5D MKIII. Boys are stupid!

yoclay said:
Don't give up yet. At least wait until you see what HDMI coming in April offers.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm waiting for the firmware update and NAB before I make any decisions. There's still a lot of things the 5D does well but there's things the D5200 does better.
 
maarek said:
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.
Click to expand...

Lol, so you're basing your opinion just on something Andrew shot in a few minutes. I've spent over a week testing the D5200 to find the optimum settings and then comparing it to the 5D.

The D800 looks noticeably sharper in every 5D comparison test I've seen except at very high ISOs. I really need that extra 80 lines of resolution to offset the softness of my Iscoramas.

Another forum member has been comparing the D7100 to the D5200 and he reckons the D7100 has about 20% more resolution. If that's the case the D7100 outresolves all 3 and would be the next best thing to the GH2 resolution wise with a lot more dynamic range.
 
Here's the screen grabs from my sharpening test https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0BzJ3L6nv6Fn0bkMyNjJRQ0ZCT2c/edit?usp=sharing
I tried 3 lenses, 3 picture profiles, IPB, and ALL-I codecs and I couldn't get the 5D to sharpen up as well as the D5200. I post sharpened both in FCPX to the same level. In camera sharpness was 0 on the 5D and 1 on the D5200 which are the optimum settings for each camera before they start to show halos/fringing. I shot the D5200 with a 35mm Summicron-r and the 5D with a 50mm Summicron-r, 60mm Elmarit-r, and a 90mm Summicron-r and they had almost identical sharpness. All lenses were @ f/4 and both cameras @ 100ISO.
 
I am curious why anyone serious about film as you are would be still looking at another DSLR at this $3000 price point. I don't see comments about loving the depth of field. The Black Magic Cinematic Camera would offer way higher overall quality than any of the DSLR''s you are talking about in this price range, unless you can't hand the media costs etc.
 
steve4505 said:
I am curious why anyone serious about film as you are would be still looking at another DSLR at this $3000 price point. I don't see comments about loving the depth of field. The Black Magic Cinematic Camera would offer way higher overall quality than any of the DSLR''s you are talking about in this price range, unless you can't hand the media costs etc.
Click to expand...

I've considered the BMCC but the workflow, rolling shutter, and aliasing are the main issues. I'm shooting my feature with a very small crew, I'm the writer, producer, director, cinematographer, steadicam operator, and editor. I'm planning to shoot one day and assembly edit the next and keep going like that for up to 3 months so a RAW workflow is definitely out of the question. If a VAF filter comes out for the BMCC then prores is an option but a D7100 with a Ninja looks like it will get pretty close to the prores BMCC in terms of resolution and dynamic range. Add the cost of a VAF filter, a speedbooster, and external battery and it's more like $4500 compared to $1500 for a D7100 with a couple of extra batteries. $3000 feeds a lot of hungry actors. The other consideration with the BMCC is reliability, is it a solid build or is it still a bit buggy? I don't have the time or patience to beta test a camera on a feature shoot, I know I can rely on a Nikon or a Canon and I can have a B cam on hand just in case.

The shallow depth of field on the 5D has been more of a curse most of the time because you have to stop down to get a good focus and use more light or push the ISO. You can just as easily get shallow DOF on S35 by opening up a lens. It's more the different field of view that concerns me but a few people have shot S35 before so it shouldn't be a huge problem making the transition.

I'm very serious about my filmmaking but a few lines of resolution or half a stop of dynamic range are far less important things to worry about than getting good performances and lots of coverage.The other thing is you pick the camera that works for the aesthetic of the film, I'm shooting a post apocalyptic psychological thriller, I'm not looking for the cleanest image, it's a stylistic choice as much as it is a practical one. I really love the look of the Nikon, more so than the Sonys, or the Canons, it grades really nicely without too much effort.
 
Looking good, squig!

(sorry I didn't click on this thread any earlier, too busy with upcoming project... to be shot on a BMC, by the way; I'm currently trying to find a good workflow, I'll probably post about "the BMC experience" when it's over)
 
squig said:
I've considered the BMCC but the workflow, rolling shutter, and aliasing are the main issues. I'm shooting my feature with a very small crew, I'm the writer, producer, director, cinematographer, steadicam operator, and editor. I'm planning to shoot one day and assembly edit the next and keep going like that for up to 3 months so a RAW workflow is definitely out of the question. If a VAF filter comes out for the BMCC then prores is an option but a D7100 with a Ninja looks like it will get pretty close to the prores BMCC in terms of resolution and dynamic range. Add the cost of a VAF filter, a speedbooster, and external battery and it's more like $4500 compared to $1500 for a D7100 with a couple of extra batteries. $3000 feeds a lot of hungry actors. The other consideration with the BMCC is reliability, is it a solid build or is it still a bit buggy? I don't have the time or patience to beta test a camera on a feature shoot, I know I can rely on a Nikon or a Canon and I can have a B cam on hand just in case.

The shallow depth of field on the 5D has been more of a curse most of the time because you have to stop down to get a good focus and use more light or push the ISO. You can just as easily get shallow DOF on S35 by opening up a lens. It's more the different field of view that concerns me but a few people have shot S35 before so it shouldn't be a huge problem making the transition.

I'm very serious about my filmmaking but a few lines of resolution or half a stop of dynamic range are far less important things to worry about than getting good performances and lots of coverage.The other thing is you pick the camera that works for the aesthetic of the film, I'm shooting a post apocalyptic psychological thriller, I'm not looking for the cleanest image, it's a stylistic choice as much as it is a practical one. I really love the look of the Nikon, more so than the Sonys, or the Canons, it grades really nicely without too much effort.
Click to expand...

Squig thanks for the wake up call.
I've been shooting with a 5DmkII, and 60D for 3 years or so and both have seen better days. The rubber is practically off the 60D. I waited in a coma for years like everybody else for the Mk3 but when it finally arrived I couldn't justify the cost vs improvements. Although nice, I don't for the most part need a low light camera. Anything important I use HMIs. I'm renting an MK3 next weeks for a shoot and still renting the HMIs. I've been very loyal to Canon, but these Nikons are looking pretty sweet. I can basically swap my 60D for a D5200 for a few extra bucks. Why up to now there is no 1920x1080 60fps or clean HDMI out is because Canon won't do it on a consumer model.
I'm looking forward to seeing your shoot. Best luck to you!
 
If you haven't already, have a read through the D5200 thread, like every DSLR it's not without its quirks. The two main issues with it for me are the horizontal fixed pattern noise, which is less noticeable than the vertical FPN on the APS-C Canons, the other problem is the face of the LCD has humps on each side so a z-finder frame won't fit flush onto it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top