nikon_obsessed
Active member
luv the bashing, nice. definitely the worst camera on earth. kudos, guys!!:cheesy:
Canon 5D Mark III Uncompressed HDMI firmware update April: Texas Media Systems
- Thread starter delete
- Start date
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
For me it is the fact that Canon was telling people 1080 HDMI out for monitoring wasn't possible due to hardware etc so it had to be a lower quality (when even prosumer cams had this ability) and it turns out it was just firmware crippled and full HD plus uncompressed clean signal is indeed possible.
That isn't adding features from listening to customers that is purposely crippling features and only after competitors one up them or consumers complain do they slowly add features that were possible and should have been on the model from launch.
John Andersson
Well-known member
Wow, "unconpressed" gotta be the new feature to have. But what does it do 
When you say "Canon was telling people", what do you mean exactly? I mean Canon is huge company. Who was actually saying what and where? A lot of sales represantatives don't actually know anything design / hardware wise. That goes with most big companies.
Or is Canon like one guy going somewhere telling stuff? John Canon?
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
Canon Rep is who I was talking to. Sure the info could be wrong but I think its pretty poor form to have had the ability to output 1080 for monitoring on the 5DIII and not implement it when all other cameras in that range and well under did already. I asked this question as it was my greatest annoyance when using an external monitor on 5DII and the rep said it was a hardware limitation or they would have for sure. I know that doesn't speak for the whole company but the fact they left it out does speak volumes to how much they rely on the Canon userbase to keep buying the incremental increases. I walked away from Apple as a pro company for the same reasons.
For all those who have a 5DIII this is a great update. For many others they have moved on as its clear that Canon is only interested in giving the bare minimum and relying on brand name and past reputation. That said I do love the C300 so its not like I'm anti-canon or anything.
irvingharvey
New member
this is definitely a better late than never situation... does anybody know of a good flash recorder that uses SSDs, that is discreet/small? Would love to utilize this on run+gun shoots without lugging around a big external monitor/recorder.
Bassman2003
Veteran
Hello Terry,
Since Canon is hoping we wait or purchase the 5DMKIII now by announcing this future update, do you know, or will they give specifics about the output stream? Will we be able to record 720p60 or 1080p30 at full resolution and progressively?
If they can not provide this info who are they try to kid here?
Since Canon is hoping we wait or purchase the 5DMKIII now by announcing this future update, do you know, or will they give specifics about the output stream? Will we be able to record 720p60 or 1080p30 at full resolution and progressively?
If they can not provide this info who are they try to kid here?
Well duh. What do you think? Ever used HDMI before?
indiawilds
Veteran
My comment was more towards the people who will use this in professional productions along side their expensive C300s and other such equipment. 5DII without its external recording was used in many films for specific shots. Whether you choose to pan it or not will not deter people from using that. If you are using a hack, then it might freeze. Professional productions will not like to use a hack due to reliability issues. My comment may be seen in that light.
I hope Canon can also create a modification and provide a locking arrangement for the HDMI out of the 5D IIII, the way it is in c100. People who are interested should write to Canon and ask for it..
I hope Canon can also create a modification and provide a locking arrangement for the HDMI out of the 5D IIII, the way it is in c100. People who are interested should write to Canon and ask for it..
Samuel H
Major Contributor
"If you are using a hack, then it might freeze. Professional productions will not like to use a hack due to reliability issues." - I must say that modern Magic Lantern releases seem a lot more stable and reliable than many un-hacked cameras (don't even wanto to mention them, but: early RED cameras!).
That's all fine and dandy, of course, but I have issues keeping my HDMI monitor fed a good signal. I realize that recording out of HDMI is frought with difficulty (not only the wonky non-locking physical connection, but the face that anything other than 60i would have to be embedded with flags, putting you at the mercy of your recorder properly removing pulldown).
It's actually not a "duh"...HDMI is 1080i60 primarily, meaning there has to be flags/pulldown and there's even the possibility that the 5D3 will output 720p60 as 1080i60 like the GH2 does. It's not just a no-brainer.
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
Not EVEN worth the workflow hassle IMO except for a very few circumstances.
SmallHD does make a fine cable lock for the 5d2, pretty sure one for the 5D3 is on the way.
SmallHD does make a fine cable lock for the 5d2, pretty sure one for the 5D3 is on the way.
One product that makes a lot of sense if the 5D3 uncompressed HDMI out is decent (> 1620x910 actual resolution (measured on a resolution chart)) is the Pix 220i: http://www.sounddevices.com/products/pix220i/
It combines a monitor, true pro audio (Sound Devices!), and high quality 422 codecs (ProRes or DNxHD (both forms of high-bitrate MJPEG)).
I dig Canon products- have their scanners, MF laser printers, and many, many cameras. I championed post-sharpening for the 5D3. However, for the work I do, I will probably sell one of my 5D3's and get something that produces higher quality without external add-ons if Canon doesn't update the internal codec quality soon. Advertising 1080p (1920x1080) when the camera only produces 1620x910 actual resolution isn't cool. Many manufacturers do this: we need to reward manufacturers who advertise honestly by buying their products instead. Canon could differentiate product lines via 422 vs 420, 10-bit vs 8-bit, better codecs, pro audio vs. consumer, more frame rates, pro hardware connectors/view-finders/features, etc.
It combines a monitor, true pro audio (Sound Devices!), and high quality 422 codecs (ProRes or DNxHD (both forms of high-bitrate MJPEG)).
I dig Canon products- have their scanners, MF laser printers, and many, many cameras. I championed post-sharpening for the 5D3. However, for the work I do, I will probably sell one of my 5D3's and get something that produces higher quality without external add-ons if Canon doesn't update the internal codec quality soon. Advertising 1080p (1920x1080) when the camera only produces 1620x910 actual resolution isn't cool. Many manufacturers do this: we need to reward manufacturers who advertise honestly by buying their products instead. Canon could differentiate product lines via 422 vs 420, 10-bit vs 8-bit, better codecs, pro audio vs. consumer, more frame rates, pro hardware connectors/view-finders/features, etc.
EIREHotspur
Well-known member
Well the way I want to use it is in a LIVE environment.
I want to hook it up to show a roomfull of people the live view on a Projector or Large Screen TV.
Eventually I will use it with a Live Mixer.....the announcment makes me change my mind again about wanting a second 5D3.
I want to hook it up to show a roomfull of people the live view on a Projector or Large Screen TV.
Eventually I will use it with a Live Mixer.....the announcment makes me change my mind again about wanting a second 5D3.
I use Premiere Pro CS6 on Win7 & OSX- for the price and this application I'd use the Pix 220i: it's a compact field monitor as well as a top-of-the-line pro audio recorder with XLR inputs. I can play back ProRes and DNxHD in real-time (really the same thing, different flavors of MJPEG). To save disk space, support for 422 long GOP H.264 would be nice (more efficient than MPEG2). The nanoFlash is very tiny & cool- would be more interesting if it was 1/2 the price of the Pix 220i.