I want a better quality video For the 5dm3

[ksieb]

i want 1080 @ 60fps at least and 720 @ 120fps

this is what i do

Dmcc Round 6 // St-Eustache // Ksieb Films

 

[JavaBean]

The video will not load....

But I agree I want improved video. I want at least a 30 minute record time and the same file overlapping feature found in the 1Dx.

 

[dkingentertainment]

Yeah I fell ya! Great Video!! I also shoot mainly video with the 5d mark II and I haven't heard anything yet as far as video upgrades that would make me spend 3,500.00. I hope canon doesn't disappoint us! I heard that new nikon d800 is a beast. I love canon and want to upgrade but they have to do something great for us video people.

 

[dkingentertainment]

Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

I actually have a 5D II and I love it but I use it for music videography and short films. I haven't heard a lot of rumors on upgrades for the Mark III as far as video capabilities, that would make me buy one. Does anyone think there will be a big improvement in it's video quality or capabilities?

 

[D_Rochat]

Re: Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

I'm surprised that nothing has been mentioned as the 5DII set the bar with DSLR video. I would think that they'd at the very least increase the frame rate to 60 in 720p. The recent photos show a headphone jack which is a plus.

 

[takoman46]

Re: Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

I also haven't heard much about video capabilities like live view AF improvements or additional frame rates. At least we can assume that ISO improvements will be useful for low light video.

 

[kidnaper]

Re: Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

I'm surprised that nothing has been mentioned as the 5DII set the bar with DSLR video. I would think that they'd at the very least increase the frame rate to 60 in 720p. The recent photos show a headphone jack which is a plus.

Video was brought up in one of the other 25 5D threads and someone mentioned that 720p60 was included with the 7D. If that's true, and I have no reason to doubt it is, there's about a 1% chance that the next 5D won't feature that frame rate at that resolution.

 

[D_Rochat]

Re: Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

Well there you go. We can now hope for 60 @ 1080p ;D

 

[kev8d]

Re: Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

I'd be surprised if we see 60 fps in 1080p. If it's not on the 1Dx, it's probably not going to be on the 5Dmk3.
I agree with kidnaper that we should expect 60 fps in 720p.

Here's my guess as to the video improvements:
- 60 fps in 720p
- Improved moire resistance and anti-aliasing
- Manual audio controls
- Mic input (confirmed in the photos)
- Improved lowlight performance
- Improved image quality due to a higher bitrate / codec.

Also, I'm certain we won't see 4K on ANY Canon DSLR apart from the "cinema" line, because this is what Canon will use to justify the price tag of the cinema cameras.

 

[tasteofjace]

Re: Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

I to use Canon DSLR's for mostly video work. I do photography on the side purely as a hobby.

So I'm definitely hoping to see some features on the MK3 that make it worth the pricetag... if not I'm going to buy another MK2 to add to my gear and use the extra money for a lens or two!

 

[SpareImp]

Re: Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

Even 550D/T2i has 720 60p, so I would be surprised if the 5D3 doesn’t have it. The 1Dx is aimed at professional photographers as far as I understand, with some pretty impressive specs. Because of this, I think Canon can release the 5D3 with video features that the 1Dx lack and possibly be able to sell one of both models to the same customer. It will sell well if it’s significantly better than the 5D2 at video – but the potential buyers probably can’t justify the cost of the 1Dx compared to the improvements it actually has.

I saw a video about the 1Dx (rep talking and demonstrating), and it appears to have proper timecode-functionality so it’s easier to synchronize in post, as well as the possibility to remote record up to 10(?) cameras with one click. Seems like a good thing to have if you’re into making music videos, if you’ve got several cameras, that is. Let’s hope the 5D3 will feature this as well.

 

[dkingentertainment]

Re: Canon 5d markII vs 5d mark III for video

I here some great ideas for video and hopefully we will see some of these features or I'm not sold on getting rid of my Mark II ;D

 

[BRNexus6]

Moire needs to be reduced to the point where it won't ruin a shot. Don't expect 60FPS in 1080p, because not even the C300 offers that, which I find ridiculous for a $12,000 camera.

The 5D Mark ll and other Canon HDSLR's don't actually shoot true 1080p video, it's actually rated just a bit higher than 720p, so hopefully Canon has improved the sensor/pixel downsampling for better resolution.

 

[wickidwombat]

since magic lantern can do all sorts of neat stuff why cant it enable 60fps1080p or 120 or 4k video for that matter since the sensor is big enough?

I dont know about all that voodoo stuff that goes on inside these things for all I know there is a squirrel inside a wheel driving the AF system... hang on that might explain!...

 

[fs454]

Moire needs to be reduced to the point where it won't ruin a shot. Don't expect 60FPS in 1080p, because not even the C300 offers that, which I find ridiculous for a $12,000 camera.

The 5D Mark ll and other Canon HDSLR's don't actually shoot true 1080p video, it's actually rated just a bit higher than 720p, so hopefully Canon has improved the sensor/pixel downsampling for better resolution.

...Are you kidding me? That is not true at all. They do in fact shoot true 1080p video.

 

[fs454]

since magic lantern can do all sorts of neat stuff why cant it enable 60fps1080p or 120 or 4k video for that matter since the sensor is big enough?

I dont know about all that voodoo stuff that goes on inside these things for all I know there is a squirrel inside a wheel driving the AF system... hang on that might explain!...

Processing power, for one. The camera's CPU can't handle capturing that many frames per second or that high of a resolution in real time. It was never built to do that, hence why the processing power isn't there, no matter what you try to tell it to do via software.

 

[Policar]

Curiously, the C300 seems to have the same pixel density as the 5DII...

I wouldn't get my hopes up. The sample videos of the 1dx at Fenchel and Janisch show a lot of ugly aliasing and only slightly less noise than videos shot with the 7d. Not even in the same ballpark as the F3 or C300. Incrementally better than the 7d--at best.

There's a HUGE market at the $3,000 price point among videographers and student filmmakers. You can buy a couple lenses and have a usable kit under $4,000 or you can spend significantly more and develop something that's almost production-ready for music videos and shorts or as a b camera for a serious rig. Canon would be foolish not to introduce an EF mount cinema camera in this price range, but for whatever reason it seems they want to start with expensive products and work their way down...

1080p/60fps would be nice, but is trivial compared with a reduction in aliasing and skew and a boost in actual resolution.

 

[aaronofnero]

There's a HUGE market at the $3,000 price point among videographers and student filmmakers. You can buy a couple lenses and have a usable kit under $4,000 or you can spend significantly more and develop something that's almost production-ready for music videos and shorts or as a b camera for a serious rig. Canon would be foolish not to introduce an EF mount cinema camera in this price range, but for whatever reason it seems they want to start with expensive products and work their way down...

1080p/60fps would be nice, but is trivial compared with a reduction in aliasing and skew and a boost in actual resolution.

for the same reasons all other film-product competitors don't have equipment that cheap. Sony does have the fs100, which is at $5k, and you can now get canon/nikon mounts for it.. but there are still substantial limitations. The benefit though, even over the f3, is that you get 60fps@1080p.. the downside is the bitrate and color space, and only hdmi out, as well as the form factor and build quality. Enough people already complain about the fs100 in the professional video field.

You also have to remember.. sure, there is a huge market base for$ 3-4k as you say.. but there is an even BIGGER market base for $1-2k, or $300-500 - what's to stop them at 3-4grand if sheer volume of market sales was their intentions? I, for one, would love to save up for the c300 of f3, as the Arri Alexa is out of my price range.. and i'm simply happy and fortunate to have a professional option for less than 20 grand.. something that could provide me with a return income that costs about what a new Honda costs.

 

[BRNexus6]

Moire needs to be reduced to the point where it won't ruin a shot. Don't expect 60FPS in 1080p, because not even the C300 offers that, which I find ridiculous for a $12,000 camera.

The 5D Mark ll and other Canon HDSLR's don't actually shoot true 1080p video, it's actually rated just a bit higher than 720p, so hopefully Canon has improved the sensor/pixel downsampling for better resolution.

...Are you kidding me? That is not true at all. They do in fact shoot true 1080p video.

Sorry, but it's true. The current Canon HDSLR's only capture a bit higher than 720p of actual resolution in 1080p mode. It's been proven with test charts.

 

[Policar]

There's a HUGE market at the $3,000 price point among videographers and student filmmakers. You can buy a couple lenses and have a usable kit under $4,000 or you can spend significantly more and develop something that's almost production-ready for music videos and shorts or as a b camera for a serious rig. Canon would be foolish not to introduce an EF mount cinema camera in this price range, but for whatever reason it seems they want to start with expensive products and work their way down...

1080p/60fps would be nice, but is trivial compared with a reduction in aliasing and skew and a boost in actual resolution.

for the same reasons all other film-product competitors don't have equipment that cheap. Sony does have the fs100, which is at $5k, and you can now get canon/nikon mounts for it.. but there are still substantial limitations. The benefit though, even over the f3, is that you get 60fps@1080p.. the downside is the bitrate and color space, and only hdmi out, as well as the form factor and build quality. Enough people already complain about the fs100 in the professional video field.

You also have to remember.. sure, there is a huge market base for$ 3-4k as you say.. but there is an even BIGGER market base for $1-2k, or $300-500 - what's to stop them at 3-4grand if sheer volume of market sales was their intentions? I, for one, would love to save up for the c300 of f3, as the Arri Alexa is out of my price range.. and i'm simply happy and fortunate to have a professional option for less than 20 grand.. something that could provide me with a return income that costs about what a new Honda costs.

I suppose that's true. PL mount cameras are allowed to be expensive since a decent kit of lenses or zooms starts around $30,000, though. But for EF mount cameras, you can outfit one cheaply. There's been a huge market in the $2,000-$5,000 range for a while (from the XL1 to the dvx to the hvx to the 5dII) of aspiring professionals. Below that is, for better or worse, mostly dabblers, above that is pros. If the 5DIII reads out like the C300 and produces decently sharp video it could very well be the next camera in this segment.