1D X III vs EOS R5 and R6

[gt3rs]

2 minutes ago, Snowbro said:

I have had some issues in Resolve with RAW files, I tried all the obvious things like making sure CUDA is enabled and force enabling GPU for decoding etc. None of that really did too much, then I did the clunky smart rendering stuff and manually optimizing the clips, which worked, but it redundantly made me lose tons of SSD space to do it. 

The solution I found: I just turned off the smart or selected rendering, did not optimize clips. Made a new project, threw clips into its native res timeline and turned on fusion memory cache. Then I would just hit play on the timeline, it would still be lower fps, but after it went through it once, it plays back smoothly every time, even with heavy color grading etc. 

I found that this is the only way I can get my computer to actually start utilizing more of my CPU/GPU power in Resolve for some reason. I don't know why this works, but it does for me, give it a go. 

RAW are 100% "decoded" and debayerd in CPU as far as I know, the grading is applied by the CUDA. h264 and h265 are decoded in the CUDA GPU but not the 10bit 4:2:2 only 10bit 4:2:0.... this is why 1Dx III LOG file are even more demanding on the CPU than RAW.... 20xx Nvidia can also HW decode h265 4:4:4 but apparently not 4:2:2

[Stathman]

Can you share a couple of seconds to give it a try?

[gt3rs]

10 minutes ago, Stathman said:

Can you share a couple of seconds to give it a try?

Is not mine at really high iso but should work for a quick test https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q7qp8dX3vFemiiw9h-S0DpWPg8KkxGKs/view

I would need to shoot 10 sec and upload but the link should work

[Stathman]

No problem here.

It plays smoothly with a lut applied and some basic adjustments (4K DCI timeline).

macOS 10.13.6 - i7 8700K - 1080Ti

Resolve 16.2.2

Maybe bad hackintosh configuration? Resolve version?

*edit: - This is true when using metal GPU processing mode. 

I tried with OpenCL and I get 8-11fps maximum. 

 

[Andrew Reid]

I get better performance with OpenCL than Metal, so it's the other way round.

Running Mojave.

Hackintosh is working flawlessly.

Resolve 16.2

Can't figure it out at all yet.

[Stathman]

Latest versions of Resolve are optimised for Metal on macOS.

I suspect this is the case. Do you have any utility to check gpu usage while playback?

Try to disable igpu in bios to see if it makes any difference. 

[Andrew Reid]

I see where the FPS shows up now. It is around 7fps with Metal. Real-time 24fps / 25fps with OpenCL.

So the problem is Metal.

Not the only problem mind you - there is the H.265 / Fuji shadow clipping issues that make all the files look like trash!

Definitely all needs to be looked into by Blackmagic.

[kye]

Is this file format a new format?

I got in touch with BM about getting better performance with playing 10-bit 5K h265 files from the GH5 and they said that AMD hardware acceleration for h265 was newly implemented (at that time) and may not have been optimised yet, so maybe there is further optimisation that might be done?

[gt3rs]

4 hours ago, kye said:

Is this file format a new format?

I got in touch with BM about getting better performance with playing 10-bit 5K h265 files from the GH5 and they said that AMD hardware acceleration for h265 was newly implemented (at that time) and may not have been optimised yet, so maybe there is further optimisation that might be done?

1Dx III has 3 formats:

- 8bit h264 4:2:0 that in Resolve is HW decoded on NVIDIA 10xxx and newer. This a popular format so nothing strange here but you need Studio version to get HW decoding.

- 10bit h265 4:2:2 that is currently not HW decoded by NVIDIA nor by Intel Quick Sync and afaik 1Dx III is the first camera to use it.... According to NVIDIA doc 20xx cards supports HW decoding 10bit h265 4:2:0 or 4:4:4 but not 4:2:2, hopefully they will implement 4:2:2 in the future. On a modern machine like i7 9900k the CPU can do the software decoding in real time but on slower machines is really a dog to edit. Strange thing is that IPB is faster than ALL-I and this seems like a bug to me.

- RAW that is a small variation of the C200 RAW so is not really new. Canon RAW currently afaik is only software decoded and debayerd so you need a fast CPU, you still need a rather fast GPU as is downscaling 5.5k to 4k. Anyway Resolve for 4k editing whatever format needs at least 8 GB Vram. On my rather old gaming notebook RAW is 2x faster to edit that h265 10bit.... 

I did order a new gaming notebook (i9-10980HK, 2070 super), as soon as I get it I will report back. A desktop PC would be cheaper and faster but I absolutely need to edit on the road..... 

[kye]

1 hour ago, gt3rs said:

- 10bit h265 4:2:2 that is currently not HW decoded by NVIDIA nor by Intel Quick Sync and afaik 1Dx III is the first camera to use it.

The GH5 shoots 4K 10-bit 422 h265 and 6K 10-bit 420 h265.

1 hour ago, gt3rs said:

A desktop PC would be cheaper and faster but I absolutely need to edit on the road..... 

I also use a laptop for this purpose, despite having a GH5 and shooting the above mentioned h265 modes....  I feel your pain.

[Andrew Reid]

The GH5 shoots 4K 10bit 422 in H.264.

[gt3rs]

55 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The GH5 shoots 4K 10bit 422 in H.264.

I had the doubt that the 1Dx III is the first one doing 10bit h265 4:2:2 having R5 having the same hopefully both intel quick sync and NVidia will support 4:2:2 so resolve could use. Resolve did add support recently on 4:4:4

[Adman]

I’m interested to know if you’ll keep the 1dxmkiii? I had it on pre-order but cancelled the purchase. I currently use my 1DC for gimbal and time lapse, but no 4K 50fps is a bummer and the HD is soft as hell now! Wondering if the 1DXmkiii is worth upgrading to considering the R5 mat be out soonish. Other than the rolling shutter, how are you finding the camera for dynamic range, low-light etc?

[Andrew Reid]

So far I find the image not a HUGE step up from 1D C, while very good in 4K and 5.5K RAW especially, the 1D C MJPEG 4K 8bit stands up well today. The 1080p is pretty naff and not any better than the original 1D X and 1D X II 120fps.

No 4K crop though, and H.265 offers much more manageable file sizes. The 10bit is better for Canon LOG.

I found myself with a lot of the recent mirrorless cameras 'hankering' for my 1D C. Not very rational! But I love the chunky DSLR build quality, OVF and the 1D C's thick chunky image, big files, amazing colour, so cinematic.

Maybe the 1D X Mark III will be thought of in the same way once I've finished comparing it to the Sony A9, A7 III, Leica SL2 and Fuji X-T4. I'll have to keep giving it the benefit of the doubt for now.

It replaces quite a lot of my stills cameras so may justify itself that way too.

Don't forget to add £500 per 512GB CFexpress card to the price though.

[Video Hummus]

Eh, still sounds like a square peg with its edges roughly trimmed to be jammed in a round hole to fit. The shiny things on the 1DXIII still seem tarnished at closer inspection.

Im hoping the R5 will change that. I really hope that camera can deliver on the expectation it is building.

I still hoping Panny will announce a GH6 camera in the coming months. I see a lot of value in MFT and am sticking with the format regardless if I have a FF camera.

[Andrew Reid]

4 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

Im hoping the R5 will change that. I really hope that camera can deliver on the expectation it is building.

Good luck. It's a Canon!

4 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

I still hoping Panny will announce a GH6 camera in the coming months. I see a lot of value in MFT and am sticking with the format regardless if I have a FF camera.

Yes hope GH6 is still on. Been a while now since the GH5.

Probably waiting for Sony to launch A7S III first.

But for that to happen, Sony first have to pull it out the bin.

[Snowbro]

@Andrew Reid I hear that the 1DX III has 12 stops of dynamic range in RAW. Canon USA replied to my question in their video & said that it is 12 stops in RAW. From what I understand, regular CLOG can get around 12 stops, but CLOG 2 can get up to 15 stops or so (canon claimed) on certain sensors. I saw a few videos where people putting the 1DX III footage into Resolve and it automatically converts it to CLOG 2, which they say has helped them get better DR than using Canons tool. 

So what do you believe? Can it get more than 12 stops in RAW with resolve? Or does this camera have a few less stops of DR vs a C200/300 etc? I wish cinema5d would test it on their new system, the pocket 6k gets 11.9 stops of DR or something like that. I wonder if this 1DX RAW is similar or better. 

[gt3rs]

38 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

Eh, still sounds like a square peg with its edges roughly trimmed to be jammed in a round hole to fit. The shiny things on the 1DXIII still seem tarnished at closer inspection.

What are you talking about? Every review is very positive, yes it has limitations as every camera but what are you expecting a C500 ii merged with an Alexa in a rather small weather sealed body at 1/3 or 1/5 of the price?

Is a FF 5.5k RAW with a great AF alternatives?

C500 II, Fx9 (no raw)

[gt3rs]

41 minutes ago, Snowbro said:

@Andrew Reid I hear that the 1DX III has 12 stops of dynamic range in RAW. Canon USA replied to my question in their video & said that it is 12 stops in RAW. From what I understand, regular CLOG can get around 12 stops, but CLOG 2 can get up to 15 stops or so (canon claimed) on certain sensors. I saw a few videos where people putting the 1DX III footage into Resolve and it automatically converts it to CLOG 2, which they say has helped them get better DR than using Canons tool. 

So what do you believe? Can it get more than 12 stops in RAW with resolve? Or does this camera have a few less stops of DR vs a C200/300 etc? I wish cinema5d would test it on their new system, the pocket 6k gets 11.9 stops of DR or something like that. I wonder if this 1DX RAW is similar or better. 

They mention here that they have not test DR yet so there is hope that they will https://***URL not allowed***/canon-1d-x-mark-iii-review-and-sample-footage/

[Mokara]

On 6/2/2020 at 3:11 AM, Andrew Reid said:

I am pretty shocked by the rolling shutter behaviour reported by Slashcam.

16ms in 4K/60p

32ms in 4K/24p

What a mess Canon!

32ms is completely unacceptable. It's worse than an A6500.

What it means is that the camera is operating at the very limits of it's processing capability. That is why you see AF going at 60p. DPAF is computationally heavy, so in order to process a 4K60p stream the camera has to give up something, which would be the AF headroom. At 24 fps the camera can process the feed and do AF, but because it is being stretched to the limits the rolling shutter is bad. AF polling has to be continuous and that means that frame reads also have to be stretched out to accommodate that, hence the rolling shutter.