What REALLY prompted Canon suddenly to get their act together with video?

[Super8]

On 5/1/2020 at 1:43 AM, zerocool22 said:

No but still 4 or 5 times! At canon c500II prices you should compare it to a red dragon epic.

The 1DX III would be the better camera to compare to the Ursa Mini Pro G2.  Not for features but price and color science. Why?  Because the R5 color science latitude should fall in line with the 1DX III.

[Super8]

31 minutes ago, zerocool22 said:

Not at all. Owned 550D, 5D III, C100, C300, GH3, GH4, a7S, A7S II, bmcc 2.5k, ursa mini pro, pocket 4K, pocket 6K (and shot with FS5, FS7, fs700, Arri amira, alexa mini lf, sony venice, F55, ...)

All camera's have their strenghts and weaknesses. One has better color out of the box, one is easier to grade, one has slowmo, one is too light, one is too heavy, ...)

You have been objective with your comments.  Others have defended what they own but can't take the time to comment on moving visual links and still visual images. 

I have to re-think posting links and images because no one seems to take the time to view and respond to them.  We do create visual content right?  We do use the cameras and gear we talk about don't we? I'm starting to thing people like to argue the written word over looking at examples from the craft that we supposedly love.  @IronFilm still hasn't responded to the video links I posted and has ignored all request to reply.

[ade towell]

Blimey I come back a few days later and you are still arguing with yourself pretty much - not being funny but you seem to have gone down a rabbit hole and killed whatever interest I had in this thread. Anyway sorry to interrupt, as you were...

[SteveV4D]

19 minutes ago, Super8 said:

I'm also not getting into the debate about accurate color and how we prove it.  You want to play strawman on this thread then go for it.

You're kinda making yourself look foolish.  Andrew and EOS HD color profiles is based on improving color science from multiple camera manufacturers.

What is EOSHD Pro Color?

"EOSHD Pro Color improves upon a range of issues with Sony’s default colour science. Your straight-out-of-camera footage will get a professional cinematic treatment."

Your "How do we prove accurate colour when we all have different eyes, " comment is an insult all around.   I know you didn't mean it that way and that your playing the straawman but it's an insult to everyone on the EOS. You can't make a blanket statement about color and color science that let's everyone become lazy and doesn't hold cameras to a higher standard.  "

Oh, don't worry, don't color grade that footage because we all have different eyes and someone will like it".

 

 

I think the strawman in this argument is you.  You've been consistently arguing with other members on this point.  Some of my replies to you have got likes.  Yours are not so well received. 😄 In fact one of your replies was to argue why a forum member wasn't using the viewfinder in a DSLR camera when recording video in sunlight.   Whereas we all know such a thing is impossible for DSLR cameras as the mirror is up when using the camera.  So remind me again, which of us is foolish.

Now I'm not arguing cameras like 1DX Mark III can be better than the Pocket cameras for colour grading.  I can't, I don't own the 1DX.   My only issue is with your blanket statement that Canon Colour Science is easier to grade.  Whereas I feel it is wholly dependant on the camera and codec being used. 

My point about how our eyes can see colour differently, is one of the reasons why I feel colour is subjective, even accurate colour.  I'm sorry it went over your head. 😄

[Super8]

4 minutes ago, ade towell said:

Blimey I come back a few days later and you are still arguing with yourself pretty much - not being funny but you seem to have gone down a rabbit hole and killed whatever interest I had in this thread. Anyway sorry to interrupt, as you were...

It would be nice if you commented on what's being discussed.  That was kinda my point in my last comment.

[Super8]

2 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

Yours are not so well received. 😄 In fact one of your replies was to argue why a forum member wasn't using the viewfinder in a DSLR camera when recording video in sunlight.  

😄

How is my commnet back at the 1DX III owner arguing?

[SteveV4D]

1 minute ago, Super8 said:

How is my commnet back at the 1DX III owner arguing?

You weren't technically, but with you, the word argue just seems to fit when discussing your replies.

[Super8]

5 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

My only issue is with your blanket statement that Canon Colour Science is easier to grade.  Whereas I feel it is wholly dependant on the camera and codec being used. 

My point about how our eyes can see colour differently, is one of the reasons why I feel colour is subjective, even accurate colour.  I'm sorry it went over your head. 😄

Do you really take someone commenting back at you as arguing?

Why do you take issue with that? It's seems you comment based on who made the statement, who well they're received and how many like they have.

This is why you keep making your strawman argument that "How do we prove accurate colour when we all have different eyes,"

[noone]

10 hours ago, Super8 said:

 

These captures are for all the people that replied and said "they didn't need accurate color" and "who's to say what accurate color is?" 

  Did  ANYONE said that?       What people ARE saying is that GOOD colour is subjective.      As for ACCURATE colour, well that is an ENTIRELY different argument and to me (my OPINION) the cameras with the most ACCURATE colour that I have used (accurate to what I saw when using them and not grading) was Sony and Canon has been close to the LEAST accurate (especially since people seem to like vivid colours from Canon..I pretty much always put lower Canon cameras into vivid mode) though no camera has had BAD colour.   

I keep looking for high end colourists saying what you have been but can not seem to find any.

Lastly, I find it funny you say you think people should use what they want, then  in the next breath putting down their choices. 

 

 

[Super8]

2 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

You weren't technically, but with you, the word argue just seems to fit when discussing your replies.

Look, I've kept everything above board and tried to reply to people in kind.  You used the word argue more than once and you make comments about how well I'm received and the number of "likes" I have.

I get it.  You want to tell me that I'm wrong for talking about color science and wrong about posting screen captures into the conversation because "how do we prove accurate colour when we all have different eyes," anyway. 

So no need for my to reply to you anymore on this topic.  You want to be proven right as you pick up @IronFilm strawman question of "who decides what accurate color is".  What color looks are subjective, what color you like is subjective, but accurate color is not.

 

[Super8]

5 minutes ago, noone said:

s for ACCURATE colour, well that is an ENTIRELY different argument and to me (my OPINION) the cameras with the most ACCURATE colour that I have used (accurate to what I saw when using them and not grading) was Sony

 

 

 

What Sony model were you using?

 

[noone]

1 minute ago, Super8 said:

 but accurate color is not.

 

Indeed but ONLY if you were able to see with your own eyes what was shot at the time it was shot in the light it was shot (and probably the same angle it was shot at). Otherwise, yes it IS subjective.

[noone]

8 minutes ago, Super8 said:

What Sony model were you using?

 

Original A7s.

It has issues with WB in auto but otherwise (and especially since I shoot in low light a LOT at higher ISOs where the extra DR over other cameras) is nice to me (see that is my OPINION).     Again, I do not colour grade but a few years ago I downloaded the colour grading app for it but gave up on that since could take years looking at combinations to find and I realised I was happy with it from the camera as it was.      

I had a Canon 7D and i hated it and i also had an old lower end Canon DSLR that i HAD to shoot RAW stills because the jpegs were horrible (colour was ok though again not as accurate as others to me)..

 

[Django]

38 minutes ago, Super8 said:

My CS discussion is based on Canon and this thread is about the R5.  People are coming down hard on the R5 specs and claiming the "cripple hammer is coming".  I brought up Canon color science because it's relevant and not on the spec sheet.

Out of this discussion we have BMP6k and Ursa Mini Pro being talked about as not as good as Canon because of the cost of the camera.

I used Deep Impact because as a case study because it showed great color all around.  This is what we all strive for except for the ones that said they didn't need accurate color that they embraced what the BMP4K gave them.  

People have become blinded by the brand they bought into and not the craft that they create with.

Don't worry about the R5 bashers. Haters gonna hate. Watch em come around in couple months..

CS is a tricky subject, there are a few dedicated threads about it here. Most of them don't end well lol..

Canon is known for their warm skin tones and Reds that pop. Clog is also pretty easy to grade. RAW 14-bit is glorious.

Pleasing CS doesn't necessarily mean accurate colours though. Strangely you will often find Sony on top of color accuracy rankings.

In the real world however, Sony are often last in the CS preferences. doesn't help their WB craps out as soon as mixed lighting comes in.

That said I love Venice CS and shoot almost exclusively with the Venice LUT on my FS7. 

I haven't worked with recent BM cams but generally speaking the ProRes & RAW footage from them grades beautifully.

My problem with BM is they can be unreliable cameras. Some Ursa Mini 4.6K had magenta cast issues for example. Very difficult to get rid of.

[Super8]

13 minutes ago, noone said:

Original A7s.

It has issues with WB in auto but otherwise (and especially since I shoot in low light a LOT at higher ISOs where the extra DR over other cameras) is nice to me (see that is my OPINION).     Again, I do not colour grade but a few years ago I downloaded the colour grading app for it but gave up on that since could take years looking at combinations to find and I realised I was happy with it from the camera as it was.      

I had a Canon 7D and i hated it and i also had an old lower end Canon DSLR that i HAD to shoot RAW stills because the jpegs were horrible (colour was ok though again not as accurate as others to me)..

 

You've gone on record many time about Sony color and after long threads and comments from you you final came out and said "WB in auto" issue.  Sony color has more than a Auto WB issues and Andrew has pointed this out. 

And now you bring up the Canon 7D and lower end Canon DSLR's to make your point.  Keep on with Sony.

[noone]

4 minutes ago, Django said:

Don't worry about the R5 bashers. Haters gonna hate. Watch em come around in couple months..

 

Pleasing CS doesn't necessarily mean accurate colours though. Strangely you will often find Sony on top of color accuracy rankings.

In the real world however, Sony are often last in the CS preferences. doesn't help their WB craps out as soon as mixed lighting comes in.

 

There is a reason why people (real people not on video/photography forums) say they like Canon for VIVID colour.     The same with Fuji and Velvia and it was the same in the film days

[noone]

12 minutes ago, Super8 said:

You've gone on record many time about Sony color and after long threads and comments from you you final came out and said "WB in auto" issue.  Sony color has more than a Auto WB issues and Andrew has pointed this out. 

And now you bring up the Canon 7D and lower end Canon DSLR's to make your point.  Keep on with Sony.

I gave my opinion about my A7s which happens to BE made by Sony but I would have got it if it was made by Lego if it was the same.

The best camera I have used (my opinion) IS my A7s (on my second one) the WORST camera i have owned was ALSO a Sony.

I have a heap of little P&S cameras from a range of makers and the Sony I have is the worst of them with a Nikon the best (none are great)....I am no Sony fanboy, I am an A7s fanboy if you like because i can use it walk around at night with a Canon f4 TS lens and just shoot among other things 

The A7s WB is easy to change (who would have thunk it).

I love Canon gear (MOST of my mainly used lenses are Canon) and i am considering getting an RP for using some of them with AF over MF on my A7s (either that or an AF Sony portrait lens) but if I DO get the RP it will NOT be because "Canon colour is more accurate" because i do not think it is.

As for the R5, it may well be what it is being hyped as (I hope it is) but on past history I can understand people being sceptical.

[Vision]

[Rinad Amir]

We are here to share and learn...But lately i see just complete bullshit from fake users that claim their pro colorist with their science 

Post your work and talk.

[thebrothersthre3]

@Django

Check out this list 
https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/

TBH I am really confused as the Fuji's are up at the top directly followed by Sony. How can they both be super color accurate while both being very different?