DBounce Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Rinad Amir said: Am in two minds either to get 1dxmii or wait for gh5 i know price diffrence but its just Canon colours that i love and PDAF Honestly, the GH5 seems to bring much to the table. Of particular interest is the 6k anamorphic mode. Still, I am skeptical of the low light performance given the smaller sensor size. Additionally, the 4k 60p mode may be less useful due to lack of 10 bit and the many comments about needing to capture color in camera if not recording in 10 bit. The IBIS is clearly a good thing. The flip out lcd view screen is another plus. It's a very interesting camera. I guess a large part of it come down to what you plan on shooting. Will you spring for the anamorphic lenses? If so it becomes a more appealing preposition. If not... and assuming you have the budget, then the Canon with it's DPAF will likely be better long-term. I personally feel more comfortable investing in Canon glass than in M43. I am kicking around the idea of picking a GH5 up. For me the compelling feature in the thought of finally being able to have some nice anamorphic shoots. But will these shot be in 10 bit? I seem to recall some saying that mode may be 8 bit? I will wait to see more footage before making any commitments. I think if money is an issue, then the GH5 seems to be the best choice. It is rich in video features. The image so far looks quite good. And it offers good versatility. The Canon is the clear choice of any action type shooting. The DPAF makes it easy to get focus under challenging conditions, and that can make for faster takes when recording video. In the end you might want to give both a try and then see which suits your needs best. Davey and Rinad Amir 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tugela Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 On 1/11/2017 at 0:28 AM, jcs said: Hey Shawn, the 1DX II 4K is soft. It's ok, it looks great! Even the GH4 4K has more detail, however the 1DX II has much better color control and the image looks more organic. To get full detail 4K we need an 8K sensor and good downsampling to prevent aliasing (Nyquist)... An oversampled 6K sensor should be enough to get sufficiently close to true 4K that any further increases would have negligible effects. Most improvement above that will come from things like bit rate and color compression, parameters which are independent of the sensor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, tugela said: An oversampled 6K sensor should be enough to get sufficiently close to true 4K that any further increases would have negligible effects. Most improvement above that will come from things like bit rate and color compression, parameters which are independent of the sensor. Nyquist sampling theory shows us we need to oversample the signal 2x in order to fully reconstruct the signal without artifacts. Shooting test charts will show the difference between 6K and 8K for 4K output. You're right in the real world it might not make much difference in most cases to the average viewer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tugela Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 On 1/11/2017 at 3:47 AM, Marco Tecno said: The NX1 downsamples from 6.5k (full sensor readout) hence I wouldn't call it "over sharp". It's simply as sharp as it should be coming from that high res. It's the only hybrid camera doing this from such a high res, AFAIK. IIRC the a6500 does as well, so does the GH5 (when it is released). Most new cameras (other than Canikon for 2017/18 at least) will likely be oversampled since the latest processors can handle it. Going forward resolution should not be an issue outside of the Canikon world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tugela Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Just now, jcs said: Nyquist sampling theory shows us we need to oversample the signal 2x in order to fully reconstruct the signal without artifacts. Shooting test charts will show the difference between 6K and 8K for 4K output. You're right in the real world it might not make much difference in most cases to the average viewer. Yes, but sampling is in two dimensions for the reconstituted image, not one. So 6K is 2.25x image sampling. A 8K sensor would have 4x sampling, which is more than you need. The optimal sensor size would be closer to 7K, so a bit larger than the one used in the NX1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 17 minutes ago, tugela said: Yes, but sampling is in two dimensions for the reconstituted image, not one. So 6K is 2.25x image sampling. A 8K sensor would have 4x sampling, which is more than you need. The optimal sensor size would be closer to 7K, so a bit larger than the one used in the NX1. You need to sample 2x for each dimension, 2x for X and 2x for Y. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Tecno Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 1 hour ago, tugela said: IIRC the a6500 does as well, so does the GH5 (when it is released). Most new cameras (other than Canikon for 2017/18 at least) will likely be oversampled since the latest processors can handle it. Going forward resolution should not be an issue outside of the Canikon world. Yep, but none of those is 28mp. One is 24, the other 20mp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 2 hours ago, Arikhan said: Tack sharp footage can be smoothed in post...BUT mushy, baked in pixel soap can NOT be sharpened as much... It's actually the other way around. Already sharpened images with contrast halos is harder to get soft than soft image (without sharpening artefacts) is to get sharp. If you zoom in 100% to a shot from a Red Epic / Arri Alexa, they have very little sharpening if at all. Compared to them a Sony A7r2 is sharpened to hell even with the lowest setting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joema Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 On 1/11/2017 at 9:48 PM, Shield3 said: ....or had the sharpness/detail slider down to 0 or what. I'm seeing very good detail in 4k on my 1dx II.... He did not mention what the in-camera sharpening settings were on either camera. If the answer is "the default", that isn't necessarily the optimal settings, nor an even comparison. The issue is how good can the video image be after post production, not out of the camera. I have the A7RII and am happy with it but just because the Canon looks less detailed out of the camera doesn't mean it's inferior. It could be specifically designed to render that image to avoid aliasing, with the intention of sharpening in post. Using deconvolution sharpening in post can recover the image clarity, but you can't recover footage with aliasing and moire. Given that choice I'd rather have an initially less-detailed image I can sharpen in post vs one with aliasing and moire that I can't fix. In Premiere, the sharpen effect uses deconvolution, whereas the unsharp mask uses contrast edge enhancement. For this reason I run my A7RII at minimal sharpening (called "detail" in the Sony documentation). The difference between these was once posted on Topaz Labs' web site: "Deconvolution is the process of approximately reversing the process that caused an image to be blurred. While unsharp masking increases the perceived sharpness of an image, deconvolution increases the actual sharpness based on information which describes some of the likely origins of the distortions when capturing the image. With deconvolution, lost image detail may be approximately recovered." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tugela Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 3 hours ago, jcs said: You need to sample 2x for each dimension, 2x for X and 2x for Y. Although a beyer array is comprised of 4 pixel groups, you are reconstituting color information from 3 channels, which means that optimal resolution will be essentially achieved with ~1.7x pixels in each dimension. More than that will yield trivial returns, less than that will have a real impact on resolution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew19 Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 4 hours ago, hmcindie said: It's actually the other way around. Already sharpened images with contrast halos is harder to get soft than soft image (without sharpening artefacts) is to get sharp. If you zoom in 100% to a shot from a Red Epic / Arri Alexa, they have very little sharpening if at all. Compared to them a Sony A7r2 is sharpened to hell even with the lowest setting. agreed. There is a difference between detail and sharpness. The sony has that larger radius, post sharpened look to it. 2 hours ago, joema said: In Premiere, the sharpen effect uses deconvolution, whereas the unsharp mask uses contrast edge enhancement. are you aware of any sharpen plugins that behave like this for FCPX? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew19 Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 also, who's sharper now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gt3rs Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 I also find a bit useless to compere the processed output and plus without knowing the settings. Best would be to compare the raw output but unfortunately both camera cannot shoot raw video (even if they would some cameras cook the raw...). It is a bit like comparing two models skins after 5 hours of Photoshop, what skin?:-) Another less scientific way would be to sharpen both in post at the max before it breaks apart and check the details but it will became quickly subjective. I also prefer to have the less sharpening in camera as possible and sharpen it in post and sometime even selectively. I'm testing out the Phantom 4 Pro settings and there at 0 sharpness (default) the 4k 30p file are so over sharpened that make no sense at all you need to dial down the sharpness at -1 / -2 and no sharpening in post to get good video. Anyway I never had a sharpness issue with the 1Dx in 4k, my wish would be a more detailed 1080p 120fps!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joema Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 11 hours ago, Matthew19 said: ....are you aware of any sharpen plugins that behave like this for FCPX? That is a good question; unfortunately most software vendors (inc'l Apple) do not publish how the technically achieve sharpening. I also don't see any methodical reviews of video sharpening software. On FCPX I use the built-in sharpen effect plus I have the BorisFX Magic Sharpen plugin and FCPEffects Sharpen plugin, and there's a sharpening effect built into Neat Video. I also have Premiere CC with its two different sharpen effects but I haven't done a thorough side-by-side evaluation of these. This is an important part of video workflow, esp for cameras (like the 1DX and 5D3 before it) which are apparently designed to trade out-of-camera sharpness for reduced aliasing, on the theory you can recover the sharpness in post. These would be good topics for some enterprising reviewer to cover: (1) Comparative evaluation of various video sharpening effects, and (2) Evaluation of post-sharpening footage from various cameras vs their resistance or susceptibility to aliasing and moire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikhan Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 @hmcindie Quote It's actually the other way around. Already sharpened images with contrast halos is harder to get soft than soft image (without sharpening artefacts) is to get sharp. OK...I can send you some shots with the 7D (Canon marketers and their unpaid henchmen call this brazenness "1080p")...Please transform the 720p ugly, mushy and baked in pixel soup in sharp footage...Are you just kidding? You never can "bring back" inferior footage with lack of resolution and of any minimal quality. You would be the first person I know who can transform 720p in quality 1080p+...Please show me an example for bringing back the Canon 720p "baked in failure"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 4 hours ago, Arikhan said: OK...I can send you some shots with the 7D (Canon marketers and their unpaid henchmen call this brazenness "1080p")...Please transform the 720p ugly, mushy and baked in pixel soup in sharp footage...Are you just kidding? You never can "bring back" inferior footage with lack of resolution and of any minimal quality. You would be the first person I know who can transform 720p in quality 1080p+...Please show me an example for bringing back the Canon 720p "baked in failure"... Sure. Here's my reel: https://vimeo.com/173797386 It contains mostly Canon 5d shots and there are also some Canon 7d shots here and there (even shot with the horrible 720p mode a couple of them). There are also some Sony shots there (fs7 / fs700 / a7s / rx10ii / a6300). Feel free to pick them out with timecodes if it truly is so easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ehetyz Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 4 hours ago, Arikhan said: @hmcindie Please transform the 720p ugly, mushy and baked in pixel soup in sharp footage...Are you just kidding? ... Please show me an example for bringing back the Canon 720p "baked in failure"... Goddamn some of you people get way too butthurt about Canon. 5DMK3 et al are still quite good enough for most things - at least regarding web content - provided you know what you're doing. If you don't, well, no camera is going to save you, is it now? Also no sharpening in-camera is always preferable. In-camera sharpening is pretty much an express ticket to videoville. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shield3 Posted January 13, 2017 Author Share Posted January 13, 2017 I shot this to show Mr. Dugdale what about 3 minutes moving the sliders around in Premiere did to my 1dxII footage (from standard). I think I oversharpened it slightly, but this was with the 35 1.4 @ F/4, ISO 800, 4k24. I also probably overexposed slightly but man it's hard to get any of my kids to sit still so you get what you get. WB set to 3300k. No comments please on the Youtbe page itself (but feel free to comment here). The end is a 200% punch in from the original footage. Looks far better than what Doug was showing. Shrug. Dave is a very nice guy by the way and I have been talking to him quite a bit via email. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted January 13, 2017 Administrators Share Posted January 13, 2017 16 minutes ago, Shield3 said: No comments please on the Youtbe page itself (but feel free to comment here). You broke the skintones entirely. Back to the drawing board with that one. webrunner5 and Geoff CB 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 33 minutes ago, Shield3 said: I shot this to show Mr. Dugdale what about 3 minutes moving the sliders around in Premiere did to my 1dxII footage (from standard). I think I oversharpened it slightly, but this was with the 35 1.4 @ F/4, ISO 800, 4k24. I also probably overexposed slightly but man it's hard to get any of my kids to sit still so you get what you get. WB set to 3300k. No comments please on the Youtbe page itself (but feel free to comment here). The end is a 200% punch in from the original footage. Looks far better than what Doug was showing. Shrug. Dave is a very nice guy by the way and I have been talking to him quite a bit via email. Shawn Umm you clipped the highlights to hell. Also the sharpening is terrible, with clear artifacts in his hair and eyelids. His skin looks like it was covered in chrome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.