMI out is not that important...  And most of those external recorder devices are pains in the ass and/or big and expensive...  At that point, just get an FS100 (or F3 or C300).  Kind of defeats the point of a dSLR (small and cheap).  I'm sure someone out there needs this feature, but for most it's a just talking point.  A lot will depend on how the all intraframe codec performs; fwiw, the c300's codec is surprisingly great so you never know...

Specs don't mean much relative to how the footage performs subjectively and how it measures on test charts.  Specs are usually a best case scenario.  We don't have test charts, just a few clips online.  So far it seems like the 5DIII has less aliasing and skew and better low light abilities but the footage is really soft. When both cameras are released and further tested we'll know the full story.

[marvinhello]

I read that the other day. But the problem with that analysis is that the owner of that site is totally tilted towards canon (or I should say against Nikon) so I can't really take most the author says without feeling like I'm watching the fox news channel talk about democrats vs republicans  I tend to avoid sites titled towards one manufacturer for this very reason.

I also saw his evaluation of the D800 came from that motorcycle video that was released on the web, and not an actual MOV from the camera. I was hoping to get an unbiased more scientific opinion of the D800's video strenghts, but I guess I'll have to wait for that to come from another source that is more objective.

For me, the thing that I find appealign of the D800 is the uncompressed video over HDMI at full 1080p. You can feed it external capture devices and pick your choice of bitrate and codec instead of beign tied to the camera defaults.
according to Philip Bloom, he was told that HDMI on the 5DIII is 720P and not clean or uncompressed
http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/02/mk/

So while dissapointing, it is not a deal breaker. But I'll want to see a capture of a D800 at a high bitrate from an external recorder versus whatever the highest quality output of a 5DIII is before deciding. I find macro blocking from the 5DII to be annoying and I'll be looking for that in 5DIII footage. I understand the 5DIII doesn't do line skipping like the 5DII does and that in this regard the D800 may be behind and have the same moire issues of the 5DII. For me, moire hasn't been an issue, and I've seen so much amazing footage from the 5DII that I think it will never be an issue for me. So while I welcome the reduction of it,  I was looking more towards clean video out of the HDMI.

I guess I'll wait for both cameras to ship and for some unedited MOVs to start making the rounds. It seems to me the majority of opinions right now are formed on speculation and guesswork instead of actual footage. So I'll wait.

Actually, footages from both camera have been released, for D800 there are two short clips which are about 120MB size, shot in bright day light, showed very good moire control. 5D3 footage is about 535MB (IPB), showed amazing moire reduction AND low light capability (iso3600), rolling shutter is 50% less than 5D2.

Personally speaking, resolution on these two camera looks identical, however i'd say that 5D3 performs a little better. There are obvious over-sharpened edge halo on the D800 footage

[psolberg]

http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/22/5dmk3/
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7551/canon-5d-mark-iii-review

now both seem to think the uncompressed 4:2:2 output of the D800 gives it an edge given the internal codec of the 5DIII failed to live up to expectations. hacked GH2 easily blows the 5DIII out of the water.

[Axilrod]

Uhhh it seems like the EOSHD guy is changing his tune....
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7590/first-truly-representative-nikon-d800-video-footage-dxomark-says-sensor-is-best-ever

[darrellrhodesmiller]

Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800

[psolberg]

Canon 5D Mark III vs Nikon D800

didn't you just post that or are you spamming all the D800 vs 5dIII threads?

[expatinasia]

I have been given a budget to buy a new camera and at the moment I am leaning towards the D800. Only reason is the lack of autofocus on the 5D III. While some will argue that it is not needed there are times when it is, and I discussed this at length this past weekend with some pro photogs who work for top newspapers and magazines.

I do not want to switch to Nikon and prefer Canon but I need AF at times.

I am also still considering whether to buy the XA 10 or even XA 100 (now I have seen the bloom review) and continue to travel with two cameras, something I was hoping to avoid.

Of course nothing will be purchased until the April announcement for Canon.