Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 52
  1. Collapse Details
    C500 II Streaking
    #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    145
    Angry
    Okay, so I bought a C500 II expecting it to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, and for $15,000, frankly I don't think I'm in the wrong for expecting that. I used a C100 for many years, loved everything about it, upgraded to a Sony FS5, didn't like a lot of things about that which I missed from the Canon, so stepping up into the next price range going with the 500 Mark II seemed sensible and a sure winner based on what I saw.

    After shooting some footage, my main issue and what I believe is an inexcusable flaw with this camera is streaking in the shadows. And I'm not just talking about taking an underexposed image and trying to bring it up in post, I mean you take a properly exposed subject with dark around it, and in those dark areas I see horizontal streaking on the sensor, and I see horizontal streaking on nearly every image with shadow areas. It's difficult to see in a still frame, and vimeo or youtube would probably compress it out of the image, so I've pushed around a few frames, one from my FS5 (taken out of the raw output into my Shogun Inferno into ProRes 422), and two from the C500 Mark II, XAVC and Canon Raw Light.

    I have pushed both these images to the extreme, far more than would ever be done, but that is to show the streaking on the sensor that is present when you watch back the footage live, even with a normal grade while difficult to see, is there. And you can almost see the noise move in those horizontal lines when it's playing, similar to VHS tape distortion.

    I don't think I'm crazy, because the FS5 while noisy, is clean. And the C500 has multiple horizontal streaks. I've asked to return the camera and have been denied, but I believe Canon truly produced a lemon here.

    XAVC
    streaking.jpg

    RAW
    canonraw.jpg

    FS5
    FS5.jpg


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,467
    Default
    It's called 'fixed pattern noise' [FPN] and it's relatively common in some cameras. (Although it's usually vertical, but times have changed as cameras have become more complicated.)

    Horizontal lines - 100% like these - were common in the UM4K. Blackmagic made the term known to most of the universe with their first camera before the UM.

    No one can tell you why this happens besides camera engineers, but rest-assured you're not the first and not the last to see it in their brand new camera.

    ___

    P.S. Try a black balance if you haven't. Also, try testing a baked profile. It's likely the lines won't be visible in one as they are usually present in a LOG when companies try to squeeze out every bit of DR they can.
    Retired.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Senior Member Eric Coughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,190
    Default
    Let's just be glad it's streaking in the shadows because no on wants to see that in broad daylight.

    See if you can see the same issues in other footage from the C500 Mark II. The first C300 Mark II I got, right when they came out, the sensor was faulty. Had TV style lines throughout the footage. Returned the camera and got a replacement. C300 Mark II faulty sensor frame grab...






    I recall when I first saw it on the small camera LCD screen I thought, "Man, this camera doesn't look that great." Then I later brought the footage into a computer and realized it was a sensor issue.
    Last edited by Eric Coughlin; 01-18-2020 at 07:52 PM.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,467
    Default
    Is that for real? Or is that the FCP X line screen filter? Those lines look too perfect, ha.
    Retired.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Senior Member Eric Coughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,190
    Default
    If you're referring to my post, yeah, that's real, straight from camera. An untouched screen shot from VLC player or Premiere.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    235
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Airwolf View Post
    Okay, so I bought a C500 II expecting it to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, and for $15,000, frankly I don't think I'm in the wrong for expecting that. I used a C100 for many years, loved everything about it, upgraded to a Sony FS5, didn't like a lot of things about that which I missed from the Canon, so stepping up into the next price range going with the 500 Mark II seemed sensible and a sure winner based on what I saw.

    After shooting some footage, my main issue and what I believe is an inexcusable flaw with this camera is streaking in the shadows. And I'm not just talking about taking an underexposed image and trying to bring it up in post, I mean you take a properly exposed subject with dark around it, and in those dark areas I see horizontal streaking on the sensor, and I see horizontal streaking on nearly every image with shadow areas. It's difficult to see in a still frame, and vimeo or youtube would probably compress it out of the image, so I've pushed around a few frames, one from my FS5 (taken out of the raw output into my Shogun Inferno into ProRes 422), and two from the C500 Mark II, XAVC and Canon Raw Light.

    I have pushed both these images to the extreme, far more than would ever be done, but that is to show the streaking on the sensor that is present when you watch back the footage live, even with a normal grade while difficult to see, is there. And you can almost see the noise move in those horizontal lines when it's playing, similar to VHS tape distortion.

    I don't think I'm crazy, because the FS5 while noisy, is clean. And the C500 has multiple horizontal streaks. I've asked to return the camera and have been denied, but I believe Canon truly produced a lemon here.
    First thought is that what we’re seeing here is cmos smear, something that affects all cmos sensors, although some, like canon, and red have been known to show it more than others. Those streaks aren’t aligning with anything we can see, and so that diagnosis is suspect. If we could see the original image, pre-being “pushed around” it might help us get some consensus around what’s happening. Matt Porwoll, in his review, declared that the camera had fixed this issue. In several scenes I’ve shot with the c500II that should have caused it, it’s been nowhere to be seen.

    I’m a little suspicious of the methodology here..to be honest, (go looking for something and you will find it.) Do you feel like this issue is going to just be there in the majority of things you shoot...? While I have seen it pop up in c300ii shots, it was hardly ever an issue, and always fixable with a change in iso, exposure, or by adding some light to the scene. Not being critical in saying that... only want to get at the truth of this camera.
    Last edited by Barry G; 01-19-2020 at 01:23 PM.


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,304
    Default
    Wow Eric! That's crazy.

    Airwolf, I see what you are seeing. However, it appears that you are pushing the images in ways that you probably would never use in real life, aren't you?
    It appears to be a FPN/sensor noise issue, I don't know if it's normal or you have a defective camera but it would be helpful if you posted some correctly
    exposed/post processed images to see if we can see this same effect in footage we would actually use?

    I'm on the list to receive a review C500 MKII from Canon USA so when I get it, I'll run some tests too and will compare it to my C200 FPN.

    On a side note, I attended the world premiere of a documentary that I mainly shot on the C100 MKI (I shot a few pieces toward the end on the C200)
    last night at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival. I was able to see my C100 MKI footage, after a good grade and CC, projected from the DCP
    and it looked REALLY good. It still makes me even more skeptical of the pointless resolution and sensor size "arms war" we've been in for years now.
    Good old 1080 Ninja Blade Prores 422 out of the C100 MKI, with good lighting looked really excellent on the big screen,
    I received multiple compliments from audience members during the filmmaker Q&A about how good the film looked. But we all
    have to be shooting 6K FF to make good images now, right? ;-)
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Senior Member Eric Coughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,190
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    But we all
    have to be shooting 6K FF to make good images now, right? ;-)
    Or 2K ProRes from Arri.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    145
    Default
    Okay - Some properly exposed, graded and ungraded images. If I need to host these elsewhere I can do. It looks worse on video. I'll try to cut together some 4k examples to upload to vimeo, but my upload speed is not the greatest at home. I shot these this morning, and did an ABB before shooting.

    This is at 800 ISO, Clog3, in 6k Raw. Downrezed to 4k. The only thing I did here is apply the Canon Rec709 Lut. If you look at my shirt above the red lettering you'll see alternating horizontal lines of black.
    streakingmornal.jpg

    Here is the same frame in 6k (cropped 1:1), pushed around a lot so you can see the lines clearly. There's a much more pronounced purple noise pattern which matches the alternating shades of black in the normal frame.
    PushedFrame.jpg

    Here is that same frame with nothing done to it at all, straight raw cropped down 1:1 in 4k.
    rawoutput.jpg

    Offsite hosted JPEGs:
    LUT - https://i.imgur.com/x9vya2V.jpg

    Extreme Push - https://i.imgur.com/bggRhyU.jpg

    Raw - https://i.imgur.com/PO3ee0e.jpg
    Last edited by Airwolf; 01-19-2020 at 03:52 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #10
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    3,947
    Default
    Even the "normal" image looks noisy and soft to me. But uploaded still images on this site look like crap. I've uploaded frame grabs that were so sharp they looked almost 3D and then when viewed on here in the forum they looked like noisy mush.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •