5D/7D comparison

Martti Ekstrand said:
Umm... the classic academy 1.37:1 format hasn't really been used for decades. Today movies are shot and composed for 1.85:1 - North America / 1.66:1 - Europe or 2.37:1 - modern anamorphic.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Sorry, now it was ME being too academic, since the term had been bandied about so much recently. :D
 
yoclay said:
Canon is not being transparent (as usual) as to whether they will match all the frame rates on the 7D for the 5D.
Click to expand...
Canon has never said anything about matching the 7D's frame rates. They said "24p is coming." That's all they said. No indication of any additional frame rates.

People are saying it's out in January, not far away.
Click to expand...
But Canon has said "first half of 2010". That could put it out in June. It might be January, or February, or March, or April, or May. Nobody knows.

Of course if/when RED ever puts out an S35 scarlet all of this is history.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Depends on the price point. If the S35 Scarlet is $10,000 for a complete kit, then I don't think it'll put any dent in the DSLR market. Guys like Kholi and me will probably dump our 7Ds to put the dough towards an S35 Scarlet, but I think for folks who can't stretch that far, they'll still be plenty happy with their 7D/GH1/5D choice.
 
bwwd said:
Any 50mm still photo lens with long throw ?
And 35mm and 28mm with long throw ?
I was aware of this because its visible in movies that lens has long focus throw but do we have this type of lenses in stills world ? Any names?

Bourne Ultimatum was shot mostly on nikon 28-70 and 80-200
http://www.theasc.com/magazine_dynamic/September2007/TheBourneUltimatum/page1.php
Click to expand...

Ty for correcting me! Even more relevant, though to that part of the discussion. The 28-70 is a great zoom, not my fav.
 
yoclay said:
I agree the frame rate issue is super-important, but the difficulty is Canon is not being transparent (as usual) as to whether they will match all the frame rates on the 7D for the 5D. People are saying it's out in January, not far away. Of course if/when RED ever puts out an S35 scarlet all of this is history. Much better sensor reading capacity and the PL mount thing is tantamount. The Gh1 owners at least have that going for them.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure we will see any slow motion capabilities in a FF 5D sensor as an upgrade.
Even the RED One has to reduce the area being used limited to the center of the censor only, in order to process the higher rate of data in high frame rates.
I don't think having both cameras is an unreasonable option though. Other advantages come in to play in production like just having a backup body as we know they can overheat causing delays. Multiple camera angles shot at the same time also opens up new possibilities. The odds of having the same moire problems in both cameras at the same time is reduced as well.
 
Barry_Green said:
Canon has never said anything about matching the 7D's frame rates. They said "24p is coming." That's all they said. No indication of any additional frame rates.
Click to expand...
There was a quote somewhere that 29.97 was going to be included...i'll have to find the quote. One thing's for sure, Canon has been granting a lot of wishes lately...hopefully the additional frame rates will make some ones new year dream come true.
 
Kholi said:
Ty for correcting me! Even more relevant, though to that part of the discussion. The 28-70 is a great zoom, not my fav.
Click to expand...
I'd love to own one...but the ball and chain said I can't sell the kid.

I did like this quote from the article:

The picture was shot in Super 35mm full frame, without hard mattes. “I like to have everything on the negative,” says Wood. “I reframe things in the digital intermediate [DI] quite often."
 
cinebuddy said:
There was a quote somewhere that 29.97 was going to be included...i'll have to find the quote.
Click to expand...
The official press release from Canon is here:
http://www.canon.co.uk/Images/5D_Mark_II_Firmware_Media_Alert_tcm14-688431.pdf

No mention of 29.97 or 50 or 60. It says "24fps and 25fps."

As for "January", the official press release says it will be made available "during the first half of 2010." It says that another press release will be issued "closer to the release date."

If you take it at face value, there's no indication that there will be 29.97, or 50, or 60, and certainly no hint towards "January". In fact, they don't even say whether the frame rates would be 24.000 and 30.000, or whether they'll be 23.976 and 30.000, or what. All we know is that it will have 24, 25, and 30 after the firmware is released, sometime in the first half of 2010.
 
Put very simply I think the great advantage of these cheap DSLR's for guys like me which is not often discussed is multi-cam. I like being able to do a dialogue between two actors and allowing them to just go. This cuts down on set time which is often limited and more of a precious asset than even the additional cost of a 2nd camera. With the addition of a 3rd camera I can even use overlapping dialogue for greater authenticity. As I already have two 5D's (an essential for pro photography - I would never show up for a shoot without a backup) the addition of a Scarlet for Master shots would be the bees knees.

If I do a corporate video, for talking heads often the CEO or President doesn't have much time. I use one camera on sticks for a master with the ML hack and a sound guy hooked in (or just let him work direct off a mixer), and the second for pickups/inserts at the same time. Of course this wouldn't be possible without Pluraleyes, because slating is often too complicated in these situations. If we are doing a walking shot, my assistant is on shoulder mount and I am on a stead. Between the two of us the shallow depth of field is less of an issue because we are usually covered if one of us goes out of focus.
 
Last edited:
yoclay said:
If I do a corporate video, for talking heads often the CEO or President doesn't have much time. I use one camera on sticks for a master with the ML hack and a sound guy hooked in (or just let him work direct off a mixer), and the second for pickups/inserts at the same time. Of course this wouldn't be possible without Pluraleyes, because slating is often too complicated in these situations. If we are doing a walking shot, my assistant is on shoulder mount and I am on a stead. Between the two of us the shallow depth of field is less of an issue because we are usually covered if one of us goes out of focus.
Click to expand...

How much trouble have you had with moire on your corporate shoots with your 5Ds? Have you been using only the DSLRs?
 
Ian-T said:
This is more like hearsay. The official announcement Canon put out didn't say any of this. Many a Canon rep said things to others that never manifested itself. I'm not trying to be pessimistic....but until I see something official from Canon I'll have to go with what was originally stated.
Click to expand...
Well if I remember 90% of this board was pessimistic about 24p. If there is one thing I know, is that we don't have a clue about what Canon is gonna do. They have become blissfully unpredictable because they are listening to what us 5d mark II owners want and that **** is sweet! We should be officially finished with the speculation on what this Digic sensor and that digic sensor can and can't do. Any engineer bright enough to tell me what these cameras can and can't do ain't on these boards and the coming 24p upgrade proves it.
 
ROCKMORE said:
How much trouble have you had with moire on your corporate shoots with your 5Ds? Have you been using only the DSLRs?
Click to expand...

Moire is less of an issue because we can ask them to bring a change of clothes, a tie can always be exchanged for instance. What is more of an issue is stepping and marching ants. Glasses with patterns, bushy eyebrows, crazy stuff... Also the false detail of these cameras (that includes the 7D) can really over-emphasize razor stubble. Lighting is a priority, keep it soft and even, anything which ups the contrast is a problem. Unless of course that is what you want as a look.

We know that the Caprock can deal with some of these issues. We know to that the 2.0 is perfect fot the 7D, but don't have the correct value for the 5D yet. A 1.0 is on it's way to me. If that doesnt work, then 5D users are out of luck on that front.
 
yoclay said:
We know that the Caprock can deal with some of these issues. We know to that the 2.0 is perfect fot the 7D, but don't have the correct value for the 5D yet. A 1.0 is on it's way to me. If that doesnt work, then 5D users are out of luck on that front.
Click to expand...
Have you tested the Caprock 1.4 on 5DM2?
 
I have not tested the 1.4, but as I live in Europe, the shipping back and forth is a pain. I don't want to inch my way along to the solution. I decided to go directly from the 2.0 to the 1.0, because if that doesn't work (blur the image sufficiently) then none will. it would be really helpful if some in the US could test the 1.4 though.
 
yoclay said:
Two photographic lenses with an equivalent horizontal field of view respective of their different sensor sizes and given the similarity of their aspect ratios will essentially behave in a more similar way (notwithstanding the individual characteristics of every respective lens) than their counterparts in the world of cinema.
Click to expand...
Do you mean behave in terms of mechanics or in terms of optics?

Cinema lenses are designed with a long throw and for minimal breathing in order to more easily pull focus.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

In order to maintain sharpness through the entire range of stops they often have more lens elements.
Click to expand...
I'll take your word for it.

Correspondingly, they generally compress the image in a different way than their photographic counterparts. It is for this reason that a still photography 24mm lens on a 7D will not necesarily look any more cinematic in terms of image compression than a still photography 35mm lens on a 5D. On the contrary, it may be just the opposite.
Click to expand...
How so? AFAIK, image compression or perspective distortion is determined by focal length, not by the number of lens elements. Please cite at least one source to back-up what you're saying here.

As lenses become wider in the world of photography the throw narrows beyond 1.5 meters to the point where a subject is not easily separated from the background and it is virtually impossible to pull focus or isolate it. In being forced to use a wider lens for a normal 50mm lens for instance, it means that a 7D user will have less throw than their 5D counterpart. Thus less capacity to isolate the subject. This is going in the opposite direction of cinema lenses or a "cinematic look" if you will.
Click to expand...
I truly do not understand what you're trying to say about focus throw and its relation to the cinematic look.

Also, how does a 7D user have "less throw" than a 5D user? The focus throw is determined by the mechanics of the lens. It's entirely independent of what camera you use.

A step away from the cinematic tradition and look of more commonly using primes in the majority of circumstances than zooms.
Click to expand...
In what ways do prime lenses look different from zoom lenses when you match aperture and focal length?

Additionally, photographic zooms are generally slower and have less contrast than their prime equivalents. A f1.4 prime closed down to f2.8 does not look like a f2.8 zoom shot wide open at the same focal length.
Click to expand...
Interestingly enough, you claim that cinema lenses often have a greater number of lens elements than photo lenses do. Well, one of the distinguishing characteristics of zoom lenses, versus primes, is that they have more lens elements, which is what accounts for the differences in image quality between zooms and primes.

Even if you were to reject the differences between zooms and primes or all the issues related to the throw where the 7D loses, given the greater similarity of the lenses between the 7D and the 5D than with their cinematic equivalents, and the similar aspect ratios of both cameras, my argument is simply that neither is more cinematic than the other.

Which is why having a sensor which is closer to "academy size" is just academic.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but the logic does not follow. As Barry said, the notion that using a nearly identical sensor size to the image format that is seen in at least 98% of movies in the theature to achieve as close a look as possible to what is seen in 98% of movies in theaters is "patently obvious." Unless you want to define "cinematic" in some way different to what is seen in theaters? So you see, it's not merely "academic."

At this point what matters then is having the speed and range of the lenses available to you to match the equivalent palette of 35mm filmmakers as well as the solidity of the image information (especially in the shadows) in more closely matching a cinematic look.
Click to expand...
Here's the truth. At the end of the day, I have almost no objection to a statement like that. You are 100% right in everything except for the last few words. Yes, you have a range of lenses that provide similar fields of view with similar maximum apertures. So having those as options is definitely an advantage. However, my point all along has been whether or not that's necessary to approximate the look of movies that you see in the theater. And the answer is simply no. Full frame at f/1.4 looks nothing like what you see in the theater. The DOF is too shallow and the image compression isn't right. It's that simple.

Which is why is why I felt the 5D was a better choice for me.
Click to expand...
All right, but I'm still not sure why you felt the need to argue that the 5D yields just as "cinematic" an image, if not more so, than the 7D.
 
Last edited:
yoclay said:
A 35mm lens on a 5D will yield virtually the same look as a 24mm on a 7D as long as you use stills lenses. Because they are built for the same purpose.
Click to expand...
This is demonstrably untrue. And I still can't make sense of what you're saying about being "built for the same purpose."

AFAIK, the look produced by a lens is determined by primarily by its focal length, aperture, the chemical composition of the glass elements, and (to a far lesser extent) the optical formula and coatings. Can you provide some sources that state that other factors are just as important?

Mechanics cannot be put aside. The long throw is what more aptly defines a cinema look. The ability to separate a subject from the background at certain distances to the camera is often attributed (mistakenly) solely to the importance of shallow depth of field, creating an obsession in DSLR's.
Click to expand...
I do not understand this at all. I seriously do not comprehend what you're trying to say here.

But it is the long throw that makes the difference. A photographic lens will not yield the same result. This is why these two cameras are more similar when they share equivalent FOV's and less like their cinema counterpart. Additionally, since the wider photographic lenses have a shorter throw, the ability to do this on the 7D is more impaired than on a 5D.
Click to expand...
What is your definition of "throw"? I think that that's what's the confusion here.

The 7D only looks more cinema-like if you believe that a film is mostly composed of medium to longer focal lengths shots. I don't happen to believe that.
Click to expand...
What you believe is irrelevant to the actual facts, which are what focal lengths are actually used in production after production. You can find documentation of the focal lengths in articles in trade publications like American Cinematographer.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top