5D MKIII specs

cowpunk52 said:
Is the AF100 out of date? The FS100? The EX1? The XF105? Red MX? F900? PMW350? HPX3700? 5d mark II? 7d? GH2?

.
Click to expand...
If you can't shoot an indie film with any of these cameras listed above, then no camera coming in the future is going to help you. Hell, i just sold my hvx200 and I miss it. Every camera listed there is capable of doing nice work image wise.
 
Little bit tired of hearing as an answer to crummy 8 bit 420, "just go out and shoot a film".
Who ever said we weren't?

The reality behind the anger, is not just for what a $16K Canon camera puts out from a technical standpoint. (8bit 422) Most people can't afford that camera anyway. It's what the consequences of that are for everything further down the line under that figure are as a result.
 
Last edited:
Kholi said:
I'm personally not speculating about anything Canon. They're always slow.

Also think that you should be willing to pay for the goods, but eventually what was good last year will be outdated. And, yeah, they do go outdated that fast these days.

Maybe not within its own brand, but definitely outdated. If you look at what the C300 is, it was pretty much dead when it was released, but the IQ always speaks for itself to a certain extent. I wanted one myself, love how it handles, it's a fun and great camera.
Click to expand...

Every camera right now is outdated already. The F3 is outdated, because it doesn´t support Canon glass properly, the C300 is outdated because the Alexa is around and supports 10-bit 4:4:4 recording, the 5DMK3 is outdated, because the D4 was announced earlier.....

I think nowadays none of these cameras are outdated or obsolete! They are all capable of great images from the 7D and AF-100 up. Now the 7D is a ***** to work with and the AF-100 seems to lack the flat profile many of us need/like. But you can make a film with them nonetheless. It all depends to your work and budget.

The C300 right now to me as someone who has Canon glass is the top of the list (yes, above the Reds and Alexa), because it does exactly what I need when I need it. No long setup times, versatile design (with or without audio, small like a DSLR or rigged like a RED all in a few minutes) . And it stays light with few batteries for a weekend-expedition. And as I said it is a beauty to work with as a cameraman with a small crew or none at all. Heyit is even weather-sealed! Put an F3 out there in the rain with its huge ventilation holes!!

I can imagine Panasonic comes out with a competitor now (AF-200 anyone?). It will be similar in terms of camera-man-friendliness. It will maybe be a lot cheaper. It will be available in October (if they announce in April). I doubt it will have the same IQ, but it will be "good enough" for a lot of people. It will compete hard against the 5DMK3, because it is so much nicer to use and it might have the AVC-Intra codec.

So maybe the C300 is outdated in October in terms of cutting-edge-technolgy. But in terms of image-quality and user-friendliness it will stay near the top of the list of cameras for at least 2 years now.
 
yoclay said:
The reality behind the anger, is not just for what a $16K Canon camera puts out from a technical standpoint. (8bit 422) Most people can't afford that camera anyway. It's what the consequences of that are for everything further down the line under that figure are as a result.
Click to expand...

I can see your point. But I still think a lot of that frstration is misguided - there are valid options at nearly every price point. But working on a budget will involve compromises - always has, always will.
 
Since you're respondin', I won't leave it hangin'.

alpi69 said:
Every camera right now is outdated already. The F3 is outdated, because it doesn´t support Canon glass properly, the C300 is outdated because the Alexa is around and supports 10-bit 4:4:4 recording, the 5DMK3 is outdated, because the D4 was announced earlier.....
Click to expand...

Well, when the F3 was released it wasn't outdated on paper or in practicality. There wasn't a large-sensor camera in its class performing as it does. Honestly, it's still the only 1080 camera with Dual-link, S-log, so on and so forth under 20K, isn't it? C300 doesn't have this. MK3 isn't for us, that's pretty clear. It's not outdated because it's a stills camera, not a video camera. They made a few minor adjustments on the video camera side and raised the price slightly.

Too each their own in this regard.

I think nowadays none of these cameras are outdated or obsolete! They are all capable of great images from the 7D and AF-100 up. Now the 7D is a ***** to work with and the AF-100 seems to lack the flat profile many of us need/like. But you can make a film with them nonetheless. It all depends to your work and budget.
Click to expand...

Outdated in the technical sense. I could still use an HVX200 to do some work, is it not outdated technically? When there are smaller HD cameras, cheaper, that produce better results. Cameraphones even..

The C300 right now to me as someone who has Canon glass is the top of the list (yes, above the Reds and Alexa), because it does exactly what I need when I need it. No long setup times, versatile design (with or without audio, small like a DSLR or rigged like a RED all in a few minutes) . And it stays light with few batteries for a weekend-expedition. And as I said it is a beauty to work with as a cameraman with a small crew or none at all. Heyit is even weather-sealed! Put an F3 out there in the rain with its huge ventilation holes!!
Click to expand...

This is what matters the most, and I'm not knocking it. I'm only commenting on how quickly things get cycled.

I can imagine Panasonic comes out with a competitor now (AF-200 anyone?). It will be similar in terms of camera-man-friendliness. It will maybe be a lot cheaper. It will be available in October (if they announce in April). I doubt it will have the same IQ, but it will be "good enough" for a lot of people. It will compete hard against the 5DMK3, because it is so much nicer to use and it might have the AVC-Intra codec.
Click to expand...

Are you sure that Panasonic wouldn't surprise people and throw out a camera at a price point that makes people giggle, sings like the hacked GH2, but with greater DR, lower noise floor, so on and so forth. It's not APS-C or Full Frame, granted, but you can use nearly any lens setup on that fictional camera and, well, we all know a hacked GH2 image on roids would be insane at 6~7K.

This is only hypothetical. I mean if Panasonic did release such a camera it's where I would go to private own something more than a DSLR. What I'm getting at? People actually just don't know unless they're working for those companies.

So maybe the C300 is outdated in October in terms of cutting-edge-technolgy. But in terms of image-quality and user-friendliness it will stay near the top of the list of cameras for at least 2 years now.
Click to expand...

I think I might've agreed with you on that before. I can't say I do now. Yes, it will probably be used by people (like all cameras) but as far as October... well... let's see what happens.

I'm not waiting on anything, personally. I'll just shoot GH2 or Epic today, not tomorrow. But, I'm always interested in the tech, and like to try different formats and cameras out.

Shoot it up.
 
So I DL'ed the night time MKIII ALL-I original files and did a few test grades on them:
ORIGINAL:
6995539221_d232c01c74_b.jpg

CC'ed
6995539335_e3d6cd9877_b.jpg

GRADE 1
6995539437_63ee1761ba_b.jpg

GRADE 2
6849416090_5de8f389d1_b.jpg

FILM GRAIN & SHARPENED
6849416280_5c0962ee2e_b.jpg

If these are indeed ALL-I mode (the bitrate seems to be at 71Mbps), they don't appear to be all that much better than Magic Lantern's own CBR or VBR bitrate boost hacks right now.
The files appear to break up in the same way, which is noticeable in the black areas (see the girl's jacket from the original and then only a SLIGHT curve was used to deepen contrast). This seems almost identical to the 5DII and 7D sensors so far.

The differences will probably be cleaner if they're transcoded to Cineform or DNxHD 10bit RGB. But, then again, if you still have to transcode, then why even use ALL-I mode in the first place?
From this quick test, it appears the only strong difference in the MKIII for video is in a high ISO noise upgrade. But the file flexibility is pretty much the same :-/
 
KahL said:
If these are indeed ALL-I mode (the bitrate seems to be at 71Mbps), they don't appear to be all that much better than Magic Lantern's own CBR or VBR bitrate boost hacks right now.
The files appear to break up in the same way, which is noticeable in the black areas (see the girl's jacket from the original and then only a SLIGHT curve was used to deepen contrast). This seems almost identical to the 5DII and 7D sensors so far.
Click to expand...

I remember reading from a Canon rep, when the All-I codec was introduced with the 1Dx announcement, that it wouldn't provide an appreciable quality over the h.264 - it's really meant just to be more edit friendly out of the gate. I mentioned this before (maybe on a different forum, I'm not sure), but was abruptly dismissed by the hopefuls.

Anyway, take the above with a grain of salt, but I'd advise people to keep this in mind.
 
cowpunk52 said:
I remember reading from a Canon rep, when the All-I codec was introduced with the 1Dx announcement, that it wouldn't provide an appreciable quality over the h.264 - it's really meant just to be more edit friendly out of the gate. I mentioned this before (maybe on a different forum, I'm not sure), but was abruptly dismissed by the hopefuls.

Anyway, take the above with a grain of salt, but I'd advise people to keep this in mind.
Click to expand...

Makes sense and honestly, seems even more disappointing.
With the higher bitrate codec, I would expect the quality to be much higher really. But, I'm guessing it's higher mostly due to be being intra frames instead of interdependent and doesn't appear to be higher quality frames individually.
There's no nice way to say it but: so far, this kinda' sucks. :-(
 
KahL said:
But, I'm guessing it's higher mostly due to be being intra frames instead of interdependent and doesn't appear to be higher quality frames individually.
Click to expand...

Exactly. To have a high quality intra codec, you need to back it up with a high bit-rate. Otherwise, interframe codecs are far more efficient at delivering high quality compression.


KahL said:
There's no nice way to say it but: so far, this kinda' sucks. :-(
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, but I feel like it's not really that surprising. This, and the 1Dx, are not cameras built for high-end cinema acquisition. That's what Cinema EOS is for. The 5dIII is a digital stills cameras first, with added video functionality second.

And to everyone that is estimating a $6-$7k price tag on any new Cinema EOS camera announcement, I would encourage everyone to take a good long look at the C300 feature list & pricing and think about what that means. Cinema EOS is built to cater to professional productions, and that rarely includes sub-$10k cameras at this point in time. I could be way off base, but that's just my cautionary soapbox for the day. Again, take it with a grain of salt.
 
KahL said:
So I DL'ed the night time MKIII ALL-I original files and did a few test grades on them:


FILM GRAIN & SHARPENED
View attachment 50198

From this quick test, it appears the only strong difference in the MKIII for video is in a high ISO noise upgrade. But the file flexibility is pretty much the same :-/
Click to expand...

The original shot is very warm, saturated, and contrasty. Not exactly the best source material for grading. Cinestyle should work a lot better on the MKIII because there's a lot less noise in the shadows. My theory is that cinestyle was developed for a MKIII prototype.

The look reminds of the D90 m-jpeg, a bit soft with some colour bleed. I actually really liked that look, not good for everything but it works well for my narrative style. For the clean/sharp look there's always the FS100 or GH2. The intra codec, 2 stops more high ISO, 60p, moire/aliasing, and rolling shutter improvements are enough for me to upgrade. Hopefully there will be a magic lantern hack that can push the bit-rate into driftwood territory. :p...
 
KahL said:
So I DL'ed the night time MKIII ALL-I original files and did a few test grades on them
Click to expand...

How do you know that's an original ALL-i file? The resolution is atleast quite wrong. Eoshd has better examples of all-i and they look way better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top