Canon 5DIII RAW Tests on Vimeo - Compared to 35 mm Film & Red Dragon

unadog

Well-known member
I posted this elsewhere in a more technical thread.

For those interested in seeing how the 5DIII RAW with Magic Lantern holds up in a comparison with high end tools. Here is a test of 35 mm film, the Red Dragon, and Canon 5DIII Raw on Vimeo:

https://vimeo.com/88834695


Atlantis Season2 Comparison Camera Test


from Dale McCready​

A comparative test of various lenses and cameras for Atlantis Season 2 at Take2 Film in London.

Sitting in is Actress Katherine Beresford. 2nd AC Alex Parish.

Our main format to shoot is 35mm film but it's interesting to compare the other formats out there at the moment. I know the Alexa well so didn't need to test it but I wanted to look at how the smaller cameras would hold up and so tested my 5Dmk3 in Magic Lantern raw mode and also I was able to get the Red Dragon in also.

This isn't a precise test of latitude or fidelity, but a real world test of matching cameras to each other. The 35mm Kodak Vision3 200T film was shot on an Arri ST camera, processed and then scanned on a spirit before being imported into the Baselight system at Prime Focus in Soho, London. There Kevin Horsewood and I looked at getting a standard grade on the film. The Red R3Ds and CinemaDNG files from the 5Dmk3 were loaded straight into the Baselight and debayered from raw files as we graded. The .R3Ds were 6K and debayered using RedLogFilm.


Lenses used were Cooke S4s and Cooke S4 minis on the PL mount cameras.
Canon 40mm Pancake and Lomography/Zenit Petzval 85mm lenses were EF mounted lenses for use on the 5D.

Due to the differing sensor sizes the lenses weren't perfect matches in field of view.

Filters tested were Schneider Classic Softs, Tiffen Black Diffusion FX, SoftFX and Black ProMists.
In testing the filters I was looking at skin detail, halo (candle glow) and filter patterning showing up in the bokeh.
​



This is pretty amazing to me, and should quiet some of the chatter about what we can and cannot do with the tools that we have! :)

It is also amazing to see someone testing the $120 40 mm panckae alongside an $8,000 Cooke mini and a $20,000 regular Cooke! What amazing tools we have available today.



Also from the comments on Vimeo, from Dale McReady, about using the 5D3 in the past:

"I've used the MK3 with Raw cut in with Alexa on BBC's In The Flesh for some action sequences and insert/macro photography and it looked great.

Same deal here. For me it was about not being able to pick up the 35mm cameras and really throw them around. So could I use the 5D instead (which I already own) to get some more kinetic shots I couldn't otherwise? In the end I've been using it more on the gimbal and cable cam as a remote head camera, but did shoot some shots on a long pole for some fights too.


I was trying to sneakily show the producer where the state of the art is with the Dragon too, as though I love shooting 35mm, the bulk and weight of the cameras (and cost of stock) really makes me want to push in the digital direction now. I can get more for the money on screen and that's the bottom line for me as the DP. I'm not overly romantic either. Give me a camera that makes good pictures in the right situation and I'm happy."


​
 
Matching the Panasonic GH4 to full frame 5D Mark III raw - an EOSHD test

Matching the Panasonic GH4 to full frame 5D Mark III raw - an EOSHD test

Another 5DIII RAW post on Vimeo.

From EOSHD:

"Matching the Panasonic GH4 to full frame 5D Mark III raw - an EOSHD test"

https://vimeo.com/94057334
 
Thanks for posting. I have to say that the 5DMKIII looked kind of soft for RAW footage. (I only watched the first video). The stuff I have shot with my 70-200 L lens has had a lot more detail. Maybe it is the lens? or workflow?
 
While obviously not a total replacement for the film and Dragon, my take was that the 5D held up pretty dang well and showed that for those of us that can't afford to shoot with those cameras and stock, that we can produce footage that most viewers might mistake for serious film work, but hey, we all knew that anyway. That's why we are here, just trying to learn the rest of the story to improve our craft.
 
Yes, I agree. I does hold up well, but even better than displayed in the test footage. Have a look at Scott's post right above "Cherish the Moment". This is more like the level of detail with the 5D shooting RAW that I would expect.
 
I have to say that the 5DMKIII looked kind of soft for RAW footage. (I only watched the first video). The stuff I have shot with my 70-200 L lens has had a lot more detail. Maybe it is the lens? or workflow?

I read this last night and have been thinking about it, but I haven't had time to rewatch the video on my dual screen editing computer (I watched it on my non-calibrated 13.3 inch laptop, but wanted to share it right away.)

The 40 mm is a very sharp lens. I am assuming that they shot it wide open though, as they were looking for a very shallow depth of field.

My best guess is that they were attempting a very soft look, given that they were trying 4 different diffusion filters later in the comparison, but only on the 35 mm film and the Dragon:

Filters tested were Schneider Classic Softs, Tiffen Black Diffusion FX, SoftFX and Black ProMists. ​
In testing the filters I was looking at skin detail, halo (candle glow) and filter patterning showing up in the bokeh.


​

The second video does show some very sharp images from the Canon 5DIII RAW, in comparison to the GH4 4K video.

I don't have a 5DIII right now, just a T4i. So I am just getting up the learning curve on 5DIII RAW.

Quite an amazing thing with Magic Lantern. Although it does make sense, as the newer BMCC and similar sensors are not anything special technically. It is more a matter of software & firmware implementation, reading, and codecs.

Cheers!
Michael
 
Last edited:
my take was that the 5D held up pretty dang well and showed that for those of us that can't afford to shoot with those cameras and stock, that we can produce footage that most viewers might mistake for serious film work, but hey, we all knew that anyway. That's why we are here, just trying to learn the rest of the story to improve our craft.

Exactly! It is pretty amazing what these tools can do.

With all of the recent commotion in the industry, it is good to be reminded that the tools that we have available are not the limiting factor in our work. I get a bit obsessed and distracted with equipment every 6 months to year or so, when new cameras come out.

Then it is back to work with the tools at hand .... It is OK to be an engineer once in a while and obsess about gear, but in the end it is pretty boring compared to creative work.

Cheers!
Michael
 
Back
Top