Administrators Andrew Reid Posted March 4, 2012 Administrators Share Posted March 4, 2012 [html][url="http://www.vimeo.com/37879608"]http://www.vimeo.com/37879608[/url]Here is a shot from Japan which was shot with both the 5D Mark II and 5D Mark III (with beta firmware) by a camera reviewer. The cleanness and lack of noise is something quite remarkable.Are we in for a incredible low light treat – a truly ground breaking camera?[url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/7328/astonishing-canon-5d-mark-iii-iso-12800-video/"]Read full article[/url][/html] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tzedekh Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I'm impressed. I hope that the improvements in the T4i are comparably impressive, with a high-data-rate I-frame-only profile. I wish Canon had added 60p so that the Magic Lantern folks could get 48 and 50 fps for their 24p/50p HDR magic, assuming the 5Dmk3 and T4i are even hackable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tungah Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Excuse me for my noob question, but what do you guys mean by "hackable"? I hear people talking about it and hoping Canon "leaves" the camera to be hacked. What does that mean? Does it mean that Canon might encrypt the firmware or not on purpose? Why would they leave it easy for people to hack if they are, for whatever reason, apparently capping features like clean HDMI out or 1080@60fps? I don't get it. I mean, can we seriously expect a hack for the 5D3 even though the 7D never got hacked? If Canon was successful in maintaining the 7D unhacked for so long, why don't they just do the same wizardry again? What am I missing in my line of thought? Can anyone please kindly explain this to me? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt2491 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 In my opinion, the 5D3 shot looks like it was passed through noise reduction software. I really hope I'm wrong but even from looking at the screen grabs, the 5D3 looks softer than the 5D2. I just hope the camera isn't performing some kind of automatic noise reduction, but is in fact truly more sensitive in low light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vas907 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 It's pretty evident that the edges on the pole are clearly sharper on the 5d mkII. But what ever the 5D mkIII is doing it is doing a great job and reducing noise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandro Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 how is it possible that we're all waiting (i hope) original 1080p footage and the only things available are one high compressed 720p short, this high iso file and 960x540 videos from canon!! Are they doing this on purpose?? Still not convinced they fixed the res problem! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted March 5, 2012 Author Administrators Share Posted March 5, 2012 You can't judge res from a clip shot at ISO 12,800! We just don't know much about what went into this clip in terms of post processing, camera settings and compression. Vimeo clip download file size is tiny, much smaller than a raw ALL-I 90Mbit file. Various review sites have a 5D Mark III already. Once one gets one with a clue about video, then maybe we can rest easy knowing our pre-orders won't need to be cancelled! It is looking good so far though.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls105 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 This is the best dslr blog hands down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandro Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 [quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=360.msg2227#msg2227 date=1330916559] You can't judge res from a clip shot at ISO 12,800! We just don't know much about what went into this clip in terms of post processing, camera settings and compression. Vimeo clip download file size is tiny, much smaller than a raw ALL-I 90Mbit file. Various review sites have a 5D Mark III already. Once one gets one with a clue about video, then maybe we can rest easy knowing our pre-orders won't need to be cancelled! It is looking good so far though.... [/quote] I know that, it's just a feeling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJB Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Hmmm, very interesting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxotis70 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 this is clearly from denoised program , way too soft . 5D MKII is noisier but musch sharper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sara Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 [quote author=toxotis70 link=topic=360.msg2236#msg2236 date=1330973630] this is clearly from denoised program , way too soft . 5D MKII is noisier but musch sharper. [/quote] You think it is fake? Might be. Because if it is real the MK3 looks poor at high iso - no detail. Everything mushy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tungah Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I find it really difficult to judge anything from these highly compressed samples that are popping up. You people preordering are very brave indeed. ;) Oh well, here's one more. [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIAy7nf1y0w#ws]Justyna KELLEY Stay - Album Over the moon-[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony wilson Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 nikon gets a thrill from loss of face from video because they never wanted it,said it was not necessary said people did not need it.and we understand what is best. just like the market should be happy with the smaller dx format and on a test bench it was good enough. canon have been cautious waited,they shaped the new market framed it. canon is hardly likely too produce a dud here,they will leave the loss of face too the nikon video clowns. japan is bankrupt this means a need for big sales..fukishima is not in cold shutdown. the mark 3 will be a very sweet slick bit of kit and another small chip off the red block. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt2491 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 tungah, now that's more like it. While we still can't get a really good look at the quality, I would believe that is definitely 5D3 material. But then again, I would believe it was 5D2 material too.... though I couldn't really discern any aliasing on her hair... so maybe it is the real deal. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattH Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 [quote author=Sara link=topic=360.msg2238#msg2238 date=1330974071] [quote author=toxotis70 link=topic=360.msg2236#msg2236 date=1330973630] this is clearly from denoised program , way too soft . 5D MKII is noisier but musch sharper. [/quote] You think it is fake? Might be. Because if it is real the MK3 looks poor at high iso - no detail. Everything mushy. [/quote] This is ISO 12,800! Have you ever shot at this iso before? Its INSANELY sensitive. The 550d only goes up to 6400. When you increase the iso the dynamic range is reduced and the picture has to loose detail to not be noisy. There is no way around this. The mk2 clip is completely unusable. The mk3 clip IS usable if you needed it. Its worth noting that the turbine is over exposed. It would probably be better at 6400 were the detail would be more and the noise would be less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Anastasi Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 The 7d can't be hacked as the firmware is encrypted or something like that - but the 5dmk2 and 550/600 and 60d can be firmware hacked. i only brought the 550d to play with the hack - same go's for the gh2 which I'm looking at buying a couple to use on a feature film, only because of the hacks available for the gh2. The hack + 5dmk2 has more features purely for us video guys then the 5dmk3 has at standard. If the 5dmk3 can be hacked then i'll be buying a couple of those instead of the gh2's :) ( and only if i see some good side by side tests with the d800 v 5dmk3 v gh2 hacks ) From what i have seen so far the gh2's hacked are still better video cameras then the 5dmk3 and the d800s ! btw a new video clip test is up [url=http://vimeo.com/37998367]EOS 5D Mark II BETA[/url] ( new daylight tests of the 5dmk3 v 5dmk2 by the same japanese shooter ) checked it out on a macbook pro 17" screen and my hdmi connected flat panel tv screen also, to my eyes the 5dmk3 looks just as good as the 5dmk2 - a bit less sharper/detailed perhaps but thats splitting hairs - the moire of the building however looks better on the 5dmk3 to me.. less dancing pixels.. but from tests of the gh2 vs 5dmk2 the gh2 looks way better then the 5dmk2.. so... i can get four x gh2 for the same price as one d800, so a couple of gh2s is still looking like my best bet for the next few months until the gh3 comes out in sept 2012.. two $25 adapters and I'm rocking with all my canon n nikon glass!.. [quote author=tungah link=topic=360.msg2221#msg2221 date=1330907285] Excuse me for my noob question, but what do you guys mean by "hackable"? I hear people talking about it and hoping Canon "leaves" the camera to be hacked. What does that mean? Does it mean that Canon might encrypt the firmware or not on purpose? Why would they leave it easy for people to hack if they are, for whatever reason, apparently capping features like clean HDMI out or 1080@60fps? I don't get it. I mean, can we seriously expect a hack for the 5D3 even though the 7D never got hacked? If Canon was successful in maintaining the 7D unhacked for so long, why don't they just do the same wizardry again? What am I missing in my line of thought? Can anyone please kindly explain this to me? Thanks. [/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Per Lichtman Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 @Andrew Reid - EOSHD Glad to see you emphasizing high ISO again. I cannot wait to start seeing some ISO 12,800 comparisons between the D800, 5DMkIII and the GH2 (though I expect the GH2 to perform very poorly by comparison, of course). It seems a shame that the 5DMkIII capped the ISO at 25,600 when the stills side gets two stops more. Any word on why that is the case? Will we need a D4 or EOS-1D X (or even the older D3S and 1DMkIV) to get higher than 25,600? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted March 26, 2012 Author Administrators Share Posted March 26, 2012 From my limited testing so far the GH2 isn't as clean as the 5D Mark III at 12,800 but it is more detailed. What I like about the GH2 is that its high ISO noise has a very nice film-like fine grain structure to it, where on other H.264 DSLRs it is blotchy and compressed. This is a big plus as it drastically makes your image more film like having finer grain. The myth is that the GH2 is bad at high ISOs, far from it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Per Lichtman Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 I know the GH2 is much better at high ISOs than people expect (I've used ISO 12,800 a lot since it got unlocked in black and white as well) but it's still not able to reach the D3s can attain (though the latter is 720P). So the 5DMarkII and D800 aren't at that level either? Will the D4 and EOS-1D X represent an advancement from the D3s at least (as regards the highest ISO video)? 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.