Does the 5DmkIII really sucks as many people say ?

robbie75vr

robbie75vr

Active member
I normally work with a GH2 hacked, all-I at 160Mbps, and I'm happy with it, but I need a camera that work better in dark situations (hotels) and possibly full frame or s35 and I need tilt-shift lenses.

I read many bad reviews about the 5DmkIII, what's your opinion?

Is it really too soft or is it realistically soft and adjustable in post prod ?

Is the All-I codec that bad as many say or... ?

I really like that camera body and being a future black magic camera user I would like to move to Canon systems to be able to share the same lenses.

My workflow normally needs grading, so it's important for me to have a robust codec in camera.

Thanks
 
yep, it is heavy, does not even give full HD, has no good monitoring, cost the hell, bad ergonomic for a camera etc...

but still a lot of user are crazy about it.
Frankly when 2 years ago there was nothing else to choose, it was ok. Today i would say there is not a lot to make it a top choice.
 
The GH3 should be revealed at Photokina in September. ( less than a month away ) This might be the better solution you are looking for. ( fingers crossed )
 
maybe I should wait for GH3, it's just that plasticky body.... I'm used to work with top line Nikons as photographer, grabbing that plastic body makes me feel like playing with a toy, but hey the videos are fantastic...

Today I tried the Canon 17mm tilt shift on the 5D and I felt in love, what a fantastic lens, for my work (architecture photography and video) it would be fantastic, but I want the GH2 quality.

Maybe the C300 but it costs too much. Blackmagic seems to be fantastic but when I need extra wide I'm in troubles again...

GH2 is light, good for my drone too... just the low light performance and the lack of tilt shift lenses..
 
And the other side...

It's a completely amazing camera. It takes all the good of the 5Dmk2 (still one of the best cameras under $3K for narrative film making) and improves many of it's few weaknesses (moire, aliasing, 12 minute recording limit, monitor resolution drop). If I had the cash to upgrade I'd do it in a second.
 
I had the 5DmII years ago, but after one week of side by side work with the hacked GH2 I gave the 5D back to the dealer.

I saw the moirè results in markIII, very good yes, no big problems about the monitor, my focus puller uses a smallHD DP6 and I use a DP4 EVF.

I just saw some 1080p videos with a poor resolution and many told me that the codec is not good for color grading workflow. Tomorrow I'm at a local shop and do some test myself side by side with the GH2.

I like the idea of 5DmIII because I do both videos and pictures for work, so a single body for all it would be very practical.

I love the 5D body and I like it heavy, but most of all I love the tilt shift lenses.... and the large choice of other lenses.

I work in DaVinci, so the BMCC is also very inviting, but that small sensor is way too small for me so BMCC so I still can't make a decision.

Let's wait and see GH3...
 
If you are concerned about resolution, the Mark III barely improves that aspect, though apparently the resulting footage responds well to post sharpening.

In my personal opinion, I feel like my work quality goes down a level solely due to shooting on my 60D whenever a client requests it, even though I always suggest the GH2 and send samples.

You can purchase the Redrock Micro Live Lens and use Canon lenses on the GH2 and control the aperture. I don't see why this wouldn't work with tilt-shift, but there may be something about mounting those kind of lenses on the GH2 that I don't know about. I was on a shoot back in April where we had a tilt-shift, and I had my EOS adapter with me, but never actually tried it on the GH2. Wish I had now.
 
Yep it works but inthe gh2 it becomes a 34mm.. I need 17mm, now I'm working with the Panny 7-14mm f4.0, excellent but no tilt-shift.
 
robbie75vr said:
Yep it works but inthe gh2 it becomes a 34mm.. I need 17mm, now I'm working with the Panny 7-14mm f4.0, excellent but no tilt-shift.
Click to expand...

Not quite as the GH2 is not a 2x crop, more like 1.87 (I just did a comparison between the AF100 and GH2 for my own purposes, and it's clear that the GH2 sensor is not as heavy of a crop). On top of that, I've never had much of an issue with the crop in the first place.

What are you shooting that the difference between 17mm and 31mm becomes a instant deal killer for you?
 
robbie75vr said:
Hotels interiors, aerial views with drones, documentaries.. 70% of my footage is made at 10mm
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you need something that super-wide then, that's where the 5D comes into its own. It's like a GoPro camera. The quality is pretty hit-or-m,iss for the most part, but it's more than acceptable when the alternative is not getting the shot. Getting a wide look with currently available focal lengths is something the 5D excels at. And if you don't have a 5D currently, I would really spend the extra dough to get the Mark III if you go that route.

Though if you're not in such a dire need at the moment, I would be very surprised that some wide tilt-shift for m4/3 doesn't become available at some point in the future, what with both Olympus and Panasonic at it.
 
Tomorrow I test a markIII with my hands and take some conclusion, some, because i also want to wait the GH3.

Does the markIII capture at 422 ?
 
nosys70 said:
yep, it is heavy, does not even give full HD, has no good monitoring, cost the hell, bad ergonomic for a camera etc...

but still a lot of user are crazy about it.
Frankly when 2 years ago there was nothing else to choose, it was ok. Today i would say there is not a lot to make it a top choice.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.
No full HD? What on earth are you talking about? Last time I checked 1920X1080 qualified as full HD.
Monitoring is fine, it gets the job done.
The image is noticeably better and cleaner than the Mark II, sharpens up remarkeably well in post and absolutely blows away the GH2 in lowlight.
The "grain" of the GH2 looks like crap above 800 ISO by comparison, and you are very likely to have banding either in your skies or on flat walls with gradations into the shadows.
The GH2 is great for detail with it's higher bit rate, but you really need to be on top of the hacks, choosing the right one for the situation. I love it for some things where I want more depth of field - I have two), hate it for others, but even with the best cards available it still occasionally locks up or gives error messages. When this happens I lose everything I just shot in that take. Thus I cannot trust it in pro situations, with talent and team costing serious cash.
The Mark III is dependable and a great compliment to the BMC camera, especially for wide angles and fast lenses. So regardless of what people may say, it is absolutely fine for what it does, and a worthy alternative to the GH2 for many situations.
 
To Yorclay's point I never hacked my MK2 and it would take a LOT to convince me to use a hacked camera (MK2, GH2, etc...) in a "pro" situation where it crapping out meant lost shots, major delays, etc... I just don't do it.
 
i buyed an mk3 ....After 2 days i brought it back to the Dealer ... the Resolution is Not only Bad in wide angle Shots....i Would say its unsharp and Even the Mark 2 is sharper!!
yes it can be improved a Little in Post but that just Takes Time
 
If many people who love MK III are considered few, but some people who dislike MK III are considered many, then yes it does.

But I like it a lot!
 
yoclay said:
No full HD? What on earth are you talking about? Last time I checked 1920X1080 qualified as full HD.
Click to expand...

So if I shoot MiniDV and uprez it to 1080p, that's full HD? It's well known the that Canon DSLRs only have an actual resolution of around 700 lines.

Monitoring is fine, it gets the job done.
Click to expand...

Outside of the 7D, 5D3, and T4i, the HDMI out is piss poor and does make a difference. I have a 60D so I have to deal with that **** every time I shoot on it.

The "grain" of the GH2 looks like crap above 800 ISO by comparison, and you are very likely to have banding either in your skies or on flat walls with gradations into the shadows.
Click to expand...

Banding comes from 8-bit processing, which the 5D Mark III does as well. And can you show us the GH2 at over 800 ISO comparison that makes it look like crap? I find the noise levels to be pretty similar up to 1600 ISO, however the GH2 has an actual limit there (higher ISOs are something of a cheat on the GH2).

The GH2 is great for detail with it's higher bit rate, but you really need to be on top of the hacks, choosing the right one for the situation.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. I think the differences are marginal. I've stuck with Sedna for now and it performs just fine in all sorts of different situations.

but even with the best cards available it still occasionally locks up or gives error messages.
Click to expand...

I have the best card available and have had zero issues outside of the file numbering bug, which is not that big of a deal.

When this happens I lose everything I just shot in that take. Thus I cannot trust it in pro situations, with talent and team costing serious cash.
Click to expand...

I have lost zero amount of footage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top