PDA

View Full Version : 7D vs 5D Mk ii - Now they've both got 24P/25P



andrew00
10-20-2009, 03:36 AM
(The inevitable thread, might as well get it going!)

Now Canon have announced the 5D will get 25P in the new year (but I believe no 720P 50/60P) what are all our thoughts on which camera is the most appealing investment for video?

I don't know if you lot around the world have had to deal with the pricing of the 7D with a grumble, but over here in the UK the 7D is currently very over priced compared to the rest of the world - for many reasons I'm sure, but certainly partially. because of 25P.

It costs you about £1500 to get a 7D Body and about £1800 to get a 5D Mk ii body. That difference in the grand scheme isn't much.

It's funny, I was all about to buy the 7D and all the gizmos on Friday before I saw the Sony announcement coming for today and turns out we get a bonus from Canon too! Glad I held off, although it's just left me more confused.

As I saw it, the main advantage of the 7D over the 5D was in the frame rates. The cropped sensor was more like S35, which was good for the film makers but isn't as good in low light and is more noisy. But by having 25P I wouldn't have to spend ages converting every video I made (with so-so results).

Other advantages of the 7D were more towards the stills market - e.g. the dual Digic processors allowing for the fast 8fps burst shooting.

Now that impediment is in many ways removed, does the 7D become a less viable option? Does the 5D become a big big draw now that it can do 24p/25p like we all want? I know the price difference in the USA is pretty substantial - about $1000. In the UK it's £300, however you do have to factor in the extra costs of Full Frame lenses.

This is especially confusing to me now b/c I was going to get the new camera, prob 7D, test it out, and decide if I wanted to sell my Ex1/Lex combo. Now there's a new Ex1R out, I'm suddenly thinking argh what do I do?! As if the new Ex1R is going to replace the Ex1 in people's affections, will it reduce the price I can get if I were to sell the Ex1? Are we about to enter a window of opportunity where we can still sell our Ex1's (if we wanted to) for a good price because the 'market' becomes flooded with EX1R's? Are these announcements forcing some tough decisions?

Interesting, but confusing, times!

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 03:41 AM
Okay well the 5D is technically superior overall. It has better image quality (although the difference is marginal, I believe) and has better stills. Though the 7D has more advanced AF and weather proof sealing. It also has 60p, I don't know if the 24p/25p update for the 5D will give us 720p as well.

But the deal sealer for was always the fact that the 5D is full frame and I had some old 35mm Zeiss lenses from the 70's which are absolutely gorgeous on the 5D. You may see it differently if you prefer EFS lenses.

The cost of the body is only 50% of it for me. I spend almost as much on a good collection of lenses. I see that as the most important variable in the image quality debate, not the test charts, etc. For me the purchase of a new lens is as exciting as a new camera release sometimes! The GH1's 2x and 7D 1.6x crop takes some of that excitement away. I'm a lens purist and that means 35mm sensor, nothing less.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 03:46 AM
As I saw it, the main advantage of the 7D over the 5D was in the frame rates. The cropped sensor was more like S35, which was good for the film makers but isn't as good in low light and is more noisy.

Yes the 7D's sensor is S35 sized. But that means almost exactly nothing when used with glass designed for 35mm photography film.

DSLR lenses are almost certainly what you'll be using. A S35 sized sensor only has it's benefits if you're gonna put a S35 cinema lens on it to replicate the exact S35 depth of field etc., so don't believe the hype.

andrew00
10-20-2009, 03:56 AM
Yes that was something about the cheaper 7D lenses that is interesting. APS-C lenses cannot be used on FF cameras but FF lenses can be used on APS-C cameras with a 1.6x crop.

Therefore, whilst it's cheaper to get APS-C lenses, they don't have the 'future proof' aspect to them that FF lenses do.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 04:16 AM
If you want a nice zoom range, from wide angle to about 135 or 200mm, with image stabilisation, a 7D is the better option because to get that kind of 'walk around' lens on the 5D would be incredibly expensive other than the 28-135mm IS which is old and of rather debatable image quality!

The new 15-85MM IS is great.

AF is better on the 7D. I am forever using the 5Ds micro adjustment menu to fine tune by AF lenses, even the Canon ones like the EF 70-300mm IS. You have to have focus spot on due to it's shallower depth of field.

I think EFS lenses are future proof. S35 sized sensors are more for the future of video and 35mm sized sensors more a legacy of older lenses and photography. But at this cross over point, a larger sensor is nice to have.

ydgmdlu
10-20-2009, 04:26 AM
Yes the 7D's sensor is S35 sized.
It's not S35-sized. Super 35 is 24.89mm wide. Standard 35mm is 21.95mm wide. Canon APS-C is 22.3mm wide, making it closest to standard 35mm.


But that means almost exactly nothing when used with glass designed for 35mm photography film.That makes no sense. The only things that matter are focal length, image circle size, and being able to physically mount a lens. The intended application of a lens is virtually irrelevant to the image.


DSLR lenses are almost certainly what you'll be using. A S35 sized sensor only has it's benefits if you're gonna put a S35 cinema lens on it to replicate the exact S35 depth of field etc., so don't believe the hype.These are the only differences that cinema lenses have compared to photo lenses:
1) glass elements made of higher quality glass (for superior contrast, sharpness, and color rendition)
2) focus rings with very long focus throws
3) non-click-stopping irises
4) bigger maximum apertures
5) bulkier and more rugged build

All of the rest are essentially the same. From an optics point of view, there is no difference between a cinema lens and photo lens. A 50mm F1.4 (approximately T1.9) photo lens will give you the same result as a 50mm T1.9 cinema lens.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 04:57 AM
Interesting facts about cinema lenses there, thank you.

But a 50mm lens on a 5D will give you a different result than on a 7D. That's what I mean.

Something to bear in mind also is the bokeh and light fall off. I actually like how the bokeh appears to curve on the edges of the image and you get a slight vignette with many 35mm lenses on full frame. Similar to the look of c-mount lenses on the GH1 but of course not as extreme.

I have a Zeiss 25mm Distagon, picked up on eBay for £200, which is one of the finest wide angle lenses ever made. On full frame 25mm is appreciably wider than the same lens at 28mm.

On the 7D with it's 1.6x crop, all that wideness is lost. I don't understand why people say things like 'a 50 is a 50', etc, etc. That may be true when it comes to the science, but not when it comes to actual use.

bwwd
10-20-2009, 06:14 AM
I hope canon is smart and have 1500D (cheapest model for less than 1000$ )for christmas with 24p and 25p ,this would be huge hit and a lot of money for canon ,i hope they know about this.

ydgmdlu
10-20-2009, 06:31 AM
But a 50mm lens on a 5D will give you a different result than on a 7D. That's what I mean.
That's fair enough, but that still doesn't explain what you meant in the quotes from your earlier post:


But that means almost exactly nothing when used with glass designed for 35mm photography film.
A S35 sized sensor only has it's benefits if you're gonna put a S35 cinema lens on it to replicate the exact S35 depth of field etc., so don't believe the hype.------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the 7D with it's 1.6x crop, all that wideness is lost. I don't understand why people say things like 'a 50 is a 50', etc, etc. That may be true when it comes to the science, but not when it comes to actual use.But that's only if you're using full frame as your reference. If you're not, then it doesn't matter. That's the whole point. 25mm was never considered super-wide for 35mm cinematography, so I don't understand the complaint from a cinematography point of view.

SPZ
10-20-2009, 08:52 AM
Let's see how the 5D handles motion in 25/24P. that's the big question. The 5D only uses 1 digic IV processor, while the 7D 2.

Kholi
10-20-2009, 08:59 AM
Okay well the 5D is technically superior overall. It has better image quality (although the difference is marginal, I believe) and has better stills. Though the 7D has more advanced AF and weather proof sealing. It also has 60p, I don't know if the 24p/25p update for the 5D will give us 720p as well.

5D in Video Mode, when matched to the 7D, is no better. In fact, the 7D has the edge due to less aliasing in 1080 and less jello.. The update doesn't look like it's 50/60P and that's fine.



But the deal sealer for was always the fact that the 5D is full frame and I had some old 35mm Zeiss lenses from the 70's which are absolutely gorgeous on the 5D. You may see it differently if you prefer EFS lenses.

Full Frame's the deal killer for most. Standard is NOT Full Frame, it's Super 35.


The cost of the body is only 50% of it for me. I spend almost as much on a good collection of lenses. I see that as the most important variable in the image quality debate, not the test charts, etc. For me the purchase of a new lens is as exciting as a new camera release sometimes! The GH1's 2x and 7D 1.6x crop takes some of that excitement away. I'm a lens purist and that means 35mm sensor, nothing less.

Lens purist means you own Leica glass.

Kholi
10-20-2009, 09:02 AM
Yes the 7D's sensor is S35 sized. But that means almost exactly nothing when used with glass designed for 35mm photography film.

DSLR lenses are almost certainly what you'll be using. A S35 sized sensor only has it's benefits if you're gonna put a S35 cinema lens on it to replicate the exact S35 depth of field etc., so don't believe the hype.


No matter which glass you use, you'll be near-to motion picture standards. Full Frame is not Motion Picture standard. The comment about glass makes no sense.

Rory_B
10-20-2009, 09:33 AM
The 7D doesn't have noticeable vertical banding like the 5D does at higher ISO's in lowlight situations. There is more noise overall at times, but it's more gritty and filmlike.

andrew00
10-20-2009, 10:13 AM
Let's see how the 5D handles motion in 25/24P. that's the big question. The 5D only uses 1 digic IV processor, while the 7D 2.

If it can do 30fps without problems, shouldn't it be able to do 25fps 1/6th more easily?

Kholi
10-20-2009, 10:34 AM
Interesting facts about cinema lenses there, thank you.

But a 50mm lens on a 5D will give you a different result than on a 7D. That's what I mean.

Naturally... two different sensor sizes.




Something to bear in mind also is the bokeh and light fall off. I actually like how the bokeh appears to curve on the edges of the image and you get a slight vignette with many 35mm lenses on full frame. Similar to the look of c-mount lenses on the GH1 but of course not as extreme.

That's actually considered bad bokeh. The term's portholing, it's a negative one.



I have a Zeiss 25mm Distagon, picked up on eBay for £200, which is one of the finest wide angle lenses ever made. On full frame 25mm is appreciably wider than the same lens at 28mm.

The 25/2.8 Zeiss Contax is one of the worst wide angles in existence. The edge fall off below 5.6 is pretty atrocious and not so much worthy of being a wide angle.

Did you mean the 28/2 or 21/2.8?



On the 7D with it's 1.6x crop, all that wideness is lost. I don't understand why people say things like 'a 50 is a 50', etc, etc. That may be true when it comes to the science, but not when it comes to actual use.


Because a 50 is a 50 in cinematic language. We aren't shooting stills, we're shooting motion picture. NOBODY on set goes "Well this 50 here has the equivalent field of view to an 85 yadda badda bing boop".

It's a 50mm. Period.

Full Frame is the outsider, not S35(ish) sensors.

JFreshInEffect!
10-20-2009, 10:49 AM
Kholi, I think you are correct on all counts.

Maybe though in the future full frame will be the future standard for all imaging applications. A possibility. I don't think that's the case but it could come to pass.

I've always shot cropped so a 50mm to me will always be a bit telephoto.

Kholi
10-20-2009, 10:54 AM
That's fine, if Full Frame becomes a staple in cinematography I'm okay with that. I've kept my MKii for Stills and, more specifically, to shoot wides or vistas when needed. So, not to discount the few advantages of Full Frame at all, there's just no need to purposely add the extra confusion of calculating focal length etc.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 11:23 AM
Because a 50 is a 50 in cinematic language. We aren't shooting stills, we're shooting motion picture. NOBODY on set goes "Well this 50 here has the equivalent field of view to an 85 yadda badda bing boop".

It's a 50mm. Period.

Full Frame is the outsider, not S35(ish) sensors.

I am sorry Kholi but that just sounds elitist. :shocked:

To a newbie, saying a 50mm is a 50mm, period doesn't help them at all. There are people trying to decide between the 5D and 7D who might have no idea about crop factors. It may be obvious to someone who isn't new to the HD-SLRs how various lenses look on various sensor sizes and to crop the lens image circle is pretty obvious, basic stuff, but I think the guy needs someone to mention that his 50 will look like an 85 on the 7D, otherwise the crop factor might be disturbing. Putting a nice wide lens on a GH1 is certainly disturbing, that's for sure.

Rules, standards... pah. All that matters is the look. I don't care that the 7D's sensor size is 'the standard' for motion picture. What I care about is that I like wide lenses and subjectively the full frame sensor helps in that respect. But it's a subjective thing. I can only speak subjectively because I don't know any facts :)

I think people should trust their personal judgement and eye first before any rulebook or standard. Subjectivity counts for a lot. My mistake is to keep passing my opinions off as facts. Poor wording, sorry. The Zeiss 25mm is an incredibly sharp and details lens to my eye, which is 3x less on eBay than the rarer 28mm F2 'hollywood', I really don't think the 'worst wide angle' tag is justified at all. "Lens purist" was a stupid way of putting it, but you don't have to own Leica to like what you see. Zeiss make some of the best lenses around, and you have actually influenced me to buy several over the past few months. The Contax Zeiss 85MM F1.4 is a stunner for the money... absolutely inky black contrast and colour, with ninja star bokeh. I am sure someone will say that the standards and rulebooks state strictly that ninja star bokeh is the worst you can get and that the radial bokeh on a GH1 with c-mount lens is 'bad' from a technical point of view, but what matters is creativity and having a look which you enjoy.

I am sitting on the fence between 5D and 7D. They're both excellent. I trust what people say about the image quality and low light being as good as the 5D, so it comes down to the only major difference and that is full frame & lenses. Consider this...

Got a Canon 70-300MM EF IS today, and on the 5D I can use that as a portrait lens at 70 and a telephoto at 300. On a 7D that ability to use it as a IS portrait lens is lost, as it'll be 112mm equiv. at it's widest. These are things to consider, no matter how many times people say 70mm is 70mm big fat full stop.

Barry_Green
10-20-2009, 11:27 AM
Yes the 7D's sensor is S35 sized. But that means almost exactly nothing when used with glass designed for 35mm photography film.
What are you talking about? Does it mean nothing when Red One users put Nikon lenses on their Red Ones?


A S35 sized sensor only has it's benefits if you're gonna put a S35 cinema lens on it to replicate the exact S35 depth of field etc., so don't believe the hype.
WHAT are you talking about!??!?! Seriously, I do not follow this at all, and I wonder if you're not laboring under some wild misconception.

I've used SLR glass on 16mm movie cameras, 35mm movie cameras, a Red One, and the 7D and GH1. What difference does it matter whether you use an SLR lens, or a cinema lens on? The DOF and field of view are going to be exactly the same, the look you get is exactly the same.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 11:40 AM
I've used SLR glass on 16mm movie cameras, 35mm movie cameras, a Red One, and the 7D and GH1. What difference does it matter whether you use an SLR lens, or a cinema lens on? The DOF and field of view are going to be exactly the same, the look you get is exactly the same.

Sorry I should be clearer what I meant earlier, as it seem to have caused a big attack.

7D sensor = 35mm motion picture sized
5D sensor = 35mm still photography sized

The image circle of cinema lenses are designed to cover 35mm motion picture film, while 35mm SLR lenses are designed to cover 35mm stills film. The look you get from the same lens, on different cameras is not exactly the same because of crop factors. That's all I'm saying. Put a SLR lens on a 35mm motion picture camera or 7D and you end up with it being less wide, put a cine lens on a 5D Mark II and you will have a major vignette. It's no good saying 'a 50 is a 50' all the time, because newbies may take that as you can put a 50mm c-mount lens on a 5D Mark II and get full coverage and the same look as you would on a 16mm cine camera. This is why I see it as so elitist when privileged hollywood guys come on and say 'look.. the lingo is this, and anyone who talks differently is wrong'. I mean c'mon, get off your high horse and explain how it affects people's movies, don't just bang out the facts which mean nothing if you're not in the know.

By the same token, what difference does it make having a Motion Picture Standard sensor size as opposed to Micro 4/3rds, Full Frame or even 2/3? So you can exactly reproduce the DOF characteristics of film on the 7D? Well, how is that a unique advantage? Over a much smaller sensor, yes. Shallow DOF is cinematic. But you can do the same on full frame simply by stopping down the lens and yet you can call on even shallower DOF (than the 7D or GH1) at the same F stop, if you need to.

Kholi
10-20-2009, 11:49 AM
I am sorry Kholi but that just sounds elitist. :shocked:

To a newbie, saying a 50mm is a 50mm, period doesn't help them at all. There are people trying to decide between the 5D and 7D who might have no idea about crop factors. It may be obvious to someone who isn't new to the HD-SLRs how various lenses look on various sensor sizes and to crop the lens image circle is pretty obvious, basic stuff, but I think the guy needs someone to mention that his 50 will look like an 85 on the 7D, otherwise the crop factor might be disturbing. Putting a nice wide lens on a GH1 is certainly disturbing, that's for sure.

We're not talking about the GH-1. We're talking about the 7D which is close enough to S35 to make the statement that a 50 is a 50. It surely doesn't help someone who's trying to shoot motion picture to be confused about Full Frame being anywhere near a standard. If you want to replicate the look of most feature films, you want a 7D.

Most "newbs" want to do that.



Rules, standards... pah. All that matters is the look.

Oddly enough, the look is generated by rules and standards, either by adhering to or learning about them then breaking them.


I don't care that the 7D's sensor size is 'the standard' for motion picture.

That's fine. You certainly do not have to care. But, lots of people certainly do. Not only does the sensor size change but so does the entire image aesthetic: not limited to DOF, but compression characteristics as well.


What I care about is that I like wide lenses and subjectively the full frame sensor helps in that respect. But it's a subjective thing. I can only speak subjectively because I don't know any facts :)

It helps if you can't afford to spend money on pristine Wide Angle glass. There are plenty of Wide Lenses that cover APS-C sized frames that will get you near-to if not exactly the same FOV as the widest angle on a Full Frame sensor.



I think people should trust their personal judgement and eye first before any rulebook or standard. Subjectivity counts for a lot. My mistake is to keep passing my opinions off as facts. Poor wording, sorry.

The "Finest Wide Angle ever made" certainly did sound like a fact, and that's pretty far off.


The Zeiss 25mm is an incredibly sharp and details lens to my eye, which is 3x less on eBay than the rarer 28mm F2 'hollywood', I really don't think the 'worst wide angle' tag is justified at all.

I saw differently. Two different sets of eyes, though. Which is fine.


"Lens purist" was a stupid way of putting it, but you don't have to own Leica to like what you see. Zeiss make some of the best lenses around, and you have actually influenced me to buy several over the past few months.

Another case of misunderstanding. Lens Purist to me certainly says that "I own only Leica Glass". There's a guy on the RED forums that hails Leica as the end and be all. He owns expensive lenses that I would never invest in; he's a purist to me.


The Contax Zeiss 85MM F1.4 is a stunner for the money... absolutely inky black contrast and colour, with ninja star bokeh. I am sure someone will say that the standards and rulebooks state strictly that ninja star bokeh is the worst you can get and that the radial bokeh on a GH1 with c-mount lens is 'bad' from a technical point of view, but what matters is creativity and having a look which you enjoy.

I own the 85/1.4, it's a great piece of glass but the Ninja Star Bokeh is certainly distracting. But that's just me. As you point out, it's subjective.



I am sitting on the fence between 5D and 7D. They're both excellent. I trust what people say about the image quality and low light being as good as the 5D, so it comes down to the only major difference and that is full frame & lenses. Consider this...

Got a Canon 70-300MM EF IS today, and on the 5D I can use that as a portrait lens at 70 and a telephoto at 300. On a 7D that ability to use it as a IS portrait lens is lost, as it'll be 112mm equiv. at it's widest. These are things to consider, no matter how many times people say 70mm is 70mm big fat full stop.

If you plan on doing portraiture more than motion picture acquisition and that's actually a deal sealer or breaker for you then I think you have your answer. I can certainly understand the benefit of having a 50/1.4 being your primarily lens for cinematic acquisition, as 35/1.4(s) and 28/2(s) get quite expensive.

My solution: own both. =B

Ian-T
10-20-2009, 11:49 AM
It's this kind of talk that continues to confuse the heck out of folks who don't know any better. I think folks hear these things from one…jump on the bandwagon…and spread this info like wildfire. Next thing you know you have a ton of folks giving out the wrong (or misleading) information. When one says ‘crop factor’ what are they referencing the crop to (rhetorical)? Maybe “filmmakers” should not use the term “crop factor” and instead leave that term for the stills folks. It seems people complain about the wrong things too often.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 11:59 AM
We're not talking about the GH-1. We're talking about the 7D which is close enough to S35 to make the statement that a 50 is a 50. It surely doesn't help someone who's trying to shoot motion picture to be confused about Full Frame being anywhere near a standard. If you want to replicate the look of most feature films, you want a 7D.

Most "newbs" want to do that.

Now Kholi. I love you (in a platonic way). I listen to what you say. My credit card is £500 lighter because I adopted a family of Zeiss lenses, a trend you started in the GH1 forum. But that statement above is pure bollocks :)

The 7D has many wonderful advantages over the 5D, like making coffee and keeping you warm in bed when it overheats but I'm sorry, I just don't buy the S35 hype. I don't thank the lord for S35 when I see The Godfather. I don't think, "wow, if that was shot on 70 mil like Lawrence of Arabia, it'd be a load of bollocks!"

It may be close to S35, but the look of the image is achieved through a combination of lens and sensor size, the characteristics of which can be controlled via your choice of lens and choice of aperture, etc. In my view, a full frame sensor is an advantage over a S35 sized APS-C sensor because you have a shallower DOF available if you need it, and the ability to match the look and characteristics of a S35 sized sensor if you need it. And now, come 2010 - 24p and 25p.

Kholi
10-20-2009, 12:04 PM
I don't thank the lord for S35 when I see The Godfather. I don't think, "wow, if that was shot on 70 mil like Lawrence of Arabia, it'd be a load of bollocks!"

Two feature films out of a sea of how many equally great ones shot Super 35mm?



It may be close to S35, but the look of the image is achieved through a combination of lens and sensor size, the characteristics of which can be controlled via your choice of lens and choice of aperture, etc. In my view, a full frame sensor is an advantage over a S35 sized APS-C sensor because you have a shallower DOF available if you need it, and the ability to match the look and characteristics of a S35 sized sensor if you need it. And now, come 2010 - 24p and 25p.

Do you own an MKii and how much Full Frame narrative or Commercial Content have you shot? I have to ask because you don't seem to realize that Full Frame just isn't about DOF. The entire image aesthetic changes, which I think you skipped over in my last post.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 12:05 PM
It's this kind of talk that continues to confuse the heck out of folks who don't know any better. I think folks hear these things from one…jump on the bandwagon…and spread this info like wildfire. Next thing you know you have a ton of folks giving out the wrong (or misleading) information. When one says ‘crop factor’ what are they referencing the crop to (rhetorical)? Maybe “filmmakers” should not use the term “crop factor” and instead leave that term for the stills folks. It seems people complain about the wrong things too often.

When I was new to HD-SLRs, people saying 'a 50 is a 50' sure as hell confused me, as well. It depends what background you come from.

If you come from cinema, then sure - a 50 is a 50 on a S35 sensor like the 7D.
If you come from stills, then a 50 is a 50 on a full frame camera, and any smaller then it's cropped.

It depends how you think. I am sure people buying the 7D and getting into HD-SLR video are just as likely to come from both camps.

mhood
10-20-2009, 12:13 PM
I don't come from either camps (I'm ENG background) but when I heard "normal lens", I thought "50mm". Not too sure why but that's the truth.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 12:15 PM
The entire image aesthetic changes, which I think you skipped over in my last post.

I still don't see how this is a factor mate. I am pretty sure the aesthetics are no less pleasing on full frame, even if you've watched S35 motion pictures every day of your life and can tell the difference subliminally. You can reproduce the aesthetics on a full frame sensor to as near as makes no difference.

You can take cinema in a new direction using razor thin DOF creatively and shooting through 35mm SLR lenses designed for stills. The aesthetic of full frame is lovely.

There are people who will read your S35 raves and think S35 sized sensor is 'more cinematic' when in fact, it's just a number.

35mm lens on S35 is gonna be a crop of what you get on a full frame camera. That has advantages but it also has disadvantages too, depends on the lens. The 'look' of cinematic footage is about so much more than S35 and 24p.

Barry_Green
10-20-2009, 01:00 PM
maybe “filmmakers” should not use the term “crop factor” and instead leave that term for the stills folks.
+1

bwwd
10-20-2009, 02:06 PM
http://www.studio-x.hu/tiny_mce/plugins/imagemanager/files/cikkek/onephoto_articles/RED_sensor_chart.jpg

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 02:16 PM
Okay so Mr Real Filmmaker's stance is to ignore crop factors. Well I think that's being generally unhelpful to the people who come from stills-land terminology, so yeah great attitude. Maggie Thatcher would be proud.

-1

And I have yet to yeah Kholi's explanation of why the aesthetics of a S35 sensor are all so much more cinematic than full frame. We're not in Real Filmmaker land any more. These are DSLRs.

Tired of fighting the Hollywood dogma and arrogance! There is more than one way of thinking about stuff.

andrew00
10-20-2009, 02:17 PM
Ok, so can I just clear something up as it's getting me confused.

If a stills photographer and a cinematographer are both looking at a scene and choosing their lenses.

If a stills photographer wants to use a 50mm lens, that means he wants to the field of view and the look and the distance from the subject etc etc that he knows he'll get from a 50mm lens of a full frame camera e.g. the 5dmk2.

If the cinematographer then decides to use a 50mm on his film camera, or in this example his 7D, he actually means a 50mm + the crop inherent with using S35mm film, i.e. in the case of the 7D he'll actually means 50mm + the 1.6 crop aka 80mm.

Is that what we're saying here? The cinematographer will select the 50mm because he knows he really means 80mm in technical terms? I.E. The crop is inherent and accepted and factored into the decision making process.

So in that sense if one is using the same maths, if the cinematographer wants the exact look he expects, but when he uses the 5dmk2, he actually needs to select the lens he wants, times it by 1.6, then take the resultant lens.

I.E. If he decides 'I want to use a 50mm', he should in fact reach for an 80mm to get an equivalent shot as he would expect to have from his S35mm film camera or his 7D.

Aye?

Because in that sense the whole problem can be solved with a simple spreadsheet of equivalents - i.e. 50mm on S35 = 80mm on FF etc.

Or am I confusing myself?

Kholi
10-20-2009, 02:26 PM
Or am I confusing myself?

Yes.

There's no thinking about it. A Cinematographer or Director (depending on the relationship) will think "I need a two shot" and immediately select a 35mm or 24mm Focal Length because we know exactly how wide it'll be, the image compression, etc. We do not select it for FOV or Equivalents or anything like that.

We're conditioned through repetition to know exactly what a 16mm will look like close-focused @ 3 feet w/or w/out a Diopter @ 4~5.6 Split.

As far as we're concerned a crop factor does not exist until we move to a larger or smaller format. S35 is the standard.

A photographer will think in equivalents, though. I feel bad for their brain. LoL

Barry_Green
10-20-2009, 02:27 PM
The cinematographer will use 50mm because he knows what a 50mm looks like on his cinema camera, and he doesn't give a **** what it looks like on a still camera or "full frame" camera.

And, by and large, neither does any cinematographer. "Full frame" has nothing to do with the movies. That's for still photographers to argue about. We don't talk about it or care about it.

So -- for those who are offended by the notion that all film shooters work on all the same sensor sizes pretty much exclusively, whether that's 35mm film or a Red One or a Genesis or an F35 or Dalsa Origin or S35 Scarlet or a 7D, and that you'll NEVER hear the word "crop factor" ever mentioned on a movie set, maybe we could change it around ...

Maybe we could just say that the cinema frame size is the default, and when using a full-frame still camera, you have a "widening" factor. How's that?

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 03:29 PM
The cinematographer will use 50mm because he knows what a 50mm looks like on his cinema camera, and he doesn't give a **** what it looks like on a still camera or "full frame" camera.

And, by and large, neither does any cinematographer. "Full frame" has nothing to do with the movies. That's for still photographers to argue about. We don't talk about it or care about it.

Until now.

Chance White
10-20-2009, 03:32 PM
I would like to second Barry's coining of the term WIDENING FACTOR to replace CROP FACTOR.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 03:34 PM
Because in that sense the whole problem can be solved with a simple spreadsheet of equivalents - i.e. 50mm on S35 = 80mm on FF etc.

Spot on, you're not confused.

When dealing with S35 cinema cameras, of course a cinematographer knows what lens gives what look, through experience. And they deal exclusivly with the S35 frame size.

By and large, a 50 is a 50 because they don't have this great variation in sensor size to deal with.

But now in the realm of HD-SLRs with their different sensor sizes (GH1, 5D, et al) you have to take into account crop factor at first, then you get used to how it works. It's simple. Don't start thinking like a cinematography who has S35 as his bench mark. It is no longer a bench mark where HD-SLRs are concerned. I think the established old school cinematographers will see it how they see it, and that's fine, but for the rest of us the crop factor is relevant when making a camera purchase and sizing up lens purchases. And it's a pretty simple concept, don't fear it. Once you stick with one camera, you get used to how it's crop factor has an effect on FOV.

I can't stand the willy waving of film makers who have been used to S35, no crop factors, to come to the HD-SLRs and try to impose their way of thinking on everybody else.

Had I ignored crop factors when buying lenses for my GH1, I'd have been expecting a 24,25 or 28mm to be wide. On a 7D or GH1, it is not.

Isaac_Brody
10-20-2009, 03:36 PM
Until now.

Yes, by and large it's the amateurs who aren't familiar with cinema cameras who are making a big deal about it.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 03:44 PM
I may not be familiar with cinema cameras, like the 'privileged ones' but I am familiar with buying a HD-SLR or two. When buying a HD-SLR you should notice crop factor and buy lenses accordingly. It is as simple as that. When you're 5 years in the film industry and instantly relate focal lengths to S35 film size, then sure you can be as cocky as this lot are with their thinking and terminology.

For the rest of us. We have different sensor sizes to think about other than the 7D and S35 and many lenses which have an image circle designed to cover 35mm film / full frame.

Isaac_Brody
10-20-2009, 03:45 PM
And I have yet to yeah Kholi's explanation of why the aesthetics of a S35 sensor are all so much more cinematic than full frame. We're not in Real Filmmaker land any more. These are DSLRs.

Tired of fighting the Hollywood dogma and arrogance! There is more than one way of thinking about stuff.

Have you worked on a professional set? S35 is the standard by which most of the films you see in theaters are shot. You may like full frame better, but to force your opinion on what's worked for a hundred years is just getting obnoxious. Give the revolution a rest already.

Martti Ekstrand
10-20-2009, 03:48 PM
It should be mentioned that many cinematographers are very experienced in constantly moving between two focal length vs field of view relations - 16 & 35 mm cameras. Some even has the luxury / torture of working with IMAX cameras with a negative size that positively dwarfs 'full frame'. As a history note, long ago cinema 35 mm Academy 4:3 format was 'the frame' and a VistaVision camera (same negative sized frame as a SLR) was 'double frame'.


Okay so Mr Real Filmmaker's stance is to ignore crop factors. Well I think that's being generally unhelpful to the people who come from stills-land terminology, so yeah great attitude. Maggie Thatcher would be proud
.....
Tired of fighting the Hollywood dogma and arrogance! There is more than one way of thinking about stuff.

Now seriously - this is not a 'Hollywood' standard that Kholi was rather patiently explaining - it's world wide cinema standards. I have previously said in friendliness that I respect your ambition and eagerness as a beginner in making motion images but suggested for your own sake that you consider the way you address others here, which is often confrontational past the point of open aggression and how you state things as 'industry facts' or 'standards' when it's really just your own opinions and your own home-made ideas of how things work. Now with this quote on top of the previous post in this thread you moved a long way from eager amateur and is just a hairline away from looking like a true dilettante. And in a incredibly rude manner at that. It's not Kholi who is arrogant, it's you.

Rakesh Jacob
10-20-2009, 03:56 PM
Give the revolution a rest already.

Descanso La Revolucion!

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 03:57 PM
Martti, all I am saying to the poor guy who asked the original question was that S35 worldwide cinema standards don't apply to the GH1 or the 5D because these are still cameras, with still camera mounts, with sensor sizes different to S35 and lenses which have nothing to do with worldwide cinema standards.

That's all I'm saying. I haven't killed anyone. Why the abuse?

Also why can't cinematographers accept an outside view? Why the belittling and bullying or people who come from different backgrounds? It's rude. Simple as that.

A guy asked a purchasing question. I gave my opinion. Are you saying he should ignore the difference in sensor size and ignore crop factors when buying lenses or cameras when there are so many different HD-SLRs and lenses on the market? That's wrong.

KeithAndrews.TV
10-20-2009, 03:59 PM
I think what is happening here is people are getting hung up on accuracies and not taking into account the reality of the situation. Until now there was no mixing of industries. Still Photographers used cameras for still images and Cinematographers used cameras for movies. There's no arguing that fact.

We now have the line between the two industries becoming thinner and thinner so we all need to understand that in one scenario you could be using a still camera for stills and in another a still camera for movies. The days of a Cinematographer calling for a 24mm cinema lens that gives the fov of a 24mm lens on a cinema camera could be changing. If a Cinematographer now chooses to use a camera like a full frame 5D Mark II, he/she needs to understand that the fov will most definitely be different than what he/she is used to using on a cinema camera.

It's not that hard to understand that things are changing, as are the traditional tools we use in still photography and cinematography. We all need to realize that and simply embrace the advancements that are being made.

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 04:04 PM
I think what is happening here is people are getting hung up on accuracies and not taking into account the reality of the situation. Until now there was no mixing of industries. Still Photographers used cameras for still images and Cinematographers used cameras for movies. There's no arguing that fact.

We now have the line between the two industries becoming thinner and thinner so we all need to understand that in one scenario you could be using a still camera for stills and in another a still camera for movies. The days of a Cinematographer calling for a 24mm cinema lens that gives the fov of a 24mm lens on a cinema camera could be changing. If a Cinematographer now chooses to use a camera like a full frame 5D Mark II, he/she needs to understand that the fov will most definitely be different than what he/she is used to using on a cinema camera.

It's not that hard to understand that things are changing, as are the traditional tools we use in still photography and cinematography. We all need to realize that and simply embrace the advancements that are being made.

You put that more eloquently than I ever managed.

Thank f*** someone agrees with me at last.

Ian-T
10-20-2009, 04:05 PM
Yeah but Keith in the mean time we have sort of a semantic chaos going on. What is it changing to? If nothing is defined then folks just coming in will be confused. So who set's the ground rules? It's all easier said than done.

Isaac_Brody
10-20-2009, 04:08 PM
Thing is Hollywood and the world haven't really changed, the only difference is these tools that were out of our reach have suddenly become available in the last year. You can choose to ignore the standard, but it's actually very helpful as a starting point to treat Super 35 as the norm to compare to. We are a filmmaking website first and while it's true that we are undergoing convergence, it might be helpful to keep the motion standard with shooting motion, and address the photo standard when shooting stills. Otherwise it gets muddy and people just get confused.

Rakesh Jacob
10-20-2009, 04:14 PM
I think a big problem with the semantics is that in regards to focal lenghts most people use it in terms of magnification. Good cinematographers and photographers don't pick focal lenghts for magnification (normaly) they pick the focal lenght for perspective/space compression. Different focal lenghts have different looks when it comes to representing 3 dimessional space, that's the real reason I pick different focal lenghts. As far as magnification goes I just walk my fat ass back and forth till I get the framing I want :)
Of course in the case where space is an issue, like not enough, is when you might pick a shorter focal lenght dispite it's perspective, or you are forced away from your subject, yada yada, so on and so forth...

commanderspike
10-20-2009, 04:30 PM
This is a great filmmaking community, but with the new users being drawn to the 7D, etc, from outside Hollywood (amazing I know) more of these people have used digital SLRs than have used cinema cameras. I think certain guys here need to adapt, soften their cinema-centric view and be a little more welcoming. Almost nobody outside the filmmaking fraternity thinks in terms of S35. When you see a Canon EFS lens, that is a lens which has been designed for stills on a APS-C (S35 sized) sensor. You think 18mm - ahh, wide. 35mm - standard, 50mm, oh - portrait. That's how most none-filmmaking professionals think of EFS lenses on the 7D, 50D or whatever other APS-C sized digital SLR.

And when it comes to other cameras (like the GH1 and 5D), you have to readjust again. Wide is 14mm on the GH1. 2x crop. 14x2 = 28mm in 35mm equiv.

35mm equiv. is full frame, for stills. Video DSLRS (7D included) come from a stills legacy, not a motion picture background. S35 is a confusing way for most people coming to VDSLRS to base their thinking on. How many have been lucky enough to work with S35 cine cameras? Kholi and others are in a minority here.

A 50mm lens is always a 50mm lens, but field of view - wide, telephoto, etc. - is not constant - it depends on format. Why I was absolutely totally and utterly berated for mentioning that, I have no idea.

ydgmdlu
10-20-2009, 04:42 PM
You know, Super 35 is not "the standard" for theatrical productions. Standard/regular 35mm is the norm. S35 is used on a minority of theatrical productions.

Ian-T
10-20-2009, 04:47 PM
You know, Super 35 is not "the standard" for theatrical productions. Standard/regular 35mm is he norm. S35 is used on a minority of theatrical productions.It's funny, I knew exactly what Isaac was talking about but that is the exact thing I was saying earlier in regards to semantics confusion. Even he slipped.

Isaac_Brody
10-20-2009, 05:39 PM
Damn sticky fingers. :happy:

andrew00
10-20-2009, 06:12 PM
I think I've (finally) understood heh.

You gents are not saying there's anything wrong with the 5D and it's full frame. More so that we need to adjust our THINKING.

After all, the film industry standard is not a full frame 35mm image, it's the extra wide cropped 35mm image.

Therefore when we approach film making we need to ensure our thinking is coming from this perspective.

The 7D's crop puts it to the same dimensions of the also cropped 35mm film image. This is a plus for anyone with experiences in using film because, as was stated above, if you reach for your 50mm you know what you're going get.

Now, technically, you're getting a 50mm that is cropped to the 35mm film image, but in reality that doesn't matter one hoot. A 50mm produces the image it does on a film camera, full frame doesn't come into the thinking, all that matters is you know if you use a 50mm you get X, if you use a 35mm you get Y. Done.

The 7D therefore for a stills photographer is a camera with a crop because it's not full frame. But from a film makers mentality, the 7D is normal and the 5D is larger than normal.

Hence the suggestion of referring to the 5D as a widened image, not the 7D as a crop. The 7D is 'normal', the 5D is the big bastard.

(Although technically in film making terms the 35mm crop uses extra width so perhaps widened to describe full frame isn't the right term, maybe 'expanded'?)

When it comes to which camera to buy, it's up to personal perference and what you need it for and both are great. All we need to do is that we make sure we're aware that the 7D is, perspective wise, a 'norm' for the FILM MAKING industry and the 5D is the bigger size.

So if we're working with pro's we have to ensure this communication goes through and they know they have to times whatever lens choice they want to use by 1.6 and they'll get the same results!

Kholi
10-20-2009, 06:18 PM
I think I've (finally) understood heh.

You gents are not saying there's anything wrong with the 5D and it's full frame. More so that we need to adjust our THINKING.

After all, the film industry standard is not a full frame 35mm image, it's the extra wide cropped 35mm image.

Therefore when we approach film making we need to ensure our thinking is coming from this perspective.

The 7D's crop puts it to the same dimensions of the also cropped 35mm film image. This is a plus for anyone with experiences in using film because, as was stated above, if you reach for your 50mm you know what you're going get.

Now, technically, you're getting a 50mm that is cropped to the 35mm film image, but in reality that doesn't matter one hoot. A 50mm produces the image it does on a film camera, full frame doesn't come into the thinking, all that matters is you know if you use a 50mm you get X, if you use a 35mm you get Y. Done.

The 7D therefore for a stills photographer is a camera with a crop because it's not full frame. But from a film makers mentality, the 7D is normal and the 5D is larger than normal.

Hence the suggestion of referring to the 5D as a widened image, not the 7D as a crop. The 7D is 'normal', the 5D is the big bastard.

(Although technically in film making terms the 35mm crop uses extra width so perhaps widened to describe full frame isn't the right term, maybe 'expanded'?)

When it comes to which camera to buy, it's up to personal perference and what you need it for and both are great. All we need to do is that we make sure we're aware that the 7D is, perspective wise, a 'norm' for the FILM MAKING industry and the 5D is the bigger size.

So if we're working with pro's we have to ensure this communication goes through and they know they have to times whatever lens choice they want to use by 1.6 and they'll get the same results!


I shed a tear. Yes... yes yes yes yes yes.

Fine, if you dont' want to work in the industry and make this a career, by all means throw out the rules. Sorry, this is how I eat.

You got it though, Andrew.

Also, Johnny Cola has it right. As far as I'm concerned Focal Lengths are just names or numbers I call out to know what lens to grab. The numbers, at this point, don't mean anything. And if I shoot Full Frame (which I have been doing) It'll be the same way.

I will NOT calculate in my head what I need, I'll know it without thinking about it. Equivalents and Charts and such are fine, but a practiced and working mind will know it just by looking at the room and the numbers are merely call outs for the 2nd AC to grab a specific piece of glass.

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 02:18 AM
The times they are a changin.

The way to approach D-SLRs is with D-SLR standards. Canon write 1.6x crop factor on the spec sheet and in the manual. S35 standards and film industry dogma have nothing to do with this new technology.

I am not saying to Kholi et al "throw out the rules" simply for the sake of being obtuse and arrogant. I am not just thinking about things from a "strange perspective" in some kind of attempt to annoy the entire film industry but the fact you all seem to miss is that these are DSLRs.

Choose your standards in terms of what's appropriate to the equipment and technology. Sure, good to know about film industry standards. But I don't go thinking in terms of my computer monitor in DPI when I go to work in the printing industry.

What you are saying Kholi is that anyone who uses the correct terminology for DLSRs "doesn't understand". Well if that's the case, then it looks like the US film industry will be thinking of apples as oranges for quite a while yet. Sheer arrogance.

mhood
10-21-2009, 04:56 AM
The way to approach D-SLRs is with D-SLR standards.

That sure seems obvious doesn't it? Also, very many of we vDSLR owners aren't from a "cinematic" background. Where is my "wide" prime for the 7D? I can use a 28mm EF (a "wide" prime by 5D definition) but it is more of a "normal". Since we are tied to the lenses that are available for the vDSLRs, that is what defines our terminology for many of us (who lack this "cinematic" reference).

KeithAndrews.TV
10-21-2009, 05:19 AM
When it comes down to it, the DP, or the person setting up the camera, should have the technical know-how to make the right choice in terms of focal length what ever camera system they are using. I mean, if I were shooting a commercial tomorrow with the 7D and I wanted a wide angle shot, I would know to put on my EF-S 15-85mm.

Then again, I know from experience from using cameras like the DVX100, HVX200, and now the HMC150, that any focal length between 3mm and 5mm is going to be very wide with those cameras. It all comes down to what you are use to, and what camera system you are using. This whole crop factor thing is not new at all.

Even in ENG, Canon and Fujinon make lenses for 1/3" cameras, 1/2" cameras and 2/3" cameras, the same way certain lenses are made exclusively for APS-C cameras. You can use a 2/3" lens on a 1/3" camera body with a mount, but the end result will not be the same as when using the lens on it's native body.

And just to get this off my chest, members of the DVXUSER forum should not assume that the visitors and members to this site are exclusively "filmmakers." Some may be freelance news photojournalists. Some may be documentary filmmakers. Some may be still photographers looking for a helping hand from people who have experience with video cameras. That to me is what this site is about. It's just a site where people talk about video cameras and the whole industry. Not one specific industry.

Kholi
10-21-2009, 05:31 AM
That sure seems obvious doesn't it? Also, very many of we vDSLR owners aren't from a "cinematic" background. Where is my "wide" prime for the 7D? I can use a 28mm EF (a "wide" prime by 5D definition) but it is more of a "normal". Since we are tied to the lenses that are available for the vDSLRs, that is what defines our terminology for many of us (who lack this "cinematic" reference).

The fact that people still think that cineprimes are any different in terms of
measurements than "photo" glass or slr glass is yet another reason why we kep trying to give you guys and gals this infortmation.

In his very thread, twice now, this slr glass is for dslrs thing has come up and it has no singnificant baring on anything but mechanical operation. A 28mm cinema prime on the 7D will have the same fov etc as a 28mm Canon slr lens.

This is no different than people trying to speak a different language and arguing over a new way to speak it without learning the core first. Or students in am art class with great brushes and paints at their disposal but refuse to learn color theory.

It has nothing to do with "Hollywood" and everything to do with the basics. But Andrew got it and one is enough for me. No thanks.

daveswan
10-21-2009, 05:54 AM
You're all wrong:smile: Standard is 12 1/2"...... oh sorry, that's for my 10x8 :smile:

The point is, stills people are used to working with a sight more frame sizes than cine people. Even as an avowed amateur I've used a 2/3" digicam, 35mm, FF digital (The same) 4/3 at work, 6x6. 6x7 and 6x9 roll film, and 5x4 and 10x8 cut film, am at ease with all, and know what focal lengths do what on which.

eg, 90mm say on 36x24 film and digital it's a nice portrait length, standard on my 6x7 usefully wide on 5x4 and won't even cover 10x8.

Oh, and Academy gate is what we call half-frame.
Dave

Ian-T
10-21-2009, 06:10 AM
And just to get this off my chest, members of the DVXUSER forum should not assume that the visitors and members to this site are exclusively "filmmakers." Some may be freelance news photojournalists. Some may be documentary filmmakers. Some may be still photographers looking for a helping hand from people who have experience with video cameras. That to me is what this site is about. It's just a site where people talk about video cameras and the whole industry. Not one specific industry.....but to add to this there are different threads in this forum that deals with the various types of folks who are here. There is a reason for that...it's so that we won't have the type of confusion that some of us are faced with here (IMO).

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 06:15 AM
A cinema 28mm is the same as a stills 28mm, but a 7D is not the same as a 5D, and a 5D is not the same as a GH1, therefore you should still use crop factors in your lens FOV calculations when working with DSLRs. The cinematic standards have nothing to do with the 5D and GH1 and it's only be coincidence that they roughly match the sensor size of APS-C.

This whole thread from page 4 on just smacks of the 'pros' trying to impose their rules on newcomers. I wouldn't mind so much if it was actually a useful way of thinking, but S35 in the land of DSLRs with cameras like the 5D and GH1 around is NOT a useful way of thinking unless you're used to using cinema cameras and not DSLRs.

mhood
10-21-2009, 06:17 AM
The fact that people still think that cineprimes are any different in terms of
measurements than "photo" glass or slr glass is yet another reason why we kep trying to give you guys and gals this infortmation.

I'm afraid you're not accepting a basic truth regarding vDSLRs: Many folks using them have no reference based in cinematic lenses. Personally, I never ever think in terms of cineprimes...and that's OK. ;-)

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 06:19 AM
....but to add to this there are different threads in this forum that deals with the various types of folks who are here. There is a reason for that...it's so that we won't have the type of confusion that some of us are faced with here (IMO).

It's not a battle of folks, it shouldn't be a culture clash but sadly it seems it is a bit of a one-up-manship contest. To me, it's just about choosing the right standard for what you personally are used to, and about thinking about the broad range of DSLRs in terms of DSLR specs and DSLR thinking. I really do resent having Kholi and others impose their cinematic standards on these cameras when it's irrelevant to the technology & stills format. It doesn't help one bit to think in terms of S35 with DSLRs unless you only plan to use the 7D and come from a traditional cinema background, which the OP and indeed many of us on the forum, don't.

mtan
10-21-2009, 06:20 AM
Being somewhat of a newcomer I just use a lens that works for the situation, if I need a wider view I use a wider lens. Pretty simple.

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 06:20 AM
I'm afraid you're not accepting a basic truth regarding vDSLRs: Many folks using them have no reference based in cinematic lenses. Personally, I never ever think in terms of cineprimes...and that's OK. ;-)

Yep. It's OK to think how we do. It's totally not okay to be talked down by people with different backgrounds.

This is DSLR land Kholi. Not S35 world.

Kholi
10-21-2009, 06:20 AM
I'm afraid you're not accepting a basic truth regarding vDSLRs: Many folks using them have no reference based in cinematic lenses. Personally, I never ever think in terms of cineprimes...and that's OK. ;-)

And you still do not get that there is no difference between a cinema prime and SLR lens in measurements....

mhood
10-21-2009, 06:24 AM
Of course I get it. Now where is my affordable wide prime for my new 7D? I'd really like a 14mm EF 1.4 USM for $400. Where is it and why isn't it?

Kholi
10-21-2009, 06:26 AM
Of course I get it. Now where is my affordable wide prime for my new 7D? I'd really like a 14mm EF 1.4 USM for $400. Where is it and why isn't it?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

mhood
10-21-2009, 06:32 AM
I have no idea what you're talking about.

I realize that...

Kholi
10-21-2009, 06:34 AM
It's what happens when you go completely off topic. Expect it.

mhood
10-21-2009, 06:41 AM
We are in total harmony on that one...

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 06:47 AM
I have no idea what you're talking about.

I think that is a little disingenuous at best, considering Kholi knows EXACTLY what the man meant.

For the benefit of others trying to follow the thread, he means that to get an affordable fast wide on the 7D, or a smaller sensor camera like the GH1 is more difficult than on the 5D. That, to me, is perfectly on topic. 7D versus 5D now they've both got 24p. Yes?

Ignorance is bliss hey Kholi?

Kholi
10-21-2009, 06:51 AM
I think that is a little disingenuous at best, considering Kholi knows EXACTLY what the man meant.

For the benefit of others trying to follow the thread, he means that to get an affordable fast wide on the 7D, or a smaller sensor camera like the GH1 is more difficult than on the 5D.

Ignorance is bliss hey Kholi?

What you just posted is NOTHING like what he posted. He's talking about the price of a 14mm for some reason when it has no relevance to anything.

Now, I could ASSUME he thinks that Cinema Prime image quality comes at a hefty price, and then I would probably have to let him know that he's absolutely incorrect, but assuming generally creates bad impressions.

I have no intent to battle you on your perspective, as it comes from an unfounded place that I would rather not tread. If you think tossing convention out of the window and ignoring it because you're using a "DSLR" to shoot is the right way to think, by all means, prove it with your work.

Have nothing more to say to you, man.

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 06:53 AM
Topic is: 7D versus 5D now they both have 24p.

Allow me to continue it.

The 14mm looks wider on a 5D than a 7D because the 5D has a larger sensor, essentially. So if you want to make full use of fisheyes and ultra wide angle lenses the 5D is the better choice now they both have 24p. The 20mm / 24mm (in terms of DSLR 35mm stills focal length) are indeed more affordable than achieving the same field of view on the 7D.

But if you want to make the most of EFS lenses then the 7D is the better option. There are some great EFS lenses out there, but an affordable fast wide like the Sigma 20mm F1.8 would look more like a standard lens on the 7D, not a wide lens. Also the 28mm F1.8 Sigma on a 5D is as wide as a 18mm EFS on the 7D. So if you need F1.8 on a WIDE lens, get the 5D.

USLatin
10-21-2009, 06:56 AM
Crop factor would be a great way to effectively label sensors, but only if there were only one aspect ratio, so forget it. And it would be ludicrous to expect the crop to be calculated from a stills baseline when we are talking motion.

What's all this "elitist" bullshit? There is no argument here, everyone agrees! There's just people that don't want to be perceived as wrong. Get whatever gear best suits your needs and focus on the way you use it. Hopefully you'll also focus on content while you are at it! :)

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 07:00 AM
We are not talking motion, we're not talking S35mm motion picture film, we're talking DSLRs with video modes.

Both the cinematographer and the photographer are correct in their own worlds, what is the point of arguing across the fence? Do what suits yourself, don't belittle someone because they come from a different background and a different set of knowledge, which in this case just so happens to be more relevant to the technology.

USLatin
10-21-2009, 07:04 AM
7D versus 5D now they both have 24p.

The 14mm looks wider on a 5D than a 7D, because the 5D has a larger sensor. So basically, now that they both have 24p it depends on if you want affordable fast wides, or if you want to make the most of EFS lenses. There are some great EFS lenses out there, but no fast wides like the Sigma 20mm F1.8 - that lens on a 5D is as wide as a 10mm EFS on the 7D.

A 20mm on a 5D gives you the same FOV as a 12.6mm, not a 10mm. And you can get a Tokina 11-16 for $500, which is f/2.8, but if you need more light than f/2.8 on a 7D you've got other bigger problems.

If you don't get why people talk from a cinematic perspective then you are lost. Have you not noticed all the pain and suffering endured with lens adapters? Or the DVX on the forum name? The first 24fps video camera in case you didn't know.

Now please stop waving the victim flag and look in the mirror, cause you are fishing for an argument when people are trying to help you.

Go back and read the thread commando, you are the one that got this argument snow ball rolling. :facepalm: (http://cdn0.knowyourmeme.com/i/1582/original/picard-facepalm.jpg)

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 07:08 AM
I totally get why cinematographers think this way, but I am sick of being told 'I'm wrong' because I don't think in terms of S35 with my 5D or GH1.

I also accept why DSLR users think in terms of DSLR crop factors when choosing lenses and camera, if they go for a smaller sensor than full frame, you do the 1.6x or 2x on your lens. Simple.

Why that gets so many cinematographer backs up, I have no idea. We're talking about DSLRs like the 7D, 5D, GH1 here, NOT 35mm motion picture cameras. Cine lens, still lens - all the same, but cameras they are not.

mhood
10-21-2009, 07:10 AM
What you just posted is NOTHING like what he posted. He's talking about the price of a 14mm for some reason when it has no relevance to anything.

Now, I could ASSUME he thinks that Cinema Prime image quality comes at a hefty price, and then I would probably have to let him know that he's absolutely incorrect, but assuming generally creates bad impressions.

I want a lens that works with a Canon...not some adapter that gives away AF and AE. We don't have a wide angle prime (EF USM Canon AF, AE) because primes are built for FF. Canon relates FOV on their lenses to DSLR, not cinematic lenses. You can get a 24mm that Canon considers a wide lens but it isn't a wide lens on my 7D. The price I would like to pay shouldn't confuse you unless you want to be confused.

My Dad used to tell me: "Only idiots argue semantics." One of the smartest things he ever said to me...

USLatin
10-21-2009, 07:23 AM
Commando, you win dude. No, serious, I mean it, I threw confetti up in the air for you and all.

Mhood, don't be affraid of the Canon mount Tokina dude, I'll give you a money back guarantee myself. :) All it is missing is the IS but at that length you are not going to miss it. Then if you really need something faster and that wide you can rent the 14mm for that night. Or just get the 5D and call it a day, but then you set yourself back some serious cash and got more jello and image weirdness, so think about it carefully. I think the best solution is to get both. Or screw Canon altogether and get a FF35 Epic which will let you shoot with a FF35, S35, 2/3, and in all sorts of aspect ratios. (too bad it ain't here yet and I won't be able to afford it). :D

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 07:29 AM
It's not about who 'wins'.

It's about advice. And thinking in terms of S35 for DSLRs is shi* advice when there are non-S35 sized cameras around like the 5D.

Also I find the baiting and willy waving in this thread intolerable as do many others.

USLatin
10-21-2009, 07:32 AM
It's not about who 'wins'.

It's about advice. And thinking in terms of S35 for DSLRs is shi* advice when there are non-S35 sized cameras around like the 5D.

Oh... so the sensor area is the only factor. Yes, people should DEFINITELY be listening to your advice. I'm out. Have fun.

BTW, the "win" thing was thrown in there to make that exact point.

Kholi
10-21-2009, 07:39 AM
I want a lens that works with a Canon...not some adapter that gives away AF and AE. We don't have a wide angle prime (EF USM Canon AF, AE) because primes are built for FF. Canon relates FOV on their lenses to DSLR, not cinematic lenses. You can get a 24mm that Canon considers a wide lens but it isn't a wide lens on my 7D. The price I would like to pay shouldn't confuse you unless you want to be confused.

My Dad used to tell me: "Only idiots argue semantics." One of the smartest things he ever said to me...

You keep posting that quote, unfortunately you aren't following his advice.

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 08:02 AM
Oh... so the sensor area is the only factor. Yes, people should DEFINITELY be listening to your advice. I'm out. Have fun.

BTW, the "win" thing was thrown in there to make that exact point.

I know it was Frost. It doesn't take a genius to work out what the point it was you were making, and I refute it.

Can't believe the bickering on this place sometimes. Can we please get back on topic?

I tried the 7D the other night and was amazed how low the noise levels were at ISO 6400. It clearly has improved noise reduction and sensor sensitivity despite having a denser pixel pitch.

As far as wide lenses go, probably the best wide zoom for versatility is the 15-85MM kit lens while another amazing option would be one of the 17mm L lenses. Expensive, but with the cost different as it is between the 5D and 7D you can afford to spend a bit more on lenses if you don't go the 5D route. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think there is anything wider and faster than the Sigma 20MM F1.8 for the 7D?

mhood
10-21-2009, 08:08 AM
You keep posting that quote, unfortunately you aren't following his advice.

I'm surprised you remembered. Actually, I only piped up on this thread because something deep in my psyche craves the sort of abuse only blantant arrogance can give me.

Kholi
10-21-2009, 08:10 AM
I'm surprised you remembered. Actually, I only piped up on this thread because something deep in my psyche craves the sort of abuse only blantant arrogance can give me.

When does your 7D arrive? It'll be interesting to see what you think when you're hands on with it instead of speculating.

Stephen Mick
10-21-2009, 08:16 AM
You know what's really cool? Both the 7D and 5D will have 24p at some point.


Wasn't that what this thread was about a long time ago? Can't someone, somewhere, start a thread entitled "Focal Length Equivalents: the Cine vs. DSLR Deathmatch" and we can have these "crop factor" discussions in one f'ing place?

mhood
10-21-2009, 08:21 AM
When does your 7D arrive? It'll be interesting to see what you think when you're hands on with it instead of speculating.

Got it last night...had to drive 150 miles to get it but it's here on the desk in front of me. Battery is charged and I'll try to play with it tonight...lots of work to do this afternoon.

I'll post some footage later if I get to craving more abuse...

Ian-T
10-21-2009, 08:58 AM
To whomever this applies :

…”act your age not your shoe size”… Prince

commanderspike
10-21-2009, 09:02 AM
Looks guys everyone is entitled to their way of thinking.

If you approach the 7D versus 5D debate from a 35mm motion picture lenser background, or work with people who do, then you are entitled to think of the 7D's sensor as the standard.

If you approach the 7D versus 5D argument from the DSLR community, 35mm stills background, photographic industry then you see the 5D sensor size as being the standard.

Then you choose your lenses based on that knowledge.

It really is that simple and I don't know why all the film guys like Kholi are getting so worked up about this 'outsider opinion' as being 'wrong'. To say it's wrong implies automatically that one way of thinking is better than the other, when is pertinently obvious from the DSLR orientated people's views on here that it isn't. Not everybody is approaching the DSLRs with 35mm motion picture terminology in mind, and when talking about two different DSLRs with different sensor sizes surely it's more relevant to use DSLR thinking?

Also, address someone who uses the other kind of terminology with some respect and not a load of abuse. There is no need for it. If I address a cinematographer on a job, I'd use their way of thinking. If I addressed a photographer on a shoot, I'd adopt their way of thinking. To not to that shows an inflexibility of mind, an arrogance and a 'my way is best' closed mindedness.