- Status
Cool stuff. This blog also have a comparison of 1Dx Raw file VS the 1D4.
http://minkara.carview.co.jp/userid/14646/blog/
Interesting! Use google translate if you can't read
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3D1dx%26start%3D10%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26sa%3DN%26tbo%3D1%26biw%3D1533%26bih%3D854%26tbs%3Dqdr:h%26prmd%3Dimvns&rurl=translate.google.com.au&sl=ja&u=http://minkara.carview.co.jp/userid/14646/blog/&usg=ALkJrhhmWXOBPet5riamXW3qv_DkGQFwAA
http://minkara.carview.co.jp/userid/14646/blog/
Interesting! Use google translate if you can't read
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3D1dx%26start%3D10%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26sa%3DN%26tbo%3D1%26biw%3D1533%26bih%3D854%26tbs%3Dqdr:h%26prmd%3Dimvns&rurl=translate.google.com.au&sl=ja&u=http://minkara.carview.co.jp/userid/14646/blog/&usg=ALkJrhhmWXOBPet5riamXW3qv_DkGQFwAA
Upvote
0
But from the 1dX manual data-rates, it looks like it uses the same codec...
It's hard to tell from the video. You can see that the light keeps changing in the background(like the sun going behind clouds), and it appears much brighter in the 5diii footage, so it's hard to attribute it all to DR.
It's hard to tell from the video. You can see that the light keeps changing in the background(like the sun going behind clouds), and it appears much brighter in the 5diii footage, so it's hard to attribute it all to DR.
Upvote
0
D
DB
Guest
Awful test. It looks lke the shooter used the same lens but slightly different focal lengths, plus the tripod has moved in the second part (more to the right). Put two fingers on the escalators then fast forward to the 1DX test, you'll see the composition change a lot. Also count the window squares to the right - it'll become readily apparent.
A prime lens would have been a much better choice (e.g. a 50mm f/1.4 even @ f2,8) for a HD video test, rather than using a standard zoom shot wide open. Neither of these videos are at all sharp.
Also the colour varies, for instance, the 5D3 appears much more saturated (look at the red roof/top on model building down to the right, lower level).
The 1DX does seem to show a bit more detail - look at the window frames on the far wall (you can see most of the vertical & horizontal lines, not so on the 5D3), but that could be because of different camera position + it seems that the ambient light was brighter on the first test.
A prime lens would have been a much better choice (e.g. a 50mm f/1.4 even @ f2,8) for a HD video test, rather than using a standard zoom shot wide open. Neither of these videos are at all sharp.
Also the colour varies, for instance, the 5D3 appears much more saturated (look at the red roof/top on model building down to the right, lower level).
The 1DX does seem to show a bit more detail - look at the window frames on the far wall (you can see most of the vertical & horizontal lines, not so on the 5D3), but that could be because of different camera position + it seems that the ambient light was brighter on the first test.
Upvote
0
1/25 shooting night also challenging, because it is not a pervert. . . (; ^ _ ^ A . I need a camera that is a pervert for very low light.
Upvote
0
takoman46 said:circuito said:
It is possible that the focus was not spot on during the test shot with the 5D3. What would you define as true 1080p resolution? 1920x1080 or 1920x1080? LOL get it?...
What would I class as 1080? 1920x1080 in all 3 colours. Not just 1080 bayer filter lines.
Upvote
0
Yes, the 1DX is better than the 5D3…but..why are we surprised?
It's got everything in it better…
But we mustn't forget, it's also double the price! Surely it had to be better than the 5d3..
It's got everything in it better…
But we mustn't forget, it's also double the price! Surely it had to be better than the 5d3..
Upvote
0
Am I the only one that doesn't see much of a difference? Maybe if they were side by side it would be easier, but I even downloaded the original and I just don't really see it. The 1DX may have a slight edge in terms of detail but nothing that couldn't be achieved with slight sharpening in post on the 5D3.
I wish they had done a tighter shot in a room with artificial lighting, the changes in natural light in there seems like it could really skew the results.
I wish they had done a tighter shot in a room with artificial lighting, the changes in natural light in there seems like it could really skew the results.
Upvote
0
DB said:
The focal length looks the same, I'm pretty sure it's just the framing that's different. But I agree with everything else, they should have done this in a controlled environment and used a tighter lens (DSLRs aren't known for detail on wide angle shots), I'd be curious to see the results of that.
Upvote
0
ianmacd said:takoman46 said:circuito said:
It is possible that the focus was not spot on during the test shot with the 5D3. What would you define as true 1080p resolution? 1920x1080 or 1920x1080? LOL get it?...
What would I class as 1080? 1920x1080 in all 3 colours. Not just 1080 bayer filter lines.
So you don't consider the Alexa and F3 to be 1080p cameras?
Upvote
0
spinworkxroy said:
Because it has 18MP rather than a 3x3 1920x1080 22MP sensor and Canon said the 5D3 would rule video for this round. The D4 video is way worse than the D800 video. The 1D4 video was worse than 5D2 video.
Upvote
0
[quote author=LetTheRightLensIn]
Because it has 18MP rather than a 3x3 1920x1080 22MP sensor and Canon said the 5D3 would rule video for this round. The D4 video is way worse than the D800 video. The 1D4 video was worse than 5D2 video.
[/quote]
Hehe, when Canon said the 5D3 would rule video, the 1DX wasn't out yet right?
So Canon's marketing now will make sure the 1DX will rule EVERYTHING and make you want to buy it if you want the best of the best in everything hehe…
Given the processing power and the more time they had to tweak the 1DX with all the delays and after seeing the competition in the market for so long, i think Canon has time to make the 1DX better than everyone else in what it was made to do…so i wouldn't be surprised at all if the 1DX is indeed better at video than the 5D3. It is after all the flagship model...
Because it has 18MP rather than a 3x3 1920x1080 22MP sensor and Canon said the 5D3 would rule video for this round. The D4 video is way worse than the D800 video. The 1D4 video was worse than 5D2 video.
[/quote]
Hehe, when Canon said the 5D3 would rule video, the 1DX wasn't out yet right?
So Canon's marketing now will make sure the 1DX will rule EVERYTHING and make you want to buy it if you want the best of the best in everything hehe…
Given the processing power and the more time they had to tweak the 1DX with all the delays and after seeing the competition in the market for so long, i think Canon has time to make the 1DX better than everyone else in what it was made to do…so i wouldn't be surprised at all if the 1DX is indeed better at video than the 5D3. It is after all the flagship model...
Upvote
0
The 22 MP enabled 3x3 pixel binning as the downscaling algorithm. The fact the 1DX has 18MP and can't do that may be much to its benefit.
Pixel binning is just one step less idiotic a way to downscale than the line skipping the 5d2 did. But it is still so lame, and so unnecessary in 2012, that if any photo viewing app on a computer or even cell phone did it that way you would wretch at the quality of your photos when they were displayed at anything smaller than 100%.
The 1DX, to beat the quality of the video resolution on the 5D3, would use a superior downscaling algorithm. While I'm nearly certain the Digic5 could downscale video in realtime just fine on the 5D3, and Canon has intentionally dumbed it down to pixel binning in order to protect the C300, the 1DX has two Digic5's and Canon might have figured they could get away with claiming two were needed for better downscaling.
The better downscaling is taking away the residual stair-stepping (i.e. aliasing) on the venetian blinds that the 5D3 shows. However, the resolution is ultimately not that great...it may be say 850 lines rather than 800 that the 5D3 gets. To get over 1000 lines, you have to pay them over $15,000 for a "C" cine camera. But that is by corporate dictat and not by technical necessity.
The only bright side to this is the video on the whole DSLR line can be intercut with each other OK. The cameras over $3000 will have progressively less moire and aliasing, but won't have much more real resolution. The C series will be an entirely different level, and going across that divide (e.g. using a C300 A-cam and 5D3 B-cam) will require nimble work in post.
Pixel binning is just one step less idiotic a way to downscale than the line skipping the 5d2 did. But it is still so lame, and so unnecessary in 2012, that if any photo viewing app on a computer or even cell phone did it that way you would wretch at the quality of your photos when they were displayed at anything smaller than 100%.
The 1DX, to beat the quality of the video resolution on the 5D3, would use a superior downscaling algorithm. While I'm nearly certain the Digic5 could downscale video in realtime just fine on the 5D3, and Canon has intentionally dumbed it down to pixel binning in order to protect the C300, the 1DX has two Digic5's and Canon might have figured they could get away with claiming two were needed for better downscaling.
The better downscaling is taking away the residual stair-stepping (i.e. aliasing) on the venetian blinds that the 5D3 shows. However, the resolution is ultimately not that great...it may be say 850 lines rather than 800 that the 5D3 gets. To get over 1000 lines, you have to pay them over $15,000 for a "C" cine camera. But that is by corporate dictat and not by technical necessity.
The only bright side to this is the video on the whole DSLR line can be intercut with each other OK. The cameras over $3000 will have progressively less moire and aliasing, but won't have much more real resolution. The C series will be an entirely different level, and going across that divide (e.g. using a C300 A-cam and 5D3 B-cam) will require nimble work in post.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
- Deleted member 399245
- EOS R
