ALl-I Or IPB on MKIII?

marvinhello said:
Well, anything is possible, it's just we don't know how to dig that deep yet.

5D3 ALL-I mode uses H264 High Profile Level 5.1, this level supports the following formats:

1,920×1,080@max 120.5fps
2,560×1,920@max 51.2fps
4,096×2,048@max 30.0fps
4,096×2,304@max 26.7fps

Considering the thermal design and other factors, I think 2,560×1,920 @24fps looks doable, it's just a question of how?
Click to expand...

But is there any way to improve the in-camera sharpening algorithm? I don't care about any other of these other resolutions and no one will make this work anyway because the in-camera binning is done in hardware; I'm just going to scale down to 1080p anyway and I can't deliver weird formats to my clients and don't want to transcode for them. But that doesn't matter. The binning is done in hardware.

The 5D III resolves about 800+ lines of resolution, which isn't great but also isn't terrible, but the sharpening is awful so it looks even softer than that. Is there any way to change the sharpening algorithm? If you look at in-camera JPEGs Canon uses the same bad sharpening for everything whereas DXO and raw developer are better.... They sharpen video the same way. Is there any way to go from a dumb wide-radius USM to something just a bit better and without the halos? This would make a huge difference to many people because currently we have to set sharpening to zero and that's very soft.... Sharpening in post isn't an option for those who deliver raw footage to clients. Higher resolutions that can then be scaled down aren't options because the binning is done in hardware.

Please have the good sense to implement features people will actually use. Zebras, focus peaking, better sharpening, etc. There's less market for 1080/60p (though apparently some) and the higher resolutions area a waste of time because the hardware won't support them.
 
Thanks for the responses. xDDD

Did the run around testing, took the camera back. Maybe Magic Lantern will help the video side of this camera.
 
From the result of my tests:

Use ALL-I for 720p60 and 1080p24 with fast motion.
Use IPB with relatively static camera shots or when you can't see any improvement with ALL-I.

While it's possible to see a quality difference with ALL-I for fast camera motion when looking at still frames, it's not that easy to notice a difference when played back in real-time (except with 720p60: use ALL-I all the time). If disk space is an issue (editing on a laptop or SSDs), IPB quality is overall excellent at ~3x less disk space used.
 
I concur with JCS. Coming from a 7d, I was shocked how much better 720p at all-I looked. It's now actually usable :) We did some explosions and fast camera work last sunday, 5d held up great. All-I doesn't break up with fast motion and that's great.
 
It'd always been ALL-I. Find one expert who recommends IPB. Andrew Reid was very influential when he raised the 'fizzy' thing, it's just like when one person looked up in the sky, everybody looks up. But he never recommended IPB. IPB's for long events recording.
 
I don't need an expert to tell me what to do, if I can test it myselfm, or watch somebody else's tests. And the tests on this thread are pretty conclusive: on shots with little movement, IPB is cleaner.
 
marvinhello said:
It's going steadily, most of the basic shooting features are now working on 5D3, Canon changed the code on bitrate a lot so we are still working on that, so far we were able to push VBR up to 122Mbps under extreme ISO12800.
Click to expand...

So it's been about a month... Just wondering what kind of progress you guys have made and when you think you may have a release? Thanks!
 
Yes maarek, with 3 different audiences who'll each get different notifications.
I apologize for trolling. It won't happen again.
 
It's not a troll. The question still seems unsettled for many. The problem is that I think you have to go out and test it yourself and do what looks best for YOU - I see so many "conclusions" by folks and then go look at what they actually do with footage and it's ridiculously bad, so you can't trust their judgement. For myself, I just shot an interview with a 5DIII and used IPB. It looked amazingly good compared to first gen canon, but there's so many factors - lens, light, subject.
 
wallrc said:
It's not a troll. The question still seems unsettled for many. The problem is that I think you have to go out and test it yourself and do what looks best for YOU - I see so many "conclusions" by folks and then go look at what they actually do with footage and it's ridiculously bad, so you can't trust their judgement. For myself, I just shot an interview with a 5DIII and used IPB. It looked amazingly good compared to first gen canon, but there's so many factors - lens, light, subject.
Click to expand...

I feel ya.
Actually, I think the reason there hasn't been much chatter about this subject in 8 months is because the difference is so negligible, it's not worth talking about anymore. :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top