PappasArts
Veteran
Exactly.... Here's another 1080P uploaded from Canon France.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCRMu2rLf_Y
Pappas
http://pappasarts.wordpress.com/
5D Mark III: Mario and Nette (original short film) 1080P version
- Thread starter PappasArts
- Start date
Exactly.... Here's another 1080P uploaded from Canon France.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCRMu2rLf_Y
Pappas
http://pappasarts.wordpress.com/
Lammy
Well-known member
We don't need any tests to confirm it's not true 1080p :thumbsup: Unless the online Editor decided to downscale to 720p, and then re-upload at 1080p for fun... I doubt it.
Anyone doing a technical recce before a shoot can also tell. Our eyes get used to things if we watch a lot of HD content. And to everyone talking about compression and viewing distances... well maybe they're just not as sensitive to it. I can tell 50cm or 5 feet away from the screen. Just watch alot of online 1080p movie trailers (at worse compression no less!) and films shot on true 1080p or watch some blurays. 360p, 480p, 720p, 1080p are really distinct...
G
Guest
Guest
Socratic method much?
Will Turner
Well-known member
All the current DSLRs look virtually the same on youtube, barring any aliasing or moire. I think if your only producing for web it doesn't actually matter anymore, until we get just insanely fast internet.
Even on my 90 odd inch projected screen, they are all much of a muchness.
Even on my 90 odd inch projected screen, they are all much of a muchness.
Will Turner
Well-known member
On youtube I really struggle to see much difference, but 1080p on youtube compared to a bluray is like night and day. I think compression levels effect video quality considerably more than sheer resolution which is why I'm very glad to see a half decent codec on the new 5d.
KahL
Well-known member
Finally someone said it.
Seriously, it feels like people are pulling a wool over their eyes and then and ONLY then when numbers are put in their faces, do they admit the obvious.
Personally as a long time user of the Canon DSLRs, this is damn disappointing. There are a lot of placebo effected folks on here claiming that the images appear sharper than MKII when in fact they look virtually the same. Had the "MKIII" text not been next to the video's title, people wouldn't know the difference.
The way I see it, this is outdated tech with a new price tag *coughApplecough* and I'm very annoyed by it.
I'd rather wait to see what the EOS-C DSLRs will be (provided they aren't vaporware BS) or just swallow the pill and buy a GH2 toward a hacked 100+Mbps intra frame/mjpeg codec. I mean really, the LCD still turns off when you plug in an HDMI monitor too? How archaic is this by now?
At this point, it's just ridiculous w/ the amount of crap we're dealing with here on a bloated $3500 price tag. Lack of moire and an intra-frame codec don't solve the main issues for me when I want a 1080p image to actually resolve like one. Not like a 720p upscaled image, for Christ's sake.
Rick Burnett
Section Moderator
I can VERY MUCH see the difference between my FS100 and 7D from five or ten feet away from my monitors. 
And if it is a wide shot, probably even further.
And if it is a wide shot, probably even further.
G
Guest
Guest
If you don't absolutely need FF35 for video work, the 5D3 looks like a waste of time.
I understand some people might like razor-thin DOF, but other than the equally limited set of circumstances in which it would be appropriate, why would anyone need FF35? It doesn't correspond to any commonly used film format, unless you regularly shot VistaVision. As everyone knows, APS-C is much closer to 35-mm film. Sadly, in light of the underwhelming news regarding the 5DMk3, I don't hold out much hope for the T4i, which I had been eagerly awaiting until recently. But, then again, given the only incremental improvements the GH2 enjoys over the GH1, I also don't have high expectations for the GH3. Sure, 10-bit 4:2:2 and significantly improved dynamic range would be nice, but no manufacturer is in the business of being nice, but of making the greatest profit at the lowest possible cost. That means more incremental improvements -- and a six-month or greater lag until Vitaliy Kiselev can crack the firmware, assuming he even wants to (plus another several months until he produces a usable hack).
Lammy
Well-known member
I'd still use the 5D3 in place of an APS-C DSLR though. It'll work out cheaper in terms of wide lenses and the aliasing is better. To get a similar look just use longer lenses, stop down more, and raise the ISO.
However, I'd obviously choose an actual camcorder or GH2 if the choice came to it...
However, I'd obviously choose an actual camcorder or GH2 if the choice came to it...
PappasArts
Veteran
The 5DMIII ia an improvement in the areas that were known to be the major issues with the 5DMII. Sure, we would love for it to resolve 1000 lines, or better it be 4K. I'm sure that will happen. However the 5DMIII looks good, and when we get more COF from the 5DMIII, we'll know more.
Pappas
http://pappasarts.wordpress.com/
Digigenic
Well-known member
HansSteinert
Well-known member
It has to do with the fact that the GH2 resolves more restitution in the first place. When paired with an increase in bitrate, you get insane results.
Alpha Beta Omega
Veteran
I think a GH2 is a great camera but it has no headphone output and a lousy tiny 2.5mm audio input jack and that is much worse than even the mkII let alone the mkIII with added bells and whistles.
And someone said this too!
The camera looks slightly better than the mk2 but the video is no way near 1080p, not even 720p. It's just full of fake details, what we've been seeing for years.
Wow. The complaints are amazing. If this is what the 5dIII is getting slammed for than the gripers have other problems besides resolution. Change this sites name to 'I want Epic camera quality and i want it for the price of a GH2 user.'
KahL
Well-known member
This is a great video and she's a great artist. But beyond this, the exact same production and look could have been done on the MKII. It doesn't really show much difference so far, beyond lack of moire.
Yes it does. If you use anamorphic s35mm photography as an example then the 5d matches it better than regular aps-c spherical. You can get wide shots with nice dof almost in a way anamorphic shooters do when they shoot s35mm. Without the distortions.