Canon M50 mirrorless camera features 4K video

[webrunner5]

3 hours ago, Mokara said:

With the relatively low cost of media these days, why would anyone bother with compressed raw on a camera like this, especially considering the additional artifacts it introduces?

The crazy thing to me is that I can't find Codec Specs for Any of the modes on this camera. So I have no clue what data usage is on it. I know it shoots in MPEG-4 AVC, but at what data rate?

 I am Guessing AVC-Intra 100 in 4k.

[markr041]

58 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

The crazy thing to me is that I can't find Codec Specs for Any of the modes on this camera. So I have no clue what data usage is on it. I know it shoots in MPEG-4 AVC, but at what data rate?

 I am Guessing AVC-Intra 100 in 4k.

 MPEG-4 AVC / H.264.

120 Mbps long GOP for 4K 23.98.

https://downloads.canon.com/nw/camera/products/eos/m50/specifications/canon-eos-m50-specifications-chart.pdf

[webrunner5]

Your link is blocked on my computer??

[markr041]

2 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Your link is blocked on my computer??

Try this, which has the link in it.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/eos-m-series-digital-cameras/eos-m50-ef-m-15-45mm-is-stm-kit

Go to Specifications, and then see the link to the Full Specifications.

That first link was blocked on my computer too, even though I was looking at it!

[webrunner5]

I still don't see the data rates. I  guess I too am old. Is that the data rate for Raw?

[markr041]

4 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I still don't see the data rates. I  guess I too am old. Is that the data rate for Raw?

It's a pdf file that gives all the specs. We are talking video, right? there is no "raw" video for the M50. And there is no "bitrate" for raw stills. Now you are confusing me!

 MPEG-4 AVC / H.264. is the video codec (which is what you said), and the bitrate for that compressed long GOP codec is

120 Mbps for 4K 23.98. 

[webrunner5]

6 minutes ago, markr041 said:

It's a pdf file that gives all the specs. We are talking video, right? there is no "raw" video for the M50. And there is no "bitrate" for raw stills. Now you are confusing me!

 MPEG-4 AVC / H.264. is the video codec (which is what you said), and the bitrate for that compressed long GOP codec is

120 Mbps for 4K 23.98. 

Ahh then I am the one that is confused.  That new C-Raw files are for Photos not Video! Yikes, sorry about that. I guess since we are in a video forum I was centered on video Lol. My Bad. And the 120 Mbps for 4K 23.98 is really not too bad for a entry level camera at 23.98.

[markr041]

5 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Ahh then I am the one that is confused.  That new C-Raw files are for Photos not Video! Yikes, sorry about that. I guess since we are in a video forum I was centered on video Lol. My Bad. And the 120 Mbps for 4K 23.98 is really not too bad for a entry level camera at 23.98.

Yes, I was positively surprised. I thought it would be 60 Mbps, given there are so many other compromises made. The GH5 is "only" 150 Mbps for 60P.

[David Bowgett]

DPReview just posted their take on the camera, and yowzer; that's some horrible moire in the 4K mode! Probably worse than on any 4K camera I've ever seen outside of the A7Rii's full-frame mode.

I can understand not being able to put out footage as sharp as the A6300/A6500's oversampled 4K, but when it can't even match the G7 or D7500, something is clearly very wrong here (DPR themselves speculate that the footage is actually upscaled from ~3.3K).

[IronFilm]

17 minutes ago, David Bowgett said:

(DPR themselves speculate that the footage is actually upscaled from ~3.3K)

Classic Canon! 

[David Bowgett]

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Classic Canon! 

I could kinda understand it if they were upscaling on a full-sensor readout, since Canon do have form for that technique. But this massive crop and upscale combo just seems to be the worst of both worlds!

Oh, and that's assuming you've got the camera's electronic stabilization features disabled. On the highest stabilization setting, you're looking at a 3.6x FF crop and roughly ~2.5K of resolution upscaled to 4K.

[mercer]

3 minutes ago, David Bowgett said:

I could kinda understand it if they were upscaling on a full-sensor readout, since Canon do have form for that technique. But this massive crop and upscale combo just seems to be the worst of both worlds!

Oh, and that's assuming you've got the camera's electronic stabilization features disabled. On the highest stabilization setting, you're looking at a 3.6x FF crop and roughly ~2.5K of resolution upscaled to 4K.

I’m not defending Canon here or even saying the image looks good. There isn’t enough footage out there to have an opinion on but the upscale theory is just speculation, correct? I mean, why would they crop the image and then upscale?

Now the 1080p is supposed to be pretty good and a downscale of the 4K... so if the speculation is correct, then it would be a downscale of the 3.3K? And also isn’t the “4K” actually UHD which is 3.8K?

[David Bowgett]

2 minutes ago, mercer said:

I’m not defending Canon here or even saying the image looks good. There isn’t enough footage out there to have an opinion on but the upscale theory is just speculation, correct? I mean, why would they crop the image and then upscale?

True, there's no definitive confirmation as of yet. But when you compare the M50's 4K output to that of the G7 and D7500, which are both confirmed to output 1:1 from a 4K crop of their respective sensors, it's noticeably softer and more moire prone. I suppose it's possible that Canon are just using a really poor codec, but the upscale theory seems to make sense given that Canon employed it on their early VDSLRs.

As to why they'd be doing that, could be any number of reasons from heat dissipation to "product segmentation." We can only speculate.

Quote

Now the 1080p is supposed to be pretty good and a downscale of the 4K... so if the speculation is correct, then it would be a downscale of the 3.3K? And also isn’t the “4K” actually UHD which is 3.8K?

No, the 1080p uses the full width of the sensor, so it's probably the pixel bin and downscale technique that's believed to have been used on their sensors since the 80D came out. It's probably higher than full HD, but not 3.3K.

[Andrew Reid]

6 hours ago, David Bowgett said:

DPReview just posted their take on the camera, and yowzer; that's some horrible moire in the 4K mode! Probably worse than on any 4K camera I've ever seen outside of the A7Rii's full-frame mode.

I can understand not being able to put out footage as sharp as the A6300/A6500's oversampled 4K, but when it can't even match the G7 or D7500, something is clearly very wrong here (DPR themselves speculate that the footage is actually upscaled from ~3.3K).

Call it sympathy for the devil, but I am going to defend the M50 here...

The 4K quality looks same as 5D Mark IV. And the 1D C is comparatively 'soft' as well.

I don't mind it when the digital sharpness of 4K is turned down. In 1080p, it was a problem. In 4K, nope, I'm fine thanks for detail and don't mind it turned down a notch.

The moire issue... Probably very minor in real world conditions outside a chart.

The M50 is probably (on a technical level) the weakest debut of 4K video on a consumer camera... The specs are total shit vs Panasonic, Sony and Fujifilm.

However the 2.7x crop is exactly Super 16.

And you can adapt c-mount glass to it...

So look at it this way...

• As a cheap alternative to the digital bolex with nice Canon colour, EOS C-LOG and other Picture Profiles
• Cheaper than M5 with better articulated screen, same res EVF
• Super 16mm 4K video with Canon skintones
• A way to make use of all those lovely Super 16mm lenses (including the wide ones) without the vignetting you get on Micro Four Thirds
• It's cheap
• Great stills and Dual Pixel AF for stills... That 22mm pancake is quite nice too. And you can adapt EF glass to it.

So yes... Competitively speaking, it's a shit camera. But it's cheap. And it could accidentally be a nice Super 16 creative cam....

[Don Kotlos]

6 hours ago, mercer said:

I’m not defending Canon here or even saying the image looks good. There isn’t enough footage out there to have an opinion on but the upscale theory is just speculation, correct? I mean, why would they crop the image and then upscale?

Now the 1080p is supposed to be pretty good and a downscale of the 4K... so if the speculation is correct, then it would be a downscale of the 3.3K? And also isn’t the “4K” actually UHD which is 3.8K?

The 1.7 crop factor from a 6000x4000 sensor means that at best case their sampling a 3530x1985 area and scaling it up to 3840 x 2160, and given the aliasing performance I think they do use all this area. 

I actually don't think there is a lot of aliasing or moire, probably just the typical from 1:1 sampling with a weak antialiasing filter. And I also don't think that is a problem during normal shooting. The Fuji X-T2 has more aliasing artifacts than M50 for example but nobody complains about it.

The softness is typical for Canon and I actually prefer that from a digitally sharpened footage. 

My only concern for this camera other than the crop factor is the jello. I might be more sensitive to it than others but 4K from this camera should be used only with a rock solid tripod. 

Here is a tripod that is not rock solid:

 

[David Bowgett]

From the charts it looks to be about on par with the A7Rii in full-frame 4K in terms of moire and aliasing. Not bad enough to be a showstopper by any means, but enough to be a major pain given the right (or wrong?) situation.

Then again, odds are most people will be using the M50 in 1080p mode anyway, and the footage from that looks absolutely fine. If anything, it's probably the lack of DPAF in 4K mode that'll be the bigger discouragement to using it.

Good point about the Super 16 possibilities, though - I'd remembered S16 as having less of a crop factor for some reason. At any rate, it'd definitely be a more affordable solution than the Digital Bolex, and lack most of the pitfalls of the original BMPCC.

[Don Kotlos]

12 minutes ago, David Bowgett said:

From the charts it looks to be about on par with the A7Rii in full-frame 4K in terms of moire and aliasing. Not bad enough to be a showstopper by any means, but enough to be a major pain given the right (or wrong?) situation.

Sorry I can't see what you are seeing. To me it looks much better than FF 4K from A7rII or 4K from X-T2 and actually even slightly better than A7sII. Of course it is worse than The A6500 or S35 4K from A7rII/III but unless you are mainly shooting interviews with fine structured clothing I would not worry about aliasing/moire at all. 

[ntblowz]

Still in japan atm, I bought the m50 over a7iii because...

a7iii is out of stock everywhere  

 

[Andrew Reid]

Have you tried pairing it with EOS Utility?

Free copy of EOSHD C-LOG in it for you if you do

[kye]

10 hours ago, mercer said:

why would they crop the image and then upscale?

It might be a technical limitation?  

I'm just guessing here, but IIRC my 700D upscales 1920 from 1728 wide, which explains why the footage was so soft.. upscale + low bitrate codec = blurry mess.
The reason I think that the limitation might be technical is that ML on the 700D is also limited to 1728 wide in RAW, so I'm guessing that they just take every third pixel - the 700D sensor is 5184 wide, and 5184/3 = 1728.

The m50 sensor is 6000 wide, so if they took every second pixel it would be 3000 wide so 3k video upscaled.  This is my guess as to what it happening.