5D MKIII. Boys are stupid!

squig

squig

Veteran
Hehe, now that I have your attention. Here's a narrative short scene I shot with the MKIII. After I shot it I decided I had to start looking for another camera, it really shows the MKIIIs resolution and dynamic range shortcomings. I've been testing a Nikon D5200 and so far I'm very impressed with it and I'm considering getting a D7100 which has the same sensor sans OLPF. The MKIII is still better in low light but the Nikons have more dynamic range, resolution, and gorgeous colours. I might hold on to the MKIII for a while for low light work but I'm really loving the look of the Nikons, they don't have that Canon orange oompa loompa skin vibe.

 
If there was anyone on here that's been the biggest proponent of the Canon Mll/lll it was always you. But to see the statement " decided I had to start looking for another camera" coming from you....well that's almost blasphamy. :)

But I see you're contemplating a Nikon...and if memory serves me well I think you used to have a D90? If so you are forgiven.

You're right about the dynamic range and sharpness on the Nikons though.
 
Ian-T said:
If there was anyone on here that's been the biggest proponent of the Canon Mll/lll it was always you. But to see the statement " decided I had to start looking for another camera" coming from you....well that's almost blasphamy. :)
Click to expand...

I know I know! What can I say, I'm a stupid boy. The Canons have served me well but I've pushed them about as far as they can go and I wanna go further.

Yeah there was something about the D90 that I've really missed, the Nikon dynamic range and colours are just more cinematic, and maybe the S35 look has something to do with it too. I would have replaced the MKII with a D800 but the aliasing and low light scared me off.

The MKIII is fine for advertising and short films but now I'm shooting a feature and I want it to look good in 20 years. All Canon did with the MKII was reduce the aliasing and add some heavy noise reduction, there's been 0 dynamic range boost after 4 years! If Canons April fools joke includes a resolute S35 crop mode then I would reconsider but I think the chances of that are next to zero. Canon could have easily built an affordable DSLR with GH2 like resolution but they keep it reserved for their overpriced luxury line.
 
Last edited:
squig said:
Yeah there was something about the D90 that I've really missed, the Nikon dynamic range and colours are just more cinematic, and maybe the S35 look has something to do with it too. I would have replaced the MKII with a D800 but the aliasing and low light scared me off.
Click to expand...

I love the video from my D800, it's superb. I've never actually noticed a problem with aliasing like I did when I was shooting with a 550D. Low light is good, too, I use it instead of the RED Scarlet for extreme low light shoots.
 
Nice work Squig! What mic/recorder?
Good writing too.

Haven't used my 5D3 for video since getting the FS700+SB. Just picked up the SELP18200 Sony lens for fast-workflow shooting: it's a slow lens (F3.5-6.3) but when shooting solo/live shots with everything on auto, works really well. Also has a nice slow servo zoom, controlled with the FS700 rocker or on the lens directly (can do fast zooms manually (hopefully a future lens will have fast servo zoom)). Can use the rocker for variable speed zooms and on-lens for constant speed zooms (rocker can also be set to constant speed).

Low-light with Canon F1.4 (T1.0 on SB) is very cool.

Also dig the pro-audio built into FS700- not quite Sound Devices quality, but really good.

I use the 5D3 for stills now. Will be interesting to see if the April firmware brings any mojo back for video.
 
jcs said:
Nice work Squig! What mic/recorder?
Good writing too.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Rode NTG1 with a rycote windjammer (it was bloody windy!) on a boom pole into a juicedlink recording straight into the 5D.

The FS700 is a bit pricey for me, I'd rather put the money towards feeding actors at this point. I'm really liking the D5200 and I'm checking out the D7100 which appears to have the same sensor without an OLPF. I'm just waiting to see what happens at NAB, I think Sony might replace the FS100 with a cine gamma cam which could be an option. I'm getting a mixpre-d to replace the juicedlink recording to a Sony PCM-D50.

The MKIII redeems itself in this one.

 
Hey Squig...

I like the dialogue and the acting from both of you in the first clip.. The girl plays her part very well, great subtle expressions attempting to hide her feelings of jealousy.. she's great. I would have love to see the camera close in on her as she says, "c'mon its not every girl".. then a close up of you looking at her but not seeing understanding her motivation.... but obviously you where in front of the camera....making that a little difficult :) .... but hey...Its great as its stands. Keep up the great work Squig..
 
Scott Freestyle said:
Hey Squig...

I like the dialogue and the acting from both of you in the first clip.. The girl plays her part very well, great subtle expressions attempting to hide her feelings of jealousy.. she's great. I would have love to see the camera close in on her as she says, "c'mon its not every girl".. then a close up of you looking at her but not seeing understanding her motivation.... but obviously you where in front of the camera....making that a little difficult :) .... but hey...Its great as its stands. Keep up the great work Squig..
Click to expand...

Lol, that's not me in front of the camera that's my homeboy Tai! I do the odd cameo here in there but I'm not a trained actor. I did shoot some singles but I decided to stick with the 2 shot because it just felt right. Woody Allen does the 2 shot scene a lot, I think it's good to let the audience choose what they want to focus on rather than forcing it all the time, it's more intimate. The problem with going for the closeup is it can make it too obvious that it's just a film. I want the audience to feel like they're sitting on the bench opposite these guys eavesdropping on them. BUT if I had more time the singles as you've suggested might have worked even better. I would have liked to get another couple of hours coverage but the film gods decided some apocalyptic weather was in order.

Yeah Eve was great, it's the first time I've worked with her and I was really impressed, it's not easy to get a scene right in one take and we got it in a couple of hours.

Thanks for the feedback mate. That was just a quickie we put together for Tai's showreel, he took it to LA and got himself a manager. I've shot some much better stuff I'll be showing in the next month or so and rest assured there's lots of cutting.
 
Last edited:
But the D5200 is not more sharp than the 5dmarkIII. It is actually less sharp. Clearly. It also breaks apart faster with it's codec.

So where's the "improvement"? It's very cheap, I'll give you that. Only the D800 can be considered an improvement but it also fails in the codec department compared. That and the aliasing. But pretty much the D800 and 5dmarkIII are neck and neck. Everything I've seen from the D5200 looks ok but it is not a sharp cam either way. Neither does the dynamic range look UNBELIEVABLY different.
 
Last edited:
What picture style are you using? Looks like neutral with some of the settings turned down. Just a guess though.

I've always disliked anything I've ever filmed in neutral. I gave Samuels Flaat10p a try when it first came out and I found I could keep the saturation, contrast and sharpening up without it coming unglued in poor lighting. Then after adding a bit of sharpening, a slight s-curve to the color curves and a tiny saturation boost, I get incredible results.

I think picture style has alot more to do with that mushy canon image we get sometimes.

Here's a great example of how clean the 5D3 can look when you get the picture style and post right.
https://vimeo.com/59171144

I'd play some more with picture styles and settings to see if you can't bring out the money shot. I think your leaving alot of what that camera can do on the table. Once you find it, you should easily be able to reproduce those results.

Cheers,
Pete
 
maarek said:
But the D5200 is not more sharp than the 5dmarkIII. It is actually less sharp.
Click to expand...

I've just tested the sharpness vs the 5D MKIII and +1 sharpness is slightly sharper than 0 sharpness on the MKIII with and without post sharpening applied. I shot a chart with a 35mm Summicron on the D5200 and a 50mm Summicron on the 5D. Sharpness setting +1 works well with Leica-r and Nikon ai primes with some post sharpening, 0 is a little too soft and +2 starts to halo like +1 does on the 5D.

The D800 has about 80 lines more resolution and a stop more dynamic range than the 5D. The D5200 doesn't have as much of a resolution bump but it has the extra dynamic range.
 
squig said:
The D800 has about 80 lines more resolution and a stop more dynamic range than the 5D. The D5200 doesn't have as much of a resolution bump but it has the extra dynamic range.
Click to expand...

Everything I saw from the EOSHD-forum examples, the D5200 was slightly more softer than the 5d. There may have been a dynamic range difference but it was difficult to spot. One stop should be easy to see.

Now the D800 does have advantages over the 5dmarkIII, namely a hidgeon more sharpness (though I believe that is just aliasing as even the 5dmarkII looks "sharper") and dr in the shadows.

But the differences are quite small. I had both the D800 and 5dmkIII and you could safely swap between them without losing anything. I personally went with the 5dmarkIII because it is easier to take photos while shooting plus the codec is more robust. The D800 has great raw-stills quality and the shadow dr was tempting.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top