21 megapix just reached adequate. 21 megapix native file size covers 11"x17" Double Page spread at 300dpi
Sure.... upsizeing happens all the time, But with a cost in image quality.
frisco
5DII DOES 1080P footage!!!!!!
- Thread starter hungrych
- Start date
21 megapix just reached adequate. 21 megapix native file size covers 11"x17" Double Page spread at 300dpi
Sure.... upsizeing happens all the time, But with a cost in image quality.
frisco
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
high megapixels used come at a cost as well...crappy high ISO handling in low light. But we shall see what Canon has done in the arena.
Krummi
Well-known member
I'm really looking forward to seeing all the real world tests rolling in. Nikon has been shooting for lower noise through lower pixel density, hence the lower pixel count. Canon has always pumped the pixels, with pretty good results.
Here are my two, probably not too popular, cents:
The video mode in these DSLRS is really nothing more than a novelty add-on. Sure, you are getting awesome dynamic range, cool DOF effects, a lot of lens options and amazing low light quality.
But all that does not a movie making machine make.
Why not? A couple of reasons:
a) "crippled" functions, including automatic shutter, no 24p (and yes, 24p matters and will keep mattering long after film is gone, because we are ALL programmed to know that this is how MOVIES look!), automatic exposure (I think), limited recording time, limited recording format and so on.
more importantly:
b) It's a DSLR with movie recording capabilities. It's movie mode may be awesome in many core ways, but it's still a DSLR. After having shot with a lot of different SLRs and Video cameras (currently own a Nikon D200 and Sony PMW-EX1 and a whole Brevis kit) I simply cannot imagine shooting a whole narrative piece on a DSLR with an automatic shutter, automatic exposure, having hassles with sound recording, codecs, recording times and what not.
Does anyone remember the South Park episode where Mr. Garrison invents the worlds best, most economic vehicle....but to operate it you basically had to stick a dildo into your ass and mouth a stroke a couple of phalicshaped things.
I'm not saying it's that bad, but it's in the same category.
Don't get me wrong, it's cool. It's a very cool feature on a, probably, pretty amazing digital photographic camera. For a do-it-yourself enthusiast who has money laying around, it's a dream gadget. I just don't think it's going to be very practical, or very popular, for serious Videography and/or filmmaking. It might catch on in the wedding business, but crippled recording times are still going to be a problem there.
This is probably going to be as good as it gets from Canon. They have a huge Video department to protect and they will not cripple themselves. They never have and won't start now. Nikon, on the other hand, has no such qualms. The best thing that can come from this is that Nikon listens to all this enthusiasm and makes a REAL Nikon mounted S35mm sensored VIDEO camera.
Here are my two, probably not too popular, cents:
The video mode in these DSLRS is really nothing more than a novelty add-on. Sure, you are getting awesome dynamic range, cool DOF effects, a lot of lens options and amazing low light quality.
But all that does not a movie making machine make.
Why not? A couple of reasons:
a) "crippled" functions, including automatic shutter, no 24p (and yes, 24p matters and will keep mattering long after film is gone, because we are ALL programmed to know that this is how MOVIES look!), automatic exposure (I think), limited recording time, limited recording format and so on.
more importantly:
b) It's a DSLR with movie recording capabilities. It's movie mode may be awesome in many core ways, but it's still a DSLR. After having shot with a lot of different SLRs and Video cameras (currently own a Nikon D200 and Sony PMW-EX1 and a whole Brevis kit) I simply cannot imagine shooting a whole narrative piece on a DSLR with an automatic shutter, automatic exposure, having hassles with sound recording, codecs, recording times and what not.
Does anyone remember the South Park episode where Mr. Garrison invents the worlds best, most economic vehicle....but to operate it you basically had to stick a dildo into your ass and mouth a stroke a couple of phalicshaped things.
I'm not saying it's that bad, but it's in the same category.
Don't get me wrong, it's cool. It's a very cool feature on a, probably, pretty amazing digital photographic camera. For a do-it-yourself enthusiast who has money laying around, it's a dream gadget. I just don't think it's going to be very practical, or very popular, for serious Videography and/or filmmaking. It might catch on in the wedding business, but crippled recording times are still going to be a problem there.
This is probably going to be as good as it gets from Canon. They have a huge Video department to protect and they will not cripple themselves. They never have and won't start now. Nikon, on the other hand, has no such qualms. The best thing that can come from this is that Nikon listens to all this enthusiasm and makes a REAL Nikon mounted S35mm sensored VIDEO camera.
canon's biggest problem with 21mp is the lack of lenses to outresolve that
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/nikon_14_24mm_1/nikon14_24mm_a.html
the first time ever when a zoom lens performed better than any fixed lens
most L lenses can't resolve 21mp, actually none of the wide L lenses do
you may enjoy now your 21mp at a cheap price. but don't expect to see 21mp very soon as resolution in your images.
so to the future 5dmk2 owners here i suggest getting one of these
http://www.16-9.net/nikon_g/
don't trust me? see here. this is a $1299 lens, L
http://web1.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos5dm2/downloads/2_landscape.jpg
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/nikon_14_24mm_1/nikon14_24mm_a.html
the first time ever when a zoom lens performed better than any fixed lens
most L lenses can't resolve 21mp, actually none of the wide L lenses do
you may enjoy now your 21mp at a cheap price. but don't expect to see 21mp very soon as resolution in your images.
so to the future 5dmk2 owners here i suggest getting one of these
http://www.16-9.net/nikon_g/
don't trust me? see here. this is a $1299 lens, L
http://web1.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos5dm2/downloads/2_landscape.jpg
Last edited:
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
The 1DsMkIII was Canon's big megapixel studio body. Lots of megapixel, not so great noise levels in low light, especially with higher ISO.
A big reason for this was the fact of going so high in resolution, you gave up on cleaner images in lower light. Check out digital medium format cameras...most I've seen don't go over ISO 800.
That was Nikon's reason for keeping to 12-14mpx with their bodies. They were able to deliver on amazing low light and high ISO performance.
Now, its been rumored for some time that Nikon will introduce a higher ISO studio body to compete with the mkIII, but in the meantime, this is where Nikon won...the D3/D700 was able to perform in low light/high ISO like no other digital body. Garnered a lot of people switching over.
But like all things, these companies will trump each other left and right. Which i good, because that means they'll both put out a great product.
cept for the addition of HD video
Park Edwards
Veteran
the picture loaded up like i was on dial up again....sheesh
Wow..... ando.....
Very brave of you to bring this up in a video forum..... I once brought up some higher level lens info onto this forum when discussing the use of older manual lens and it seemed to be over the heads of the lower budget filmers here.
For Canon there was a big delay in bringing out the 1dsMklll for this exact reason.
Nice post ando!
frisco
Very brave of you to bring this up in a video forum..... I once brought up some higher level lens info onto this forum when discussing the use of older manual lens and it seemed to be over the heads of the lower budget filmers here.
For Canon there was a big delay in bringing out the 1dsMklll for this exact reason.
Nice post ando!
frisco
rawfa
Veteran
That would be awesome.
I'm betting on Red to fill the gap with a revolutionary hybrid product that will please both film makers and photographers. Being a smaller and newer company they "can afford" to listen to what people want instead of telling what people want.
The 1DsMkIII was Canon's big megapixel studio body. Lots of megapixel, not so great noise levels in low light, especially with higher ISO.
- Ummm..... Wouldn't call anything in a 35mm body a studio camera. I have two of these cameras and noise is not an issue. Yes... Any digital camera makes noise at higher ISO's, under exposed in a dark hole. Only amatuers and journalists get caught in those enviroments.
A big reason for this was the fact of going so high in resolution, you gave up on cleaner images in lower light. Check out digital medium format cameras...most I've seen don't go over ISO 800.
- I own a Hasselblad/Leaf Aptus 75 set-up. Most don't spend 50k-70k on a med format system to shoot low light High ISO's. Where I come from 800 is High ISO
I mostly shoot at ISO 50 or 100..... Maybe 200 if I get myself into trouble. Gotta put light on it and control your light levels.
That was Nikon's reason for keeping to 12-14mpx with their bodies. They were able to deliver on amazing low light and high ISO performance.
- Not true. Nikon opted to use a smaller APS size sensors for edge sharpness reasons.
Now, its been rumored for some time that Nikon will introduce a higher ISO studio body to compete with the mkIII, but in the meantime, this is where Nikon won...the D3/D700 was able to perform in low light/high ISO like no other digital body. Garnered a lot of people switching over.
- Can't call you out on this one as I know nothing about the D3/D700's
But like all things, these companies will trump each other left and right. Which i good, because that means they'll both put out a great product.
- It's been a long while since Nikon trumped Canon. Now don't get your panties all bunched up.... This is not a Nikon bash!!! I have made a nice living with both systems and have a great relationship with both companies.
cept for the addition of HD video
frisco
thisiswells
Retired
shoot wider than I have to, then crop.
over 90% of my stills lately have been on a 135mm f/2... This lens will utilize all those megapixels, no doubt! So, for me and my needs, it's a good fit.
dual
Active member
All this garbage about 24 and 30p and "it's not really 1080p" and ae is a complete turn off really! Some people here keep discussing endlessly over the same things on and on, that's how the d90 thread got unreadable! The same happens to this thread. Useful discussions go down inside a pile of junk. Sorry, but it has to be said, it's annoying.
One question I would like to add: Is anybody else here from Europe and planning on being one of the first to get your hands on a 5d? I'd like to find a way to achieve that. Ideas, other than preordering soon?
One question I would like to add: Is anybody else here from Europe and planning on being one of the first to get your hands on a 5d? I'd like to find a way to achieve that. Ideas, other than preordering soon?
Sorry I have to chime in on that 24p vs. 30p as well - but I've been reading arguments here that say a feature film shot on a Red One in 30p will look like home video. Excuse me, but that is bullsh*t! The 30p movie will not have the classic 24p look (that you might or might not miss - I for instance won't miss it!) but it will in no way look like home video. Let aside superior picture quality, decent lighting and so on and so on, 30p does NOT equal 60i, which is basically speaking half-resolution 60p.
I'd love to see more good films shot in higher framerates and let them lay the ground for a new, modern style in filmmaking!
My experiences with watching pans in 24p on a movie theater screen haven't really been that enjoyable. Call me an amateur if you like - but I think most people would like higher framerates better if they even knew what framerates were...
I'd love to see more good films shot in higher framerates and let them lay the ground for a new, modern style in filmmaking!
My experiences with watching pans in 24p on a movie theater screen haven't really been that enjoyable. Call me an amateur if you like - but I think most people would like higher framerates better if they even knew what framerates were...
ESTEBEVERDE
Veteran
Great points.
If it were all about frame rate I would challenge those who hold this position to take any ol crap camera and shoot at 24p.
That would be all there was too it!
But, we know that it much more than film cadence.
Really the sine qua non is the story.
If it were all about frame rate I would challenge those who hold this position to take any ol crap camera and shoot at 24p.
That would be all there was too it!
But, we know that it much more than film cadence.
Really the sine qua non is the story.
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
They have that already. They are called Soap Operas and they look like ****.
Here's a little demo from a Canon rep. He demos some of the video mode toward the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnpQcuhEk0Y&fmt=18
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnpQcuhEk0Y&fmt=18
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Always true when all things are equal. But in this case, it isn't equal, is it ?
Yes, it would. sorry. And, can't wait for one of you people to go and shoot a feature in 30p.
Make sure you record the audience responses. And, yeah, I care what the audience thinks: who do you think is gonna keep your career going?