X-T3 vs A7III vs EOS R vs Z7 vs Pocket 4K - Video Quality Compared!

[tweak]

This sharpness test video is fucked.

[Andrew Reid]

5 hours ago, Jordan Drake said:

Max repeatedly stated that this was the first of several tests. I'd rather see his findings as he shoots them, then wait a month for a 40 minute video with all the results in every category. 

I am sorry i did not mean to critique your brofriend

The problem I have is that it's incomplete. There's no telling what sharpness was dialled into each picture profile. That makes a ton of difference.

There's no telling what the hell he did to the zoomed shots.

The EOS R just does not look like that at 100% crop. He's turned into absolute mush when you view this full screen (click it to enlarge)...

What codec settings? He doesn't say.

Was it IPB or ALL-I?

What bit-rate?

Did he shoot RAW or ProRes on the Pocket?

Did he compare the sharpness in the LOG profiles as well? Nope. That's how most filmmakers will use these cameras... In LOG! (Or at least Flat on the Nikon)

Nothing personal but I just didn't rate it.

And on top of all that, it's just pixel peeping. Overall results and cinematic quality matter more than resolution.

[wolf33d]

7 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Yeah but when you look at the so-called "super soft" EOS R 4K footage full screen in normal way it looks tac sharp. The last thing it looks is "super fuzzy".

When you enlarge a 100% crop to 400% like Max, yes it looks fuzzy.

I say... So fucking what?

That is not how people watch your stuff!

Ok you got one point. Yet it still got awful rolling shutter, awful crop, awful slowmo, all that for more money than Z6 and A7. 

Cinematic or not, a 1.7 crop jelly on screen is unnaceptable in 2018 at this price point. And there is nothing cinematic in this.

All things considered the best camera of this Max test factoring all aspects for video is the XT3 I think. Overall great detail, colors, codec, 10 bit, good AF, 4k60p and good 120p. 

Z6 Will probably be second closely followed by Sony. Canon is so far behind everyone else. Only thing they got is their AF, too bad for them competition catched up on that. Even on ergonomics where they were first they actually go backward with this shitty Touch Bar.

[Andrew Reid]

You got all that from Max's test - ONE SHOT!?

Trust me the EOS R image is not lacking. Yeah the rolling shutter and crop are downsides. Almost deal-breakers for many.

I suppose I will just have to show you. Will shoot some stuff and upload it as ProRes for people to play around with.

[Emanuel]

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am sorry i did not mean to critique your brofriend

The problem I have is that it's incomplete. There's no telling what sharpness was dialled into each picture profile. That makes a ton of difference.

There's no telling what the hell he did to the zoomed shots.

The EOS R just does not look like that at 100% crop. He's turned into absolute mush when you view this full screen (click it to enlarge)...

What codec settings? He doesn't say.

Was it IPB or ALL-I?

What bit-rate?

Did he shoot RAW or ProRes on the Pocket?

Did he compare the sharpness in the LOG profiles as well? Nope. That's how most filmmakers will use these cameras... In LOG! (Or at least Flat on the Nikon)

Nothing personal but I just didn't rate it.

And on top of all that, it's just pixel peeping. Overall results and cinematic quality matter more than resolution.

Man, I knew I appreciate your insights. But you took exactly my thoughts this time when I watched it, even before this thread to have popped up. So I guess we cannot go wrong, both of us, in any way whatsoever... ; -)

[gelaxstudio]

19 hours ago, Django said:

@Robert Collins even better:  it does object tracking in continuous, so you can select the eye (given you are close enough) and it'll track it. YMMV, but it's pretty dope feature.

the image in focus looks like out of focus ，because it is still line-skipping

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am sorry i did not mean to critique your brofriend

The problem I have is that it's incomplete. There's no telling what sharpness was dialled into each picture profile. That makes a ton of difference.

There's no telling what the hell he did to the zoomed shots.

The EOS R just does not look like that at 100% crop. He's turned into absolute mush when you view this full screen (click it to enlarge)...

What codec settings? He doesn't say.

Was it IPB or ALL-I?

What bit-rate?

Did he shoot RAW or ProRes on the Pocket?

Did he compare the sharpness in the LOG profiles as well? Nope. That's how most filmmakers will use these cameras... In LOG! (Or at least Flat on the Nikon)

Nothing personal but I just didn't rate it.

And on top of all that, it's just pixel peeping. Overall results and cinematic quality matter more than resolution.

I think max is using the right settings，if using log，some camera will lose resolution（like the A7III）

Sampling is what real matter, seriously,the C100 and the old GH2 only 24M bit-rate,but producing mush better image than any canon DSLR

Resolution is not  sharpness,just been proved by the z7 in this video,the in-camera sharpping does not show more usable details

The fact is canon still using line-skipping for the eos r,which is a waste of the sensor and the lens,if GH series is using line-skipping,I think no one will buy it and say it is  cinematic

[Lars Steenhoff]

He was using default sharpness setting son each camera, this alone makes a big difference between the cameras.

Also when testing for sharpness you have to take in account the lens.  and the aperture it set at and the focus distance . many variables .

[Andrew Reid]

Default sharpness varies a lot between cameras. Even minimum sharpening level does. Maybe set them all at minimum then level them out in post with unsharp mask or even small blur for the horrible oversharpened ones.

EOS R is not line skipping. It’s 1:1

[Anaconda_]

EOS R comes out on top or at least a tie in ProAV's comparisons - Shame they didn't have an XT3 though:

 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

16 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I suppose I will just have to show you. Will shoot some stuff and upload it as ProRes for people to play around with.

Careful, people might be as hard on you as you were on Max. ?

[hansel]

Hilarious, I wish the p4k would have been in some kind of flat profile “factory setting” and he would have complained about the contrast of the image and no apparent sharpness.

This test was an eyesore and a waste of my time! This is going full loop back to that camera blogger reviewers thread, I mean what is he doing on yt even talking about cameras, I dearly wish for him his intention is to sell Sony or what not otherwise he has to be simply trolling.

[Andrew Reid]

5 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Careful, people might be as hard on you as you were on Max. ?

I don't give a flying fuck.

[DBounce]

23 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

EOS R comes out on top or at least a tie in ProAV's comparisons - Shame they didn't have an XT3 though:

 

The P4k seems to always warm the image. Pale skin becomes tan. Don't think I've seen any footage where this was not the case. 

[Mark Romero 2]

I don't know...

Even when NOT zoomed in - at 100% - on my low resolution monitor the EOS R looks pretty soft. On my slightly higher resolution monitor it looks decidedly softer than the others even before zooming in.

Will wait and see what people who have access to the EOS R and the Z7 can do with in camera sharpening / sharpening in post to create some samples before making a final judgement.

But for someone like me who often uses zoom in post on 4K clips and exports at 1080p, I think the X-T3, a7 III and BMPCC4K would be better for MY needs.

[gelaxstudio]

On 10/26/2018 at 8:57 PM, Andrew Reid said:

Default sharpness varies a lot between cameras. Even minimum sharpening level does. Maybe set them all at minimum then level them out in post with unsharp mask or even small blur for the horrible oversharpened ones.

EOS R is not line skipping. It’s 1:1

Actually I mean the 1080P and 720P  is line-skipping，but the 4K on EOS R ,it really very soft and lack of details when compare with other 1:1 pixel readout 4K cameras

I think the soft image is  caused by the smaller size pixel.

The bigger the crop is，the smaller size pixel it gets，like the D5，which is also very soft，but still a little bit better than canon.

The full sensor   1:1 readout looks really great，well balance between resolution and rolling-shutter performance，IMO

 

[Andrew Reid]

1 hour ago, gelaxstudio said:

Actually I mean the 1080P and 720P  is line-skipping

Pixel binning in 1080p actually. Not line-skipping.

1 hour ago, gelaxstudio said:

but the 4K on EOS R ,it really very soft and lack of details when compare with other 1:1 pixel readout 4K cameras

FUCK ME how many times do I have to explain that.

1 hour ago, gelaxstudio said:

I think the soft image is  caused by the smaller size pixel.

Yeah and global warming is caused the moon!!

1 hour ago, gelaxstudio said:

The bigger the crop is，the smaller size pixel it gets，like the D5，which is also very soft，but still a little bit better than canon.

Small pixels don't reduce resolution.

Noise does.

Also you can't get the size of the pixel just from the resolution and sensor size. It depends on the pixel design, micro lenses, gaps between pixels, and lots more besides.

1 hour ago, gelaxstudio said:

The full sensor   1:1 readout looks really great，well balance between resolution and rolling-shutter performance，IMO

On what - the D5?

[Danyyyel]

On 10/25/2018 at 7:31 AM, wolf33d said:

This is the video I wanted @Andrew Reid to make. I have to say the Z7 is quite disappointing. I am also disappointed by XT3 120p cause it does not look really better than the Sony. 

The Canon I fully expected that. But man, what a disaster! This is so embarrassing for Canon. This company should go bankrupt. No one should pay that much for getting such disgusting results. And thanks god he did not do rolling shutter tests! 2.5K for worst rolling shutter, worst 4K, worst 1080p, worst slowmo, and insane crop? Thanks, but no thanks. This company is a joke. 

In what way does the z7 disappoint, perhaps if he did take a little time and test the camera a little bit more he would know that every camera does not have same basic settings. You have sharpness settings on every Nikon camera and it can be dialed down, same for DJI drone for example where the default setting is too high and people know they should just dial it down. For me getting such a detailed and moire/alias free image from a 45 megapixel sensor is extraordinary and a win for Nikon.

Now lets go the meat of that test, looking at a 400% enlargement  of a 4k image is like looking at a 100 - 200 inch screen from about 15 inch. It is completely unrealistic, just good for geeks and not shooters, thats why all these cameras are very good resolution wise. Even the Eos-R would pass a lot of people eye without a side by side. What will make a difference when those camera rez are good enough now is colour, DR, noise, motion cadence and rolling shutter, with Colour and DR being the most important in normal shooting condition.

[Andrew Reid]

What's so disappointing about the X-T3 120p? I can't see any other camera doing 1080/120p with that much detail for the price. The Sony A7R III and A7 III are a lot more expensive. GH5 and GH5S have smaller sensor and aren't cheaper either.

[Mark Romero 2]

Well, these seem like some better "real world" tests pitting the EOS R against the a7 III, and my opinion is that the EOS R comes out ahead in "picture quality" (of course, they weren't using EOSHD Pro Color on the a7 III, which probably would have helped the a7 III fair a bit better in terms of colors and rolloff, I am guessing).

Sharpness Test (4K and 1080p)

Digital Video Talk

 

 

I don't know what happened but in the first video comparing sharpness, the EOS R seems significantly sharper than the a7 III. Maybe just contrast is by default higher on the EOR R???

Seemed to me the dynamic range of the EOS R wasn't as good as that of the a7 III, but then again, the rolloff on the a7 III is kind of hard to take.

Hopefully we will get a DR / rolloff test with the EOS R and the a7 III with EOSHD procolor 4.

[Trek of Joy]

Been shooting a lot of run and gun video with the A73 for a new job lately, super impressed despairs shitty EVF and LCD. It’s so versatile. I haven’t seen anything better from the EosR yet. And the DR with stills is like a drug, so much latitude to push/pull shadows/highlights with high contrast shots like sunrise/sunsets. The AF is pretty amazing too. Not tempted by anything Fuji/Nikon/Canon at all. Going to a craft beer tasting with 40 breweries and then a seafood festival for some event coverage. The A73 will likely be the only camera I use. Though I need to rent a P4k....

chris