5DM3 for video?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MikeHunt

Guest
Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

WoodysGamertag said:
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.

Canon have provided a video that shows the new 5D Mark III video capabilities with lots of 'L' glass:

Canon 5D3 HD Sample Video
 
Upvote 0
Mar 25, 2011
16,847
1,835
Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

Check out Vincent laforet's blog. He is the one who first popularized video in the 5D MK II.

His tone says it all, he did not participate in making videos with it. Its improved, but other models do much better. Its a pretty unenthusiastic comment coming from a Canon maker of light."

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/

Here is the first paragraph!

"I obviously didn’t choose to thrown my hat into the ring in the quest to shoot a sequel to Reverie for the launch of this camera - and that is due to four main reasons:

1. I find it foolish to mess with a good thing…

2. The specs on this camera don’t necessarily warrant it.

3. No clean HDMI out… why…why…why? (not!?)

4. I thought that the Canon C300 was a bigger leap forward – and therefore chose to throw my hat in the ring to shoot "Mobius" just a few months ago for the Hollywood launch of Canon’s Cinema EOS line at Paramount in Hollywood. Canon’s move into the cinema market was a much bigger development in my book – pretty spectacular given how quickly it happened, following the MKII’s launch a few years earlier. The C300 is in effect the Canon 5D MKII all grown up – but a pure video camera (not a still camera.)"
 
Upvote 0
P

pravkp

Guest
Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

I honestly think if you were ok with 5d2 video- given its shortcomings, you should be certainly happy with 5d3 output.
c300 is in a different league. After mobius I doubt if Vincent laforet would want to throw his weight behind 5d3. May be he's gotta a taste of the 'C' model that Canon has at its workshop - which might explain his disappointment.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 23, 2012
31
0
5DMK3 HDMI Out

Ok, so quite a lot of chit chat about this. I would have liked uncompressed out, it would be really handy but the industry has got by without it for the last 3 years. Plus I think Canon are just holding this back for the 4K DSLR which I think will be announced in September.

What concerns me, and frankly annoys me quite a bit is this. If Gordon Laing is correct, and he nearly always is. Then Canon has done something pretty cheeky.

This is a quote from Gordon's preview of the camera on Camera Labs.

"You already know about the new headphone jack in addition to a stereo microphone input, but I understand the Mark III also outputs a higher resolution signal through the HDMI port once recording begins. I also believe the display icons remain present though, so I don't think anyone will be recording the output; I'm confirming this.

What's that all about? Any thoughts or shall I just move this to a video specific thread? Haha.

Apologies if this has already been raised.
 
Upvote 0
M

MikeHunt

Guest
Re: 5DMK3 HDMI Out

The new 5D Mk III does not output uncompressed video, unlike the Nikon D800 (unfortunately). What this means - and I've tried this with my 7D - is that whilst you're recording in 1080p full-HD what you see on an external monitor is not what you actually get on the CF card (or as Bill Gates would say the new Canon is not WYSIWYG).

A lot of videographers have invested in 5D Mark II's + a lot of 'L' primes. The inclusion of full uncompressed HDMI out would have meant it was a no-brainer to upgrade all their older 5D2 bodies for new 5D3. Now, who knows.

The issue of actually recording the HDMI out signal simultaneously is a bit of a red herring, I mean why would you want to do that without any fixing in post??

I've recorded interviews in a hotel conference room whilst simultaneously monitoring the recordings on a 60-inch LCD TV, to check custom-WB, focus etc. and it doesn't look great. In the end it was a distraction, so I stopped.
 
Upvote 0
J

jaduffy007

Guest
Re: 5DMK3 HDMI Out

Nikon just became the leader in DLSR video. Through their uncompressed hdmi out, we get 4;2;2 vs 4;2;0. That's a seriously big deal in general...but incredibly important if you do green screen stuff. I'm hearing mixed things about Magic Lantern offering clean hdmi out via a hack. We'll see.

Canon has a massive dslr following though, where many have invested heavily in Canon lenses, accessories, etc. Jumping ship ain't so easy.
 
Upvote 0
V

VishVR

Guest
Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

WoodysGamertag said:
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?

Personally I am sticking with 5DII, my next upgrade is going to be doing 4k video.
 
Upvote 0
S

sh00terman

Guest
Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

wow, crazy to read posts here about people complaining it's not a sufficient enough upgrade, or too expensive, not worth it, etc. i mean really?

first of all, with its new compression abilities alone, importing into an avid (what i use) will be a vast improvement over the mark II. to complain that it doesn't have a 1080p 60 chip - which the 1dx doesn't have either - therefore, it's not worth it, is just plain silly. first of all, shooting high speed is so yesteryear. i don't know many DPs, producers shooting 60p in the broadcast world i traverse in anymore - which is high-end sports docs. maybe if you are making vimeo videos, having a 1080p, 60 chip will rock your musical montages... right there with all of them TL videos, which are yesteryear as well. if you want to make slow mo video step up to the phantom and do real slo mo.

what matters the most and why we use these cameras are to tell stories. for example, having the ability to shoot without a ton of lights adds to the versatility of the 5d and allowing more intimate access with the subject. now you have an upgrade coming out that will allow you to shoot in even lower light conditions, while improving picture quality -- wow, that's a filmmaker/tv maker's dream come true.

since somebody here mentioned c300, let me chime in: the c300 was not built from a 5d. in fact, it was three years in the making (do math) and was based on canon's video cameras - not DSLRs and targeting cinema DPs, NOT 5d users. the c300, is most amazing with capturing images in low light - just breathtaking. however, it's nowhere close to 5d mark II and mark III with regards to versatility and ease of use, especially, in a run and gun world.

and really, does anyone care what vincent has to say? obviously, canon doesn't.

lastly, i edit and shoot extensively with the 5d in the high-end world of broadcast TV. we also use a lot of footage from RED, sony F3, Alexa and Varicam. the 5d mark II holds up mighty fine against all of those other, MORE expensive cameras. in fact, when all of the mentioned camera's files are transcoded into avid media composer with its DNX compression - real world for most of TV that airs - the mark II looks just amazing and hard to imagine that it's so much cheaper than those other cameras... hence that revolution it started. now canon is coming out with a new version that actually improves compression and greatly improves the video, offering better low light sensitivity to noise ratio - and that's not worth a grand more?

well, good thing they put a headphone jack in it.
 
Upvote 0
T

theuserjohnny

Guest
Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

For me personally the video isn't that big of a leap. Sure it might look better and they fixed some of the artificial video but it isn't that huge of a leap. Personally I'm waiting for the next camera from camera which is the "4k video DSLR" from them. It won't have a huge price tag like the C300 but it won't be cheap as well.

I mainly shoot video w/ my 5D Mark II but while excited about the 5D III there just wasn't enough to really make me wanna go for it. If your doing video you should wait for the "4K video DSLR".
 
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
Eye of Mind looks pretty good, but it's only available in low res (WTF Canon?).

Mario & Nette is a disgrace, and someone should get fired for deciding to use it as a sample movie.

Color of Hope is okay, but like Mario & Nette they relied too much on natural light. I really want to see what the camera can do under Ideal conditions.
 
Upvote 0
T

thundermonkey

Guest
Nice to see this thread is still going.

Having looked at this video https://vimeo.com/37879608

I think it is clear I need to get the Mark 3, coming from a 60D. If I had a Mark 2 I would probably stick with it. I will look out for some more reviews, but I think I really want the Mark 3 now. Would come in really handy with that low light capability.

Anyone else considering the M3 from a crop sensor?
 
Upvote 0
May 12, 2011
1,386
1
Re: Is the 5DM3 better for video?

HurtinMinorKey said:
Mobius was probably the worst of the demos, and an embarrassment to filmmaking. He could have done much better with the baller c300. So if he is going to comment on a camera he hasn't used, then why should we care?

See there's your mistake, thinking that the fact that he had a C300 made ANY difference in the story whatsoever. In video the story is 100x more important than the camera. You can't just give someone an Alexa and expect that to make the story, it absolutely will not. People would much rather see a good movie with lower resolution than some piece of garbage shot on a really high end camera.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.