Canon EOS-1D X Mark II to Shoot 4K Video [CR2]

[unfocused]

I guess we have to ignore those who have absolutely no imagination and no inclination to improve their game ... again ... with the 4K revolution.

Feel free, but I have the strong feeling that Canon does not ignore the ignorant but significant portion of potential buyers that do not crop a 4k image to 180p, achieving zoom or pan effects in post...

People don't crop 4K to 1080p, they down-sample and get increased IQ as a result.

I think he meant that a 4K original video can be reframed to a 2K video, thus achieving HD quality. I would say this is one of the reasons to shoot 4K now. If you are doing documentary work, where it is a one shot opportunity, then the 4K original framing can be off a bit and then adjusted to a better frame in 2K.

That doesn't happen nearly as often as it does with photography.

If a movie is shot in 4K, do they 'reframe" it down to 2K? No.

When a movie is shot, the framing is done once and done right the first time. The master is in 4K and a 2K (HD) video is made from that. In the future maybe masters will be done with 8K. When movies like Star Wars are shot, there's no "cropping" of the frame - that would be wasting film and people's time.

Smart people are already shooting in 4K and using it to master HD video - and not for the purpose of cropping.

If you are doing documentary work then you take a professional approach to it and get it right the first time so that minimal time needs to be spent later "correcting" in post. Doing multiple takes is perfectly acceptable and indeed preferred to "reframing."

I'll remember your sage advice the next time I'm shooting a Star Wars sequel with a DSLR.

Seriously, Dilbert your response is a total non-sequitur. Did you fail reading comprehension? No one was talking about Hollywood film production. Gsealy was talking about the not uncommon need to do some reframing or cropping in post when shooting documentary footage on the fly. If you actually had any real life experience you would know that it's not always possible to have perfect framing when shooting run and gun footage. Having a little headroom for cropping (reframing), post-production stabilization, pan shots in post production, zooming in post production, etc., is a very helpful thing.

 

[Nitroman]

Lets hope it has moe than 18mp this time - as the last one was pathetic for a 1Ds 3 replacement, pro spec, top of the range dslr !

 

[ahsanford]

Lets hope it has moe than 18mp this time - as the last one was pathetic for a 1Ds 3 replacement, pro spec, top of the range dslr !

Where have you been, sir? I've been alleging that the 1Ds3 camp has wanted a high MP 1D body for ages and all I get are cricket noises.

Why can't there be a low FPS 1D body with that 5DS sensor in it? Some dude will pay $7k for that -- for the added toughness/sealing, for the 1D goodies like better metering, spot meter at any AF point, etc.

- A

 

[neuroanatomist]

...
Seriously, Dilbert your response is a total non-sequitur. Did you fail reading comprehension? No one was talking about Hollywood film production. Gsealy was talking about the not uncommon need to do some reframing or cropping in post when shooting documentary footage on the fly. If you actually had any real life experience you would know that it's not always possible to have perfect framing when shooting run and gun footage. Having a little headroom for cropping (reframing), post-production stabilization, pan shots in post production, zooming in post production, etc., is a very helpful thing.

So you're saying that people with video cameras that shoot 1080p crop their video in post so that they can deliver video that has less than full 1080p resolution? Maybe amateurs that don't have a lot of experience (and thus don't know how to frame a shot correctly) do that. But when you've got reporters live on the scene with a cameraman, there's no cropping in post and that's very much run and gun plus live to air.

As usual, dilbert is totally correct concerning the way things work in dilbertland...a place that seems to diverge ever further from reality as time passes.

 

[jeffa4444]

I guess we have to ignore those who have absolutely no imagination and no inclination to improve their game ... again ... with the 4K revolution.

Feel free, but I have the strong feeling that Canon does not ignore the ignorant but significant portion of potential buyers that do not crop a 4k image to 180p, achieving zoom or pan effects in post...

People don't crop 4K to 1080p, they down-sample and get increased IQ as a result.

I think he meant that a 4K original video can be reframed to a 2K video, thus achieving HD quality. I would say this is one of the reasons to shoot 4K now. If you are doing documentary work, where it is a one shot opportunity, then the 4K original framing can be off a bit and then adjusted to a better frame in 2K.

That doesn't happen nearly as often as it does with photography.

If a movie is shot in 4K, do they 'reframe" it down to 2K? No.

When a movie is shot, the framing is done once and done right the first time. The master is in 4K and a 2K (HD) video is made from that. In the future maybe masters will be done with 8K. When movies like Star Wars are shot, there's no "cropping" of the frame - that would be wasting film and people's time.

Smart people are already shooting in 4K and using it to master HD video - and not for the purpose of cropping.

If you are doing documentary work then you take a professional approach to it and get it right the first time so that minimal time needs to be spent later "correcting" in post. Doing multiple takes is perfectly acceptable and indeed preferred to "reframing."

I've been in the movie camera rental business for 35 years in the film days people shot open gate and re-framed in post regularly whether movies, commercials or TV. The closest to open gate is the full-frame Arri Alexa and guess what productions, editors etc. Reframe from open gate. You've less Lee way with 16x9 but it's still done particularly the more resolution you have so I'm afraid Dilbert even in Hollywood your totally wrong.

 

[sanj]

I have been a mainstream DP in features, commercials etc. Although I understand the benefit of reframing possibilities in post, I must say that this option is left only for shots which for some reason did not get framed properly while shooting and retake is not possible.

Generally speaking we frame perfectly whenever can and leave as little as possible for post. Dilbert has a very valid point.

All are shooting 4k to master HD video but they know that if need to there is a possibility of reframing.
But this reframing thing is over rated - when zoomed in the picture does look a little 'off'. I noticed this many times when I grade on a large screen.

 

[sanj]

I guess we have to ignore those who have absolutely no imagination and no inclination to improve their game ... again ... with the 4K revolution.

Feel free, but I have the strong feeling that Canon does not ignore the ignorant but significant portion of potential buyers that do not crop a 4k image to 180p, achieving zoom or pan effects in post...

People don't crop 4K to 1080p, they down-sample and get increased IQ as a result.

I think he meant that a 4K original video can be reframed to a 2K video, thus achieving HD quality. I would say this is one of the reasons to shoot 4K now. If you are doing documentary work, where it is a one shot opportunity, then the 4K original framing can be off a bit and then adjusted to a better frame in 2K.

As is frequently the case, our friend Dilbert is relying only on what he reads on the internet and not on any real world experience. In fact, cropping is one of the best uses for 4K.

Gsealy, you are correct: re-framing is one use.

Another key one would be post-production stabilization. To stabilize in post Premiere must crop the image to remove the shaky, inconsistent edges and reframe the sequence. Starting with a 4K image would preserve the quality.

I'm not sure what romanr74's exact point was supposed to be, but certainly taking a 4K frame and creating a move that simulates panning or a slider shot by cropping to HD would also be useful.

In my experience this is all theoretical. As soon as we start zooming in various flaws of the shot (focus, noise) start showing up and when edited together with un-cropped footage it feels wrong. We techs notice it immediately and know the reason, the producers and general audiences feel it subconsciously. If you do not agree then try it and watch on a large area. Yes, a 'bit' here and there is fine.

 

[sanj]

I'm a sports photographer. I use the 1DX to shoot sports. If we need or use a video camera to shoot sports it is NOTHING like a 1DX.

Even a cheap consumer Sony PXW-Z100 is better suited for video. If you shoot pro-sports and need serious equipment then a Sony PMW-F55 CineAlta is a beautiful piece of equipment as it shoot over 200fps for stunning slow-mo

We've know for years that the 1DX could be hacked to shoot video but that's not what "I" need as a sports shooter. I have to believe at 4K Canon's 1DX MKII would be for a VERY small user group. Why??? Why??? When there are so many better video options

Canon is on the cusp of real product reliability issues with my fellow sports shooters who use 1DX bodies. We ALL travel with 3 bodies now because of oil and debris issues with 1DX's we have to get the shot. Shooting stills for the Olympics in 2016 we want and improved 1DX not a video camera. We need a 1DX THAT DOES NOT SPEW OIL, freeze, stop focusing or blow a PCB.

Canon better get back to serving pro-users so we're 2-3 steps in front and not playing catch up. I don't need a video TOY. We pay $10,000 to $12,000 for our lenses to take amazing stills. A NEW 1DX that will NOT spew oil will be fine. Please not a another BOMB with service recalls, service advisories and units that BRICK. How about a camera without "issues" that allows pros to work without FEAR so we don't have to lug all these back-up bodies around.

Get back to BASICS CANON. You're going to lose a market that you'll NEVER get back

I also shoot sports, a lot of international events, and for stills the 1D X is the best there is.

But I also shoot a lot of video, and for the type of video I do the 1D X is terrific.

I can shoot sports and do the type of video I need to do all on one machine. How great is that! Especially because international travel is concerned so weight is an issue I need to watch.

If you are also a sport shooter then I doubt you will leave Canon because the 1D X II also does 4K. Same as you did not leave Canon as the 1D X can shoot video too. That's just too funny.

I'm more concerned with quality. I'm not shooting video for a major sports production that requires exceptional features "devoted" to video and slow-mo with a Canon 1DX. We're using a camera that starts at $22K before you even put on a lens or an advanced ENG pack to the truck to the dish. The REASON I use this example is the 1DX is at the TOP of it's game "for now" for shooting sports stills. That is WHY I use it. I'm not shooting in field remote fast action sports for the Olympics with a 1DX. THAT WOULD BE A JOKE. The 1DX is "THE" sports still camera. This is INSANE... The 1DX is not for equivalent Hi-END VIDEO for professional SPORTS where you need a DEVOTED PLATFORM for VIDEO optimized for SPORTS.

I do not understand at all, what you are getting at.

The 1D X is the best sports camera for stills currently available. You seem to agree on that.

The 1D X II will be an even better sports camera, retaining the title of best sports camera for stills available.

The fact that Mark I shoots HD video does not seemed to have affected your shooting of stills, in just the same way that if the Mark II can shoot 4K video it won't affect your shooting of stills either.

So where is the problem?!

Nobody, and I mean nobody, is suggesting that the 1D X II is going to compete with the C300 or any other dedicated video/broadcast camera. That frankly is crazy.

If your primary concern is video, then get a video camera. If your primary concern is stills then get a stills camera. But don't get upset when the manufacturer tells you that they have built in a few other useful features for you. From memory the C-line can even take stills!

BTW your caps lock seems to be broken. :

You tell him Expentesia. And yes, the caps lock needs fixing.

 

[3kramd5]

Leica's latest entry into the camera market, the "SL", is capable of shooting 4k video (although more expensive.) The Sony A7RII also shoots 4K video and many would expect it to be close to the price of the 5DIV.

If the 5DIV doesn't do 4K at launch then Canon is going to get laughed at.

The company that made using DSLRs to shoot BluRay quality video its own thing now cannot deliver 4K capability in small bodied DSLRs whilst companies all around them can.

If Canon don't have 4K ready for the 5DIV then they may now realize it will be necessary to push back the release so that it is ready.

But the same also is true for Nikon - their next big ticket DSLRs also need to deliver 4K video capability.

Isn't this thread about the 1D?

Regardless, I don't think Canon or Nikon measure themselves based on humor. What matters is: will a 5D4 without 4k sell? And I think the answer is: if it's a good camera, yes.

 

[privatebydesign]

I am in the target market for the 1DX MkII, I don't care if it has 4k or not and it will not be a determining factor in my purchase decision, though I expect it will have it.

I doubt the 5D MkIV will have native 4k at launch and I expect the 1DC is the only DSLR C line camera we will ever see.

 

[ahsanford]

I am in the target market for the 1DX MkII, I don't care if it has 4k or not and it will not be a determining factor in my purchase decision, though I expect it will have it.

I doubt the 5D MkIV will have native 4k at launch and I expect the 1DC is the only DSLR C line camera we will ever see.

4K being a must vs. not being a must for an SLR goes on the same list as:

• To UV filter vs. to not UV filter a lens
• Wanting IS vs. wanting a faster lens without IS
• Cropping in-camera vs. cropping in post
• Pushing a shot 5 stops being useful for sensor reviews vs. a 5 stop push is utter nonsense
• Gun control, abortion, the designated hitter in baseball, instant replay in soccer, etc.

Just walk away from all of the above, people. Opinions will never change on these topics.

- A