Canon 6D, state of RAW with ML, and which is better?

C

crashwins

Active member
Before posting I spent a lot of time combing the forums to no avail. Last I checked, ppl were saying the 6D was a waste of time for video and ML RAW, but now it seems that tune has changed. Lots of good video up on Vimeo, but it's hard to say. Can anyone comment?


I'm a stills guy, but want to get into video some..not necessarily RAW, but good to have the option. I had the GH2 before and loved it, but I was a FF for stills so it would be cost-prohibitive to buy a GH2 body for video and a Canon FF for stills. So, 2 birds, 1 stone I hope...The 5D3 is a lot of money so I'm hoping to steer clear. So my choices are the 5D2, 6D, or 5D3. Unless convinced otherwise!


Thanks for reading!
 
My opinion: For somebody who already has a 6D, ML raw video is a nice bonus feature, even if very much limited compared to 5D3 raw video which is excellent. For somebody who is searching to buy a camera now, a 6D is not a good option (for raw video). If you like the stock H.264 image of the 6D, then its a good choice! Generally people are bashing the Canons for being soft with moire...etc...but personally I like the images Im getting from them. For some reason I was never a fan of GH images. Anyway the camera that cought my attention lately is the very promising Sony A7s. You might want to check it out! I mean...if you can have a 5D3 RAW like image out of it, without the hassle of the raw workflow in a price lower than a 5D3...hmmm sounds like a good deal right?
 
lyrov said:
Generally people are bashing the Canons for being soft with moire...
Click to expand...

For the OP. You probably already know from shooting Canon stills - but Canon files need sharpening!

For stills, there are often 3 levels of sharpening applied:

1.) Acquisition sharpening, to counteract the AA filter.

2.) Creative sharpening, for effect. Like sharpening the background, but slightly softening a face, etc.

3.) Output sharpening, to match the display device.


Back in 2004 with the Canon 1DsII 16 MP sensor, Canon published a White Paper. One of the recommendations for acquisition sharpening to counteract the AA filter was to use (300, .1, 0) Unsharp Mask in Photoshop! (I now find 300, .3, 0) :)

At the time I was a bit shocked, that seemed like a huge amount of sharpening! Now of course video JPEGs can't take quite as much sharpening as a RAW file, but the point is that some base sharpening is pretty important as a standard part of the workflow.


Most cameras that shoot JPEGs that amatuers like right away, "overcook" the image right out of the camera to look like a Velvia slide - high saturation, higher contrast, high sharpening for "pop." Most video shooters do the opposite - shoot wide, flat images to preserve data/dynamic range for grading in post.

Some of these are dated, but it is a start:

http://philipbloom.net/2011/09/18/pictureprofiles/


http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2011/04/29/technicolor-cinestyle-profile-available-for-canon-5dmkii/

http://marvelsfilm.wordpress.com/marvels-cine-canon/

http://prolost.com/flat


Basically, the 6D can do most of what you need until you can afford an additional $2K to $5K camera for video - Canon C100, GH4 with trhe dock, etc. It is proabbly a much better all around stills camera than any of the alternative video centric cameras.

Also, FWIW, I have been playing with a Canon EOS M body for video. Just getting started, but you can pick up a body with the Excellent 22 mmm prime lens for $250. The 18-55 mm also is a pretty decent lens for around $85 new on eBay. I love, love, love mine. Such a small package.

Cheers!
 
You can get perfectly decent video out of the 6D. It's like a 5D II, but with much better low light performance. And the stills are great. It's basically a matter of what you already have available. The 6D takes SD cards, which is great if that's what you already own. It's AF system is rudimentary, but it's fine if you are focus/reframe type of shooter. The one thing that none of the Canon cameras will give you is decent sharpness in video. This includes ML Raw. The 5D III can be sharpened in post to get a crisp image, but the 6D/5Dii will just start to look worse the more you sharpen.

I don't understand the desire to shoot in ML RAW, so somebody else will have to answer that question.

I second the EOS-M. I feel like every Canon video shooter should own one as a b-cam considering the price.
 
cpreston said:
I don't understand the desire to shoot in ML RAW, so somebody else will have to answer that question.
Click to expand...

That is a really interesting question! I ve recently started to expiriment with ML RAW on a 60D (limited in raw video but thats what I have). My conclusion so far is that you can have a much better final image compared to H.264. I cant tell you in numbers, but the DR is far better and the ability to push the image to the limits without breaking it is a big benefit if you do much grading. With a 60D I can shoot around 8 seconds max continously in 1728x648 which uprezes nicely to a 1920x720 (24:9) image. I believe the correct workflow plays a big role in the final image and Im still trying to find the best. Having said all that Im still wondering if the final image out of this, is so much better that an average viewer would notice. I ve seen amazing raw videos on the web (mostly from 5D3) but I ve also seen amazing videos shot on stock H.264 as well...!
 
cpreston said:
You can get perfectly decent video out of the 6D. It's like a 5D II, but with much better low light performance. And the stills are great. It's basically a matter of what you already have available. The 6D takes SD cards, which is great if that's what you already own. It's AF system is rudimentary, but it's fine if you are focus/reframe type of shooter. The one thing that none of the Canon cameras will give you is decent sharpness in video. This includes ML Raw. The 5D III can be sharpened in post to get a crisp image, but the 6D/5Dii will just start to look worse the more you sharpen.

I don't understand the desire to shoot in ML RAW, so somebody else will have to answer that question.

I second the EOS-M. I feel like every Canon video shooter should own one as a b-cam considering the price.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you entirely in terms of sharpness. The 5D Mark III is extremely sharp in RAW. Certainly as sharp as anything I see coming from the big boys. It is night and day with their in-camera codec as well. Aside from that the additional ability to manipulate a 14 bit image means that it can take a TON of correction.
 
AFAIK, you need to record to CF cards to get proper resolutions recorded in ML-RAW. The Canon SD controller doesn't allow the required bitrates.
 
Thanks everyone for chiming in here! Really appreciate it - why I really like this forum.


I was aware of the choking point of SD cards with the 6D in RAW, but was curious if that had changed. I’m guessing not and never will. I actually have 2 Lexar 1000X CF cards so going the route of the 5D2/3 isn’t bad on that point..


I guess, more specifically, I should ask: what are the current recording limits of the 5D2/3 in RAW? Last I was able to find out it was like 45 seconds for the 5D2 — I never could ascertain the limit on the 5D3.


Also, how do folks feel on the h264 between the 5D2 and 6D? I realize the latter has better low-light capabilities, but does the 6D have crisper h264 or is it more or less the same?


Ultimately, RAW is just something I’m curious of exploring and I agree with what some have said about workflow..But I also feel that may be getting easier in time. If I can get a good image out of h264, I’m game!


I imagine lots of people find themselves in a similar dilemma when they’re into stills. If I liked video alone, I’d probably grab a GH2/3, but I don’t like them for stills. And with the crop factor it’s more difficult to use the 35-85mm focal lengths (think old Nikkors, for instance) on the GH series, but definitely not so on Canon FF setups: my 35 is 35, but on the GH it becomes around 70. So having a 5D2 for stills and a Gh2 with a $1000 27.5mm Voigtlander would be very costly..I haven’t seen many non-M43 lenses able to generate an image quite like the Voightlanders on the GH2/3.
 
Regarding the SD thing: if it has changed in the last month or two, I wouldn't know. But it was an issue.
 
If you can scrape together the extra cash for a 5D3, or are willing to buy a used one, I'd recommend that. I have a 5D3 and love it. The best DSLR I've ever touched.
Soft on stills? I haven't seen that.
Soft on video? Compared to the oversharp video look of the GH, yes but correctable with sharpening in post. The 5D3 looks more like film than video to my eye.

The raw function is fun, and can be useful in a lot of situations but the workflow and data size are challenging. The rewards of raw are great though…the improvement in dynamic range and highlight recovery is impressive.
 
Thanks, Andrius..Definitely helpful. Could you comment on the recording length of RAW with the 5D3? I assume it has to be better than the 5D2.
 
No time to comment in detail. Just a couple of quick things:

I just saw this EOSHD comparison of the 5DIII shot in RAW to the G4. Pretty impressive looking on teh part of the 5DIII:

https://vimeo.com/94057334

Article here. I didn't wade into the comments too much. That isn't always the most useful thing to do. :)

http://www.eoshd.com/content/12750/5d-mark-iii-raw-versus-panasonic-gh4



I have seen some interesting workflow article on the Magic Lantern group on Vimeo. Link here to everything:

https://vimeo.com/groups/192344/videos



My "benchmark" price for a new 5DIII is about $2,550. Either from recent eBay sales, or from buying the kit with the 24-105 and reselling the lens for $600 +-.

As a serious still photographer for many years, the 5DIII is an incredible camera!! The auto focus alone in stills mode - that it shares with the 1DX - is enough to justify the camera.

For video, the new Dual Pixel Auto Focus on the 70D and C100 are very enticing. I know people sneer at auto focus, but it is an incredible creative tool in some cases. Especially with the touch screen and touch screen "focus pulls."

I would be inclined to see what is announced by Canon at Photokina in regards to the 7DII< perhaps a 6Ti, and other cameras that include the DPAF. That is a major future road map for Canon.

It is surprising that the roll out of DFAF has been so slow. I **assume** that Canon may be struggling to integrate that functionality with a newer generation of higher DR sensor?? Lets hope that is possible, and that it will be released with the 7DII. I have aslo heard that the 7DII was delayed from 2Q to 3Q due to lingering effects of the floods.
I think, too, that the Cinema EOS line - C10 & similar - has much higher margins than DSLR's, and that Canon has focused their energies there first with their newer sensor technologies.


Given all of that, I would be inclined to make shorter terms decisions and "make do" to a certain extent until August or September.

Obviously, if you have professional projects that you need to complete, do what you need to do. Personally, I would like to see Canon's "next step" with DPAF.


Although if you could get into a 5DIII for not too much money to play with RAW .... On teh other hand, there may be a few/many sales of teh 5DIII if teh 7DII has great auto focus, and especially if iot has better DR. There are a lot of "birders" and such who use the 5DIII who would prefer a crop body for the "reach" with lonmg lenses, etc.

Cheers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top