Kemalettin
Member
Why they dont use 7D or T2i? Tell me the difference MkII between these,i read on ASC Mag few months ago some DP said 7D was better than 5D..so why 5D?
5D Mark II used to shoot entire House season finale
- Thread starter Abaddon
- Start date
xmephestox
Carbonite Member
Full Frame Depth of Field and FOV.
Better low noise (probably won't make a difference since they are LIGHTING the set.
Less overheating issues. (more rare)
but the huge sensor and FF look is pretty much its biggest appeal.
Better low noise (probably won't make a difference since they are LIGHTING the set.
Less overheating issues. (more rare)
but the huge sensor and FF look is pretty much its biggest appeal.
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
Makes a huge difference seeing as most TV and feature DPs are typically shooting close to wide open these days.
Long gone are the days of Wizard of Oz, where you only had ASA64 and had to light the set to an 8 to get an exposure.
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
Could have been...read my last post on the previous page.
steventimothy
Well-known member
Whatever format they're shooting, it's a smaller sensor/negative than the Canon 5D, so they're getting more DOF with the 5D, was my point.
In fact, the 5D sensor size is pushing into 65 mm film territory (48.5x22.1). It'll be interesting to see how artsy they get with it in that episode. If the director chose to use the 5D because of artistic choices related to DOF control and lens choices, that to me is extremely interesting. It means that hollywood in one sense doesn't care that much about any technical limitations if it means they have more artistic choices.
I have worked on TV shows, but again it's the director who tweeted that the reason they were using the 5D on that particular episode was lack of space. So here I'm answering the poster's question, who may not have seen that tweet.
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
Steven Poster (ICG President) Just wrote a small article on this for the newsletter. He mentioned this show specifically and one other, I forget.
There were discussions including the DPs of those shows, and while everyone does like the format they understand its limitations, and while they can get away with it for TV, feature films aimed at the big screen are still not a great choice.
In the end, like HD when it first came out....its another tool in the bag.
sheridan pennell
Active member
House not not on red!!
House not not on red!!
Has everyone seen the post on red about house finale?
It seems it is hurting them and they cannot understand why these guys are using the 5d.
Red are so far up their own asses that they think that no other camera should be used except their own even ones that STILL are not made yet
well everything in life changes including people using 5d over red
House not not on red!!
Has everyone seen the post on red about house finale?
It seems it is hurting them and they cannot understand why these guys are using the 5d.
Red are so far up their own asses that they think that no other camera should be used except their own even ones that STILL are not made yet
well everything in life changes including people using 5d over red
Back in the day when I did my one month of film school, I do remember one thing I was told regarding budgets. This director was speaking and said if you ever have any left over money, put it into what you see on screen. In other words, put it into props, scenery, a better location, nice costumes etc etc etc.
I see these cameras in that respect, you can put 50% of your budget on a red, get great footage, or 10% of your budget on a 5d and the remaining 40% on other ON CAMERA areas of your production.
Maybe the Canon's only shoot footage thats 90% as good, but you can improve your low budget production much more by spending the spare cash on what you see on screen.
I see these cameras in that respect, you can put 50% of your budget on a red, get great footage, or 10% of your budget on a 5d and the remaining 40% on other ON CAMERA areas of your production.
Maybe the Canon's only shoot footage thats 90% as good, but you can improve your low budget production much more by spending the spare cash on what you see on screen.
Lammy
Well-known member
I loved the episode where they used a lens baby.
I can't wait to see what they do with the 5D. So many possibilities... including freeing the actors from repeated takes and long setup times and thus happier time on set? Using ultra-wide lenses and CCTV corner style tight framing? Jitterjello effects?
I can't wait to see what they do with the 5D. So many possibilities... including freeing the actors from repeated takes and long setup times and thus happier time on set? Using ultra-wide lenses and CCTV corner style tight framing? Jitterjello effects?
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
The nashing of teeth over on REDuser about this is comical.
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=43987
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=43987
I just read the first page and I'm mind boggled. It never stops over there.
Lammy
Well-known member
Well they have a point about the quality.
But if House is shooting on a 5D, they'll be a creative and technical reason: cramped spaces, minimal crew, and faster set up times etc.
I look forward to downloading the 720P video stream. It doesn't get broadcast in HD in the UK, so I'll have to wait an age to properly see it on 1080P BluRay when its out.
Be interesting to see what kind of post effects they'll do to maximise the footage (24bit, denoising the image, adding in extra film grain?)
But if House is shooting on a 5D, they'll be a creative and technical reason: cramped spaces, minimal crew, and faster set up times etc.
I look forward to downloading the 720P video stream. It doesn't get broadcast in HD in the UK, so I'll have to wait an age to properly see it on 1080P BluRay when its out.
Be interesting to see what kind of post effects they'll do to maximise the footage (24bit, denoising the image, adding in extra film grain?)
They have a point about quality, but the RED craze kinda made quality the main issue. These decisions are made in a business environment too, they'll save on anything. Points made, but it's clear that no one likes it. There were two or three really mature posts in there though.
I always thought and still think the best thing about the dslr rage is how small they are. Most powerful point. Can see why someone would go with them.
If aliasing is considered before shooting, then I think a great deal can be done with art direction. It's extra work before, but hopefully less work after. I don't imagine they'd finish to 1080, but have no clue how it's going down.
I'll bet on they add some grain. Maybe lots of masking and blurring where things sizzle? No clue.
I always thought and still think the best thing about the dslr rage is how small they are. Most powerful point. Can see why someone would go with them.
If aliasing is considered before shooting, then I think a great deal can be done with art direction. It's extra work before, but hopefully less work after. I don't imagine they'd finish to 1080, but have no clue how it's going down.
I'll bet on they add some grain. Maybe lots of masking and blurring where things sizzle? No clue.
Lammy
Well-known member
Yeah, House shoots on 35mm not Red. Why should House anger anyone, 35mm is better than 5D/Red if quality is the main issue. I don't think the entire camera team will forego 35mm, unless this episode is an incredible technical success!
They'll finish to 1080P defo but broadcast at 720P. House is one of my favourite TV Shows, and if you look back at the very first episode... that looked so stylised and mucky. It looks far more clean now, but it'd be interesting how stylised this 5D ep will be.
I really don't think moire will be much of an issue, even if the episode is in a brick heavy destroyed warehouse. The show has always had a very short depth of field...
They'll finish to 1080P defo but broadcast at 720P. House is one of my favourite TV Shows, and if you look back at the very first episode... that looked so stylised and mucky. It looks far more clean now, but it'd be interesting how stylised this 5D ep will be.
I really don't think moire will be much of an issue, even if the episode is in a brick heavy destroyed warehouse. The show has always had a very short depth of field...
steventimothy
Well-known member
I think if the Red users are defensive about their camera choice for economic reasons, they have a greater problem coming soon.
At this point, there probably isn't any technical reason why a Canon or Nikon couldn't eliminate most of the issues related to quality. The problems could at least likely be greatly diminished.
Some companies could limit their development on the video DSLR side for business reasons. The main reason being, they wouldn't want people to have more video capability in a $2,500 DSLR than a $7,500 professional video camera.
However, that argument can be slapped aside pretty soon, I predict. After all, Canon, Nikon et. al. don't really sell their cameras to DPs, production companies, film students, directors, etc. That's a tiny part of their market.
Their real markets are the teeming hordes of hobbyists, why buy millions of these cameras (11.2 million DSLR sales predicted in 2010). That's $US 5-7 billion in DSLR alone. But they will also sell 19.6 million lenses for those cameras, so it's an extremely profitable part of the digital camera market. (125 million units of digital cameras total).
Of course Canon is happy to open new market possibilities up with the new HD capability of these markets. But their core group of buyers, who are mostly tweakers at heart, will demand that these cameras have high video capability on top of the still capability.
You can now see, for example, birders including high-definition video clips on top of their photos of boobies and blue-belly suckers.
But a lot of these (mostly men) in this market are only taking vacation snaps. They enjoy the technical aspect of the hobby instead, comparing pixels, resolution, colourspace, lightroom raw colour timing, lens sharpness, etc. ad nauseum.
They will demand the highest level of video quality to match what they already enjoy in the still world. Does anyone really need 22MP to shoot bird or vacation snaps? So they will push Canon/Nikon on the video side, and those companies will deliver those features.
At this point, there probably isn't any technical reason why a Canon or Nikon couldn't eliminate most of the issues related to quality. The problems could at least likely be greatly diminished.
Some companies could limit their development on the video DSLR side for business reasons. The main reason being, they wouldn't want people to have more video capability in a $2,500 DSLR than a $7,500 professional video camera.
However, that argument can be slapped aside pretty soon, I predict. After all, Canon, Nikon et. al. don't really sell their cameras to DPs, production companies, film students, directors, etc. That's a tiny part of their market.
Their real markets are the teeming hordes of hobbyists, why buy millions of these cameras (11.2 million DSLR sales predicted in 2010). That's $US 5-7 billion in DSLR alone. But they will also sell 19.6 million lenses for those cameras, so it's an extremely profitable part of the digital camera market. (125 million units of digital cameras total).
Of course Canon is happy to open new market possibilities up with the new HD capability of these markets. But their core group of buyers, who are mostly tweakers at heart, will demand that these cameras have high video capability on top of the still capability.
You can now see, for example, birders including high-definition video clips on top of their photos of boobies and blue-belly suckers.
But a lot of these (mostly men) in this market are only taking vacation snaps. They enjoy the technical aspect of the hobby instead, comparing pixels, resolution, colourspace, lightroom raw colour timing, lens sharpness, etc. ad nauseum.
They will demand the highest level of video quality to match what they already enjoy in the still world. Does anyone really need 22MP to shoot bird or vacation snaps? So they will push Canon/Nikon on the video side, and those companies will deliver those features.
Last edited:
Yeah ... I waited patiently for a SCARLET until I finally bought a 5DM2. I have to say ... what hell is going on over there? The elitism is out of control. The bashing (even if only from a technical standpoint) is way beyond reasonable. There's either an unrealistic superiority complex, or a chip on their shoulders ... I say "their" meaning the those DPs posting on the RED forum, and not Jannard or RED as a company. I'm sure that this kind of bashing went on within the circles of the old 35mm film camp as well, but back then there was a distinct line between the "video guys" and the "film guys" who DP'd feature films. I think that RED users need to be weary that they are leading the pack in a very transitional period of pro/prosumer film technology. They are the middle ground. They should be more aware of this fact. Maybe it would help them not unnecessarily bash new technology. If they're getting annoyed by a 5D already, I think they've got much bigger problems coming down the road.
It's like anything, if you invest a lot into something you tend to value it highly and get defensive/aggressive if it looks like your investment isn't good value compared to other things.
They've seen their super camera not come out, all the while investing time and energy into it, whilst viable alternatives have come out for a fraction of the price giving quality that, to most eyes, its just as good.
It's like anything, if you buy a tv one day for 500 bucks and the next someone comes out with one that costs half that and is just as good then you're gonna be annoyed heh.
They've seen their super camera not come out, all the while investing time and energy into it, whilst viable alternatives have come out for a fraction of the price giving quality that, to most eyes, its just as good.
It's like anything, if you buy a tv one day for 500 bucks and the next someone comes out with one that costs half that and is just as good then you're gonna be annoyed heh.
The director mentioned that the 5DII footage looks richer than what they were using previously. Richer than 35mm? Really? If that's the case, it seems he prefers the look, and we may see more of the 5DII if he remains as the director. I swear there was some 5DII in last weeks episode and one short shot where shallow DOF was crazy shallow.
Lammy
Well-known member
Film normally looks quite flat and greyish with alot of room for post, so I think we know what the director meant when he said that the 5D footage was more richer. Hopefully it hasn't limited them too much though!
I didn't notice any shots in House so far that standed out to me as 5D, but if they did use one as an early test then awesome!
I'm interested to see how the Canon L glass compares to their usual cinema lenses (don't they use Cookes?). I own a few Nikkors and I prefer the look to them than the L glass, but if they've shot
it in such a great way I may have to invest/rent Canon L's more often...
I didn't notice any shots in House so far that standed out to me as 5D, but if they did use one as an early test then awesome!
I'm interested to see how the Canon L glass compares to their usual cinema lenses (don't they use Cookes?). I own a few Nikkors and I prefer the look to them than the L glass, but if they've shot
it in such a great way I may have to invest/rent Canon L's more often...