Kimmy - 1DX mark II 4K video

Guess we have ourselves a strange paradox then.. While you guys are wondering why we think so poorly of it, we are likely trying to figure out what you guys(and canon) think is so "ok" about it.

I'll try my best to explain:

Technically,

1. There are blown highlights everywhere(even in very manageable conditions)
2. Sharpness was either cranked in camera, or abused in post. Either way it isn't helping
3. Jerky slider shots and virtually no camera movement(2 things this camera makes VERY easy)
4. Sound, where is it? Even though its a promo for a camera it doesn't mean you should just slap a sh!tty soundtrack in there and call it a day.
5. ND(also listed under subjectively) because cranking the shutter should be done where needed, not the entire video.

Subjectively,

1. The color seems ok in some areas, and overly saturated in others, like the tv's on display @ the mall
2. The soundtrack sounds like something sourced out of a late 80's nintendo game
3. Not a single piece of ND was used to control the shutter angle
4. Editing, as poor as the soundtrack is the editor made little to no effort to follow its cadencel
5. Here these guys are flying impressively threw the air and yet the most ruggedly built camera on this planet remains on the ground(ironic)
6. Finally( and most importantly for me personally). There is absolutely zero story, substance or even character to this piece( not sure about you guys, but I don't need a big budget to make something worth watching).


Combine those factors with an overall lack of creativity(given the subject matter) and one can see where a promo video representing one of the best cameras on this planet(guaranteed to be viewed by thousands around the world) should be.... Done better.

I would say the video that the KIMMY video(posted by the OP) is a much BETTER representation of what the mk ii is capable of in terms of quality and usability. About the only non-negative I see in the motocross video is that the entire thing was in focus, an impressive feat for any large sensor camera nowadays.
 
Well, I guess I was not judging it as a "piece" so seriously. Just looking at the image only. I can't say that I care about what Canon does or does not do to promote its cameras. I guess it is in the same category as so many things that go up to show cameras shooting some stuff.

Can't say I disagree with anything you said outside of my opinion of the Kimmy footage. While nicely shot I thought the highlights did not hold very well. But that could have been a choice as the shooter said he was just testing high ISO.
 
Bassman2003 said:
Can't say I disagree with anything you said outside of my opinion of the Kimmy footage. While nicely shot I thought the highlights did not hold very well. But that could have been a choice as the shooter said he was just testing high ISO.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, what part of the kimmy footage do think had poor highlight performance. The only highlight issues I see in the original footage is during the last shot, but there isn't a camera on this planet that would perform well in that situation.

Looking at :39 makes a strong case for the mk ii's dynamic range performance(and all without any kind of picture profile tinkering).
 
I think the sensor DOES have a significantly improved DR. The way I see it, it's being held back by the standard picture profiles.

In the beginning, at 12-15s, the outside area has this typical steep curve to it. You see it again at the end 1:45s where large chunks of the house wall outside gets this nuance less, blown out, clippy white.

Now, if shooting Neutral, I'd recommend using HTP. It will help you protect some additional detail (1 stop).

The last shot doesn't seem that hard to me. You expose for the daylight outside and let the window light the girl. Let the exterior go 2 stops over. With this camera, maybe close to 3 stops. I would have preferred the building not to clip that much. I would have taken what the window gave (Kimmy is clinging to it) and lifted the interior a little bit in post. I think there is quite a bit of room to lift the shadows with this camera if you shoot around ISO 400. I'm not basing that off the raw examples we've seen, but my own tests of what's already possible on the 1Dc.
 
Last edited:
AndreeOnline said:
I think the sensor DOES have a significantly improved DR.
Click to expand...

That is very positive news considering your experience with the 1DC. Thank you for sharing!

AndreeOnline said:
The last shot doesn't seem that hard to me. You expose for the daylight outside and let the window light the girl. Let the exterior go 2 stops over.
Click to expand...

Not so much a degree of "hardness", but I think we can all agree that the priority in the scene is the girl(mainly her skin tones). If one were to expose properly for the exterior(building in direct sunlight) then I think she would be well below two stops under and it would require an entirely different approach(ND film window/reflectors/flags or an expensive lighting package) to bring her skin back up to a useable exposure. Considering it was "shot from the hip" I think it looks excellent.

Another aspect of this that I really enjoy is the quality of skin tones. Aside from the auto-iso clip, the camera has captured beautiful organic skin tones(something many cameras struggle with).
 
Hi there,

Yes, I guess another way to look at it is that the sensor performs admirably under the circumstances. For me it's just that having had Canon Log in a very similar body with the same codec I feel they're not giving the camera all the tools needed.

Interestingly, I vented some of my frustration to my local Canon dealer (when I canceled my pre-order) and he had come across information stating that Canon have to consider many aspects of a cameras performance. Specifically, the issue had been raised where it could be a problem if every Canon sports still photographer had a camera that were able to simultaneously produce video of a quality above a certain standard (like the EBU broadcast tiers). Rights to video coverage is handled separately from stills photography and it's sensitive once you reach world cup or olympic games level.

I hadn't thought too much about this, and I'm not sure that's the case, but I can't really dismiss it either.

Anyway, simultaneously, the rumors around the 5D mkIV has turned a bit and it now seems it will be quite strong on the video side. We'll see.
 
AndreeOnline said:
the rumors around the 5D mkIV has turned a bit and it now seems it will be quite strong on the video side. We'll see.
Click to expand...

I read the rumors and whilst it is all speculation, I don't' see them giving it 4k60p. I can however see them adding things like 4k24p, waveforms, clog, dpaf, touchscreen etc. The only hope is that market share losses over the last year force them into a more progressive way of thinking. Really enjoy using my a7's but I missed the polished feel of my old canons.

Someone make a petition for MKIV/4k60p :Drogar-Shock(DBG):
 
Last edited:
I have not used the camera so I am in no position to say, but the DR seems to be strong from the shadows up. When I shoot RAW stills on the 5D I have always protected the highlights and was able to recover a lot of info in the mids and shadows. But that is with the help of 14bit info. The 1DX MKII looks to be a great performer from that point of view but only if the video recording has enough usable information to play with. It looks like Canon is fully aware of this and thus the hobbling we are used to. I would expect the 5DMKIV to have the same or more limitations.
 
AndreeOnline said:
I hadn't thought too much about this, and I'm not sure that's the case, but I can't really dismiss it either...
Click to expand...
It is indeed the case. The video/streaming/highlight packages to the major sporting events are sold at a steep price while the stills are normally given away as "news access" free of charge. The news organizations then agree not to publish any videos that infringe on the video/streaming/highlight holders rights.

Having said that, any decent news/sports photog should have enough sense not to "film" during an event that he is not authorized to "film". In exceptional cases, where sports stops being sports and starts being news, one can always use a short clip under the "fair use" doctrine anyway. In other words, Canon's withholding of C-Log from 1DX II at this juncture has less to do with the unseemly convergence of videography and photography and more with their desire to protect C300II.
 
DLD said:
In other words, Canon's withholding of C-Log from 1DX II at this juncture has less to do with the unseemly convergence of videography and photography and more with their desire to protect C300II.
Click to expand...

Which is weird because those photog's would not be shooting with a C300II anyway.
 
LeoGrey said:
Same goes for the c300/500 120fps modes.
Click to expand...

Yea, man...Canon does not know how to do HFRs. I don't get it.

Something is happening to the 120fps in these cameras where it just looks bad.

Actually looks like 720/120p too.
 
It likely has to do with how they are achieving such great AF / low light / compression / battery life performance. The 1dx / Cinema cameras have VERY FEW weak areas but there has to be some kind of processing threshold that prevents them from doing full sensor readouts due to cooling / power requirements. I think the camera is physically capable of it but perhaps image quality does not meet Canons QC. Even the fs7's image looks like junk above 60fps and so do many other cameras below $20k. The only exception I know of is bmcc / red but neither of them can shoot in low light and both have horrid battery lives(especially considering the size of the battery packs they utilize).

ps: This is all personal speculation but I don't think this threshold prevents the mk ii from achieving 4k60p, that is just a poor choice by Canon Inc.
 
I hear you. On a side note, the Blackmagic URSA V2 (not Mini) has really beautiful 4K/120fps.
 
LeoGrey said:
It likely has to do with how they are achieving such great AF / low light / compression / battery life performance. The 1dx / Cinema cameras have VERY FEW weak areas but there has to be some kind of processing threshold that prevents them from doing full sensor readouts due to cooling / power requirements. I think the camera is physically capable of it but perhaps image quality does not meet Canons QC. Even the fs7's image looks like junk above 60fps and so do many other cameras below $20k. The only exception I know of is bmcc / red but neither of them can shoot in low light and both have horrid battery lives(especially considering the size of the battery packs they utilize).

ps: This is all personal speculation but I don't think this threshold prevents the mk ii from achieving 4k60p, that is just a poor choice by Canon Inc.
Click to expand...

Just for info,
Since 4K60P on the 1dx2 is pixel to pixel(Cropped) and in mjpeg format, cooling and cpu requirement is much lower than 1080p format. if you do not need FF or 120P the 4k60p can achieve a much better result.


Just want to ask you guy who have try the new camera, what crop factor is the 4K, 1.4? 1.6?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top