EOSHD at DPReview - final summary of 5D Mark III's video abilities

[Andrew Reid]

[html]

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/5d-mark-iii-review.jpg[/img]

[url="http://***URL removed***/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii/"]Read the full comprehensive Canon 5D Mark III review at DPReview[/url]

DPReview have now delivered their verdict on the 5D Mark III, with a contribution to the video section (as an independent voice) by myself, Andrew Reid. I felt it necessary to be frank over the shortcomings, as it is only right you are aware of them on a $3500 DSLR body. But do keep in mind that the 5D Mark III is still capable of stunning video, like the 5D Mark II before it but a little bit more refined.

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/content/8138/eoshd-at-dpreview-final-summary-of-5d-mark-iiis-video-abilities/"]Read full article[/url]

[/html]

[FilmMan]

Oh, what the 5D3 could have been.  I'm on the same page as you with respect  to the 5D3.  For those wanting a "cinema camera" the BM seems like it will be the work horse.  Had a good conversation with a rep today.  I'm starting to think it may be the way to go, depending upon what a person needs.  I was starting to spring onto the Sony FS700 bandwagon, but now I am turning towards the BM wagon.  Fun times lie ahead.  Now throw in Kineraw in the mix and the excitement increases even more.

[Simco123]

Andrew, I'm pretty sure your review of the 5DIII has influenced Dpreview giving the camera worst score than the D800 for video. When you consider nearly all reputable reviews put the 5DIII video ahead of the D800. A dSLR IQ for stills is mostly based on its RAW abilities because most people will be using RAW to fine tune their images. Like RAW videographers shooting videos on dSLRs will fine tune their videos in post. What we have is a 5DIII when fine tune through post put it in another league above D800 certainly match it in resolution but exceed it with moire & aliasing handling which is critical to filmmakers. And I we havent even mention lowlight ability. The negativity you gave saying its only a slight improvement over the 5DII while everyone knows that the D800 video was a quantum leap over D3s really put paid to Dpreview niavely gave the 5DIII lower score than it really deserve. >:(

[Andrew Reid]

Simco123, is nobody is going to be put off by a score of 82, it is one of their highest on record for any camera. The fact remains video was a disappointment.

I think you need to redefine your expectations of what such a camera could have been. We waited nearly 4 years for an update to the 5D Mark II, yet there is hardly any difference in image quality and video feature set apart from at high ISOs. Sure moire is fixed, that is the minimum they could have done. It certainly doesn't match the D800 with a bit of sharpening in post.

[Alex Mand]

[quote author=Andrew Reid link=topic=776.msg5638#msg5638 date=1337943732]
Simco123, is nobody is going to be put off by a score of 82, it is one of their highest on record for any camera. The fact remains video was a disappointment.

I think you need to redefine your expectations of what such a camera could have been. We waited nearly 4 years for an update to the 5D Mark II, yet there is hardly any difference in image quality and video feature set apart from at high ISOs. Sure moire is fixed, that is the minimum they could have done. It certainly doesn't match the D800 with a bit of sharpening in post.
[/quote]

I think that DPreview put the right score on MKIII. It's fair enough. Competition is tough nowadays. You have D800 which is also a great cam.

I've been shooting a project with a MKIII as a B cam and it is a capable camera. It has an unique look however resolving power is a problem, but with sharpening in post you can avoid a little. It's up to the client but really I hardly see someone from audience to complain regarding image quality.

We all know that things will shake badly with Blackmagic camera. It will have its own problems like the really smaller sensor but, as the MKII on its days,  a lot of us will be using it because of its quality.

People on a budget should buy a MKII and a mosaic filter. Put the new magic lantern and with a good card you can record on higher values than the normal ~50mbit. For me is a great deal. And now you can find MKII really cheap on the market.

[MatthewP]

From what I've seen (I've not used one), the 5DIII lacks texture retention in video... which is something the D800 seems to excel at. The D800's picture seems more like the GH2 than anything else out there, if you ask me. AND it's full frame!

[Camera does NOT matter]

Gh2, Gh2 Gh2 Gh2 Gh2 Gh2 Gh2 Gh2.

Andrew,
You should just name this stupid FUCKING site GH2
You seem to compare ever camera on the market to a hacked
Camera.

Fuck this site I am sick of your constant complaining about the 5d mk3.
You shouldn't of removed the filter, maybe you could of got your money
back.

[rube]

If Canon advertises the Mark III as 1080p and it is closer to 720p,
what else should they expect from end users!

I own a MarkII, I really like the cam yet
it too is closer to 720p than 1080. Get it right Canon, you have a wonderful cam thats shoots closer to 720P not 1080!

Andrew, I like  and appreciate your work and your blog. You are an advocate for independent creators.
You celebrate the good and protest the bad, I couldn't ask for anything more.

[eosjames]

[quote author=rube link=topic=776.msg5650#msg5650 date=1337973717]
If Canon advertises the Mark III as 1080p and it is closer to 720p,
what else should they expect from end users!

I own a MarkII, I really like the cam yet
it too is closer to 720p than 1080. Get it right Canon, you have a wonderful cam thats shoots closer to 720P not 1080!

Andrew, I like  and appreciate your work and your blog. You are an advocate for independent creators.
You celebrate the good and protest the bad, I couldn't ask for anything more.
[/quote]

+1. Its great to hear the full details or all the pros and cons. We need to know all limitations if there are any before spending money. There has been alot of positives on the FS100 and d800 then just the GH2. If something sucks or is a mixed-bag, we need to know about it and its great to get an education as well.

[mike_tee_vee]

[quote author=Simco123 link=topic=776.msg5636#msg5636 date=1337920922]
Andrew, I'm pretty sure your review of the 5DIII has influenced Dpreview giving the camera worst score than the D800 for video. When you consider nearly all reputable reviews put the 5DIII video ahead of the D800. A dSLR IQ for stills is mostly based on its RAW abilities because most people will be using RAW to fine tune their images. Like RAW videographers shooting videos on dSLRs will fine tune their videos in post. What we have is a 5DIII when fine tune through post put it in another league above D800 certainly match it in resolution but exceed it with moire & aliasing handling which is critical to filmmakers. And I we havent even mention lowlight ability. The negativity you gave saying its only a slight improvement over the 5DII while everyone knows that the D800 video was a quantum leap over D3s really put paid to Dpreview niavely gave the 5DIII lower score than it really deserve. >:(
[/quote]

DPReview's evaluation of video features in DSLR's is extremely superficial.  They do not have any standardized lab tests for video, so the video score in their conclusion appears to be subjective.  They really should have consulted Andrew on their GH2 review, because what they do have now is basically rehashing the spec sheet.  There's absolutely no mention of resolution, tonal range, or gradability of the footage coming out of the GH2. 

According to DPReview, "the GH2 is unlikely to be an adequate replacement for a serious videographer's equipment."
http://***URL removed***/reviews/PanasonicDMCGH2/15

[gene_can_sing]

I think most people didn't have crazy aspirations for the 5D3 - No moire, no aliasing, higher resolution, 1080 60p, clean HDMI out. For a long 4 year wait, that's not asking that much IMO, and Canon did not deliver and the 5D3 really is a let down to most. Even people who are using it, aren't that happy with it obviously if they are constantly trying to hack the resolution and praying that Magic Lantern will fix a lot of things.

Because of the 5d2, many people started associating large sensor video and video in general for that matter, with the brand Canon. Those days are over now and I'm sure the sales are going to reflect it. Even the fanatical die hard Canon still photogs at canonrumors.com seem bitter that the D800 is a considerably better still camera. Maybe for video, the D800 is a bit below the 5D3, but for stills Nikon D800 basically knocked Canon out.

Canon lost big time this round to Nikon in stills, and in video the Black Magic and Sony. The BMC and the Sony FS700 are going to clean house around Canon. Canon cinema division is an overpriced joke and I doubt the C300 is flying off the shelf and the 1Dx has got so much negative press, I can't really see it selling well at $15K.

Although I do get tired of hearing about GH2 (I don't use the camera), but I feel like just out of spite for buying too many Canon lenses thinking it was going to be a good video platform in the future, the more bad press Canon gets, the happier I am :)

[popalock]

5d3 finally gets a good AF system and with the lack of FF competition out there, it'll will by default earn a best buy award despite the hefty price tag, and rightly so.

Canon simply knows it can get away with it while competition lags behind it.  makes perfect business sense to screw over consumers, who are price elastic, with limited new features in this new model.  HOWEVER, by pissing off your client base, you are conversely making it easier for future competition to jump in and steal your customer base - enter the scene BMD cinema camera.

I'm a Canon 5D owner, but not a proud one.  The day a more friendly competitor emerges with a full frame offering, who doesn't want to screw me over, and who has good lens compatibility/options, I'll be leaving Canon with a massive sigh of relief

[see ya]

[quote author=popalock link=topic=776.msg5664#msg5664 date=1338025782]
and who has good lens compatibility/options, I'll be leaving Canon with a massive sigh of relief
[/quote]

And that's one reason I sold my Nikon years ago and went to Canon apart from Nikons being p-ss poor with video and manual control for video, because although Nikon make great glass and there's a lot of it about, Nikons design 'decision' years ago with regard to small back of lens to sensor distance means that a Nikon camera has a very limited choice of lens mounts that can be utilised without optics in the adaptor. So any Canon owner wanting to move to Nikon has to reinvest in Nikon mount glass, that's a barrier when a cameras performance is on a 'par' all things considered.

This is not true of a Canon though, with the deeper distance to sensor infinity focus can be achieved on a massive amount of lens mounts and options via a simple non optic adaptor including using Nikon glass. Except Canon FD needs optics for EOS, shrewed move in the change to digital?. :-)

[eosjames]

@popalock: i think Nikon now has finally stepped up to the plate and as @gene said, it has won this round. The d800 has been sold out everywhere. They did it right with pricepoint (which Canon will never concede) and specs. And they now have decent video. If the rumored d600 comes out (budget FF), they will have gained or taken over from budget to 'Semi-Pro' range. As a Landscaper, the 14-24 is worth the jump to Nikon. But i am happy with the MkII/24L results. The Nikon menu system feels very foreign to me. Well, Sony too. It would take readjustment. Thats my concern.

[Tim McC]

Andrew, you have stated that you feel that simpler, older glass (for the taking lens) is better for shooting anamorphic, such as with the Iscoramas.  But which camera body captures the right look for anamorphic?  Canon 5D (mark ii or iii) or GH2 or something else?  Would the softness of the full frame 5D better suit the anamorphic aesthetic, or is the higher resolution of the GH2 better suited?  Right now I'm shooting with a Iscorama Cinegon on a Canon 60D, and wondering if I should upgrade. 

[Andrew Reid]

For LA7200, GH2 captures the best of it.

For the Iscorama the 5D Mark III is interesting since you get a curving of the bokeh and a steady light fall off at the edges. I like this look.

However, it isn't right to say one camera is better than the other for anamorphic, they are different looks. Actually I prefer the look of my 2x Centa Vision on a 50mm with GH2, than Iscorama 36 1.5x on a 50mm with 5D Mark III right now... The 2x stretch is more dramatic. This lens doesn't really work as well on the 5D Mark III because it has a smaller rear element.

[Tim McC]

Great!  Thanks!  The Iscorama Cinegon is like a 36 without the coating (it's an older model) so perhaps the 5D's larger sensor might make the best use of its optical properties.  I just ordered a nikkor 50mm pancake lens from ebay, after seeing the results you got when pairing it with your 36.  Now I'm thinking about trading in the 60D for a 5D...