C300: 1DC and Sony F55 4k Side by Side

P

Picture and Color

Member
Cinema 5D posted a new test today.

http://www.cinema5d.com/?p=16907

Very interesting comments about the 1DC. They say that the 1DC footage is even more rescuable from underexposure than the mighty F55, by a full stop. Also, that their colorist said that the 1DC footage is extremely gradable, even more so than the C300's.

128GB CF card lasts only 30 minutes on the 1DC's MJPEG codec, where as it lasts a full hour on the F55's XAVC Codec.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBS
Not sure how 1DC is more rescuable from underexposure than F55 when the article calls out the lack of detail in blacks on the 1DC. The article says nothing about the difference in dynamic range between F55 and 1DC, this is something the F55 excels at, even beyond the Alexa, with the benefit of lower noise and higher resolution. And, of course, the F55 can shoot 4k RAW, which is not an option for the 1DC. I just can't imagine any real production choosing the 1DC over the F55, given adequate budget.
 
Dino said:
Not sure how 1DC is more rescuable from underexposure than F55 when the article calls out the lack of detail in blacks on the 1DC. The article says nothing about the difference in dynamic range between F55 and 1DC, this is something the F55 excels at, even beyond the Alexa, with the benefit of lower noise and higher resolution. And, of course, the F55 can shoot 4k RAW, which is not an option for the 1DC. I just can't imagine any real production choosing the 1DC over the F55, given adequate budget.
Click to expand...

You took the words right out of my mouth. Plus, I don't know anyone who'd give up the tools and functionality of a video camera for the form factor of a DSLR.
 
Finnegan said:
I don't know anyone who'd give up the tools and functionality of a video camera for the form factor of a DSLR.
Click to expand...
Still this argument? Phew... I also have no clue about who goes to the ocean with the car, but what can you do with a boat in the middle of a highway? ;-)
 
Finnegan said:
You took the words right out of my mouth. Plus, I don't know anyone who'd give up the tools and functionality of a video camera for the form factor of a DSLR.
Click to expand...
People that want to shoot film/video while looking like they are taking still pictures??? Journalists? DOC guys?
 
dustylense said:
People that want to shoot film/video while looking like they are taking still pictures??? DOC guys?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm actually considering it for this very reason. But it's a shame that the 1080p is only 4:2:0 (and 8 bit for that matter...). 4k is (mostly) an overkill for shooting docs. And if you want to shoot normally
(being able to focus, hold the camera, etc) you'll need at least a follow focus and a monitor. This then kinda negates the whole purpose of a small DSLR looking cam. I've tried shooting with canon EF on a C100 without a follow focus and I wont try that again! Shooting without auto focus for docs, I don't think so. It's really good to have it in a lot of situations.
 
Both images looked great to me. I preferred the skin tones of the 1DC, but the F55 seemed to give a more clear image.

I would like to see a comparison of the 1DC and the F5, since they are closer in price and they both use bayer based CFAs. One might be convinced to jump to the F5, albeit with a significant investment to make it 4k capable, or just usable in the first place.

It would be nice if Canon could upgrade the codec to mjpeg2k, but I doubt that can happen, the codec is probably hardcoded in the ASIC.

Picture and Color said:
Cinema 5D posted a new test today.

http://www.cinema5d.com/?p=16907

Very interesting comments about the 1DC. They say that the 1DC footage is even more rescuable from underexposure than the mighty F55, by a full stop. Also, that their colorist said that the 1DC footage is extremely gradable, even more so than the C300's.

128GB CF card lasts only 30 minutes on the 1DC's MJPEG codec, where as it lasts a full hour on the F55's XAVC Codec.
Click to expand...

Getting past that 128GB CF card limit shouldn't be all that difficult.

CF cards use the ATA standard, specifically PATA. So it wouldn't be that difficult to build a bridge device that connects the PATA host (the 1DC) to an external SATA device like a HDD or SSD. You would probably need an external power source, depending on the size of the drive. 1.8" and 2.5" drives might be able to be powered from the camera. In fact, they make bridge ICs that are essentially ready to go, just need a few bits of external circuitry.

The only issue is the memory card door, and whether it would close properly with a cable sneaking out, or if a modified door would need to be created which had some sort of port in it.
 
KINOKS said:
if you want to shoot normally
(being able to focus, hold the camera, etc) you'll need at least a follow focus and a monitor. This then kinda negates the whole purpose of a small DSLR looking cam. I've tried shooting with canon EF on a C100 without a follow focus and I wont try that again! Shooting without auto focus for docs, I don't think so.
Click to expand...
The beauty of the thing is that in moviemaking there's some department known by editing, where you can even put your movie upside down, that is, if 50% of your dailies will be in focus... LOL But 50% of 1 is better than (100% of) 0 :)
 
Last edited:
KINOKS said:
I've tried shooting with canon EF on a C100 without a follow focus and I wont try that again! Shooting without auto focus for docs, I don't think so. It's really good to have it in a lot of situations.
Click to expand...

I've shot for years with DSLR's and never used a follow focus. And usually I tend to hit the mark. I'm just that good.
 
KINOKS said:
And if you want to shoot normally (being able to focus, hold the camera, etc) you'll need at least a follow focus and a monitor. This then kinda negates the whole purpose of a small DSLR looking cam. I've tried shooting with canon EF on a C100 without a follow focus and I wont try that again!
Click to expand...

Exactly, only opposite.

You can not critically focus the C100 on the run without a monitor. Yet (Zacuto has a clip-on Viewfinder on the way). You can punch in on the fly, but since you can't move the zoom window around it doesn't add THAT much.

With a 5D or 1Dc you can. I've used a LCDVF for my mk3 without problems. Adds stabilization as well as get me behind/into the picture. I feel more attached to my shots being directly behind the camera this way.

A LCDVF (or Zacuto viewfinder) and a monopod with a videohead is all you need with a DSLR. EXTREMELY nimble. Of course, you can still setup your 1Dc with a slider, rig, motitor and whatnot if you want to. But you don't have to.

So many people seem to think that the bigger the camera/rig the better. For me:

Matte box=fail
rods=fail
follow focus=fail
monitor=fail
shoulder support=fail

I only need these things to overcome shortcomings in the camera system/setup. It can be nice gear, but while some can't find enough **** to hang on their camera, I want as little as possible without compromizing focus, exposure and steadiness.

Anyway, don't project your own needs onto others. <--- general comment and not directed at KINOKS.

I do not believe that the 1Dc is a better "video camera" than the F55. But it was interesting to hear them say that the 1Dc had more usable dynamic range. This smells a bit lite user/workflow error to me, but it will be interesting when the next part is out. This comparison is over a week old now and I think part two is due shortly.
 
Focusing with an EF lens that has a few centimeters of focus ring action is not good. You can't be serious? Move the focus ring one mm and you've lost your focus. I found it quite hard to nail focus in a hury. You need manual lenses that have a longer focus ring. But this lenses don't usualy have AF which is a nice thing to have when shooting docs and news.
 
On the F55 it's actually 48 minutes per 128GB of 4k XAVC to be exact.

My partner owns the 1DC and I've shot with it many times - and no doubt it is a GREAT camera. But don't forget the F55 can shoot MPEG-2 proxy files to the same SXS card at the same time it is recording 4k XAVC which has a lot of post workflow benefits. Not to mention the F55 has a global shutter which gives you really nice motion judder, and when combined with higher shutter speeds you get a really really nice clean image out of it.

Here is one of my recent tests with the F55 testing for dynamic range. There are others that test motion attributes and look for aliasing when shooting detailed subjects in 4k and down-rezzing to 2k or HD.

https://vimeo.com/61298885
 
KINOKS said:
Focusing with an EF lens that has a few centimeters of focus ring action is not good. You can't be serious?
Click to expand...

I am serious.

I am of course assuming a reasonable working DOF. Let's say it's an event. Then I'd at least want a human head's worth of DOF (ear to ear), preferably a shoulder width's worth. This is still more than enough to control the viewer's eye and separate subject from background.

For "wide open fast glass close to MFD" I'd always plan the shot and rack normally.

Within these modest constraints I find manual focus with hand on lens works well, if I have a viewfinder like the LCDVF.

You were probably adding some salt and pepper to your argument for good form, but with the lenses I use (16-35 2.8 II, 35 1.4, 50 1.4, 24-105 4.0, 70-200 2.8 II) I have never had a mm throw the focus that much. I get around 90-100 degrees of focus pull with most of the rotation applying to the closer distances where it matters the most.

While cine style, long pull lenses might be good when you have a dedicated focus puller, I never want to find myself in a situation where I need to pull, re-grip and then pull again because the throw is too long. It's a trade off.
 
Come on guys, the fact that the Canon 1Dc is in the conversation with the F55 is quite amazing. All cameras have their strength and weakness. Global shutter in the F55 is a big plus. Weather sealing on the 1Dc is a big plus. One will do your proxies right on camera. THe other will make you say, "I'm shooting video" (that good ol' HDslr phrase we all became accustom to). One will defiantly require a shooting permit for location while the other will steal shots on a simple monopod. One costs about $40,000 the other about $12000. Some people like to eat both apples and oranges. Some people just like vitamin C. It's a big world, even with 24 hour news coverage. There are lots of things to shoot and there is NOT one single camera that fits them all perfectly. I feel all of these cameras today are simply amazing. But for ownership, you just have to pick one that fits your bill (and bill fold). The rest are available at your local rental house.
 
I didn't get much from comparing the two cameras side by side. Both are REALLY NICE!, but two very different tools. Whats next. A GH3 and a Alexa side by side?
 
AndreeOnline said:
You were probably adding some salt and pepper to your argument for good form
Click to expand...

Yes I was:)

Kudos for getting good focus with your EF lenses. I'm not saying it's impossible but just that it's a hassle. And when doing docus
there is very little place for this "hassle". It's more important to get the shot then to not get the shot because you didn't have time
to focus:) Off course it depends on the format of the film. I'm thinking of a run and gun situation where the time I need to make a single usable
shot counts a lot!
 
atarijedi said:
It would be nice if Canon could upgrade the codec to mjpeg2k, but I doubt that can happen, the codec is probably hardcoded in the ASIC.
Click to expand...

If Canon did "upgrade" the codec to Motion JPEG2000, I doubt there is any computer that could edit it - Motion JPEG 2000 is a very sophisticated codec and requires dedicated hardware decoder, for 4K JP2K sequence, even octa core xeon CPU can't play smoothly.

Prores 422 HQ would be great, better be 10bit! Although Canon never had any partnership with Apple...
 
marvinhello said:
If Canon did "upgrade" the codec to Motion JPEG2000, I doubt there is any computer that could edit it - Motion JPEG 2000 is a very sophisticated codec and requires dedicated hardware decoder, for 4K JP2K sequence, even octa core xeon CPU can't play smoothly.

Prores 422 HQ would be great, better be 10bit! Although Canon never had any partnership with Apple...
Click to expand...

It isn't that sophisticated, it is an update to jpeg, and if by dedicated hardware decoder you mean Nvidia CUDA, than you are right it does, but CUDA isn't anything special nowadays.

It really isn't that much more intensive than mjpeg. I can playback 1080p24 mj2 on my Athlon64 4200+, a dual core, 2gb of ram, and an Nvidia GTS250. In fact, I can go up to 2k60p with the right codecs.

4k48p would be playable on a regular Intel core i7 w/ 4gb of ram and a 560 or higher nvidia video card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top