Compare 5d3 ML to 5d4

G

ggrantly

Veteran
Hello Listers,

As the title suggests, I am seeking opinions comparing the 5d3 running ML to the 5d4. Resolution aside, the pros and cons of using them in the field would be appreciated.

TIA
Grant
 
5d4: touch screen tracking AF that really works, c-log, can use cheap SD cards, can be controlled remotely (i.e. useful on gimbal or as a static 2nd camera). Files don't need processing so quicker turnaround. I think 5D IV 4K file size is similar to ML compressed raw.
 
I'm not sure, I have a MkIII and a MkIV but my III is not running ML at present so I can't compare it. In terms of usability, the 5D IV is going to be easier. I just got my MkIV and intend to use it as a B cam to C100/C200/C300 cams. I mainly chose it for convenience. I've used the Panasonic and Sony mirrorless cameras and great as they are on their own, I find them too much trouble as a B cam in terms of colour matching / needing adapters when compared to just using another Canon camera.
 
5D3 ML has better color than 5D IV with stock picture styles (I have 5D3 and 1DX Mark II, similar to 5DIV stock color); I use custom picture styles on the 1DX II which optimize skin tones. I also use the 1DX II mostly in full frame, which is a little soft (slight aliasing sometimes) vs 4K (~1.4x crop). The full frame files are much smaller/more manageable, and the extra DOF is useful, especially with lenses such as the 24-105 F4L. And lenses such as the 50mm F1.4, 85mm F1.2, 135 F2, 70-200 F2.8 II (on the long end) have magical bokeh and other-worldly shallow DOF with full frame sensors. The other major win for 5DIV/1DX2 is touch/face-tracked DPAF: super, super useful.

DR is higher on 5DIV and 1DX2 vs. 5D3 ML, however all are sufficient for just about any modern shoot (only time you'll want more is shooting indoors with bright windows outside, etc.).

I've used the 5D3 + ML and I'd recommend the 5DIV shooting full frame and a custom picture style (e.g. Filmic Skin; not a big fan of log with 8-bit codecs, however Canon's 'real' CLog does provide a touch more DR in the highlights) along with DPAF. The only exception is if you want/need extreme grading in post, in which case 5D3 ML is much, much better (every frame is a RAW 10-14 bit still). If you have an aliasing issue and/or need more detail and super shallow DOF isn't needed, 5DIV 4K looks excellent.
 
I should mention that if your recording 4K on the 5D Mark IV -- it needs to be onto compact flash cards, not SD.

Yes, you can record onto SD -- but within a few seconds you usually end up getting a "Movie has automatically stopped recording" message -- I had a shoot delayed because of this while I ran out to buy some compact flash cards.

Save yourself the hassle and shoot onto compact flash for 4K recording.
 
Yeah. Fast UHS-I cards like the Sandisk Extreme Pros and equivalent will take 5D Mark IV 4K reliably. That's actually how I shoot my video on it (to SD) because large, fast SD cards are generally cheaper than large, fast Compact Flash.
 
5D mk III with ML shooting RAW is so much better image quality it's not even funny. But the 5d mk IV is sharper with the 4k (though with a 1.7x crop and huge rolling shutter). DPAF on the 5dmkIV is awesome too. I would choose the 5d mk III with ML and raw. But that's mostly for indiestuff and personal projects where I can fiddle. For proper work I would go with the 5dmkIV.
 
Does anyone know off hand what the data rates are for the 5d3 running ML raw vs the 5d4 recording 4k? I'm being lazy here, but maybe someone knows off the top of there head.

I am also curious about the 5d3 running ML but recording at 1080. The file sizes must be dramatically smaller. Has anyone tried it? How does the color science look. My entire workflow is still 1080, so if the 5d3 running ML at 1080 is an improvement over the stock 5d3, that would be of some interest. For what I need, or want, the RAW file sizes seem pretty unnecessary.

Thanks for keeping this thread going,
Grant
 
ggrantly said:
Does anyone know off hand what the data rates are for the 5d3 running ML raw vs the 5d4 recording 4k? I'm being lazy here, but maybe someone knows off the top of there head.

I am also curious about the 5d3 running ML but recording at 1080. The file sizes must be dramatically smaller. Has anyone tried it? How does the color science look. My entire workflow is still 1080, so if the 5d3 running ML at 1080 is an improvement over the stock 5d3, that would be of some interest. For what I need, or want, the RAW file sizes seem pretty unnecessary.

Thanks for keeping this thread going,
Grant
Click to expand...

ML Raw looks great. 14bit is hard to beat. Much nicer than the native Mark IV files.
IN my experience, very little color correction is needed.
The only drawback is that dynamic range is around 11.5 stops.
So make sure to hold the highlights at all costs.
 
ggrantly said:
Does anyone know off hand what the data rates are for the 5d3 running ML raw vs the 5d4 recording 4k? I'm being lazy here, but maybe someone knows off the top of there head.

I am also curious about the 5d3 running ML but recording at 1080. The file sizes must be dramatically smaller. Has anyone tried it? How does the color science look. My entire workflow is still 1080, so if the 5d3 running ML at 1080 is an improvement over the stock 5d3, that would be of some interest. For what I need, or want, the RAW file sizes seem pretty unnecessary.

Thanks for keeping this thread going,
Grant
Click to expand...

Grant, the image is way better but the workflow is more time consuming. The files are very large. So it is a limited use imho. 1080p24 is your only recording option. There are some new programs that read the .MLV format directly so you now only need to work with what comes out of the camera, CC or grade or not and export an intermediary file for your NLE.

I used it for a while as it gets rid of the green/magenta wrestling match in the 5D3 image. Since it is 14bit RAW you can add custom color profiles and bend the files a lot, just like a still workflow. But now that a camera like the GH5s is created, shooting 10bit 4:2:2 4k with an easier workflow kind of makes the ML RAW a thing of the past for me.
 
The images may be "nicer" aesthetically-speaking, but the 5D Mark IV's 4K is clearly of a higher resolution than ML if you're looking for more of a modern picture, IMO.
 
Bassman2003 said:
Grant, the image is way better but the workflow is more time consuming. The files are very large. So it is a limited use imho. 1080p24 is your only recording option. There are some new programs that read the .MLV format directly so you now only need to work with what comes out of the camera, CC or grade or not and export an intermediary file for your NLE.

I used it for a while as it gets rid of the green/magenta wrestling match in the 5D3 image. Since it is 14bit RAW you can add custom color profiles and bend the files a lot, just like a still workflow. But now that a camera like the GH5s is created, shooting 10bit 4:2:2 4k with an easier workflow kind of makes the ML RAW a thing of the past for me.
Click to expand...


I keep pursuing (casually) the Canon DSLR option since I have both lenses and cams already. I just don't want another camera system (GH5 for example). I have choked a little bit on the cost of a Mk4 just yet though since my existing still cams are still getting it done just nicely. I am still invested in Panny P2, but that market is changing. Seems moving forward, the only Panny P2 cams will be for ENG. Shame too, since I think a large sensor 4k version of a PX270 would be a great cam. Short of diving in deep for a 4k EVA1, or a 4k Canon Cinema Cam in order to use my glass, I am getting more comfortable with using DSLR and doing dual system audio. Fear has kept me from doing ML raw, but I probably should as it would give me more and better options. Eventually, a Mk4 is in my future.

G
 
It is a tough choice. I do more video work (PX270) than large sensor work but do use larger sensors as well. After using the MKIII with ML as well as some other cameras I have decoded to go the GH5 route and get an adapter if needed for Canon glass. Having the audio adapter with the GH5 is a big plus along with a great image. My still photography business has been unchanged for a while with my 5DMKIII looking just fine. What you should be told about the 5DMKIII and ML is that the data rate is right on the edge of what the CF cards can handle. They have come out with a compressed RAW version which might take the heat off but in 1080p24 you are recording at 95MBps and the CF cards top out at 95MBps with that spec. Using this on a job was scary to say the least. Checking to make sure the recording did not crash during takes is not cool. But that was the price of better image quality at the time.

I do not like the MKIV because Canon hobbled it with the massive crop on 4k and the crazy codec choice. I did not want to reward Canon with a purchase since I am still bitter about their claim of "uncompressed output" on the 5DMKIII when what we really got was an uncompressed stream straight out of the encoder :)

As an aside, I too would like to see a 1" P2 version of the PX270.
 
Just finished shooting some shots on the MKIV. 4K material shot with Clog. Matches very well with my Canon C100. Can use shots for a slow push in or dolly like move across for 1080p timeline. The MKIV is a good B camera especially for landscape and has new options for interval timer built in that I really like. I have a 5DIII and will keep it for dedicated timelapse shots for the time being. All of my Canon glass can be used for both cameras.
I would never use the MKIV for an A camera, interviews, etc. I would rent a Canon C300 II if I need 4K and use the MKIV for a B cam. I have also used the MKIV for stills and it is a step up from the 5dIII. A lot of small adjustments and added features. Just a few thoughts after the first time on a paid job.

Oh, the crop doesn't really bother me since I use a Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 for my C100 anyway. The crop of the MKIV is similar to the C100. Plus I hate lugging around additional recorders, so the limited output doesn't bother me either. Just depends on your needs. Also the crop actually helps when I need to shoot wildlife.

The codec is the same as the Canon 1DC which I have used in the past and was used to the file sizes, but I'm used to working on shoots that shoot Red raw files so....
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top