Canon 1DX-II vs. 1DC - Which one would you buy?

[photographer-at-large]

I'm very tempted by 1DxII, but am keeping an open mind as Photokina approaches.

Anyone know how Sony (A7sII, A7rII) autofocus compares to Canon's dual pixel in speed and accuracy?

[Luke Mason]

31 minutes ago, photographer-at-large said:

I'm very tempted by 1DxII, but am keeping an open mind as Photokina approaches.

Anyone know how Sony (A7sII, A7rII) autofocus compares to Canon's dual pixel in speed and accuracy?

Only A6300 comes close in terms of autofocus

[DBounce]

9 hours ago, Kino said:

Thanks for posting that Cinema5d review. It's really informative.

With Technicolor Cinestyle installed on the 1DX II, he achieves the exact same DR as the 1DC with C-Log (those final stops look much darker but they are there indeed: note that the 1DC is shooting at f5.6 while the 1DX II is at f11):

Of course, I'd love to see footage that demonstrates this in a side-by-side (like the one on the other thread). Honestly, I would not have believed it based on most of the 1DX II footage I have seen, but this is concrete proof.

Is no one else shooting with Technicolor Cinestyle installed on the 1DX II?

Moreover, the rolling shutter on the 1DX II has been reduced to 14ms, which is incredible! That's better than the FS7 and Ursa Mini 4.6k.

We are testing out Technicolor Cinestyle and recently shot a TV pilot with it. Our experience was that it allowed for more flexibility when it came time to color grade.

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

6 hours ago, Luke Mason said:

Only A6300 comes close in terms of autofocus

it comes close in terms of speed and accuracy but very far away in terms of usability. At least for video.

[karoliina]

The downside of the Cinestyle is that it discards values 0-16, it has lifted blacks. This is not good and it was a workaround for the h264 codec. However, in case of the 1DX mark II, such lifting of blacks is unnecessary. I have switched on using Marvel's Cine instead of Cinestyle nowadays. For me it seems to provide good results. I sold my BMCC and I still don't regret it. BMCC had more DR yes and better bit depth in raw yes, but by all other means the Canon wins. And actually I need to sometimes shoot some interviews/presentations etc. quickly (at work), and the grading step takes away time. The BMCC was not usable without using the Film mode (the in-built video mode was crappy). With 1DX2 I can use a picture style and settings (picture style settings and white balance and tone settings) that will give the final image I like and I can shoot the interview without doing any grading. If I just plug my Sennheiser ME66 into the mic input of the 1DX2, I can even record the audio with the one take and don't even need to synchronize that. This way I have more time on editing the clips than adjusting colors and syncing audio. And even if the subject happens to move, the subject stays in focus, thanks to DPAF. And FCPX ingests these mjpeg clips just like that without conversion (unlike BMCC raw files). It is extremely quick now to do a quick video at work with the 1DX2 - quality is nice and the productivity is fast. What I could complain. For serious cinema production with actual cinema budget, I would anyway choose a RED most likely, but since the 1DX2 has great image quality in 4K, it could be a B-camera (IMO). For indie and second hand work camera this one suits me very well as A-camera. 1DC would have not been any better for my use in this regard. And the Cinema5D review confirms my expectations as an engineer, a sane engineer would not implement two picture style systems in camera and a sane product manager would not allow two different competing systems where one is inferior to the another, to be implemented in the camera. Therefore in 1DC and the 1DX2 the C-log probably is yet another picture style which only happens to be locked. There probably is no separate engine that would implement it and there most likely is no difference between a flat style and C-log in the signal path in the 1DX2 or 1DC on that regard. It is possible that the C-log has built-in adjustments which are beyond the abilities of the picture style editor, but the engine is the same, and probably it should be possible to implement a picture style (without Picture Style editor, but more low level approach) that would provide exactly the same results as C-log. The picture style file format specification would be obviously needed for that and some knowledge on what to write to the file. The rest is then about writing a little program that does all that.

Magic lantern guys might have just the required kind of expertise. They could most probably reverse engineer picture style format and implement this. 

 

[Kino]

On ‎6‎/‎7‎/‎2016 at 4:09 AM, karoliina said:

The downside of the Cinestyle is that it discards values 0-16, it has lifted blacks. This is not good and it was a workaround for the h264 codec. However, in case of the 1DX mark II, such lifting of blacks is unnecessary. I have switched on using Marvel's Cine instead of Cinestyle nowadays. For me it seems to provide good results. I sold my BMCC and I still don't regret it. BMCC had more DR yes and better bit depth in raw yes, but by all other means the Canon wins. And actually I need to sometimes shoot some interviews/presentations etc. quickly (at work), and the grading step takes away time. The BMCC was not usable without using the Film mode (the in-built video mode was crappy). With 1DX2 I can use a picture style and settings (picture style settings and white balance and tone settings) that will give the final image I like and I can shoot the interview without doing any grading. If I just plug my Sennheiser ME66 into the mic input of the 1DX2, I can even record the audio with the one take and don't even need to synchronize that. This way I have more time on editing the clips than adjusting colors and syncing audio. And even if the subject happens to move, the subject stays in focus, thanks to DPAF. And FCPX ingests these mjpeg clips just like that without conversion (unlike BMCC raw files). It is extremely quick now to do a quick video at work with the 1DX2 - quality is nice and the productivity is fast. What I could complain. For serious cinema production with actual cinema budget, I would anyway choose a RED most likely, but since the 1DX2 has great image quality in 4K, it could be a B-camera (IMO). For indie and second hand work camera this one suits me very well as A-camera. 1DC would have not been any better for my use in this regard. And the Cinema5D review confirms my expectations as an engineer, a sane engineer would not implement two picture style systems in camera and a sane product manager would not allow two different competing systems where one is inferior to the another, to be implemented in the camera. Therefore in 1DC and the 1DX2 the C-log probably is yet another picture style which only happens to be locked. There probably is no separate engine that would implement it and there most likely is no difference between a flat style and C-log in the signal path in the 1DX2 or 1DC on that regard. It is possible that the C-log has built-in adjustments which are beyond the abilities of the picture style editor, but the engine is the same, and probably it should be possible to implement a picture style (without Picture Style editor, but more low level approach) that would provide exactly the same results as C-log. The picture style file format specification would be obviously needed for that and some knowledge on what to write to the file. The rest is then about writing a little program that does all that.

Magic lantern guys might have just the required kind of expertise. They could most probably reverse engineer picture style format and implement this. 

 

I'm very interested in your results with Marvels Cine Picture Style on the 1DX II specifically. Do you have any samples that you can post that demonstrate enhanced DR performance or roll-off relative to the standard or neutral profiles? All the Marvels samples online are with other Canon cameras.

Also, I believe C-Log has access to RAW sensor data before the point at which picture profiles are ever involved. I guess only the Canon engineers know for sure.

One thing we do know is that if the $6,000 1DX II had C-Log it would seriously threaten the entire Cinema EOS line. It may be that they have no plans for a 1DC II, such that their main objective here is simply to protect the overpriced C300 II and whatever 4K C200/C100 III they plan to release.

[DBounce]

12 hours ago, Kino said:

I'm very interested in your results with Marvels Cine Picture Style on the 1DX II specifically. Do you have any samples that you can post that demonstrate enhanced DR performance or roll-off relative to the standard or neutral profiles? All the Marvels samples online are with other Canon cameras.

Also, I believe C-Log has access to RAW sensor data before the point at which picture profiles are ever involved. I guess only the Canon engineers know for sure.

One thing we do know is that if the $6,000 1DX II had C-Log it would seriously threaten the entire Cinema EOS line. It may be that they have no plans for a 1DC II, such that their main objective here is simply to protect the overpriced C300 II and whatever 4K C200/C100 III they plan to release.

The 1DX Mkii with C-Log will not threaten the entire Cinema EOS line any more than the 1DC did.  It you need a hybrid you buy a hybrid, likewise if you need a traditional Camcorder with XLRs, NDs etc...

[Kino]

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

The 1DX Mkii with C-Log will not threaten the entire Cinema EOS line any more than the 1DC did.  It you need a hybrid you buy a hybrid, likewise if you need a traditional Camcorder with XLRs, NDs etc...

To be honest, the more footage I see from the 1DX II, the more I think it doesn't really need C-Log at all. There are a lot of excellent picture styles and post-processing looks out there already for every kind of filmic grade that you may want. Here are just a few examples that impressed me:

 

 

Moreover, the 1DX II footage is some of the cleanest I have ever seen from a 4K camera, let alone anything that Canon has produced in its Cinema EOS line:

On 4K image alone, it is a threat to the C100 II (no 4K), C300 II (overpriced), C500 (no internal 4K), UM 4.6k (would not have one for free), FS7 (XAVC-I is highly compressed at 240 Mbps), and even the Raven (too much noise) that I have ordered, all of which I would pass on to buy this camera.

When I need XLRs, I attach a separate audio preamp/recorder with a line into the camera. It's really not a problem and generally better than what you get from in-camera XLRs on a dedicated video camera. I would have to do the same thing with the Raven, for example, as the XLR module costs an extra $3K.

[Jimmy]

Great vids.... Colour and skintones look really nice (though the wedding grade is too magenta for me).

What's going on in the first video though? Looks like some really strange jello effect (post production stablisation, maybe?)

[Jaime Valles]

2 hours ago, Jimmy said:

What's going on in the first video though? Looks like some really strange jello effect (post production stablisation, maybe?)

Holy warp stabilizer, Batman!

[Leica50mm]

1DC all about the skin straight outa the camera 

 

[Kino]

1DX II colors and skin tones "straight out of the camera":

Good example of smooth and creamy roll-off here. Those picture style settings have a significant affect on color and DR. The number of looks you can achieve with the 1DX II are endless.

[AaronChicago]

As soon as the 1DC drops below $3K I'm in. Looking for a small hybrid B cam to the UM46k. The GH4 is a great camera on it's own but it's very hard to match up with Ursa footage.

 

[David Hung]

I own the 1DC since they have available stock for the general public, a second hand at around US$3k is sure worth buying. I the results may be even better than the ursa 4.6 

[Kino]

Here is a really impressive demonstration of shadow recovery on the 1DX II (video and blog by Jon Roemer):

 

I can start to see how Cinema5d got similar overall DR numbers in its testing of the 1DC and 1DX II. If you expose for the highlights, you have a lot to work with in the shadows and midtones before hitting visible noise levels.

[Luke Mason]

52 minutes ago, Kino said:

Here is a really impressive demonstration of shadow recovery on the 1DX II (video and blog by Jon Roemer):

 

I can start to see how Cinema5d got similar overall DR numbers in its testing of the 1DC and 1DX II. If you expose for the highlights, you have a lot to work with in the shadows and midtones before hitting visible noise levels.

I did the shadow recovery comparison in my 1DX II vs 1DC test, both using neutral profile and shadow raised drastically, they both show same amount of detail recovered but 1DX II showed a bit more chroma noise.

[Kino]

52 minutes ago, Luke Mason said:

I did the shadow recovery comparison in my 1DX II vs 1DC test, both using neutral profile and shadow raised drastically, they both show same amount of detail recovered but 1DX II showed a bit more chroma noise.

Yes, I remember commenting on that thread in favor of your 1DC results:

It was a very useful test. One thing I would like to have seen is shadow comparisons between the 1DC in C-Log and the 1DX II. I believe the ones you provided were 1DC Neutral vs. 1DX II, whereas the highlight test looked at 1DC C-Log vs. 1DX II Neutral. C-Log is not always the best for clean shadows on the 1DC.

What I'm seeing in pretty much all the 1DX II footage is much cleaner shadows than the 1DC in C-Log. The highlight roll-off might be more difficult to match, but the overall DR is very similar as portrayed in Cinema5d's Xyla test, where the DR is derived from Imatest software.

The Roemer video above speaks for itself. It's an amazing performance for the 1DX II or any DSLR for that matter.

A lowlight, portable and weather-sealed camera with 4K 60p and DPAF (and great rolling shutter performance) would be a nice complement to what I already have.

[Jaime Valles]

On 6/18/2016 at 1:48 PM, Kino said:

Here is a really impressive demonstration of shadow recovery on the 1DX II (video and blog by Jon Roemer):

 

I can start to see how Cinema5d got similar overall DR numbers in its testing of the 1DC and 1DX II. If you expose for the highlights, you have a lot to work with in the shadows and midtones before hitting visible noise levels.

Wow... This is fantastic.

[Liam]

That's pretty expected.. That's what you can get from the shadows from jpegs off any canon dslr. Is c-log really not much better?

[hmcindie]

Yeah, you can get a surprising amount of shadow information out of jpegs too. And those are 8bit files. People just never really seem to even try. But the good thing about the mjpeg codec is that it's basically a bunch of jpeg files. So the quality should be in the same ballpark.