5DM3 for video?

[thundermonkey]

Hi all.

I currently shoot with the 60D and have to deal with a lot of low light shooting. By chance, does anyone have a t2i/60d and 5D, and have you noticed a difference say, using the same lenses on either camera and notice if the 5D makes a significant difference in low light shooting?

I am currently trying to figure out how to get the absolute best low light performance out of my camera. Yes, I know of the native ISOs, and I bough neat video, but I am wondering if getting the Mk3 might help me up my game as well. Of course, that same money could get me another cam (maybe T4i) and another lens or two. Just trying to figure out what is the wisest thing to do!

 

[neuroanatomist]

A FF sensor gathers more total light, and that translates directly to a 1.33-stop advantage of lower ISO noise

 

[thundermonkey]

OK, but tell me this. Saying stuff like that is all good, but is it one of those things where "on paper" it is better but not so much in reality?

I'm trying to figure out if it really is a case that, yes, you should absolutely try to go the 5D route for video because it is worth it in terms of the image you get.

 

[DavidRiesenberg]

The current 5D2 is much better in low light than any Canon APS-C camera. I would guess that the 5D3 will improve on that. Wether it will provide a noticeable enough improvement in low light to justify the cost is a subjective matter but the general consensus is that the 5D2 is is a worthwhile upgrade if you are primarily shooting in low light situations.

If you haven't already, I suggest you watch the three part Zacuto shootout that compares a lot of cameras in various scenarios: http://www.zacuto.com/the-great-camera-shootout-2011

 

[Axilrod]

OK, but tell me this. Saying stuff like that is all good, but is it one of those things where "on paper" it is better but not so much in reality?

I'm trying to figure out if it really is a case that, yes, you should absolutely try to go the 5D route for video because it is worth it in terms of the image you get.

Yes, I used to have a T2i and have had a 5DII for over a year and I shoot video 90% of the time. There is a significant difference in low-light capability between the two, generally the larger the sensor, the better it does in low light.

For instance, with the T2i, ISO800 is pretty much the limit for shooting acceptable video, and even at 800 there is a fair mount of noise. But with the 5D you can get away with ISO 1600 all day, and will look less noisy than a T2i at ISO 800, so there is a pretty big difference. But with the 5D you'll also get more shallow depth of field, and your lenses will look less "zoomed" than they do on your 60D. Your wide angle lenses will actually look wide instead of medium telephoto-ish. Also the 5DII handles rolling shutter much better than the 60D.

As for whether it's worth it or not to buy a 5DIII, I'd honestly say no. If you aren't even sure of the differences between an FF and APS-C sensor I would guess that you aren't doing work at the level that would necessitate purchasing a brand new $3500 camera. You would be better off buying new glass and upgrading bodies once the price of the 5DIII drops, or you could get a 5DII and it would still be a big improvement over the 60D.

 

[SPG]

Also the 5DII handles rolling shutter much better than the 60D.

I think you mean that the other way around. I don't own a 5DII, but when I've used one I thought the jello effect was much more pronounced than on my 7D (same sensor as 60D).

 

[cinema-dslr]

Exactly The jello effect is caused by the speed at wich a sensor is readout.
The 5dII has it worst because of larger sensor and the digic 4 has more work to do with the codec.
The aps-c camera's have a smaller more in line of s35 sensor and is newer tech so readout is faster also the codec is more robust.
The 5dx/III probably will fix things and be much better.
The FF camera's definitely have higher iso capability/smaller DOF.

 

[tt]

Also the 5DII handles rolling shutter much better than the 60D.

I think you mean that the other way around. I don't own a 5DII, but when I've used one I thought the jello effect was much more pronounced than on my 7D (same sensor as 60D).

For rolling shutter - about 6 and 7.30 min in on the Zacuto Great Camera shootout. http://www.zacuto.com/the-great-camera-shootout-2011/episode-three

 

[thundermonkey]

My main thing is that I maybe just need to figure out how to best utilize the situation I am in. I have a lot of low light situations to deal with. Even for situations that are not "low" light they are poorly lit all the same, and external lighting is almost never an option.

So perhaps I need some help in figuring out how best to expose what I shoot. I generally just eyeball what I am shooting and shoot as wide as I can. For something like a wedding ceremony, though, I encounter the problem where shooting at 1.4 on my 50mm will result in people going out of focus at times as you probably guessed. However, jumping up to 2.8 might still make things a bit too dark, though maybe I am overthinking it and should just bump things up to 1250 or so in ISO.

 

[filmrebel]

5D III Slow Motion?

Hey everyone. What do you think is in store for the video fps rate of the 5d III. I'm not asking if anyone knows, I'm just wondering what you'll think. 60p 720p (or even better 60p 1080p)? Thanks!

 

[ed24]

Re: 5D III Slow Motion?

Hey everyone. What do you think is in store for the video fps rate of the 5d III. I'm not asking if anyone knows, I'm just wondering what you'll think. 60p 720p (or even better 60p 1080p)? Thanks!

I predict exactly the same as the 1DX, there is no way they'll let a DSLR out perform the C300 on frame rates. I'd be astonished if there was a 1080p setting for 50/60FPS.

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

it does look like it beats the c300 in bitrate though. The way I interepret the specs is 10.1 MBs (80Mbs), so that looks like 30fps @4:2:2. Anyone else agree?

 

[WoodysGamertag]

Is the 5DM3 better for video?

I pre-ordered the 5DM3 because I have a sizable investment in L glass and as a T3i guy it's a solid improvement for me.

However, I have started wondering if the 5DM3 still has the video edge over the D800. Mostly just out of curiosity, I'm not interested in switching.

What are the pros and cons of each system for guys with a video focus?

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

^Thank you for correcting my math.

The comparison to Blu-ray is a bit deceiving though. Because Blu-ray is a finalized product in compressed form. You need more information to do post production work. But either way, 90Mbs looks good. I just hope they don't nerf it when they realize that it outclasses the C300 in this one aspect.

 

[NormanBates]

Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

still no idea, we'll have to wait for detailed reviews
the canon seems to have better in-camera codec, but the nikon has clean HDMI-out
the canon should be moire/aliasing free, the nikon may have some
the nikon has a very fast rolling shutter and therefore nearly no jello artifacts, no idea on the canon
but for the most part: no idea, let's wait and see

 

[NormanBates]

you can't compare bitrates so easily
90 Mbps with all-intra may be more editing-friendly but worse image quality than 33 Mbps with IPB
or it may be the other way around
so: we just don't know yet

 

[kkoster]

Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

Not sure yet until we see some in-depth reviews.

I for one am sticking firmly with my 5D2 for now. I see nothing in the new specs for the 5D3 that is enough to tempt me to upgrade.

Would be a different story for me if I saw 1080p at 60fps, or 120fps at 1280x720. But it's just a full frame 7D really, with an extra 2 stops of light over the 5D2... at least it seems that way to me.

A bit disappointing but will keep an open mind.

 

[Axilrod]

Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

""The video bitrate is a very high 91Mbit* in 1080p ALL-I mode. That is well beyond broadcast standard AVC Intra 50." 8)

 

[schemula]

Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

I am a T2i looking to upgrade to full frame at some point. To this point I have spent my money on lenses, so, Nikon is not an option.

Only based on the Canon PR, I see a few claims specific to video:

• 29 minute 59 second record length - auto splits 4GB files
• less moiré
• 720p 60fps
• all I-Frame compression
• embedded timecode

They also had some audio improvements including a headphone jack, but I use a field recorder and don't do audio on the camera.

Unless the moiré performance is truly dramatic, I may opt for one of the used 5DM2 we are likely to see from upgraders.

But like everyone else says, we'll know more when people actually get these in their hands and report back.

 

[BRNexus6]

Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

I am a T2i looking to upgrade to full frame at some point, and to this point, I have spent my money on lenses. So, Nikon is not an option.

Only based on the Canon PR, I see a few claims specific to video:

• 29 minute 59 second record length - auto splits 4GB files
• less moiré
• 720p 60fps
• all I-Frame compression
• embedded timecode

They also had some audio improvements including a headphone jack, but I use a field recorder and don't do audio on the camera.

Unless the moiré performance is truly dramatic, I may opt for one of the used 5DM2 we are likely to see from upgraders.

But like everyone else say, we'll know more when people actually get these in their hands and report back.

Word is the moire is reduced to the point that it won't ruin shots. It's dramatically improved over the Mark ll.