Canon vs. RED

Status
Not open for further replies.
squig said:
So we've established f/4-f/5.6 on the 5D is like t/2.8 on an S35mm film camera so what's comparable shallow DOF on the GH1 f/1.4 or f/2?
Click to expand...
f/2.4. The difference between a 35mm sensor like the 7D, and the GH1's sensor, is at most 1/2 stop. Now that we know the GH1's sensor is a lot closer to the 7D's sensor size, it's probably more like 1/4 stop.

For some reason people seem to think that a 4/3 sensor is a lot smaller than a cinema-sized frame. It isn't. It's very, very close to the same size; the cinema crop factor is 1.18.
 
squig said:
I'm seriously considering picking one up especially if tester cracks 24/25p m-jpeg. I've been wanting something with high bit-rate m-jpeg ever since I got the D90. I won't be ditching the 5D though.
Click to expand...
Believe me Anthony, your movie wouldn't be the same with a GH1 ;-) and definitely not better. To each its own. They are too much different acquisition devices. Even if the GH1 is decidedly a no-brainer as of today, any comparison of both outcomes is apples to oranges. It reminds me the video vs. film discussion threads. LOL
 
Barry_Green said:
For some reason people seem to think that a 4/3 sensor is a lot smaller than a cinema-sized frame. It isn't. It's very, very close to the same size; the cinema crop factor is 1.18.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Even though we cannot say the same as far as the full-Vistavision-format concerns.
 
acoelho1 said:
Raw is not a deal breaker for me but maybe they could provide a more robust codec. I also like the form factor although may not be ideal for video, I do like the fact that it doesnt draw too much attention.

No matter which camera system you decide to invest in, the next year or so should be pretty exciting for us in the market for a new camera.
Click to expand...

Ok, so the first two criteria: no moiré, and no line skipping....


Gh1.

(ok it has some moiré but whatever. and it uses pixel binning not line skipping, which is a better way to do things, but the implementation is far from perfect.)

But again, as Barry said, the AF-100 is this game changing camera you've described.

As for the low light performance and shallow DOF of 4/3rds vs full frame or APS-C....I actually like the 4/3 sensor better because it's more versatile. It can get you shallow DOF or deep dof, and it is actually sharp in low light, unlike the 5D which is soft as a puppy's fur until about f/11 on a wide lens, which makes it less viable for deep DOF in any conditions other than bright sunlight...not to mention the fact that it poops moiré everywhere at such high apertures. If you need crazy shallow DOF on a m4/3 camera you can always use a longer lens....in fact you should avoid using aperture to control DOF in most controlled shooting conditions....you can't exactly light for f/11 and f/1.8 in the same scene, but you can easily light for f/5.8 on a 14mm and 140mm lens respectively, or just light for f/2.8 and enjoy the fact that with a wider lens the GH1 can actually get you a workable amount of sharpness/deep DOF for your wide shots, etc, and still get you shallow DOF when you switch to the longer glass, whereas IME the 5D is gonna be soft even on wide lenses until a much higher aperture.
 
Last edited:
Even though we cannot say the same as far as the full-Vistavision-format concerns
Click to expand...
Unquestionably, if one needs the VistaVision frame size, the 5D is the king of that market. And it does make a difference for those who need it. Tattersall wanted that look, and so therefore the 5D was the right choice for "House", regardless of what other benefits other cameras could have brought to the party. If you need what you need, and one product offers it and another one doesn't, then ... the decision's made for you, right then and there.
 
Barry_Green said:
Unquestionably, if one needs the VistaVision (...)
Click to expand...
LOL You did it right. I forgot the second "V" and a database error didn't allow the early editing. I knew you wouldn't drop the typo* though :-)

* My second one today as far as I could notice... :laugh:
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
Unquestionably, if one needs the VistaVision frame size, the 5D is the king of that market. And it does make a difference for those who need it. Tattersall wanted that look, and so therefore the 5D was the right choice for "House", regardless of what other benefits other cameras could have brought to the party. If you need what you need, and one product offers it and another one doesn't, then ... the decision's made for you, right then and there.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately by the time House reached my TV it could have been shot on an iPhone for all that I could make out. SD broadcast (analog cable actually) is in a sorry state in a lot of the country...
 
Ben_B said:
Unfortunately by the time House reached my TV it could have been shot on an iPhone for all that I could make out. SD broadcast (analog cable actually) is in a sorry state in a lot of the country...
Click to expand...

ah that's too bad ... but you guys got internet right?
 
BradM said:
ah that's too bad ... but you guys got internet right?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just think that it's funny that with all this talk of "good enough for broadcast" we forget just how bad broadcast can look sometimes, or that the internet often looks better...which is ironic given that people say things like "oh this is fine for the web but not broadcast work" well...the web looks better.
 
Ben_B said:
Yeah, I just think that it's funny that with all this talk of "good enough for broadcast" we forget just how bad broadcast can look sometimes, or that the internet often looks better...which is ironic given that people say things like "oh this is fine for the web but not broadcast work" well...the web looks better.
Click to expand...

All season I have been watching broadcast footage shot on $49 web cams via the weather channel, also discovery channel's storm chasers used about 20 $249 go pro HD cams this year in addition to the z7's. Content decides if it's broadcast worthy not the camera model or price.
 
I'm not even sure if number 3 from the OP's list is even necessary, red's 'raw' is actually 4:2:0 and very highly compressed but for some reason they like to call it raw.

No, I'm not a red hater, just trying to keep it real.
 
ChipG said:
I'm not even sure if number 3 from the OP's list is even necessary, red's 'raw' is actually 4:2:0 and very highly compressed but for some reason they like to call it raw.

No, I'm not a red hater, just trying to keep it real.
Click to expand...


Chip, I don't know where you get your info, but RED's RAW is NOT 4:2:0.
 
Emanuel said:
Believe me Anthony, your movie wouldn't be the same with a GH1 ;-) and definitely not better. To each its own. They are too much different acquisition devices. Even if the GH1 is decidedly a no-brainer as of today, any comparison of both outcomes is apples to oranges. It reminds me the video vs. film discussion threads. LOL
Click to expand...

By the time the script is finished and I'm done raising funding and casting I think I'll be shooting with a much improved DSLR. What was Mattsand's quote, everything I want in a camera is available today just not in the same body?
 
Can we have a moratorium on the term, "game changing"? It had its place, the game changed, but now the adjustments are more incremental than anything.
 
ChipG said:
Sorry, It is 4:2:2 upscaled in some cases to 4:4:4
Click to expand...

RAW doesn't have the same amount of data for all 3 channels due to the bayer pattern. You'd be wasting bits using a "444" pattern. You really can't talk about RAW in terms of color subsampling because there is none. If its RAW, you've sampled all the pixels even if there are more green ones. Think of it this way, if the sensor is natively recording in a 422 pattern, why waste the bits by oversampling into a 444 stream?

For all intents and purposes, RAW data, before de-bayering, is actually a monochrome image. Color subsampling a monochrome image doesn't even make any sense.
 
I'd say the OP is also missing another important fix that needs to happen, and that's faster read/reset. The MX sensor has a read reset of 5ms, and film has an equivalent of 4ms. I've not seen any numbers on the DSLRs but they are SLOOOOOWWWW! The D90 was way worse than my 7D, but they are both WAY SLOWER than my HV30. These sensors need to be SERIOUSLY speed up. Right now, it is almost pointless to try and shoot with a long lens with no IS. The jello so easy, action shots are very difficult to pull off and I ALWAYS have to use my stabilizer (blackbird) because horizontal rotation makes for some HORRIBLE jello.

Additionally, I haven't seen anything that states the AF100 is going to solve the moire issues. From what I saw, it's the same sensor used in the same way but without the compression. Did they announce they were going to do things different and not pixel bin the same way? One thing nice about the GH1 sensor is the lack of rainbows that the Canons have, but still, I really cannot stand any Moire in the shots. Also, let's not forget aliasing as well. This is really bad too. I can't count the number of shots I have lost with very visible jagged lines in it.

I'll also say that I like the form factor of the DSLR for shooting video. I'm not a huge fan of the body of the AF100 they showed. I like the LCD on the back, I just wish it articulated on the 7D. That said, since the scarlet is getting pushed out AGAIN, I will certainly take a serious look at playing with the AF100 and see how it performs.

The Scarlet has other features that I really want that I haven't seen the AF100 or any DSLR have an equivalent system either

1) Remote control. The redmote comes off the back and works up to 100 feet away. When I put my DSLR up on a crane, I have to lower it, make changes, start record, raise it back up. It's a pain in the neck. With the Scarlet, you can just pop the remote off and completely control the camera from 100 feet away.

2) rack focus built in. Of course, I'd need to see this to know how well it works, but you can set focus points and then switch between them with the wheel at the back of the redmote, or, switch to the redmote pro and get a traditional focus wheel to use the same effect. I'd love to use this.

The problem with both the AF100 and Scarlet is neither of them are in stone, neither are fully fleshed out in terms of features that we know 100% are going to be here.

It's also not just about image quality, but the tools that help you with acquisition. Like on the 7D the lack of over/under exposure zebra stripping, the no live histogram on it. False color modes. These lists go on and on.

Until we can hold these cameras and use them and test them, the AF100 and any Scarlet variety are just a bunch of guesses and marketing slides. We can speculate all we want, but I don't trust any manufacturer to fully flesh out every detail I care about.

What I think we can all agree on is that these are exciting times in video. I LOVE where cameras are going, where costs are decreasing, and how the tools we get to use aren't limited to those with $1m budgets :)
 
shaocaholica said:
RAW doesn't have the same amount of data for all 3 channels due to the bayer pattern. You'd be wasting bits using a "444" pattern. You really can't talk about RAW in terms of color subsampling because there is none. If its RAW, you've sampled all the pixels even if there are more green ones. Think of it this way, if the sensor is natively recording in a 422 pattern, why waste the bits by oversampling into a 444 stream?
Click to expand...

Do not confuse 4:2:2 with Green:Red:Blue in the bayer pattern a description of 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 ect. can be found here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroma_subsampling
 
oh, and let's not forget the dynamic range of the sensor as well. The 7D in stills mode exhibits I think 11 stops of range, but in video mode it is substantially less in all the tests I have seen.

The MX sensor that has been tested so far exhibits 13.5 stops of range. That said, the Scarlet will be slightly less.

Not sure what the AF100 will be.

I personally like what I've seen of the FLUT technology used in the Red cameras where some of that extra dynamic range is used as a roll-off before you blow out the image. I hope Panasonic implements similar types of tools in camera.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top