Canon 1DX III, FF 4k60p with 422 10bit internal

[Django]

23 minutes ago, jgharding said:

Having a C200, and never using Canon RAW because of the file sizes, it does not excite me.

To each their own, I recently bought a C200 not expecting to use RAW that much but with the very simple workflow, USB-C speed & storage space coming way down, I'm finding myself shooting RAW as much as possible. It's kind of hard to go back to 8-bit after 10-bit but even harder once you start messing with 12-bit RAW. 

Having access to RAW internally at a flick of a switch is a godsend imo and brings me back to MLRaw days (minus the post workflow & reliability issues!).

I have 2 Atomos recorders (including the V) and use them as monitors 95% of the time. Internal recording is the way to go for me.

HEIC is also very interesting for stills giving basically 10-bit 4:2:2 vs 8-bit 4:2:0 for JPGs. 

[Otago]

19 minutes ago, Django said:

HEIC is also very interesting for stills giving basically 10-bit 4:2:2 vs 8-bit 4:2:0 for JPGs. 

It's also quite like MXF in video in that hit can hold metadata, if it is implemented well then all the edits can stay in the file as metadata. Unfortunately it is heavily patented so it might never take off as a universal file format. 

[androidlad]

38 minutes ago, Django said:

To each their own, I recently bought a C200 not expecting to use RAW that much but with the very simple workflow, USB-C speed & storage space coming way down, I'm finding myself shooting RAW as much as possible. It's kind of hard to go back to 8-bit after 10-bit but even harder once you start messing with 12-bit RAW. 

HEIC is also very interesting for stills giving basically 10-bit 4:2:2 vs 8-bit 4:2:0 for JPGs. 

Most cameras produce 8bit 4:2:2 jpeg files.

[Django]

45 minutes ago, Otago said:

It's also quite like MXF in video in that hit can hold metadata, if it is implemented well then all the edits can stay in the file as metadata. Unfortunately it is heavily patented so it might never take off as a universal file format. 

Apple is pushing it hard inside iOS and latest Mac OS:

https://www.macworld.co.uk/feature/iphone/what-is-heic-3660408/

 

[Snowfun]

Other than stills is there any compelling reason to put this above the C200 on the Christmas list? 

[OliKMIA]

3 hours ago, gt3rs said:

Not sure why is so hard to understand that the main target is not video only people, but it is sport action photographer that also shoot video and there are many like me.

Not hard to understand. There is a market, this is just a small one.

[Otago]

12 minutes ago, Snowfun said:

Other than stills is there any compelling reason to put this above the C200 on the Christmas list? 

It might do full frame 4k 10-bit 422 and 6k RAW ? 

[kye]

1 hour ago, Django said:

It's kind of hard to go back to 8-bit after 10-bit but even harder once you start messing with 12-bit RAW.

I'm curious how much extra you feel that 12-bit gives you over 10-bit?  

I definitely agree that 10-bit is a decent jump up from 8-bit, but when I was playing with ML I did a bunch of tests comparing 10, 12 and 14-bit RAW and didn't really see any useful differences above 10-bit.  I'm not saying there was none, but I can't really think of when those differences would really matter.

[currensheldon]

21 minutes ago, Snowfun said:

Other than stills is there any compelling reason to put this above the C200 on the Christmas list? 

I would say the 10-bit 422 codec is big. Also just the size - bigger than mist mirrorless/DSLRs, but still easy to use on a Ronin-S (whereas a C200 requires something much larger) and a glidetrack. 

After the C500 II, it is starting to look like Canon may be done crippling cameras for a bit (even the 90D has no-crop 4K and now 24p). I still don't like the 1DX series for a B-Cam (too tall, no flip out screen, more photo-oriented), but internal raw at 4k 60fps AND 10-bit 422 (probably XF-AVC) in such a small camera would make an amazing B-Cam to the C500II or even a great A-Cam for many other productions.

With that said, If this was even S1H-sized (less tall, basically), had an articulating screen in some way, and (the big one) had an RF Mount, it would be an instant buy for me. If the C500 II had an RF Mount, I would strongly consider it as well. Mainly because I love their f2.8 RF lenses that are all packing stabilization and the variable ND adapter if you want to go that route. IBIS in the 1DX III would also make it very tempting.

We'll see what the next EOS R mirrorless and 5D V bring, but if Canon keeps this up, those might be knockouts too.

 

 

Just now, kye said:

I'm curious how much extra you feel that 12-bit gives you over 10-bit?  

I definitely agree that 10-bit is a decent jump up from 8-bit, but when I was playing with ML I did a bunch of tests comparing 10, 12 and 14-bit RAW and didn't really see any useful differences above 10-bit.  I'm not saying there was none, but I can't really think of when those differences would really matter.

Honestly, Canon's 12-bit raw is leaps and bounds above any 10-bit camera I've used (EVA-1, C300II, FS7, etc). You can push and pull those files an incredible amount. It's hard to describe because online comparisons don't do it justice. It's when you see it that you realize what it gives you. 

The colors are SO much richer, so much deeper, and more natural. I really wish Canon could do on more level of compression (like Red) and get it to 8:1 though - file sizes are just too big for most things I do. 

 

[kye]

3 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

Honestly, Canon's 12-bit raw is leaps and bounds above any 10-bit camera I've used (EVA-1, C300II, FS7, etc). You can push and pull those files an incredible amount. It's hard to describe because online comparisons don't do it justice. It's when you see it that you realize what it gives you. 

I tested it in real life, filming my own test footage, including pushing and pulling heavily in-post as well as doing only light grading, but the differences really weren't that much.  I'm curious to hear what that difference is actually useful for, not just a subjective impression.

Oh, and did you test the Canon 12-bit against Canon 10-bit?  Otherwise we're introducing other factors into the question.

[Sid]

1 hour ago, kye said:

I'm not saying there was none, but I can't really think of when those differences would really matter.

Shooting greenscreen in the Arctic is not something to be sneezed at.  ?

[jgharding]

3 hours ago, Django said:

To each their own, I recently bought a C200 not expecting to use RAW that much but with the very simple workflow, USB-C speed & storage space coming way down, I'm finding myself shooting RAW as much as possible. It's kind of hard to go back to 8-bit after 10-bit but even harder once you start messing with 12-bit RAW. 

Having access to RAW internally at a flick of a switch is a godsend imo and brings me back to MLRaw days (minus the post workflow & reliability issues!).

I have 2 Atomos recorders (including the V) and use them as monitors 95% of the time. Internal recording is the way to go for me.

HEIC is also very interesting for stills giving basically 10-bit 4:2:2 vs 8-bit 4:2:0 for JPGs. 

Depends on the job i guess, I've yet to have anything to justify shooting it all raw over GH5 10bit 422

[forofilms]

16 hours ago, wolf33d said:

The AF. Much better than S1H. A deal breaker for me and for many on the S1H. 
But the 1DX size is a deal breaker for me (so is the price). 

So I am still waiting for that FF 4K60 10 bit no crop camera. Last hope in the near term is on Sony A7SIII. Let's see. 

Me too. I want an uncropped, full frame 4K60p 10bit tool. I can look past the lack of IBIS and ND filtration, but if I'm paying $6,000 i don't want any crop. Otherwise, I can just stick with an APSC Pocket 6K and have 10bit RAW 6K at 50fps. Yes there are some ergonomic and battery issues, but nothing that can't be addressed with < $500 extra. 

[Django]

 

2 hours ago, kye said:

I'm curious how much extra you feel that 12-bit gives you over 10-bit?  

I definitely agree that 10-bit is a decent jump up from 8-bit, but when I was playing with ML I did a bunch of tests comparing 10, 12 and 14-bit RAW and didn't really see any useful differences above 10-bit.  I'm not saying there was none, but I can't really think of when those differences would really matter.

I'm talking about the difference in between 10-bit compressed and 12-bit RAW. The leap there is pretty staggering.

have a look at 10:35 the amount of recovery he can bring back is kinda insane. in any 10-bit compressed camera that over exposed data would be gone!

[nathlas]

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

 

Foveon version of the Fp I very much doubt will shoot decent video due to how much extra data there is on the Foveon chip.

That's why they launched FP. To have their L customers happy for all purposes.

With two bodies similar (Foveon will use the very same body ) but with different capabilities everyone that should plan to enter Sigma universe will feel future safe

[Alex T]

It's cool. But why are people so excited I don't understand...

[Andrew Reid]

Hate to spoil the $6000 Canon fanclub party, but I took delivery of the Sigma Fp today and glad to say the full frame 4K CDNG is incredible. Looks nothing like 8bit RAW... More like having 14bit Magic Lantern with huge dynamic range. Whatever they have done with colour science on this camera it is very clever.

Remains to be calculated how large the file sizes are in 4K 8bit RAW mode internally. Massive I expect!

Going to try the 12bit next via USB C to my Samsung T5.

But the internal MOV ALL-I 4K is also very nice.

Bitrate is a very high 400Mbit in this mode.

It's a beast.

[Sid]

Wow, FP is starting to ship ?  Great news.  The early hint of quality is most welcome too.

[thebrothersthre3]

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Hate to spoil the $6000 Canon fanclub party, but I took delivery of the Sigma Fp today and glad to say the full frame 4K CDNG is incredible. Looks nothing like 8bit RAW... More like having 14bit Magic Lantern with huge dynamic range. Whatever they have done with colour science on this camera it is very clever.

Remains to be calculated how large the file sizes are in 4K 8bit RAW mode internally. Massive I expect!

Going to try the 12bit next via USB C to my Samsung T5.

But the internal MOV ALL-I 4K is also very nice.

Bitrate is a very high 400Mbit in this mode.

It's a beast.

Is an external recorder needed for 12bit RAW? Or you just plug an SSD directly into the camera via USB-C?
 

[Mokara]

20 hours ago, Michi said:

What oversampling? We are talking about the dam crop on the eos r and 1dx2. 
do you even read what i write or just stop after half a sentence?

You were responding to me, and I was talking about oversampling, so yes, we were talking about oversampling.

do you even read what i write or just stop after half a sentence?

The crops used on those cameras are because the processors used do not have the processing bandwidth to the extent that would be necessary to cover the full width of the sensor. It has nothing to do with the sensors actual size or resolution. If the processors could handle the oversampling required, then the camera would have no crop factor.

4 hours ago, forofilms said:

Me too. I want an uncropped, full frame 4K60p 10bit tool. I can look past the lack of IBIS and ND filtration, but if I'm paying $6,000 i don't want any crop. Otherwise, I can just stick with an APSC Pocket 6K and have 10bit RAW 6K at 50fps. Yes there are some ergonomic and battery issues, but nothing that can't be addressed with < $500 extra. 

I doubt many are buying this camera as a video camera. They buy it primarily for stills, but with the option of shooting some quality video as well if they have the need.

If you are purely into video and have no interest in stills, there are better options.