Dublin's People: Phil's first 1080p24 short from the 7D

[sblfilms]

Still converting, har har har. Should be done in a few minutes though.

http://vimeo.com/6475938

[sblfilms]

Jeez. I never thought I would be able to own a camera that produced those results at the price level we are talking about. Added bonus, the 7D can use all my beautiful Canon glass :)

Thanks PB for solidifying my decision!

[boo]

beautiful! just beautiful! low light is AMAZING! thank you philip! i'm sold!

by the way, i see slight horizontal lines. could that be from compression or it being a pre-production model?

[Kdawg]

Wow, amazing footage. Also its not often you'll see Phillip sporting a green cowboy hat.

[Kholi]

Thank gawd...

24p, APS-C...


Gawd...

[philip bloom]

blimey. that was quick...here is the blog about it

http://philipbloom.co.uk/2009/09/07/dublins-people-shot-on-a-canon-7d-in-native-24p/

[Rakesh Jacob]

IQ and low light close enough to the 5D for me!!!
Might probably still have aliasing on wide, deep focus shots but I don't like establishing/master shots, so it's good enough for the crap I shot YAY!!!!!!!!!

[Kholi]

There's no doubt that there is aliasing all over the place and it cannot be helped unless someone uses Barry's theory (3K native) or puts the 4k/5k video image straight to the card.

Might as well not even bother trying to get an alias free DSLR until that happens.

Everything else is great, though. Cheap-ass camera with some decent results.

[mcgeedigital]

Looks great Philip!

[NC17z]

I'm floored... I need to start picking up some Canon Glass... Please some one start a lens thread for this camera...

[mico]

Alright. A Mud free 24p Gamechanger.

Great job Phil.

[Boz]

Brilliant, simply brilliant. No regrets on returning my GH1, now. None at all. Nice work Philip!

[Ian-T]

The available low-light ability of this cam looks great. I agree with you mico...no mud within any of the movement is nice. It's like a 5Dll with 24p.

[Zim]

is it to clean?

[mhood]

Makes me feel very good about my pre-order. TYVM Mr. Bloom.

[griffin86]

Looks sweet- kudos for another film well shot and very pleasing... Also it's nice to see what the imagery looks like from skilled hands;-)

[Ian-T]

....no macroblocking artifacts when blown up to its full 1080p size on my PC. Nice.

[mcgeedigital]

is it to clean?

No such animal, grain it up in post.

[sblfilms]

No such animal, grain it up in post.

Exactly. You can always do a grain pass in post, but you really can't do a (worthwhile) clean pass in post :grin:

[Zim]

No such animal, grain it up in post.

Not talking about grain,,,,,talking about the "look" and it does look really good but does it just look like really good 1080HD? Which there is nothing wrong with that and it has its purpose.

[Zim]

probably good for weddings.

[mhood]

If you're asking "Does it look like a D90?", the answer IMO is "No!" ;-)

[Kholi]

No such animal, grain it up in post.

Pretty much. Gots to drop some custom settings on it. It was more important to me to see what the 24p Cadence/Motion Rendition looked like. Pretty square for me.

I think by the time the camera gets here my back-ass-ordered (technically) Zeiss ZF set will be here. Swayt.

[Zim]

Still kind of liking the D300s stuff myself
http://www.vimeo.com/6163655

[J Davis]

This montage was good, but via vimeo nothing stood out to me that separates it from the better GH1 clips.

Where the 7D will move ahead is non web delivery or applications that take advantage of its bitrate like chromakeying, FX
or seeing footage on 1080 screens or projected.

EDIT :
I would love to see a 7D example of someone accurately pulling focus all over the place because they are using the HDMI out.
Now that is something the GH1 could not do.

[Ian-T]

I'll at least say that it has a more "organic" look and feel to it than the 5Dll. The 5Dll has a more.."hard" sharp digital look to it (not that this is bad). But you're right...both will have its purpose.

[mickjones]

Well I can see my HVX - Letus combo getting flicked VERY soon. I have barely even used the letus, but the resolution on these DSLR's is so much better than my grungy HVX. And WAAAAYYY less hassle to set up and knock off a few shots.

[John Caballero]

is it to clean?

So is Hollywood shot 35mm movie film. I have no idea what people see in the grainy awful looking footage from the D90 and D300s, unless you want that 16mm retro look. That is not the look of 99% of big budget movies out there. They don't have that look neither the dizzying in and out of focus shots. It is clean and very sharp.

As far as aliasing on the 7D footage from Philip download the file. In no way compares to the Vimeo version. Very negligible aliasing on the downloded file. Great work again Philip Bloom.

[mcgeedigital]

Not talking about grain,,,,,talking about the "look" and it does look really good but does it just look like really good 1080HD? Which there is nothing wrong with that and it has its purpose.

Yes is does. Which is what it is. I'm not sure I'm understanding your question.

[Zim]

these don't look grainy from the D300s
http://www.vimeo.com/6163655
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lfiYFV6AjQ




So is Hollywood shot 35mm movie film. I have no idea what people see in the grainy awful looking footage from the D90 and D300s, unless you want that 16mm retro look. That is not the look of 99% of big budget movies out there. They don't have that look neither the dizzying in and out of focus shots. It is clean and very sharp.

As far as aliasing on the 7D footage from Philip download the file. In no way compares to the Vimeo version. Very negligible aliasing on the downloded file. Great work again Philip Bloom.

[Michael Olsen]

As far as aliasing on the 7D footage from Philip download the file. In no way compares to the Vimeo version. Very negligible aliasing on the downloded file. Great work again Philip Bloom.

I'm going to agree here, absolutely. Since Philip evidently uploaded the 1080p version and Vimeo displays 720p max, the compression must have done something to exacerbate the aliasing. I watched it through my Playstation 3 and really enjoyed it. Great stuff.

[mhood]

Neither of those two clips are HD. If you're drawing conclusions about the look of a D300s from these two clips, you're not seeing the whole picture.

[John Caballero]

these don't look grainy from the D300s
http://www.vimeo.com/6163655
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lfiYFV6AjQ


They are sharp. And they are both obviously by people that know that "Hollywood Look". Those are about a few that would past mustard. Most of the other stuff doesn't look quite the same.

[PaPa]

amazing looking footage Phil, would love to see the same stuff with a lower contrast to see how it compares to the flat red footage.

[ChipG]

Thanks Phillip! Appreciate you taking the time to do this. Looking forward to this cam.

[Michael Olsen]

Just re-read his description. I'm floored that this was all in camera - no grading. I'm inspired...

[griffin86]

Just watch the film again- Very usuable it seems considering no grading was done I'd like to see how the footage grades in comparison to xdcam ex 420 and DVCPRO HD in terms of color to test its usability with some lower contrast footage (as another poster stated). Also I'd like to see some stress tests for DR- in the alleyway shot the streetlamps clip (1:37) a little harshly but it actually isn't anything that can't be avoided in 98% of situations. I love the shallow DOF characteristics and I'd like to also know what iso was this shot at (sry if someone already posted) the footage looks very clean for night with all environmental raw lighting

[Michael Olsen]

I'd like to also know what iso was this shot at (sry if someone already posted) the footage looks very clean for night with all environmental raw lighting

From M. Bloom's fingers:


I took the Canon 7d, Zacuto Tactical rig, Z-Finder V2 and one lone lens, a Canon 35mm f1.4, which becomes more like a 50mm lens on the 7d. So a bit like what I did with Sofia’s People (but I didn’t have the Zacuto rig for that).

I shot 1/50th of a second as I was shooting 24p and to match the 50hz frequency of the artificial all around me in Temple Bar so there was no horrible banding and flickering. Most of the time my ISO was between 400 and 800. Some shots I even had at 200 and a few are at 1600, especially the end sequence.

[griffin86]

thanks Michael- I must stop speed reading at times... this is remarkably clean considering the iso was pushed to 1600 and there is very little noise throughout- I will be sure to pick one up by November

[Zim]

Yes is does. Which is what it is. I'm not sure I'm understanding your question.
I guess it should have been more of a comment than a question.

[mico]

I will be sure to pick one up by November

At the rate these cameras are dropping that struck me as funny.

[griffin86]

At the rate these cameras are dropping that struck me as funny.

lol I'd love to pick it up day one but I've my hands far in other things so I'll get around to my leisure by then... But you are right the "next big thing" will probably be jumping out of the woodworks and then everyone else will jump to it

[Kholi]

Unfortunately, getting one and not being on a PreOrder list is probably gonna be hard as hell.

[ChipG]

Yep, I bet much harder than a gh1.

[tnle2]

I could be wrong, but I don't think it will be that hard to get this camera. I know the 5DMkII is in short supply but I think that's because it's full frame and yields on the sensor aren't as good as with the smaller APS-C. Well, at least I hope they will be able to meet demand, which will be coming from both still photographers and videographers. That's a good problem to have, I suppose.

This is just a hobby for me, so I'm going to wait a few more months for the dust to settle before ordering.

[griffin86]

I'm excited about this little camera here but if there happens to be a shortage I don't think Canon would be too far behind the curb on meeting the demand eventually.

i am a patient fellow and in the need to produce a particular project I can still use a lot of other things I have access to- just without the fun of playing with a new toy:-/ lol Release time and Christmas season I wouldn't be surprised at this camera being the hardest thing around to find however...

[mico]

I
This is just a hobby for me, so I'm going to wait a few more months for the dust to settle before ordering.

Thing is the dust doesn't seem to settle anymore. Just as its about to another mega all u ever wanted in a cheap camera drops. Right now there's several cameras rumored to be unveiled next week. The buy when u need axiom is truer than ever.

[Kegan]

Great video Phillip! Thanks a lot for taking the time to make it. Not only does it reaffirm my 7D pre-order, it also makes me want to visit Dublin!

Again, awesome work.

Kegan

[tnle2]

Thing is the dust doesn't seem to settle anymore. Just as its about to another mega all u ever wanted in a cheap camera drops. Right now there's several cameras rumored to be unveiled next week. The buy when u need axiom is truer than ever.

That's true, things are changing rapidly. There are rumors of a Canon video camera at IBC but I personally don't think that will happen. I'd love for it to happen, but realistically it feels like it's too soon because they need to develop servo EF video lenses and an AF system for it.

A new 1D series from Canon is also rumored by the end of the month but that will be out of my price range and it'd be too big. At this point the 7D seems safe to get because for me it's just a hobby and I'm not risking a lot of money in depreciation like in the old days when you had to pay $3K+ for an XH-A1 or something like that. I'm also a still photographer and am itching to get my first DSLR so I can use my existing Canon L lenses again. I've been holding out for full frame on the still side but the cost is still too high.

I just want to hear the reports from the people who get the 7D first to better understand any limitations with the camera (both from the still and video sides).

[Justyn]

So is Hollywood shot 35mm movie film. I have no idea what people see in the grainy awful looking footage from the D90 and D300s, unless you want that 16mm retro look. That is not the look of 99% of big budget movies out there. They don't have that look neither the dizzying in and out of focus shots. It is clean and very sharp.

As far as aliasing on the 7D footage from Philip download the file. In no way compares to the Vimeo version. Very negligible aliasing on the downloded file. Great work again Philip Bloom.


I agree too. The 300s looks lifeless and so muted and just doesn't pop out at ya.. unless that's the intended look and it was graded like that, but most of the nikon stuff I've seen just looks blah..

[Jean Dantes]

This is beautiful! Thanks Philip!! :)

And it's a sign too; back when I was in high school, Metallica's cover of Thin Lizzy's "Whisky in the Jar" was my favourtie song!! :)

Also, was this shot with 35mm EF lens? (sorry if that sounds like a stupid question, I don't know much about lenses lol)

[Paprochy]

Great Video! Only gives me more hope :)

Vimeo won't let me download the .mov, something about it being downloaded too many times. Does someone feel like uploading to an alternate location? Pretty please?:grin:

[Ted Ramasola]

http://exposureroom.com/dublinspeople

[Paprochy]

Thanks a bunch! :)

[jls4]

Thanks Mr. Bloom, you've done it again and proven to us why the big guys go to you. But thank you so much for taking time out of your super busy schedule to shoot, edit and post this for us. It really does mean alot.

[OPHERBA]

Looking great on a 50'' Plasma screen played from a PS3.

Thanks Philip!

[Richard J. Johnson]

Well I can see my HVX - Letus combo getting flicked VERY soon. I have barely even used the letus, but the resolution on these DSLR's is so much better than my grungy HVX. And WAAAAYYY less hassle to set up and knock off a few shots.

The old HVX can still hang with 'em.:grin: BUT.....I will be getting a 7D myself and if I find myself not touching the ODB I will sell it.

[Tim Joy]

Wow. Pretty nice.

At 3:05 there's a blocking artifact in the upper right corner. Is that just a vimeo thing or was is recorded that way?

[Michael Olsen]

At 3:05 there's a blocking artifact in the upper right corner. Is that just a vimeo thing or was is recorded that way?

Here's what I see from the 1080p download:

http://www.ugafilmmakers.com/macro.png

[bimdas]

thats a heck of a load better than dark areas of my xha1 footage.

[Eddy Robinson]

I spent an hour messing around with the color and exposure in After Effects last night and was quite impressed - it wasn't hard to get a more natural grade and remove all those orange tones from the sodium lights, and by tweaking exposure and gamma (across the whole image, rather than 3-way) I was able to recover between 2 & 3 stops on many shots before seeing any artefacting.

Also, I was amazed how crisp it all looked at 100% - aliasing was not really an issue, even on shots where you'd expect to see it like the close-up of the guy wearing glasses.

[Ian-T]

Also, I was amazed how crisp it all looked at 100% - That’s the part I like best. From personal experience most footage that was shot at 1920x1080 does not look too good at 100% on my PC. But this one kept its crispness.

[Tim Joy]

Here's what I see from the 1080p download:

http://www.ugafilmmakers.com/macro.png


I downloaded the original and yes, it seems to be a vimeo artifact that I was seeing.


Upon closer inspection, the only thing that worries me is the 'edgyness' that I see in a lot of the footage from the 7D. It's mostly visible with deep DOF shots that have high contrast or over exposed highlights. It's the same way on a GH1 where it feels like it's been over sharpened, but maybe it's just a dynamic range issue where the slope to over exposure is very sharp.....:huh: I'm sure that can be cleared up with proper lighting.

[Kholi]

Tim - It's probably the regular old standard settings. I wouldn't worry about it. It's the same thing that happens with every camera. Just need to get your hands on it and dial down sharpness (looks like it's up here) and everything else.

[Michael Olsen]

In the vimeo comments, Mr. Bloom noted sharpness was dialed down 2 notches.

[Eddy Robinson]

Upon closer inspection, the only thing that worries me is the 'edgyness' that I see in a lot of the footage from the 7D. It's mostly visible with deep DOF shots that have high contrast or over exposed highlights.

If you look at the shot around 1:36 (3 gays walking away from the camera in a dark alley towards a courtyard with several lights which are blown out), I've got that up in AE right now...and even that is surprisingly tweakable.

[philip bloom]

don't forget what you are looking at is heavily compressed version, even the download. It's the native files as I edited in Pro Res and exported H264 mp4 8000kbps

[Jean Dantes]

If you look at the shot around 1:36 (3 gays walking away from the camera in a dark alley towards a courtyard with several lights which are blown out), I've got that up in AE right now...and even that is surprisingly tweakable.


The shot of the three guys at 1:36 is my fav shot (closely followed by the one at 1:25)! I love how it's lit!


P.S. How could you possibly tell they are gay? lol

[JamesBenet]

Right the compression is 8.5mbits/sec which just shows the quality of the output is so good even at 1/6th compression. I wonder how good it looks in the original file, sweet!

Great work Mr. Bloom 7D Master!

[Jean Dantes]

Also Philip, not sure if you will see this post, but is so (and if you have time), I would love to get your opinion on this lens:

http://www.camerastore.com.au/Canon+EF+35mm+f2.0_419_details.htm

I originally wanted a GH1, but thanks to your video, I have been swayed to 7D :) I'm on a really tight budget (recently unemployed, full-time University student), and would just like a lens that will deliver similar quality to what you shot in "Dublin's People". I'm new to DSLR's, and even newer to lenses (I've been shooting with handycams and fixed lenses my whole life). I originally had my heart set on this:

http://www.camerastore.com.au/ProShop/Canon+EF+50mm+f1.4+USM_403_details.htm

But I'm fearful of what it would look like as it will become an 80mm lens...right?

Would it be hard to shoot at 80mm or something? (sorry for the novice questions!)

Thanks for your time!! :)

[Richard J. Johnson]

great stuff. Sealed the deal for me as a great 2nd weapon.

[sblfilms]

http://exposureroom.com/members/philipbloom.aspx/assets/0b8e68acc32349378168a568c69816ef/

Philip just posted that camera original file on XR. Looks pretty damn snazzy on my 120" screen.

[Michael Olsen]

Sharp. I love the detail...seems wonderful.

[mcgeedigital]

I wonder how much he played with the picture styles....

[Eddy Robinson]

P.S. How could you possibly tell they are gay? lol

D'oh! Anyway, working with the uncompressed clip (Jean-Jacques smoking a cigarette and then mugging for the camera around 1:14) the original is definitely richer. Not sure how to quantify it...looks like approximately 2x the color resolution.

You can see gradients are a lot smoother zoomed in to 1600%, zooming in on the right eyeball there are reflection details that disappear altogether from the vimeo version; jacking the contrast up to ~80% made it really noticeable everywhere in the image, with the vimeo version looking like it was made out of 4-pixel blocks. There's a lot more shadow detail in the original.

Now I'm going to be dreaming about the giant floating eye of Jean-Jacques all night :-)

[philip bloom]

I wonder how much he played with the picture styles....

i went with neutral. Normally i go with neutral and with contrast down, sharpness down, saturation down two notches and highlight tone priority enabled for a very flat image

[philip bloom]

Also Philip, not sure if you will see this post, but is so (and if you have time), I would love to get your opinion on this lens:

http://www.camerastore.com.au/Canon+EF+35mm+f2.0_419_details.htm

I originally wanted a GH1, but thanks to your video, I have been swayed to 7D :) I'm on a really tight budget (recently unemployed, full-time University student), and would just like a lens that will deliver similar quality to what you shot in "Dublin's People". I'm new to DSLR's, and even newer to lenses (I've been shooting with handycams and fixed lenses my whole life). I originally had my heart set on this:

http://www.camerastore.com.au/ProShop/Canon+EF+50mm+f1.4+USM_403_details.htm

But I'm fearful of what it would look like as it will become an 80mm lens...right?

Would it be hard to shoot at 80mm or something? (sorry for the novice questions!)

Thanks for your time!! :)

35mm on the 7d is the ideal base lens. Ideally f1.4 if you can but f2 would be ok as a starter...50mm is a great portrait lens for the 7d but shitty for wides!!

[Kholi]

i went with neutral. Normally i go with neutral and with contrast down, sharpness down, saturation down two notches and highlight tone priority enabled for a very flat image

This scares me. So this is with tweaked settings? Or is it just the standard neutral profile untweaked? As in sharpness hasn't been dialed down.

I was hoping not...

[philip bloom]

This scares me. So this is with tweaked settings?

I was hoping not...

why does that scare you? only tweaked a bit, it wasn't base neutral, had a minor fiddle! also it is graded...

[philip bloom]

The shot of the three guys at 1:36 is my fav shot (closely followed by the one at 1:25)! I love how it's lit!


P.S. How could you possibly tell they are gay? lol

good typo! i will send them round to Jean's place to sort him out!

[Rakesh Jacob]

why does that scare you? only tweaked a bit, it wasn't base neutral, had a minor fiddle! also it is graded...

?? I thought it was ungraded?

[philip bloom]

?? I thought it was ungraded?

it was earlier today. i uploaded a tweaked version a few hours ago to get rid of the yellow tinge from sodium lights. with 30k views in 4 hours i needed it to look perfect!

[Rakesh Jacob]

BADASS I need to re-download!!!!

[Kholi]

why does that scare you? only tweaked a bit, it wasn't base neutral, had a minor fiddle! also it is graded...

namely because it looks a bit oversharpened, the rest is just personal preference v

the dark edges around objects I'm not to fond of. Nor the globby appearance of fine detail. I assumed it was camera sharpening and compression. But if you dialed down sharpness then I'm a littttlleee weary now.

[philip bloom]

BADASS I need to re-download!!!!

get it from exposureroom as the vimeo download is oversubscribed!

[Michael Olsen]

Just to clarify: was this shot with the usual "for grading" lowered contrast, saturation, sharpness and highlight tone priority? Or was it shot in the stock "neutral" setting with just minor tweaks?

[philip bloom]

namely because it looks a bit oversharpened, the rest is just personal preference v

the dark edges around objects I'm not to fond of. Nor the globby appearance of fine detail. I assumed it was camera sharpening and compression. But if you dialed down sharpness then I'm a littttlleee weary now.

oh Kholi. Don't fret. I will do a shot for you with proper flat PP so you can take a look. sharpness all way down, saturation down 2 notches, contrast all way down and highlight tone priority enabled.

[philip bloom]

Just to clarify: was this shot with the usual "for grading" lowered contrast, saturation, sharpness and highlight tone priority? Or was it shot in the stock "neutral" setting with just minor tweaks?

i am getting confused now. It was neutral with some tweaks, but not down, up...but i would have to check! it certainly was not the grading profile at all.

[Michael Olsen]

it certainly was not the grading profile at all.

Thanks Philip. I think people were getting worried that this was the grading profile.

[philip bloom]

Thanks Philip. I think people were getting worried that this was the grading profile.

god no. that would be washed out as hell. I wanted to post something out of the camera as I was not planning to grade it. I honestly can't remember EXACTLY what the settings were. Sorry!

[Michael Olsen]

god no. that would be washed out as hell. I wanted to post something out of the camera as I was not planning to grade it. I honestly can't remember EXACTLY what the settings were. Sorry!

That's what I was thinking. No worry about the settings - it looks great! :beer:

[powervideo]

Just downloading Phillip. V2 is a much smaller file - 91mb v 250 I think. More compression?

Peter

[Rakesh Jacob]

I got it from vimeo it's 220MB

[powervideo]

Just downloading Phillip. V2 is a much smaller file - 91mb v 250 I think. More compression?

Peter


Scrub that. I had the wrong version. sooorrrrryyyyyy....

[Eddy Robinson]

Bringing that XR clip into AE and interpreting the color space of the clip as linear reveals a surprising amount of shadow detail (this is NOT the right way to do it AFAIK, it's just a fast way of imposing a drastic gamma curve change.

[Kholi]

oh Kholi. Don't fret. I will do a shot for you with proper flat PP so you can take a look. sharpness all way down, saturation down 2 notches, contrast all way down and highlight tone priority enabled.

Thanks Phillip. Honestly if it's a still of a shot glass somewhere that would be enough.

[Ian-T]

Bringing that XR clip into AE and interpreting the color space of the clip as linear reveals a surprising amount of shadow detail (this is NOT the right way to do it AFAIK, it's just a fast way of imposing a drastic gamma curve change.
I did something like this before reading your post. What I did was bring both the original image and the re-compressed image into Vegas and cranked the gamma and saturation up on both clips. The original version showed a lot more color information, detail and blacks than the recompressed file (which was expected). It goes to show how much information we actually lose when re-compressing for downloads etc.

[PaPa]

Thanks Phillip. Honestly if it's a still of a shot glass somewhere that would be enough.

ditto, wanna see how it compares to the flat red look.

[Sttratos]

Whoa! I know it technically shouldn't, but is it just me or does this look as good as anything I have seen coming out of a Sony EX1?

[ydgmdlu]

Whoa! I know it technically shouldn't, but is it just me or does this look as good as anything I have seen coming out of a Sony EX1?
Why would you think that the EX1 is technically superior in terms of its image-acquisition capability?

[JamesBenet]

Well the EX1 is not skipping lines, so in hi detail textures and slim lines the EX1 will be superior.

And I agree for everything else, the DoF look and quality of this improved H.264 bit-rate seems to be right up there with the EX series and somehow more inspiring.

[ydgmdlu]

Well the EX1 is not skipping lines, so in hi detail textures and slim lines the EX1 will be superior.

And I agree for everything else, the DoF look and quality of this improved H.264 bit-rate seems to be right up there with the EX series and somehow more inspiring.
Yes, the aliasing and the rolling shutter are the only major technical flaws that can be seen in the footage, and they are fairly minor anyway, but I think that in all other ways, the 7D should be considered technically superior.

[Barry_Green]

Well the EX1 is not skipping lines
Is the 7D? Is the 5D? I mean, everyone repeats this like it's true, I know that it's treated as "common knowledge", but has this been confirmed anywhere? Has Canon confirmed that in video mode their sensors just skip whole rows and columns of pixels entirely?

[f64manray]

Is the 7D? Is the 5D? I mean, everyone repeats this like it's true, I know that it's treated as "common knowledge", but has this been confirmed anywhere? Has Canon confirmed that in video mode their sensors just skip whole rows and columns of pixels entirely?

I think the first I heard of it was on Red forum. I thought I heard Jannard and some of his guys mention it. I don't know, I don't exactly take notes as I'm pouring through these forums. Someone needs to get to the bottom of that and ask Chuck Westfall or something.

If I can't see it and if as reported at the collision conference that both 35mm film and the 5DII were projected side by side and they were very close, I could care less. They can cry line skipping all day long, and I won't care. The proof is in what you can see. As Charter said when he showed 35mm and 5DII side by side: “This camera has no business looking this good…” We live in a majical time.

http://radraven.com/2009/09/05/collision-conference-day-2/

[griffin86]

Well the EX1 is not skipping lines, so in hi detail textures and slim lines the EX1 will be superior.

And I agree for everything else, the DoF look and quality of this improved H.264 bit-rate seems to be right up there with the EX series and somehow more inspiring.

I'd like to see a source that states whether this (line-skipping) occurs during this camera's de-bayering process... I, like some others have noticed this statement being being put out there as fact but I am yet to encounter a real source. Let's try to positively move these discussions forward with facts from viable sources and not rampart statements.


Sensors of various types have more pixels than what is actually used in the output as the wizardry required to get the video is different based on make and model for each manufacturer- some processes are disclosed while others are not. If the information is not available from a proper source then we shouldn't allow it to go on as fact- verify if this "line-skipping" is real and if it truly is the factor that is producing the aliasing or whatever artifacts utilizing a proper source.

cheers:beer:

[John Caballero]

So much misinformation flying around. People talking with such authority without actual facts. Just amazing.

[ydgmdlu]

While I have also not seen any authoritative source for the line-skipping claim, line-skipping does seem to be the best explanation for the results (i.e. artifacts) that we get. Other quick-and-dirty down-scaling algorithms don't produce quite the same artifacts.

[Jean Dantes]

35mm on the 7d is the ideal base lens. Ideally f1.4 if you can but f2 would be ok as a starter...50mm is a great portrait lens for the 7d but shi*ty for wides!!

Thanks so much for the reply Philip!! :)

So, if you had to pick "an all rounder lens" (I can only afford one of these for the time being) between the EF 35mm f2.0 or the EF 50mm f1.4, you would go the 35mm, even though it's f2.0 (which I know is still fast)?

Is f2.0 enough for night shots (where the only lighting is street lights and moonlight)?

For your "Dublin People" video, what aperture where you using the most?

Again, sorry for the novice questions, I'm still learning! :) Thanks again :)

[Jean Dantes]

Yes, the aliasing and the rolling shutter are the only major technical flaws that can be seen in the footage, and they are fairly minor anyway, but I think that in all other ways, the 7D should be considered technically superior.

I didn't see any rolling shutter? Can you please tell me the minutes:seconds mark where you saw them? Thanks!

[ydgmdlu]

I wasn't talking about anything in Philip's work. I was speaking generally. What I'm saying is that, as far as the image is concerned, the only areas in which the 7D is demonstrably inferior to the EX1 is aliasing and rolling shutter. Resolution is kind of a question mark. But in everything else, I think that the 7D is superior.

[ydgmdlu]

Is f2.0 enough for night shots (where the only lighting is street lights and moonlight)?
You can never really know without testing it yourself. But, in my experience, I would stick to F1.4 for night exteriors. If I had the 5D with me right now, I could do a test...

[SPZ]

If at IBC Canon or anyone else (RED, for example) don't introduce a new video camera and a release date, I'll be preordering this one. And Zacuto will also be getting some business from me...

[squig]

oh Kholi. Don't fret. I will do a shot for you with proper flat PP so you can take a look. sharpness all way down, saturation down 2 notches, contrast all way down and highlight tone priority enabled.

There's been some discussion over at cinema 5D about highlight tone priority and increased noise, you might want to avoid it.

[Sttratos]

Why would you think that the EX1 is technically superior in terms of its image-acquisition capability?



Well, I was not talking only about codec, which you seem to be, but about the image in a whole and all things that affect the image.

I mean, I've heard 48mbit H.264 is twice as efficient as HDV, I'm not sure it's better than XDCAM but even if the codec is better than XDCAM, there's more to an image than just the codec. The EX1 has an immense range of controls, multiple gamma curves, color matrix control etc. There's also a bunch of other things to consider in the image department alone. Just because Phill's video looks great doesn't mean the 7D would beat the EX1 for any shooting situation. Some of the questions that need to be asked are:









What is the dynamic range compares? The EX1 is around 10 stops.
How does the 48mbit H.264 holds through HEVAY color correction? Although in practice XDCAM shouldn’t be that good because it’s 4:2:0, it actually holds incredibly well. Its impressive how much you can manipulate and how much your can recover from the image. By the way, what’s the color space of the 7D codec? Isn’t H.264 much more compressed than XDCAM? It was created to be half the size of MPEG-2.
How the 7D does behaves for green screen shots? XDCAM produces great green screen footage and if you really need better quality you can capture straight out of the SDI from uncompressed. I’m sure this is not even an option with the 7D.
The 7D has no HD video out as far as I know. This is an important part of getting good images on a set.
How much control do you have over your image? Can you manipulate your gamma and knee? Or are you stuck with whatever the stock settings are, which will severally impact how your images are rendered and the final quality of your image? If it shot RAW, then all that would be pointless, but if a compressed format it is important to be able to manipulate your signal at acquisition time.
It has no zebras, no focus assistant, and no other features that helps perfecting the image.

On top of that, there are other things that affect the final image and or make them a bad choice for video, like, controlling exposure on these auto still lenses is a drag. You can get older manual lenses though.
Honestly, the form factor which is what most people complain about doesn’t bother me at all. On a tripod it doesn’t make a difference and handheld it’s not really that different from a Bolex. The lack of a swinging LCD does pose a problem though for making tripod shots easier, since there’s not swinging viewfinder.
The so called rolling shutter problems couldn’t matter less for me. I have shot hundreds of times with the EX1 and EX3 and it was never a problem, although I’m not sure if the 7D is worse in this department.

But when comparing images I think it’s important to also compare how easy it is to get good images.

Based on what I know about these DSLRs shooting in HD, I don’t think they can yet replace a serious camera like a EX1 or HVX200a yet. Since they are cheap, I would rather have a real video camera PLUS a 7D, but not replacing my video camera with the 7D. If you ever need uncompressed footage or ever need to shoot in more complex situations the 7D will most likely let you down. Shallow DOF is sex as hell, but sexiness is not all.

Feel free to correct me.

[ydgmdlu]

Well, I was not talking only about codec, which you seem to be, but about the image in a whole and all things that affect the image.

I mean, I've heard 48mbit H.264 is twice as efficient as HDV, I'm not sure it's better than XDCAM but even if the codec is better than XDCAM, there's more to an image than just the codec. The EX1 has an immense range of controls, multiple gamma curves, color matrix control etc. There's also a bunch of other things to consider in the image department alone. Just because Phill's video looks great doesn't mean the 7D would beat the EX1 for any shooting situation. Some of the questions that need to be asked are:









What is the dynamic range compares? The EX1 is around 10 stops.
How does the 48mbit H.264 holds through HEVAY color correction? Although in practice XDCAM shouldn’t be that good because it’s 4:2:0, it actually holds incredibly well. Its impressive how much you can manipulate and how much your can recover from the image. By the way, what’s the color space of the 7D codec? Isn’t H.264 much more compressed than XDCAM? It was created to be half the size of MPEG-2.
How the 7D does behaves for green screen shots? XDCAM produces great green screen footage and if you really need better quality you can capture straight out of the SDI from uncompressed. I’m sure this is not even an option with the 7D.
The 7D has no HD video out as far as I know. This is an important part of getting good images on a set.
How much control do you have over your image? Can you manipulate your gamma and knee? Or are you stuck with whatever the stock settings are, which will severally impact how your images are rendered and the final quality of your image? If it shot RAW, then all that would be pointless, but if a compressed format it is important to be able to manipulate your signal at acquisition time.
It has no zebras, no focus assistant, and no other features that helps perfecting the image.

On top of that, there are other things that affect the final image and or make them a bad choice for video, like, controlling exposure on these auto still lenses is a drag. You can get older manual lenses though.
Honestly, the form factor which is what most people complain about doesn’t bother me at all. On a tripod it doesn’t make a difference and handheld it’s not really that different from a Bolex. The lack of a swinging LCD does pose a problem though for making tripod shots easier, since there’s not swinging viewfinder.
The so called rolling shutter problems couldn’t matter less for me. I have shot hundreds of times with the EX1 and EX3 and it was never a problem, although I’m not sure if the 7D is worse in this department.

But when comparing images I think it’s important to also compare how easy it is to get good images.

Based on what I know about these DSLRs shooting in HD, I don’t think they can yet replace a serious camera like a EX1 or HVX200a yet. Since they are cheap, I would rather have a real video camera PLUS a 7D, but not replacing my video camera with the 7D. If you ever need uncompressed footage or ever need to shoot in more complex situations the 7D will most likely let you down. Shallow DOF is sex as hell, but sexiness is not all.

Feel free to correct me.
I wasn't talking about the codec. I was referring more to the hardware abilities. The way that the chips capture and downscale moving images is responsible for the rolling shutter and aliasing artifacts. You can't write new software/firmware to make those things go away.

The 7D is based on the 50D. DxOMark measured the 50D's dynamic range to be 11.4 stops. I don't know how the EX1's dynamic range was measured, nor do I know how dynamic range might differ between still and video modes. But that's a number for you.

The color space of the 7D is still 4:2:0. I don't know why you would think that either it or the video in general would be "more compressed." The level of compression is derived from the bitrate or the ratio between the compressed file size and the uncompressed file size. The 44 Mbps codec of the 7D is, technically speaking, LESS compressed than 35 Mbps XDCAM. Your idea that H.264 was created to be "half the size" of MPEG-2 is confused. H.264 is more EFFICIENT than MPEG-2, which means that, on paper, it does a much smarter job of throwing away redundant information for the compression process. None of that has anything to do with color space. 4:2:0 color space compression is the same for any codec. At least, that's my understanding. The 7D's codec could only be inferior to XDCAM if it was a really bad implementation of H.264. It's either the same as or better than the 5D's codec. And the 5D's codec has proven to be very good. Users of both the 5D and XDCAM have said that the 5D's codec is significantly better.

You know, Philip made the original video file available for download, and you can easily find raw 5D clips as well. So why not try working with the files and seeing for yourself how good the codec is?

Since the 7D presumably has the same or better codec as the 5D, you can estimate the green screen ability based on the tests that 5D users have done with their cameras. But I would imagine that every 4:2:0 codec has roughly the same capability, limited primarily by the codec's overall image compression efficiency.

Why is having HD video-out an "important part of getting good images on the set"? The 7D does standard-definition video-out while recording. That's good enough for critical focus and other checks using a decent monitor.

The gamma and knee and other image controls that you have in mind are primarily software effects. If you capture a flat, neutral image without over-sharpening or punchy contrast, then you have plenty of control over those things in post-production. The quality of the image is actually limited mostly by the ability of the sensor and image processing chip, which is what I've been trying to say all along. And that's why you shouldn't be surprised that the 7D footage looks as good as EX1 material. The hardware is simply better overall.

Lack of zebra stripes, focus assist, and other such features never limited the image quality of 35mm film. In fact, none of the things that you mentioned have much to do with the camera's ability to get good images; they only HELP you get good images. Do you think that the limitations of 35mm film technology make it a less capable image acquisition system? Are you surprised at the image quality of 35mm film, even though it's captured with far more difficulty than video on your EX1? I think that you simply have some slightly off-base ideas.

[KeithAndrews.TV]

48 mbps MPEG 4 is a lot more than twice as efficient as HDV, unless you are refering to Sony and JVC's 35mbps HDV. Typical HDV of 19 mbps would be more comparable to 11 mbps MPEG 4.

[Rakesh Jacob]

The EX1 is around 10 stops.


Really.....? Did I miss a meeting? That seems pretty high, some one enlighten me please. :dankk2:

EDIT: Well I googled it and that's what some people are saying... huh

[Ian-T]

@ anybody....Um.....what vdgmdlu^^^^^^ said (and oh so well).

[Ian-T]

As far as MP4's more efficient codec doesn't that matter more when compressing to smaller files (such as 9Mbps, 6Mbps etc.)? From what I always understood the higher you go, > 21 Mbps, the benifits of its efficiency starts to even out. What I mean is at a data rate of 48MBps for MP4 and HDV there would not be much of a difference. MP4 basically shines when you start compressing to smaller files. Or do I have this all wrong?

Technically I don't think you can call HDV or MP4(AVCHD) by those names anymore because at that data rate they have surpassed the limit of those categories. HDV only goes up to 25Mbps and AVCHD 24Mbps.

[Luis Caffesse]

Fantastic work, Phillip - you may have convinced me to take the plunge (finally).

[mico]

This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566

[jls4]

Truth is HDV while not the best codec is a decent one. I've pulled keys from Greenscreen easily on several shots with no HDMI out, just plan old HDV hitting the tape at 25Mbps. To have 44mbps or 35Mbps in a more efficent codec only makes things easier and allows for even smaller details to be easier to key. But until you have 4:4:4 at over 100Mbps you'll continue to have some green screen problems.

Right now I'm happy that the 7D looks to be the most efficent camera with the best datarate (for those into indie film, I wouldn't encouage videographers to have anything without a large depth of field). If anything, it'll force Panasonic and Sony to up their game. It's be nice to see an EX5 with 50Mbps and a 2/3 inch chip! LOL And it puts pressure on the RED folks to finish up the Scarlett and stop stalling.

As for monitoring, jeepers people. This 7D is cheaper than a DVX! I bought my first DVX for $3500! Now I get a cam and lens for under $2000. Heck I can go buy a Zacuto Rails set and monitor and still break out even with what I would have spent on a new DVX. These are easy fixes.

My main concern is the skipping of lines, only slight gamma curve change (through picture profiles) and the lack of HDMI out; which would have been nice especially with the Convergent Design Nano Flash. That would have made the 7D + Nano Flash + Monitor + Rails a $7500 mini RED. LOL

Panasonic DVX100 - 5 years ago - MiniDV (720x480 4:1:1 12Mbps), 24p/30p, Large DOF $3500
Canon 7D - 3 Weeks - Mp4 (1920x1080 4:2:0 44Mbps) 24/25/30/50/60p, Small DOF, Customizable Picture Profiles- $1800
Canon 7D + Zacuto Rails + Manhattan/Ikan/Marshall Monitor $1800 + $800 + $1000 = $3600

Be happy! Life right now is good! LOL

[jls4]

This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566

D&mn that was good. Everybody needs to check that out, a lot of fears just went out the window.

I've also thought about this for those who are concerned about alasing. Maybe it'd work, maybe not. What about shooting in 1080p and simply resizing down and back up. Maybe telling AE or Shake or Final Cut or Premiere to go from 1080 to maybe 840 and then back to 1080. Yes you'll loose a little resolution, but you'll have less aliasing and still higher than 720p resolution. And you only have to do it on scenes that have high aliasing in them, for more organic shots you probably wouldn't need to do anything. Heck the slow mo is in 720p.

[Michael Olsen]

I think this camera will be just fine.

[Ian-T]

…or do what McGregor suggested once and that is to add a quick blur and sharpening in post (that was specifically for Sony Vegas but I’m sure any NLE would work).

[alexdias]

This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566

Very nice sample of work. This camera ROCKS!

[PaPa]

holy cow. that was amazing.
I'm soo excited for this thing to show up. Im really curious to see how things thing performs with a lower contrast.

[Rakesh Jacob]

This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566

OMG!
um... who wants to buy a barely used HVX200a?

[Eddy Robinson]

This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y24/Tuneman7/matrix_Whoa.gif

The more I see, the more impressed I am. I wonder what lens(es) they used. I'm worrying less and less about the CMOS - besides the movement, which looks great, check out all those scenes with the blinkenlights (esp. 2:24). There's some skew evident around 2:29 (yellow fence) but it's hardly objectionable - if anything it's surprisingly gentle. I only see a few frames where it really breaks up, around 1:49, and that's on the bottom dip of a rollercoaster...I don't think I care, because I loved the way it looks in motion.

Note (for downloaders) it's been compressed to HDV - 1440 horizontal pixels with a PAR of 1.33:1. Why, I don't know, compression is pretty ugly on this one if you zoom in. You can really see it on the Moon shot around 1:13...good thing we already have Phil Bloom's material so we know this isn't the camera itself.

[philip bloom]

Thanks so much for the reply Philip!! :)

So, if you had to pick "an all rounder lens" (I can only afford one of these for the time being) between the EF 35mm f2.0 or the EF 50mm f1.4, you would go the 35mm, even though it's f2.0 (which I know is still fast)?

Is f2.0 enough for night shots (where the only lighting is street lights and moonlight)?

For your "Dublin People" video, what aperture where you using the most?

Again, sorry for the novice questions, I'm still learning! :) Thanks again :)

I would go for f1.4 lenses every time. I stop down so the shallow DOF isn't so intense. I mostly shot at f1.4 to f2.8 depending on what I was after.

[dillont]

OMG!

I'm so glad i pre ordered 2 of these for my department! I can't wait to get my hands on one of these.

I just can't believe how astonishing these images are. This tool placed in the right hands is capable of damn near anything.

Holy cow I'm so glad to be alive in this day and age. Thank you for posting that link!

Dillon



This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566

[Sttratos]

I wasn't talking about the codec. I was referring more to the hardware abilities.

Fair enough. I was talking about capability of making good images, which is a combination of codec+hardware+software and functions.


The 7D is based on the 50D. DxOMark measured the 50D's dynamic range to be 11.4 stops. I don't know how the EX1's dynamic range was measured, nor do I know how dynamic range might differ between still and video modes. But that's a number for you.

Sounds great. But would nice to confirm it is the same in video mode.


The color space of the 7D is still 4:2:0. I don't know why you would think that either it or the video in general would be "more compressed." The level of compression is derived from the bitrate or the ratio between the compressed file size and the uncompressed file size. The 44 Mbps codec of the 7D is, technically speaking, LESS compressed than 35 Mbps XDCAM. Your idea that H.264 was created to be "half the size" of MPEG-2 is confused. H.264 is more EFFICIENT than MPEG-2, which means that, on paper, it does a much smarter job of throwing away redundant information for the compression process.
None of that has anything to do with color space. 4:2:0 color space compression is the same for any codec.


Didn’t mean color, I was talking compression as in size. DV is 5 to 1 compression whether it’s 4:1:1 NTSC or 4:2:0 Pal.



The 7D's codec could only be inferior to XDCAM if it was a really bad implementation of H.264. It's either the same as or better than the 5D's codec. And the 5D's codec has proven to be very good. Users of both the 5D and XDCAM have said that the 5D's codec is significantly better.

I never had any interest in the 5D so I’m really out of the loop here. Are there any sites dedicated to the 5D for filming, test or tutorials for the 5D from a filmmaking point of view or any other resources for filmmaking with the 5D besides the forums here? It would be nice to read more about it.


You know, Philip made the original video file available for download, and you can easily find raw 5D clips as well. So why not try working with the files and seeing for yourself how good the codec is?

Will do.


Since the 7D presumably has the same or better codec as the 5D, you can estimate the green screen ability based on the tests that 5D users have done with their cameras. But I would imagine that every 4:2:0 codec has roughly the same capability, limited primarily by the codec's overall image compression efficiency.

Yes sure and that’s where a real HD camera with SDI shines. You at least have the option to capture uncompressed for green screen or anything else you may need while with the DSLRs this options doesn’t exist. This is why I can see the 7D being an addition but not a replacement for a HVX200a or EX1.


Why is having HD video-out an "important part of getting good images on the set"? The 7D does standard-definition video-out while recording. That's good enough for critical focus and other checks using a decent monitor.

Sorry but when using a 35mm adapter with the EX1 is VERY HARD to tell focus even on a 720p monitor, let alone a SD one. I can only imagine the same is true with the 7D since it has a S35mm sized chip. Having your image in focus is an important part of getting good images on the set". The 7D already has no focus assistant. Without the option of a HD monitor all you have is the 3” LCD. Not very reliable for motion picture work. Maybe for stills.


The gamma and knee and other image controls that you have in mind are primarily software effects. If you capture a flat, neutral image without over-sharpening or punchy contrast, then you have plenty of control over those things in post-production.

Well, there’s some to be said about manipulating your signal at acquisition rather than in post when all is already recorded.




Lack of zebra stripes, focus assist, and other such features never limited the image quality of 35mm film.

Well, I really do not want to go there. You want to compare film with compressed to death video? Film is a lot more forgiving, I mean A LOT than even uncompressed video, let alone highly compressed codecs like MPEG-2 and H.264.



In fact, none of the things that you mentioned have much to do with the camera's ability to get good images; they only HELP you get good images.

Of course it does. If it helps to get better images, it has an edge when it comes to getting better images.


Do you think that the limitations of 35mm film technology make it a less capable image acquisition system?

As I said above, don’t want to go there. Apples and oranges really.

[Jean Dantes]

I would go for f1.4 lenses every time. I stop down so the shallow DOF isn't so intense. I mostly shot at f1.4 to f2.8 depending on what I was after.

Thanks you so much Philip for taking the time to deal with my novice questions!! Truly, truly appreciate it!!

I think my mind is made up then - a Canon 7D + EF 50mm f1.4 USM :)

Can't wait for this summer! Gonna be shooting day and night! Thanks again :)

[Mirezzi]

I think everybody should watch Martin Scorsese's "The Big Shave" - and imagine it being shot with the 7D. :D

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2jwek_the-big-shave-martin-scorsese_shortfilms

(Wrong thread I realize, but I'm referring to the shaving video by Philip.)

[PaPa]

lol, that was amazing! looks almost like it could have been shot with the D90.

[ydgmdlu]

Fair enough. I was talking about capability of making good images, which is a combination of codec+hardware+software and functions.
That wasn't the impression that I got when I read your initial post. You were reacting to the quality of the the 7D's video, based on Phil's work here. You expressed skepticism at the camera's technical ability to capture such images. You said that it "technically shouldn't" look as good as the footage that comes out of the EX1/EX3. And why shouldn't it? The software abilities and functions that are so important to you only affect the usability of the camera, not the actual core image acquisition capability. And that was the point that I was trying to make by bringing up 35mm film. The mostly superior sensor and image processor of the 7D should give you EVERY REASON to expect not only comparable image quality, but BETTER image quality compared to the EX1. The only thing that would ruin its potential is the codec, which we have seen is not an issue.

Remember, you did not say that you were surprised that such a good quality image was so easy to obtain with the 7D compared to the EX1. If you had said that, then we'd be talking about usability concerns, not image acquisition quality.


Sounds great. But would nice to confirm it is the same in video mode.Here's a huge problem with your EX1 DR number. That number is not an absolute fact. It comes from the particular test that was done to determine it. Different testing methods yield different results. For example, RED's internal testing demonstrated that the RED One's DR was 11.3 stops. Other people have tested it to be closer to 8 stops. One guy's test revealed that it was 9.2 stops. So how is the EX1's DR in comparison with the RED One? Is it better or worse? I have a hard time believing that the RED One, the 5D Mark II (which someone measured to be 8 stops), and the 7D, with their much-larger photosites, would have worse DR than the EX1. I won't believe it until the same test that measured the EX1 at 10 stops is done to the 7D.


Didn’t mean color, I was talking compression as in size. DV is 5 to 1 compression whether it’s 4:1:1 NTSC or 4:2:0 Pal. I was also talking about compression in size, but the way that you phrased your post indicated to me that you were also questioning the color space compression (i.e. "chroma subsampling"). And again, 44 Mbps is, technically speaking, less compressed than 35 Mbps, no matter what the codecs are. Compression ratios and bit rates say almost nothing about how good an image will look. Those numbers are only useful in relation to the codec or algorithm that's being used. So not only is the 7D's codec less compressed than XDCAM, it's also more efficiently compressed. On paper, it looks like a huge win.


I never had any interest in the 5D so I’m really out of the loop here. Are there any sites dedicated to the 5D for filming, test or tutorials for the 5D from a filmmaking point of view or any other resources for filmmaking with the 5D besides the forums here? It would be nice to read more about it.http://www.cinema5d.com is the forum dedicated to 5D and DSLR filmmaking.


Yes sure and that’s where a real HD camera with SDI shines. You at least have the option to capture uncompressed for green screen or anything else you may need while with the DSLRs this options doesn’t exist. This is why I can see the 7D being an addition but not a replacement for a HVX200a or EX1.If you need uncompressed full HD capture through HDMI, then of course it won't replace any camera that can do it. A lot of us here don't need that, which is why we would choose a DSLR to replace a HVX200 or EX1 in a heartbeat. It's about personal needs. Sometimes people here forget that and try to make universal statements.


Sorry but when using a 35mm adapter with the EX1 is VERY HARD to tell focus even on a 720p monitor, let alone a SD one. I can only imagine the same is true with the 7D since it has a S35mm sized chip. Having your image in focus is an important part of getting good images on the set". The 7D already has no focus assistant. Without the option of a HD monitor all you have is the 3” LCD. Not very reliable for motion picture work. Maybe for stills.Well, it is subjective. Some people say that the DOF on the 5D is so shallow that it makes focusing excruciatingly difficult, while others say that it's not bad at all. The funny thing is that people in the GH1 forum are raving about the GH1's EVF over the 7D's lack of one. EVF is supposedly so important and beneficial for focusing, but it's not very high resolution either, is it?


Well, there’s some to be said about manipulating your signal at acquisition rather than in post when all is already recorded. Why is that better than manipulating in post? The only advantage that I can see is convenience. RED fanboys love to talk about how shooting RAW is infinitely better than "baking in" everything in the acquisition phase.


Well, I really do not want to go there. You want to compare film with compressed to death video? Film is a lot more forgiving, I mean A LOT than even uncompressed video, let alone highly compressed codecs like MPEG-2 and H.264. I was not comparing the quality of film to the quality of compressed video. My point is that film looks so good not just because it's so forgiving. It's because its image acquisition ability is superior to digital video. Digital video can't (yet) match film's resolution, dynamic range, and color reproduction. Yet film has serious usability difficulties compared to digital cinematography. So it's not really a matter of how "forgiving" a medium is. And again, usability has virtually no bearing on image acquisition quality.

[ChipG]

http://prepshootpost.blogspot.com/2009/09/7d-takes-color.html