5D MKIII specs

that's a very fair point, Rick - now, if the 5D3 was giving us 12-bit RAW footage... or the price of the RED was $3500... or the sensor of the D-Bolex was at least m43...
 
Rick Burnett said:
So let me get this straight, taking Epic footage and having to debayer it in post is somehow okay, but applying sharpening to all your footage in post is not? Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I *want* another step in the process, but at this point, both the Epic/Scarlet and the 5Dm3 requiring post processing mean at that aspect, they are on par in terms of extra steps.
Click to expand...
Well put. Ya know, I never sat in the theatre and have my wife whisper this in my ear. "Honey, did they post sharpen that or is the camera that sharp? And, how many color bits are in scene"? She also didn't ask me if Paranormal Activity was shot on RED or DV tape. She also has never complained that her Iphone was only 420 color.

I'm really glad this forum isn't about quantum physics. Although sometimes I get the feeling it is...
 
Well apparently cameras follow Heisenberg's little known certainty principle, no matter how many cameras come out, everyone is certain to be unhappy about something. :)
 
dustylense said:
I think it's still too early to say what the "best" settings are. Lot's of testing and exploration to do. I hope 5dtorgb breaks it down and updates if needed. But thanks for taking time to enlighten us with your findings so far.
Click to expand...

Right- not best settings just recommended based on latest tests. If 5Dtorgb can fix macroblock issues, that could be helpful with ALL-I (see the back of the SUV upper red light: actually better in that region on ALL-I vs. IPB). Overall, when looking at the entire image full screen IPB, looks better so far (especially without the noise crawl of ALL-I).
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
@jcs - Thank you. Wow, that's a huge difference. Did Canon lower the bitrate from the 5d2 for the non i frame codec?
Click to expand...

The ALL-I clip was 84.8Mbps, and IPB was 30.4Mbps! It's possible IPB is a lower max bitrate, but it sounds like they added B frames, so that increases efficiency (5D2 had a simpler H.264 profile and no B frames running at around 38Mbps). A higher bitrate would be welcome, of course. At least one region looks a little better with ALL-I- the back of the SUV (top red light area: red light is better defined). Without the sharpening and pixel peeping, IPB looks better than ALL-I due to lower noise crawl (and looks more detailed). Perhaps if Canon reduced input noise to ALL-I that might help (however I'd prefer to see higher quality from a long GOP codec to save disk space- more efficient and very high quality (e.g. Canon's 50Mbps 422 MXF for the C300 and XF camcorders)).
 
K guys, consider this. Lots of talk about I frame vrs IBP. Try and drop the thought that I-frame is like a built in gh2 hack or something. I'm pretty sure that canon included the I-frame (and pretty sure they talked about it) so that you can get better more responsive playback natively in your NLE without transcoding. Even in your much hated FCPX (which I like but thats another 2000 pages of banter) if you ingest the media natively and scrub though the footage with the scrub tool, the I-frame is butter and the IBP is stutter.
I'm pretty sure canon explained that in some interview or write up. Just think about it.....

The things I'm finding without 400% blow ups (you dont blow up your TV to 400%) is that the inner details of I-frame are holding up better and sharper than they do in IBP. Just what I'm seeing. Increased noise? with this camera? Who cares. WHat, 10% perception more noise? Most seeing it on computer screens?
 
Last edited:
On my 12-core 2.93 box with a GTX285 + SSDs, IPB isn't too shabby- pretty fast, however ALL-I is snappier. The minor difference in editing speed on this hardware isn't worth the sacrifice in quality, however. The ~3x savings in disk space is also compelling.
 
jcs said:
On my 12-core 2.93 box with a GTX285 + SSDs, IPB isn't too shabby- pretty fast, however ALL-I is snappier. The minor difference in editing speed on this hardware isn't worth the sacrifice in quality, however. The ~3x savings in disk space is also compelling.
Click to expand...
Well, then that is why they have the option of both codecs, so that you can choose what suits you. You have a super computer. THey also have to think about the guy that edits lets say on a macbook pro only. Can't take that 12 core on the plane now, can you? It's why I-frame is in the camera, it's main reason is native smooth preview in the inspector of your NLE. On my MBP 17 with a $100 FW800 I see butter in I-frame. On my bigger system I see butter salted.
 
dustylense said:
Well, then that is why they have the option of both codecs, so that you can choose what suits you. You have a super computer. THey also have to think about the guy that edits lets say on a macbook pro only. Can't take that 12 core on the plane now, can you? It's why I-frame is in the camera, it's main reason is native smooth preview in the inspector of your NLE. On my MBP 17 with a $100 FW800 I see butter in I-frame. On my bigger system I see butter salted.
Click to expand...

Good point, however I generally see butter with my glasses on.
 
jcs said:
Good point, however I generally see butter with my glasses on.
Click to expand...

I just think there are advantages and disadvantage to each codec. I'm just hitting random shots in both and apply the same settings to each clip and I see things I like in Iframe and things I don't like. Same goes for IBP. But I-frame is not like what we think of a driftwood hack. It's just there mainly for easier playback with less computer graphic hardware strain.
 
You're calling someone out here, right?

dustylense said:
Well put. Ya know, I never sat in the theatre and have my wife whisper this in my ear. "Honey, did they post sharpen that or is the camera that sharp? And, how many color bits are in scene"? She also didn't ask me if Paranormal Activity was shot on RED or DV tape. She also has never complained that her Iphone was only 420 color.

I'm really glad this forum isn't about quantum physics. Although sometimes I get the feeling it is...
Click to expand...

You don't find it ironic that this is your next post?

dustylense said:
I think it's still too early to say what the "best" settings are. Lot's of testing and exploration to do. I hope 5dtorgb breaks it down and updates if needed. But thanks for taking time to enlighten us with your findings so far.
Click to expand...
 
Rick Burnett said:
So let me get this straight, taking Epic footage and having to debayer it in post is somehow okay, but applying sharpening to all your footage in post is not? Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I *want* another step in the process, but at this point, both the Epic/Scarlet and the 5Dm3 requiring post processing mean at that aspect, they are on par in terms of extra steps.
Click to expand...

It's simple Math really:

Epic + backup + grip truck + generator + crew + permits + etc

vs

MKIII

I'd rather put my money towards feeding my actors but that's just me. I'm suggesting you don't light, I just bought some 900 LED panels with v-mount batteries, they rock! If an extra post step is an issue you're not a professional, you're a GWC (guy with a camera).
 
Rick Burnett said:
Well apparently cameras follow Heisenberg's little known certainty principle, no matter how many cameras come out, everyone is certain to be unhappy about something. :)
Click to expand...

I'm happy as Larry.

Here's an idea, lets stop bitching and get creative. We're all very fortunate. There's nothing stopping anyone shooting a feature on a $600 camera except their own insecurity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top