Dublin's People: Phil's first 1080p24 short from the 7D

Truth is HDV while not the best codec is a decent one. I've pulled keys from Greenscreen easily on several shots with no HDMI out, just plan old HDV hitting the tape at 25Mbps. To have 44mbps or 35Mbps in a more efficent codec only makes things easier and allows for even smaller details to be easier to key. But until you have 4:4:4 at over 100Mbps you'll continue to have some green screen problems.

Right now I'm happy that the 7D looks to be the most efficent camera with the best datarate (for those into indie film, I wouldn't encouage videographers to have anything without a large depth of field). If anything, it'll force Panasonic and Sony to up their game. It's be nice to see an EX5 with 50Mbps and a 2/3 inch chip! LOL And it puts pressure on the RED folks to finish up the Scarlett and stop stalling.

As for monitoring, jeepers people. This 7D is cheaper than a DVX! I bought my first DVX for $3500! Now I get a cam and lens for under $2000. Heck I can go buy a Zacuto Rails set and monitor and still break out even with what I would have spent on a new DVX. These are easy fixes.

My main concern is the skipping of lines, only slight gamma curve change (through picture profiles) and the lack of HDMI out; which would have been nice especially with the Convergent Design Nano Flash. That would have made the 7D + Nano Flash + Monitor + Rails a $7500 mini RED. LOL

Panasonic DVX100 - 5 years ago - MiniDV (720x480 4:1:1 12Mbps), 24p/30p, Large DOF $3500
Canon 7D - 3 Weeks - Mp4 (1920x1080 4:2:0 44Mbps) 24/25/30/50/60p, Small DOF, Customizable Picture Profiles- $1800
Canon 7D + Zacuto Rails + Manhattan/Ikan/Marshall Monitor $1800 + $800 + $1000 = $3600

Be happy! Life right now is good! LOL
 
mico said:
This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566
Click to expand...

D&mn that was good. Everybody needs to check that out, a lot of fears just went out the window.

I've also thought about this for those who are concerned about alasing. Maybe it'd work, maybe not. What about shooting in 1080p and simply resizing down and back up. Maybe telling AE or Shake or Final Cut or Premiere to go from 1080 to maybe 840 and then back to 1080. Yes you'll loose a little resolution, but you'll have less aliasing and still higher than 720p resolution. And you only have to do it on scenes that have high aliasing in them, for more organic shots you probably wouldn't need to do anything. Heck the slow mo is in 720p.
 
…or do what McGregor suggested once and that is to add a quick blur and sharpening in post (that was specifically for Sony Vegas but I’m sure any NLE would work).
 
holy cow. that was amazing.
I'm soo excited for this thing to show up. Im really curious to see how things thing performs with a lower contrast.
 
Last edited:
mico said:
This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566
Click to expand...

matrix_Whoa.gif


The more I see, the more impressed I am. I wonder what lens(es) they used. I'm worrying less and less about the CMOS - besides the movement, which looks great, check out all those scenes with the blinkenlights (esp. 2:24). There's some skew evident around 2:29 (yellow fence) but it's hardly objectionable - if anything it's surprisingly gentle. I only see a few frames where it really breaks up, around 1:49, and that's on the bottom dip of a rollercoaster...I don't think I care, because I loved the way it looks in motion.

Note (for downloaders) it's been compressed to HDV - 1440 horizontal pixels with a PAR of 1.33:1. Why, I don't know, compression is pretty ugly on this one if you zoom in. You can really see it on the Moon shot around 1:13...good thing we already have Phil Bloom's material so we know this isn't the camera itself.
 
Jean Dantes said:
Thanks so much for the reply Philip!! :)

So, if you had to pick "an all rounder lens" (I can only afford one of these for the time being) between the EF 35mm f2.0 or the EF 50mm f1.4, you would go the 35mm, even though it's f2.0 (which I know is still fast)?

Is f2.0 enough for night shots (where the only lighting is street lights and moonlight)?

For your "Dublin People" video, what aperture where you using the most?

Again, sorry for the novice questions, I'm still learning! :) Thanks again :)
Click to expand...

I would go for f1.4 lenses every time. I stop down so the shallow DOF isn't so intense. I mostly shot at f1.4 to f2.8 depending on what I was after.
 
OMG!

I'm so glad i pre ordered 2 of these for my department! I can't wait to get my hands on one of these.

I just can't believe how astonishing these images are. This tool placed in the right hands is capable of damn near anything.

Holy cow I'm so glad to be alive in this day and age. Thank you for posting that link!

Dillon


mico said:
This makes me want to thank Canon again for this cam. Lots of vertical line and fast movements.

http://vimeo.com/6487566
Click to expand...
 
ydgmdlu said:
I wasn't talking about the codec. I was referring more to the hardware abilities.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I was talking about capability of making good images, which is a combination of codec+hardware+software and functions.

ydgmdlu said:
The 7D is based on the 50D. DxOMark measured the 50D's dynamic range to be 11.4 stops. I don't know how the EX1's dynamic range was measured, nor do I know how dynamic range might differ between still and video modes. But that's a number for you.
Click to expand...

Sounds great. But would nice to confirm it is the same in video mode.

ydgmdlu said:
The color space of the 7D is still 4:2:0. I don't know why you would think that either it or the video in general would be "more compressed." The level of compression is derived from the bitrate or the ratio between the compressed file size and the uncompressed file size. The 44 Mbps codec of the 7D is, technically speaking, LESS compressed than 35 Mbps XDCAM. Your idea that H.264 was created to be "half the size" of MPEG-2 is confused. H.264 is more EFFICIENT than MPEG-2, which means that, on paper, it does a much smarter job of throwing away redundant information for the compression process.
None of that has anything to do with color space. 4:2:0 color space compression is the same for any codec.
Click to expand...


Didn’t mean color, I was talking compression as in size. DV is 5 to 1 compression whether it’s 4:1:1 NTSC or 4:2:0 Pal.


ydgmdlu said:
The 7D's codec could only be inferior to XDCAM if it was a really bad implementation of H.264. It's either the same as or better than the 5D's codec. And the 5D's codec has proven to be very good. Users of both the 5D and XDCAM have said that the 5D's codec is significantly better.
Click to expand...

I never had any interest in the 5D so I’m really out of the loop here. Are there any sites dedicated to the 5D for filming, test or tutorials for the 5D from a filmmaking point of view or any other resources for filmmaking with the 5D besides the forums here? It would be nice to read more about it.

ydgmdlu said:
You know, Philip made the original video file available for download, and you can easily find raw 5D clips as well. So why not try working with the files and seeing for yourself how good the codec is?
Click to expand...

Will do.

ydgmdlu said:
Since the 7D presumably has the same or better codec as the 5D, you can estimate the green screen ability based on the tests that 5D users have done with their cameras. But I would imagine that every 4:2:0 codec has roughly the same capability, limited primarily by the codec's overall image compression efficiency.
Click to expand...

Yes sure and that’s where a real HD camera with SDI shines. You at least have the option to capture uncompressed for green screen or anything else you may need while with the DSLRs this options doesn’t exist. This is why I can see the 7D being an addition but not a replacement for a HVX200a or EX1.

ydgmdlu said:
Why is having HD video-out an "important part of getting good images on the set"? The 7D does standard-definition video-out while recording. That's good enough for critical focus and other checks using a decent monitor.
Click to expand...

Sorry but when using a 35mm adapter with the EX1 is VERY HARD to tell focus even on a 720p monitor, let alone a SD one. I can only imagine the same is true with the 7D since it has a S35mm sized chip. Having your image in focus is an important part of getting good images on the set". The 7D already has no focus assistant. Without the option of a HD monitor all you have is the 3” LCD. Not very reliable for motion picture work. Maybe for stills.

ydgmdlu said:
The gamma and knee and other image controls that you have in mind are primarily software effects. If you capture a flat, neutral image without over-sharpening or punchy contrast, then you have plenty of control over those things in post-production.
Click to expand...

Well, there’s some to be said about manipulating your signal at acquisition rather than in post when all is already recorded.



ydgmdlu said:
Lack of zebra stripes, focus assist, and other such features never limited the image quality of 35mm film.
Click to expand...

Well, I really do not want to go there. You want to compare film with compressed to death video? Film is a lot more forgiving, I mean A LOT than even uncompressed video, let alone highly compressed codecs like MPEG-2 and H.264.


ydgmdlu said:
In fact, none of the things that you mentioned have much to do with the camera's ability to get good images; they only HELP you get good images.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. If it helps to get better images, it has an edge when it comes to getting better images.

ydgmdlu said:
Do you think that the limitations of 35mm film technology make it a less capable image acquisition system?
Click to expand...

As I said above, don’t want to go there. Apples and oranges really.
 
philip bloom said:
I would go for f1.4 lenses every time. I stop down so the shallow DOF isn't so intense. I mostly shot at f1.4 to f2.8 depending on what I was after.
Click to expand...

Thanks you so much Philip for taking the time to deal with my novice questions!! Truly, truly appreciate it!!

I think my mind is made up then - a Canon 7D + EF 50mm f1.4 USM :)

Can't wait for this summer! Gonna be shooting day and night! Thanks again :)
 
Sttratos said:
Fair enough. I was talking about capability of making good images, which is a combination of codec+hardware+software and functions.
Click to expand...
That wasn't the impression that I got when I read your initial post. You were reacting to the quality of the the 7D's video, based on Phil's work here. You expressed skepticism at the camera's technical ability to capture such images. You said that it "technically shouldn't" look as good as the footage that comes out of the EX1/EX3. And why shouldn't it? The software abilities and functions that are so important to you only affect the usability of the camera, not the actual core image acquisition capability. And that was the point that I was trying to make by bringing up 35mm film. The mostly superior sensor and image processor of the 7D should give you EVERY REASON to expect not only comparable image quality, but BETTER image quality compared to the EX1. The only thing that would ruin its potential is the codec, which we have seen is not an issue.

Remember, you did not say that you were surprised that such a good quality image was so easy to obtain with the 7D compared to the EX1. If you had said that, then we'd be talking about usability concerns, not image acquisition quality.

Sounds great. But would nice to confirm it is the same in video mode.
Click to expand...
Here's a huge problem with your EX1 DR number. That number is not an absolute fact. It comes from the particular test that was done to determine it. Different testing methods yield different results. For example, RED's internal testing demonstrated that the RED One's DR was 11.3 stops. Other people have tested it to be closer to 8 stops. One guy's test revealed that it was 9.2 stops. So how is the EX1's DR in comparison with the RED One? Is it better or worse? I have a hard time believing that the RED One, the 5D Mark II (which someone measured to be 8 stops), and the 7D, with their much-larger photosites, would have worse DR than the EX1. I won't believe it until the same test that measured the EX1 at 10 stops is done to the 7D.

Didn’t mean color, I was talking compression as in size. DV is 5 to 1 compression whether it’s 4:1:1 NTSC or 4:2:0 Pal.
Click to expand...
I was also talking about compression in size, but the way that you phrased your post indicated to me that you were also questioning the color space compression (i.e. "chroma subsampling"). And again, 44 Mbps is, technically speaking, less compressed than 35 Mbps, no matter what the codecs are. Compression ratios and bit rates say almost nothing about how good an image will look. Those numbers are only useful in relation to the codec or algorithm that's being used. So not only is the 7D's codec less compressed than XDCAM, it's also more efficiently compressed. On paper, it looks like a huge win.

I never had any interest in the 5D so I’m really out of the loop here. Are there any sites dedicated to the 5D for filming, test or tutorials for the 5D from a filmmaking point of view or any other resources for filmmaking with the 5D besides the forums here? It would be nice to read more about it.
Click to expand...
http://www.cinema5d.com is the forum dedicated to 5D and DSLR filmmaking.

Yes sure and that’s where a real HD camera with SDI shines. You at least have the option to capture uncompressed for green screen or anything else you may need while with the DSLRs this options doesn’t exist. This is why I can see the 7D being an addition but not a replacement for a HVX200a or EX1.
Click to expand...
If you need uncompressed full HD capture through HDMI, then of course it won't replace any camera that can do it. A lot of us here don't need that, which is why we would choose a DSLR to replace a HVX200 or EX1 in a heartbeat. It's about personal needs. Sometimes people here forget that and try to make universal statements.

Sorry but when using a 35mm adapter with the EX1 is VERY HARD to tell focus even on a 720p monitor, let alone a SD one. I can only imagine the same is true with the 7D since it has a S35mm sized chip. Having your image in focus is an important part of getting good images on the set". The 7D already has no focus assistant. Without the option of a HD monitor all you have is the 3” LCD. Not very reliable for motion picture work. Maybe for stills.
Click to expand...
Well, it is subjective. Some people say that the DOF on the 5D is so shallow that it makes focusing excruciatingly difficult, while others say that it's not bad at all. The funny thing is that people in the GH1 forum are raving about the GH1's EVF over the 7D's lack of one. EVF is supposedly so important and beneficial for focusing, but it's not very high resolution either, is it?

Well, there’s some to be said about manipulating your signal at acquisition rather than in post when all is already recorded.
Click to expand...
Why is that better than manipulating in post? The only advantage that I can see is convenience. RED fanboys love to talk about how shooting RAW is infinitely better than "baking in" everything in the acquisition phase.

Well, I really do not want to go there. You want to compare film with compressed to death video? Film is a lot more forgiving, I mean A LOT than even uncompressed video, let alone highly compressed codecs like MPEG-2 and H.264.
Click to expand...
I was not comparing the quality of film to the quality of compressed video. My point is that film looks so good not just because it's so forgiving. It's because its image acquisition ability is superior to digital video. Digital video can't (yet) match film's resolution, dynamic range, and color reproduction. Yet film has serious usability difficulties compared to digital cinematography. So it's not really a matter of how "forgiving" a medium is. And again, usability has virtually no bearing on image acquisition quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top