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

[karoliina]

3 hours ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

****Would someone do me a favour and post full JPEG grabs from the 1DxII in Neutral/Faithful/Cinestyle (preferablly) going from zero to +7 sharpening step by step focused outside the window on any wide scene/buildings/street/anything really? Take one shot with the 120p mode too to give us impression on how it looks, plus a normal 1080p ALL-I 24p frame to compare to the 120p image. 


 

 

I can post later different sharpenings step by step. 
In my current footage and frame grabs, the sharpening slider has been pulled all the way to the left, ie absolute minimum.

I have not shot with the camera with different sharpening settings yet (than absolute minimum).

I do not see any sharpening halos on my frames so I am guessing that if there is some sharpening left, it is at least quite low. On per pixel level it is probably a little softer than BMCC in ProRes mode as BMCC had no AA filter and the 1:1 pixels are a little blurred on the 1DX2 due to AA filter and 1:1 pixel readout and no oversampling. Looking frame grabs from the video, they look about the same as still photographs with the camera and I am very happy about this (ie the video mode is not any worse than the still mode in other words, in previous Canon models, the video mode has always been inferior to still mode, for example with 5D2 the image quality per pixel and also including the dynamic range was way worse in video mode vs. still mode). 

I have also shot with "Prolost" style in Fine detail picture style (not neutral). However, I find the Cinestyle much flatter than that. But I think in many occasions the Prolosted Fine detail may be good enough (ie when not pointing to bright sky). Bright sky appears to require Cinestyle and also dialing exposure down to not clip the sky around the sun. I would say that sky clips more easily than on my ex-BMCC in raw-mode. About ProRes mode I am not sure, quite similar.

I will test the Prolostified Fine detail also saturation dialed all the way to minimum because with my experience the footage was still very saturated despite I had the contrast at minimum and the saturation at -2 (vs Cinestyle that is colorless in comparison, but not as colorless than BMD film - saturation will clip earlier than in BMD film for sure). 
 

 

"Prolosted" fine detail. Contrast: minimum, sharpening  minimum, saturation -2. As you can see, white highlight clips.
With Cinestyle the highlight would not have probably clipped.

I also own Panasonic GH4. I am liking the video I get from the 1DX2 maybe million times more than GH4. The GH4 feels now so disappointing that I am reluctant to use it at all. GH4 was supposed to be good, but the sensor in fact is worse than the BMCC sensor and in fact the GH4 processing makes the image mushy soft after around 1600 ISO, some forced noise reduction is going on that can not be turned off. All this kind of symptoms are absent on 1DX2 images. The only ISO from GH4 I can stand now is 200 and 400, all other ISOs look just bad. I would sell my GH4 if it wasn't so small. The only advantage of the Panasonic now is the size (handy to take places). Sadly it is so poor in especially anything else than sunlight, that it is not so handy when going to places. Instead I find myself carrying the heavy 1DX2 and 70-200 2.8L around instead of the GH4 that has the same focal length for fraction of the weight.

 

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, karoliina said:

I can post later different sharpenings step by step. 
In my current footage and frame grabs, the sharpening slider has been pulled all the way to the left, ie absolute minimum.

I have not shot with the camera with different sharpening settings yet (than absolute minimum).

I do not see any sharpening halos on my frames so I am guessing that if there is some sharpening left, it is at least quite low. On per pixel level it is probably a little softer than BMCC in ProRes mode as BMCC had no AA filter and the 1:1 pixels are a little blurred on the 1DX2 due to AA filter and 1:1 pixel readout and no oversampling. Looking frame grabs from the video, they look about the same as still photographs with the camera and I am very happy about this (ie the video mode is not any worse than the still mode in other words, in previous Canon models, the video mode has always been inferior to still mode, for example with 5D2 the image quality per pixel and also including the dynamic range was way worse in video mode vs. still mode). 

I have also shot with "Prolost" style in Fine detail picture style (not neutral). However, I find the Cinestyle much flatter than that. But I think in many occasions the Prolosted Fine detail may be good enough (ie when not pointing to bright sky). Bright sky appears to require Cinestyle and also dialing exposure down to not clip the sky around the sun. I would say that sky clips more easily than on my ex-BMCC in raw-mode. About ProRes mode I am not sure, quite similar.

I will test the Prolostified Fine detail also saturation dialed all the way to minimum because with my experience the footage was still very saturated despite I had the contrast at minimum and the saturation at -2 (vs Cinestyle that is colorless in comparison, but not as colorless than BMD film - saturation will clip earlier than in BMD film for sure). 
 

 

"Prolosted" fine detail. Contrast: minimum, sharpening  minimum, saturation -2. As you can see, white highlight clips.
With Cinestyle the highlight would not have probably clipped.

I also own Panasonic GH4. I am liking the video I get from the 1DX2 maybe million times more than GH4. The GH4 feels now so disappointing that I am reluctant to use it at all. GH4 was supposed to be good, but the sensor in fact is worse than the BMCC sensor and in fact the GH4 processing makes the image mushy soft after around 1600 ISO, some forced noise reduction is going on that can not be turned off. All this kind of symptoms are absent on 1DX2 images. The only ISO from GH4 I can stand now is 200 and 400, all other ISOs look just bad. I would sell my GH4 if it wasn't so small. The only advantage of the Panasonic now is the size (handy to take places). Sadly it is so poor in especially anything else than sunlight, that it is not so handy when going to places. Instead I find myself carrying the heavy 1DX2 and 70-200 2.8L around instead of the GH4 that has the same focal length for fraction of the weight.

 

Haven't used my A7Rii since I got the 1DX Mkii, so I know exactly where you are coming from. Not sure how someone can write a damming  review on a camera that they have never used? But I guess that doesn't bother some. After having used the 1DX Mkii for a couple weeks now I love it more and more. Zero buyer remorse. It's a fantastic hybrid, and a worthy successor to the 1DX and 1DC both of which Canon stated it replaces. 

[Kino]

9 hours ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

The notion about different film stocks is what's bothering me. These cameras have a different emulsion. And I simply like the 1DC one better. More filmic to me. While the 1DX-II ''emulsion'' looks modern, high-end, Red footage, it actually really looks like Red footage but with ''nicer'' colour. 1DC looks like F35/it's probably due to just the picture profile sharpening and contrast, or grain, highlight rolloff, blacks, or sensor architicture, I don't know... it's just a different film stock.

With Local customs it's in Red Raven/Scarlet Dragon territory actually. So need to be absolutely sure on how it works and looks as it'll be my A camera for years to come for my company. Planning to snatch up a Canon C100 original as a B-cam (very cheap) and will cut with the 1Dc seemlessly (C-Log and s35 1080p mode is IDENTICAL to C100 image). But finding a B-cam for the 1DX II sounds quite hard. How will I find a colour-matched still-high-resolution camera to the 1DX-II? Not willing to shoot C100 and 1DX-II in Standard EOS profile! And not willing to spend time grading either to match. C-Log will allow that. And S35 1080p mode will allow it even further. Another point you guys forgot for the 1DC. It takes a 3K 1.5x crop and downsamples it to beautiful 1080p with C-Log, very high quality. That again opems the door for the 1DC to be used in documentary/weddings/interviews while on the 1DX-II the only good mode is the enormous 4K one. So will be specialized for beauty/glamour shots.

I understand. I was trying to be as fair as I can to the 1DX II. I completely agree with you about the look of the 1DC. The 1DC image in C-Log will have a much softer roll-off so you will never get that high DR look with the 1DX II, which basically goes off a cliff at both ends. You are adding two stops to the highlights and two in the shadows. Moreover, you are also getting more detail and more color fidelity in the shadows. People seem to forget that C-Log also provides many advantages when color grading. The 1DC is simply in another league when it comes to producing footage that can be cut easily with high-end cinema cameras and that is why it costs $2,000 USD more. If you demand that type of cinematic image quality, you already have your answer.

[Kino]

8 hours ago, kaylee said:

welcome dude! im gonna check out that boring thread on dvxuser lol 

Thanks very much for your kind words. Our debate on this topic was spread out over several threads, but it's not too difficult to find. Some of the members who post here also post there so you will find at least some overlap.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Canon explicitly states to me:

"The Canon EOS 1D-X Mark II is not a successor to the EOS 1D-C. The Canon EOS 1D-C is a part of our Canon Cinema Line of cameras, therefore it offers the the Cinema Standard BT.601 colour space integrated in a Logarithmic Luminance/chrominance (Canon-Log) shooting mode. Also, being part of the Canon EOS Cinema Line, it has no limit of the maximum continuous recording time that can be captured in one take. The Canon EOS 1D-C is still in production and will remain being a part of the Canon  EOS Line-up, with no current successor released from Canon, as of writing this.''

This is from very very high up Canon Professional Services chain, not a rep/web Email inquiry.

So let's not forget the 1D-C DOES have a few benefits over the 1DX-II, it's not a predecessor. They're very valid for comparing due to these differences.

To remind: 

1DC over 1DXII

-Lesser crop/wider FOV (16mp 4K crop vs 20mp, 1.28x vs 1.35x I think)
-Unlimited record time. No EU TAX limit (which does increase the camera price by 10% alone. So 600$ just for that feature. 
-Canon Log and BT.601 Colour Space
-Higher Dynamic Range 
-S35 HD Crop Mode, super super sharp and C-Log applicable. Matching C100/C300 image identically. And offering a mode for getting very high quality video in small files vs 4K only

1DXII over 1DC

-Dual Pixel AF with Touchscreen tracking
-4K up to 60p vs 25p. 
-1080p up to 120p vs 60p. With in-camera conforming. 
-About a stop better high ISO performance in 4K DCI 24p (confirmed) 

So, which would you pick out of these?

The internal 120p + 60p + DPAF is killing me when you put it in comparison with C-Log and S35 mode. 

[Luke Mason]

1 hour ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

Canon explicitly states to me:

"The Canon EOS 1D-X Mark II is not a successor to the EOS 1D-C. The Canon EOS 1D-C is a part of our Canon Cinema Line of cameras, therefore it offers the the Cinema Standard BT.601 colour space integrated in a Logarithmic Luminance/chrominance (Canon-Log) shooting mode. Also, being part of the Canon EOS Cinema Line, it has no limit of the maximum continuous recording time that can be captured in one take. The Canon EOS 1D-C is still in production and will remain being a part of the Canon  EOS Line-up, with no current successor released from Canon, as of writing this.''

This is from very very high up Canon Professional Services chain, not a rep/web Email inquiry.

So let's not forget the 1D-C DOES have a few benefits over the 1DX-II, it's not a predecessor. They're very valid for comparing due to these differences.

To remind: 

1DC over 1DXII

-Lesser crop/wider FOV (16mp 4K crop vs 20mp, 1.28x vs 1.35x I think)
-Unlimited record time. No EU TAX limit (which does increase the camera price by 10% alone. So 600$ just for that feature. 
-Canon Log and BT.601 Colour Space
-Higher Dynamic Range 
-S35 HD Crop Mode, super super sharp and C-Log applicable. Matching C100/C300 image identically. And offering a mode for getting very high quality video in small files vs 4K only

1DXII over 1DC

-Dual Pixel AF with Touchscreen tracking
-4K up to 60p vs 25p. 
-1080p up to 120p vs 60p. With in-camera conforming. 
-About a stop better high ISO performance in 4K DCI 24p (confirmed) 

So, which would you pick out of these?

The internal 120p + 60p + DPAF is killing me when you put it in comparison with C-Log and S35 mode. 

haha, BT.601 is cinema standard colour space? It's an almost obsolete standard definition colour space. It's about the same as BT.709 but lacks a bit green coverage.

So it's either that person who told you this was totally incompetent or you made it up.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

What's Bt.601 and does the 1DC use it? Maybe it's responsible for some mojo? 
 

18 hours ago, Luke Mason said:

haha, BT.601 is cinema standard colour space? It's an almost obsolete standard definition colour space. It's about the same as BT.709 but lacks a bit green coverage.

So it's either that person who told you this was totally incompetent or you made it up.

 

[jcs]

10 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

What's Bt.601 and does the 1DC use it? Maybe it's responsible for some mojo? 
 

 

Nothing do to with mojo, almost exactly the same as 709: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._601

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

 From the 1DC user manual it seems the man is right, "HC: Rec. ITU-R BT.601", looking it up it's not a thing and actually it's surprising it's not using 709. It's not cinema-related I believe he meant C-Log. Interesting he did mention that specification when talking about the 1DC vs 1DXII anyway... 

[Kino]

The only Canon rep I know of who made the claim that the “1DX II replaces the 1DC” was Roger Machin of Canon South Africa in this interview with a SA YouTuber:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRXc6_OIswc

I remember this because I was the first to post about it on DVXuser, where I made the wrong conclusions at the time. In reality, it’s a completely off-the-cuff remark and I wouldn’t read too much into that considering several other Canon sources have since confirmed that these are indeed two separate camera lines.

For example Wasim Ahmad, who is USA Canon’s main spokesman for the 1DX II, made it very clear that Canon views the 1DC and 1DX as separate product lines that will continue simultaneously:

"This is the first 1D series camera that can do 4K aside from the 1DC, which is technically a cinema camera, but in the 1DX line this can do 4K . . ."

https://vimeo.com/165931499

[Kino]

It actually does not matter what 8-bit color space (709 or 601) the 1DC camera uses. What really matters is that we are talking about 8 bit Log (1DC) vs. 8 bit Linear (1DX II). That makes a world of difference in dynamic range and color grading. It's C-Log that allows the 1DC to achieve 12.5 stops of DR, which would be on par with the FS7 and C300 II: 

https://***URL not allowed***/canon-c300-mark-ii-review-dynamic-range/.

That amount of DR is incredible for almost any camera, let alone an 8 Bit DSLR:

http://www.thehurlblog.com/film-education-online-the-next-gen-in-digital-film-capture-canons-4k-1dc/

In the above article on the 1DC, Hurlbut also has this to say about the 1DC color space when grading the C-Log footage in post:

"The contrast ratio feels more like a hill than a cliff. Skin tones are absolutely beautiful. Vitality abounds with the Canon’s sensor and color space. I could care less that it is 8 BIT color. I am getting it very close, and Dave Cole, our colorist at Technicolor, had a huge range to deal with. Canon’s 8 BIT feels like 12 BIT with its color space and reproduction."

[Luke Mason]

1 hour ago, jcs said:

Nothing do to with mojo, almost exactly the same as 709: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._601

 

48 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

 From the 1DC user manual it seems the man is right, "HC: Rec. ITU-R BT.601", looking it up it's not a thing and actually it's surprising it's not using 709. It's not cinema-related I believe he meant C-Log. Interesting he did mention that specification when talking about the 1DC vs 1DXII anyway... 

BT.601 is tied to MJPEG codec, because this codec is so ancient, using BT.601 is the only option. 1DX II also uses BT.601 when recording 4K.

[Kino]

Ebrahim,

It's interesting to me that you are trying to decide between the 1DC and the 1DX II. I just don't think they can be compared at all.

In my case, I am trying to decide among the Raven, Scarlet-W, 1DC, FS7 and UM 4.6k (cancelled my order on that one before it shipped!). I currently have a deposit on the Raven, but I'm not sure if I will upgrade to Scarlet-W or switch to the 1DC. Those are the 1DC's "peers" in terms of image quality as far as I can tell from comparing camera files from all of them. And even if I end up with a Scarlet-W, I can tell you that the 1DC stands up to Dragon 5K footage in every way but the color palette. I would say that the 1DX II and 1DC actually resolve more detail than the Raven at 4.5K, owing to the aggressive OLPF or anti-aliasing filter that RED employs on these cameras. At 5K, the Scarlet-W draws even in resolving power, and, with the RAW "pseudo-16 bit" color palette, it's a much more attractive investment for me. But, still, I am continuously drawn back to the 1DC because of its amazing image quality, its portability/weight and its weather sealing. It's a very tough decision.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

18 hours ago, Luke Mason said:

 

BT.601 is tied to MJPEG codec, because this codec is so ancient, using BT.601 is the only option. 1DX II also uses BT.601 when recording 4K.

Makes sense. Searching indicates BT.601 is the Standard Def. colour space while BT.709 is the HD colour space. MJPEG probably developed in SD days and never expanded the colour space of its subsequent HD to BT.709. 

Manual mentions 1DC in 640x480 and 4K is BT.601. 

Just fun fact. 

Another fun fact, 1DX-II has an expanded and an even higher technology heat sink and management system than the one that was added for the 1DX to make the 1DC. The cooling system/sink is lighter at 80 grams vs the 135 grams hardware heat-sink in the 1DC but way more efficient. 

Guess it's for the 4K 60p and that 16p 6K bursts. 

18 hours ago, Kino said:

Ebrahim,

It's interesting to me that you are trying to decide between the 1DC and the 1DX II. I just don't think they can be compared at all.

In my case, I am trying to decide among the Raven, Scarlet-W, 1DC, FS7 and UM 4.6k (cancelled my order on that one before it shipped!). I currently have a deposit on Raven, but I'm not sure if I will upgrade to Scarlet-W or switch to the 1DC. Those are the 1DC's "peers" in terms of image quality as far as I can tell from comparing camera files from all of them. And even if I end up with a Scarlet-W, I can tell you that the 1DC stands up to Dragon 5K footage in every way but the color palette. I would say that the 1DX II and 1DC actually resolve more detail than the Raven at 4.5K, owing to the aggressive OLPF or anti-aliasing filter that RED employs on these cameras. At 5K, the Scarlet-W draws even in resolving power, and, with the RAW "pseudo-16 bit" color palette, it's a much more attractive investment for me. But, still, I am continuously drawn back to the 1DC because of its amazing image quality, its portability/weight and its weather sealing. It's a very tough decision.

They're very different systems, Scarlet and 1DC that is. What do you shoot? 

[Kino]

Currently, I have a BMPC-4K for my own projects and I don't want anything more to do with these massive CinemaDNG files or the rig that I had to assemble to carry the V-Lock battery (the internal battery lasts about 30 minutes). Its rear screen is also completely useless outdoors and the "black sun" issue has ruined many of my shots that cannot be fixed in Resolve. With its limited DR, I have to shoot this camera 12 Bit RAW instead of ProRes in order to recover highlights and shadows and that means that 1 minute of footage takes up 12 gigabytes! It's also very difficult to edit on Resolve unless you have two GPUs.

The 1DC would alleviate many of these problems and allow me to take my camera places where my current setup is impractical. I would also be able to use my slider and Steadicam and carry all this equipment to remote locations in the forest, for example, where I have gone in the past with smaller cameras. Add to that the weather-sealed body and my L glass collection and it's a perfect combination. If I keep to the Raven preorder or switch to a Scarlet-W, I would retain the RAW quality while easing up on the processing requirements for post. Both the 1DC and the Raven/Scarlet-W would offer a significant improvement in DR. And this is not even to mention the IR pollution on the BMD sensors . . .

[photographer-at-large]

I learned a few things today attending local Canon 1DxII event:

• confirmed that 1Dc is still in production

• face detection locks on closest face when there's multiple faces

• touchscreen is usually disabled when cable is plugged into hdmi port,

  but setting in hdmi menu allows touchscreen and hdmi monitor to both be active

[zuku]

How is the 1080p FF video in camera? is it as good as a C100 or more like the internal 5d mark iii video?

[jcs]

2 hours ago, zuku said:

How is the 1080p FF video in camera? is it as good as a C100 or more like the internal 5d mark iii video?

Not as good as C100, better than 5D3 (based on using the 5D3, C300 II, 1DX II). While sharper than 5D3, has aliasing and sharpening halos on edges (not as sharp as 5D3 ML RAW). I initially shot 1080p, but switched to 4K (even when delivering 1080p) as the difference in quality is major between 1080p and 4K downscaled to 1080p in post. The tradeoff is long-term hard drive cost. C300 II 1080p is very sharp and usable (50Mbps IPB), though can alias on very fine detail (haven't see that on 1DX II 4K scaled to 1080p yet).

[karoliina]

IMO the 1080 is the typical Canon video. Can't stand that mode. Difference in quality is large Canon 1080 video vs the 1:1 pixels from the jpeg engine on 4K.

Can someone experienced with C-log explain what is the difference of C-Log or other log picture style that can be made with picture style editor? Highlight rolloff indeed is sharp on Canon standard profile but who (if anyone else than some early 1DX2 testers) shoots with Canon standard. And how Cinestyle compares to C-Log and why C-log would be superior? I am an engineer what I am seeing is a gamma curve and then another flavor of gamma curve, what exactly would be the advantage of C-Log?

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

On 5/20/2016 at 0:52 PM, karoliina said:

IMO the 1080 is the typical Canon video. Can't stand that mode. Difference in quality is large Canon 1080 video vs the 1:1 pixels from the jpeg engine on 4K.

Can someone experienced with C-log explain what is the difference of C-Log or other log picture style that can be made with picture style editor? Highlight rolloff indeed is sharp on Canon standard profile but who (if anyone else than some early 1DX2 testers) shoots with Canon standard. And how Cinestyle compares to C-Log and why C-log would be superior? I am an engineer what I am seeing is a gamma curve and then another flavor of gamma curve, what exactly would be the advantage of C-Log?

The Canon Cameras since the 5D and 1DC have this writing sequence:

-The sensor inside the camera delivers the RAW data. This Raw data is 14bit RAW uncompressed data, with Dynamic range of the RAW stills mode. 12 stops on the 1DC and 11.5 Stops on the 5D and about 13/14 on the 1DX-II. You get this data and Dynamic range shooting in Raw stills mode. The sensor is capable of that large shadow/higlight range.

-This Raw sensor Data is downsampled to the video resolution number for liveview mode. On the 5DII, one of each three lines is taked and two are line-skipped. Ending up with 1080p. On the 5DIII, each three pixels are binned/blended together for 1080p (hence moire removal). On the 1DxII/1DC no downsampling occurs, the camera just takes a 4096x2160 window of the sensor (again hence no moire/aliasing). It's just like the pixel readout of the RAW stills mode, only cropped to reach 4K instead of 6K (hence 1.3x crop)

-This Downsampled but still Raw feed is delievered to the Liveview In 14bit full raw. ML was able to write this feed to cards thus giving the ML RAW journey. 

-Highlight Tone Priority is applied in this step to the RAW data. 

-When you Press record, the Canon cameras simply through away 1/2/3 stops of the highlight and shadow headroom, in order to give normally contrasty images as well as deliver small H.264 files. Then apples the Picture Style image tweaks (Sharpness, Contrast, Saturation), to the already compressed 8bit 10/11 stops data stream. 


On the other hand, Canon Log has access to the RAW data stream before the compression to lower DR, it compresses the full dynamic range of the sensor to the 8bit file (giving an extremely flat contrastless image with the full highlight/shadow room as the raw stills DR but in 8bit)

While Using a low contrast curve in the picture style stage simply lowers the contrast of the already compressed image to 10/11 stops. 

Result is, Canon LOG gives more DR. Cinestyle just gives a LOG image with no DR increase over Neutral/Faithful with -4 Contrast. So what's the point? It was made to make the Canon DSLR footage easily intercut with Film footage and high end cinema cameras. It also gives compatibility with LOG LUTs and so on. IT IS a LOG mode, it gives a logarithmic tone distribution but it's just 10-11 stops vs C-LOG that offers more by accessing earlier sensor data stream. 

With Cinestyle, the point where the highlights clip and shadows clip is identical to all the other Picture Profiles. You can test it. And you can't get more DR by designing any Picture Style because it's applied after the DR compression has been made. 

So Canon Log on the 1DC is pretty different vs Cinestyle Picture Style.

By the way, enabling Highlight Tone Priority adds a full extra stop of Dynamic Range to video mode to the highlight room, so make sure you use that all the time. It has access to the Raw sensor data and like it keeps a stop of highlight data and boosts the shadows a stop up to compensate, giving a stop more DR. Many avoided enabling it in fear of noise on the 550/600D but the 1DX-II and 1DC have low noise floor and no noise penalty. 

HTP + Cinestyle with minimum settings will give the highest DR and LOG image to grade. 


Hope it makes sense..