Spring Revolution - my shoot with the Canon 5D Mark III - first impressions

[Andrew Reid]

[html]

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/5d-mark-iii-shoot-1.jpg[/img]

I now have my Canon 5D Mark III and I’m working my first piece of cinematography that I’ve shot with the camera, called Spring Revolution. The shoot is work in-progress but I have some initial impressions of the camera which I’m happy to share right now…

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/7528/spring-revolution-my-shoot-with-the-canon-5d-mark-iii-first-impressions/"]Read full article[/url]

[/html]

[Sara]

Well even if the camera is a mixed bag - Your sample screen grabs Andrew are STUNNING.  Your talent and analysis of the MK3 are very helpful to everyone wondering what it is capable of.

Can you describe the noise you are seeing in the shadows?  One of the tell tale signs of a cheap digital production is that blotchy pixel noise.  Though probably limited in dynamic range, current GH2 patches DONT have this problem - the noise if tight and filmic in nature. 

Looking forward to experiencing your final video shot with this camera.

THANKS ANDREW!

[FilmMan]

Thanks for the article.  If possible, when you post your Canon Mark 5d III video, could you mention which shots had which lenses (ie. Leica 50 mm, etc.). 

[gene_can_sing]

Hmmm... This is really disappointing about the resolution. I think I'm going to take a pass on this camera until the 4K CDSLR comes out. I want true HD for that price.

I thought in your previous 5D3 article with the footage grading you said that the resolution was hugely improved over the Pre-Production models? What happened? Why the discrepancy?

[Sara]

[quote author=gene_can_sing link=topic=434.msg2707#msg2707 date=1332283261]
Hmmm... This is really disappointing about the resolution. I think I'm going to take a pass on this camera until the 4K CDSLR comes out. I want true HD for that price.

I thought in your previous 5D3 article with the footage grading you said that the resolution was hugely improved over the Pre-Production models? What happened? Why the discrepancy?
[/quote]

Remember that being improved over the MK2 is one thing - the GH2 is another.  The new hacks from PTOOLs are pushing the GH2 into a category all their own.  Canon knew this all along - hence the lack of 1080p files anywhere to show what the MK3 is capable of.  They were padding preorders in the hopes of tricking customers plain and simple.  Every Canon rep I know and talk to knows about the hacked GH2 - they are not oblivious to it - they knew - and they knew they couldn't compete.


The real question is how long MK3 customers will have to wait for a Magic Lantern hack to boost bit rate (might help) or possible flat log-type color profiles to increase dynamic range and help with the shadow mush.

[mike_tee_vee]

As disappointing as the resolution is, there is just something special about the "look" of Canon video.  The tones and colors are beautiful, and I prefer them for people to the GH2

[gene_can_sing]

I have to agree with you on the Canon aesthetic, it's something the GH2 just cannot match. Even the APS-C Canons have that nice, magical Canon color and shallower DOF. I just can't get myself to go with a 2x crop and the Panny color scheme. Just can't do it. I guess it just comes down to personal preference as the companies have a very different look. I think the FS-100 has a really nice look interms of color.

With that said, for $3500, it should have true HD. Canon Sucks. The FS-100 is calling and I just don't know how much longer I can wait for Canon to get their act together, especially with the Metabones adaptor.

Yes I am PISSED that I have to wait even longer for the 4K C-DSLR. The thing is, I have no problem dropping 6K on a camera, just want the right one. FULL FRAME with true 1080p. Also, put a F-Ing flip screen on it. Fixed screens suck for video.

[IsleOfRed]

when you say 'true HD', what do you mean?

[gene_can_sing]

The Canon's are at 700 lines of resolution while the GH2 and the C-300, FS-100 are at 1000 lines of resolution. Big difference.

[Andrew Reid]

[quote author=gene_can_sing link=topic=434.msg2711#msg2711 date=1332286504]With that said, for $3500, it should have true HD. Canon Sucks. The FS-100 is calling and I just don't know how much longer I can wait for Canon to get their act together, especially with the Metabones adaptor.

Yes I am PISSED that I have to wait even longer for the 4K C-DSLR. The thing is, I have no problem dropping 6K on a camera, just want the right one. FULL FRAME with true 1080p. Also, put a F-Ing flip screen on it. Fixed screens suck for video.
[/quote]

Every sympathy. I think you hit the nail on the head with this.

[christianhubbard]

[quote author=FilmMan link=topic=434.msg2706#msg2706 date=1332281784]
Thanks for the article.  If possible, when you post your Canon Mark 5d III video, could you mention which shots had which lenses (ie. Leica 50 mm, etc.).
[/quote]

First post!  :)
yes please do what filmMan asks :]

Can you elaborate a bit on your contax/canon adapter? did you have to do anything special? i've read online that some people had to do some modding to fit on their mkii's, not a fan, is there something specific i know for certain lenses that will fit best? Sorry for being all over the place, there just isnt much information about adapting the contax zeiss to canon. At least none that I could find relatively easily.

[quote]Blacks crush hugely on my Macbook Pro 17″ 2011. Your milage with the below frame grab my vary but to me it is quite different to the exposure as shot…[/quote]
probably stupid to ask, but are you using a glossy screen? apple has said openly that they purposefully boost contrast to make it look better, but matte screens have true color.

[quote]Nikon are now providing stronger competition, and don’t have a Canon C300 to protect. The D800 has a lower price (although that is soft as well!). [/quote]
Although this is true, i would NEVER pay for a dslr that is ATTACHED to its external recorder! clean HDMI out may be great, but i refuse to invest in a product that is utterly useless without it.

[quote]Panasonic will bring a GH3 possibly this year and if it is anything like the GH2 it will hit well above its price point as far as video is concerned.[/quote]
YES. very excited for this, but the 2x crop kills =[
even though i could adapt nikon or zeiss class, the 2x completely changes my focal ranges. :/

[moebius22]

That 4k dslr is likely going to be way above my pay grade. If Sony doesn't come through with the A99, I'm going Panasonic for sure.

[Jeff Gibbs]

I just cancelled my 5d Mark III pre-order at BH.  I cannot live with a camera with this low of video resolution.  I tried out a Nikon D4 last week and by comparison the 1080p seems much sharper, and the video options more refined. The crop mode has more resolution yet.  I am not ready to switch to Nikon--I have a GH2 for now. But I agree with those who prefer Canon people and colors, but I don't want to continue filming buildings and landscapes virtually in SD not HD. (I have owned and used a Mark II, 7d, and T2i.)  I feared all along Canon would not allow the 5d III to compete with the C300 much less the video cameras in between the XF300, etc. With this very high bit rate, and a sensor tuned for video, and more advanced codecs, its hard to see any other explanation.

[Jeff Gibbs]

I wouldn't be surprised if Canon tremendously upgrades the Mark III video resolution in a firmware upgrade.  Until then, I will look elsewhere.

[nahua]

Just saw the ISO 12500 test.  Still can't beat that full frame look.  And the D4 footage still has something missing that Canon gets. Regardless of resolution, this camera sings in the right circumstances.  I think Andrew is right, both the GH2 and 5DmkIII can complement each other well.

[Sara]

To everyone complaining about the gh2 2x crop.  #1 it is actually 1.86.  #2 good luck getting Sharp corners with your ff dslr wide open.  Interviews with the cinematographer who shot the house episodes on the mk2 had him saying that it was a mistake that they shot so wide open.  Ff is brutal on even zeiss or l glass.  The results are not pretty.

There is a reason most PL glass from cooke, schneider, leica cine, and red is NOT ff.

The work around if you shoot canon ff is to crop the image but if what Andrew says is correct about the low resolution, your final image won't look good.

[Gabe]

Jim Jannard is right.  Canon is playing games.  They've had 3.5 to resolve their resolution issue and they have failed to do it with the Mark III.  All to protect their C300.  Meanwhile Panasonic has been able to produce true 1080p on the GH2 for almost a year and a half now.  Canon is guilty of false advertising if they call this a Full HD camera.

On top of it Canon announces the C300 and a forthcoming 4K DSLR at the same time.  If this 4K DSLR were to shoot true 4K, why would anyone buy the C300 that only shoots 1080P?  Is this going to be a DSLR that shoots true 4K and renders the C300 obsolete or is it going to be a DSLR that shoots fake 4K resolution that doesn't compete with the C300?  This is ridiculous marketing games.

Nikon also somehow hasn't figured out true 1080 resolution, but at least the 8-bit uncompressed HDMI is competitive and may force Canon's hand in future camera bodies.

I'm betting my money on the GH3.  Photokina can't come soon enough.

[magjipro]

A lot of things are wrong with this post and review.

I personally found the MK2 too sharp in HD video in many cases. And from what I've seen so far from the 3 its equal if not better.

Also I've always been skeptical with shooting with non Canon L glass, as a photographer shooting and full resolution you see the weakness in lesser glass.

Also shooting wide open is never the sharpest for any lens. Which seem what some impressions were based on. Its uneducated to judge the sharpness of the video if not shooting at the right Fstop and right lens.

Also shooting wide open all the time is never smart for many reasons. So much people are so into getting a 2.8 or wider lens or trying to shoot that wide open but fail to understand that its not always the best way or smartest thing to do. On a wide lens you should almost never shoot under 5.6 unless you are hurting for light. Who whats a wide shot that is usually perceived as naturally sharper to look soft in a lot of areas because of DOF?

I've also seen other postings else where which contradict some of the opinions here.

As pixel peeping most of the times is just ignorant. Its about getting a tool that can get the job done and making it work. You audience is not gonna know the difference of care much, as long as it looks overall good and you accomplish illustrating your message. Pixel peepers never come off as smart as they perceive themselves to be.

My apologies if this seems like an attack on the reviewer. My intention is only to let people know that before they put themselves out there and report on something they should think about how they approach it more and do a better job in fairly reporting on something and not make claims about and item that might not be truly accurate based on many other tangible factors. 

[Simco123]

If GH2 can improve on the DR, highlight roll off, wacky consumer colours and electronic look I will always look for answers in a dSLR.

[quote author=Gabe link=topic=434.msg2723#msg2723 date=1332300479]
Jim Jannard is right.  Canon is playing games.  They've had 3.5 to resolve their resolution issue and they have failed to do it with the Mark III.  All to protect their C300.  Meanwhile Panasonic has been able to produce true 1080p on the GH2 for almost a year and a half now.  Canon is guilty of false advertising if they call this a Full HD camera.

On top of it Canon announces the C300 and a forthcoming 4K DSLR at the same time.  If this 4K DSLR were to shoot true 4K, why would anyone buy the C300 that only shoots 1080P?  Is this going to be a DSLR that shoots true 4K and renders the C300 obsolete or is it going to be a DSLR that shoots fake 4K resolution that doesn't compete with the C300?  This is ridiculous marketing games.

Nikon also somehow hasn't figured out true 1080 resolution, but at least the 8-bit uncompressed HDMI is competitive and may force Canon's hand in future camera bodies.

I'm betting my money on the GH3.  Photokina can't come soon enough.
[/quote]

[Andrew Reid]

@ Jeff - the D4 isn't better for resolution apart from in 2.7x crop mode with the same effective sensor size as a Nikon J1. I think you'll be disappointed with your decision, sorry.

In short, resolution is terrible on both cameras compared to what true 1080p should really look like. I urge both Canon AND Nikon to sort their act out. I'm also having some terrible issues with noise at base ISO with my footage and gamma issues with the codec. That issue is on my Mac, but not via HDMI to a TV or projector! Not a good start to be honest.