PDA

View Full Version : Canon 5D MkII - 25fps or not?



JBT27
06-28-2011, 02:28 PM
We've just today started to look at doing a shoot with DSLR ... we'll likely be using the 5D MkII, but Canon's product page says it's 30fps and nothing else ... various forum posts suggest that's been 'fixed' and it'll now do 25fps.

Does anyone have one and can actually tell me the reality of this please?

Thanks!

Julian.

stiff paper
06-28-2011, 03:25 PM
I just called a friend (!!)

In Huddersfield.

He says they shoot on their 5D all the time at 25fps. Maybe the US spec model only shoots 30?

(I'm guessing you know all about the trouble you can have with moire and patterning, and know you've really got to be sure the footage is okay before you pack up and go home?)

BigHache
06-28-2011, 05:22 PM
This is from the Magic Lantern wiki (http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Magic_Lantern_Firmware_Wiki):

"Canon has finally released the video-related firmware (2.0.3 and a fixed 2.0.4) which adds or changes the following movie frame rates.

… 1920×1080 : 25 fps (added - actual 25.0 fps)"

So it must be a newer firmware update feature only.

JBT27
06-29-2011, 08:19 AM
Thanks very much Cardboard and BigHache ... the UK Canon website and product listing certainly doesn't seem to reflect this, but ... seems like there is 25fps.

I know about the problems, I've read tons ... but I've never shot with one. So I'm still thinking it through.

This shoot cannot easily be repeated - so it's a tough call - we are going to shoot a rehearsal, and there's plenty of lead time to get it sorted and decided. Difficult wading through the evangelism and then the criticism, and somewhere in between wondering what the reality actually is ...

I would check footage before I packed up anyway ... :)

Julian.

BigHache
06-29-2011, 10:01 AM
I shoot with one at work. The video files are decent looking, the h.264 compression is fairly heavy though. In my findings, I think the footage NEEDS to be graded. Even adding a bit of grain in the now defunct Color helped quite a bit.

Now, there's the new profile released from Technicolor & Canon that I have not tried yet. Supposedly it helps the footage be better set to be graded, but from what I've read you do HAVE to grade the footage with this profile.

Strobe lighting is a no-go with the 5D.
Low-lighting was pretty decent.
And obviously, record sound with something else.

Dexter2999
06-29-2011, 11:15 AM
http://www.fxguide.com/fxguidetv/fxguidetv-111-technicolor-cinestyle-examined/

You NEED to watch this.

BigHache
06-29-2011, 01:42 PM
Thanks! That was a need indeed.

JBT27
06-29-2011, 03:08 PM
Yes - thanks! That was a NEED to view for sure. Great - all that has helped alot ... thank you to all.

Julian.

biliousfrog
06-30-2011, 02:20 AM
The video files are decent looking, the h.264 compression is fairly heavy though.

Have you tried the Nikon's for shooting video?...Honestly, the Canon compression is barely noticable in comparison.

I upgraded my 550D to a 5D a couple of months back and it came with the firmware update as standard so it shoots at 24, 25 or 30fps...though I haven't really used it for video because it's even less user friendly than my 550D in my opinion. The quality is very good but I'd still go for a dedicated video camera if I was serious about filming video and nothing else.

JBT27
06-30-2011, 02:33 AM
I'm erring towards Canon, because I have Canon's already, and lenses ... like them alot ... and I've had chats with film editor and camera friends over the past week who have all shot or edited with the 5D and its output.

The video we shoot tends to be short clips, and we shoot alot of stills, so in many ways, a newer DSLR covering both options is a good call ... though agreed, if we had greater funds and more constant use for video, I'd buy a video camera, no doubt about it.

Julian.

biliousfrog
06-30-2011, 03:02 AM
http://www.fxguide.com/fxguidetv/fxguidetv-111-technicolor-cinestyle-examined/

You NEED to watch this.

great post, thanks

BigHache
06-30-2011, 07:37 AM
I have not had a chance to work with Nikon's lately, no. For most video needs I shoot with an HVX200a.

So I guess that's my comparison gauge, the 5D's h.264 compression is heavy compared to the HVX200a's DVCPRO50.

T-Light
07-07-2011, 06:47 PM
this is a test from somebody, with the most crappy lens + Cine Color
http://www.cinema5d.com/videolog/?p=4474


this is 60D, the 5D is a full frame sensor, it means more DOF and no crop in the Images

That's a Canon 50mm 1.8 II, it's a very good lens housed a crappy plastic case :D. I use a 50mm 1.8 Nikor. Great quality and a HUGE focus ring movement. Problem with it is it's more like a pancake lens by todays standards and it's hard to get your fingers round it on a 60D, especially with a battery grip fitted.

To JBT27. Make sure the camera's set to PAL mode for 25p
In NTSC mode you'll get 24p / 30p and 60p (60p in 1280x720)
In PAL mode you'll get 24p / 25p and 50p (50p in 1280x720)
I'd also shoot many hours of test footage in different environments before you use it in battle. They can take a bit of getting used to. I've been shooting stills with a Canon DSLR for years and thought the transition to a movie Canon would be easy. But, I've had a 60D for a few weeks and I'm still not 'at one' with the thing.

Something else to watch is blown highlights with Technicolor color space. It blows more than the standard Canon settings but is more forgiving in the shadows. Test test test :thumbsup:

JBT27
07-09-2011, 03:19 AM
Thanks T-Light - good advice :thumbsup:

I am still surprised Canon and some main dealers (Calumet for one) haven't updated their product specs for the 5D MkII ... very misleading for DSLR video shooting newbs like me ... though I have also been photographing with Canon DSLRs for years - love 'em :D

Julian.

T-Light
07-09-2011, 06:01 AM
Sorry JBT27, I was jumping the gun.

The 50p and 60p modes were something touted as happening but I can't find any proof. I did find this for you though on 25p.

This IS from Canon :thumbsup:

(Previous) Version 2.0.4 improvements: Firmware Version 2.0.4 incorporates five enhancements to the movie function and a fix to the manual sensor cleaning function of the EOS 5D Mark II camera. 1. Adds or changes the following movie frame rates. - NTSC frame rate (fps) . Firmware Version 2.0.4 or later . . . Recording size / Listed / Actual . . . 1920 X 1080 / 30 / 29.97 . . . 1920 X 1080 / 24 / 23.976 . . . 640 X 480 / 30 / 29.97 . Firmware Version 1.2.4 or earlier . . . Recording size / Listed / Actual . . . 1920 X 1080 / 30 / 30.00 . . . 1920 X 1080 / - / - . . . 640 X 480 / 30 / 30.00 - PAL frame rate (fps) . Firmware Version 2.0.4 or later . . . Recording size / Listed / Actual . . . 1920 X 1080 / 25 / 25.00 . . . 1920 X 1080 / 24 / 23.976 . . . 640 X 480 / 25 / 25.00 . Firmware Version 1.2.4 or earlier . . . Recording size / Listed / Actual . . . 1920 X 1080 / 30 / 30.00 . . . 1920 X 1080 / - / - . . . 640 X 480 / 30 / 30.00 2. Adds a function for manually adjusting the sound recording level (64 levels). 3. Adds a histogram display (brightness or RGB) for shooting movies in manual exposure. 4. Adds shutter-priority AE mode (Tv) and aperture-priority AE (Av) mode to the exposure modes for shooting movies

They updated this in firmware 2.04. All I can find for firmware updates for the 5D mkII is now 2.09 (which incorporates the previous firmware builds but doesn't mention older improvements). You have to dig to find it :)
http://www.canon.co.uk/Support/Consumer_Products/products/cameras/Digital_SLR/EOS_5D_Mark_II.aspx?DLtcmuri=tcm:14-840238&page=1&type=download

To recap, The Canon 5D mkII DEFINITELY has...
24fps and 25fps at 1080p in PAL mode
24fps and 30fps at 1080p in NTSC mode

Sorry for the confusion, hope this helps.

ps (720p at 50/60fps mode on the other Canon's is pretty poor as it enhances the Canon's worst qualities, aliasing, moire etc. You're not losing a lot unless you like shooting a lot of organic slow mo stuff).

JBT27
07-09-2011, 10:10 AM
Thanks T-Light - no problem, that helps alot ... I've been digging around for bits of this data for days and days now, both on official product pages, and via reviews and how-tos.

Slow-mo is not something I need - 1080p at 25/24fps is the key thing, and the vast majority of the stuff I will be shooting will be shots of tens of seconds, at the most, even though I see people shooting with them for an hour or two.

Monitoring while filming seems possible, but a tad hazy ... you can do it, so it seems, but there's a quality hit on the monitored image I think, or perhaps it reverts to standard def during recording ... not sure.

Sooner than later, I'm going to have to jump in ... we're coming up on enough shooting days that rental would be money down the drain, versus what the 5D MkII body costs ...

I appreciate the help - many thanks :thumbsup:

Julian.

T-Light
07-09-2011, 06:59 PM
You're welcome.

The 5D does switch to SD when you start recording, same as the 550D, the 600D and the 60D. Only the 7D outputs full HD during recording (It has dual digic 4's to take the strain).

Bought a viewfinder this week for the 60D. Viewfinders just allow you to see that screen resolution in all it's glory (it doesn't drop in resolution when you record) and they block out even the brightest sunlight. I've recently had three or four pieces of footage binned because of blown highlights, It's so easily done with technicolor cinestyle in daylight where you rely on the histogram and the exposure meter because you can't really see the screen. I don't have an external monitor so I don't know if that helps, I can see there still being issues. Certainly, a viewfinder's well worth the investment, especially when they now start at about £20:thumbsup:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Finder-Viewer-Extender-Canon-Nikon/dp/B00549P3M2/ref=sr_1_63?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1310258742&sr=1-63

JBT27
07-10-2011, 06:06 AM
Output to a larger monitor is not a big deal ... still getting my head around all that.

Been looking at Philip Bloom's site alot, and at all the Zaguto gear ... all of which adds up to an eye-watering spend and not seriously on the cards yet anyway, apart from the camera body that is.

The 7D is around £400 cheaper than the 5D, and I'm having difficulties seeing why some go for one and not the other ... there doesn't seem to be much in it. On the 5D, it's the full frame and the aesthetic of the image which seems the biggest comments ... but for some reasons which I still can't get, the 5D just seems to have that street cred with pros ...

Julian.

JBT27
07-10-2011, 07:30 AM
Something else ... which is a key point right now ... and which I'm dumb enough only to have just considered, is that my lenses are optimised for APS-C sensors. I've got enough for what I need, but on a full-frame sensor, they would be quite limited. So that kind of knocks the 5D out of the running.

At this point, and since you've been mentioning yours T-Light, I'm not sure that the 60D wouldn't be perfectly fine for what I need, not least on it being some £800 cheaper than the 5D body and £400 cheaper than the 7D body, at least on Calumet prices.

Philip Bloom's comparison is interesting, especially what he says about the 60D:

http://philipbloom.net/2011/03/17/whichdslr/

As I say, my big concerns were 1080p 25fps, manual exposure ... I suppose the usual core stuff. HD out while recording is not crucial ...

Julian.

T-Light
07-10-2011, 01:03 PM
Difficult choice, the harder you look, the worse it gets. I spent many months looking at them all. Before I bought the 60D I actually bought the Panny GH2 as a temporary test to see if it was as good as certain Panny fans were making out.

Good points
Higher visible resolution in 1080p mode = True
Less moire in certain situations. = True
Bad points
Tiny lightweight body (not good for a glide cam)
Panasonic only batteries at £60 a pop
Bad battery life
No Battery grip
Pain in the b*tty menu system
No Technicolor grading
Can't match Canons for colour
Send it back to the shop points
Colour banding!!!!! Unbelievable !!!

Apart from the money angle, the bad thing about the 5D mkII is there's a 5D mkIII around the corner. Noone knows when but it's been expected since last year. Their were rumours a few months ago that some testers had three different versions of it. I'd hate to shell out £1700 or so on a body only to find Canon release the mkIII a few weeks later.

On the others (550 / 600 / 60 and 7) I would say it comes down to the intended use. If you're prepared to go the Magic Lantern route, then the 550D is without doubt the best value movie DSLR on the planet. BUT, Magic Lantern can do some funny things, not least of which is brick your camera for up to twelve hours :devil:

The 600D seems a great camera but there's no magic lantern and without it you basically have a 550D + adjustable screen and optical zoom.

The 7D is a superb machine - if you're a photographer. The flash extension sockets, faster fps while shooting still images, extra focusing accuracy and as Philip Bloom points out, very weather resistant.

However, lots of reviewers have missinformed the public on the image chip of Canon's cameras. People believe the 7D is superior with the 550D being the worst. A Canon engineer came out and admitted early this year that the 550, 600, 60 and 7 all share the same imaging chip. The noise that people pick up on is because the 7D and the 60D are capable of fractional ISO settings, the 550D and 600 are not. At least, not without magic lantern.

My final choice of the 60D over the 7D was the superior screen (both in resolution and manouvering ability (I wouldn't be without it)) and the price difference. It also had manual audio override when it was released which the 7D didn't. The 60D also has the option to process RAW images. That doesn't sound like much, but I like to take RAW's then adjust white ballance, intensities etc in post. The fact that you can do it in camera means you can take a RAW still, mess with it till you get the image you like, and use those settings to set up the camera for the motion shot. Sounds good in theory but to be honest, I haven't used this in practice yet and I doubt it's doable whenusing technicolor cinestyle.

All in all, I think of the 5D as being an artists camera, the depth of field is simply awesome, nothing can beat a full frame sensor.

If you want great video out of the rest (550D -> 7D) I'd get the 60D, the screen just makes it so easy to use. If you want a high res screen at some stage then a 7D might be the better option, although the 60D's built in screen I think works out at about 1280x800 anyway, more than enough for anything I need and still higher res than the popular lilliput monitor :thumbsup: (Do get a viewfinder though).

ps On the water resistance front I've seen the diagrams issued by Canon on the weather proof seals for the 60D and the 7D. Apart from controls being in different places they look pretty much identical. I was caught in heavy rain the other day and th 60D was fine with it :thumbsup: Canon, as usual, are very quiet on this front.

Important points. Things that the 5D / 7D and 60D have that the 550D and 600D don't (without ML)
Manual kelvin white ballance setting
Fractional ISO
On screen histogram (standard and full RGB)
Audio metering and manual audio control

Good Luck :thumbsup:

blindsided
07-10-2011, 01:09 PM
our first effort with the 5d
http://www.youtube.com/user/ADItvLED#p/u/0/Uq47yrw3KUA

JBT27
07-10-2011, 01:55 PM
Thank you once again T-Light!!! :thumbsup:

Reading that, and especially about the MkIII and indeed other rumours about a shakeup in the EOS line, which inevitably are going to add major video features, the trick right now will be to buy as low as possible to get the jobs done. And that is looking like the 60D. In fact I was erring towards the 7D, but now I know this, the 60D has to have the edge.

I suppose there's the rental option, but we figure we need so many days that a 60D body looks more sensible, ie. the spend would be similar.

And, if the MkIII or whatever turns out to be the thing to have for DSLR video, well, we can see about that ... we'll still have a 60D to go with it!

Thanks to all, but especially to T-Light - I've got a clearer mind on this thanks to your observations and comments, which is much appreciated.

Julian.

biliousfrog
07-11-2011, 10:58 AM
Personally I wouldn't worry about a 5D mk3...they have been rumoured for a couple of years at least and there hasn't been any solid evidence to suggest that it even exists let alone that it is ready for launch...add to that, the main factory in Japan was closed with severe damage to some equipment during the quake/tsunami and I doubt anything new will appear for a while anyway. I'm not sure whether the factory has opened again or not but I bought my 5D for £1500 from a UK shop a few days after the quake and they were rising at £100 per week as stock depleted.

Also, just because a mk3 is released doesn't make a mk2 a bad camera, the original 5D still sells well. They are the best bang-per-buck SLR on the market and will hold their price for a long time - original 1D's still make a good price 2nd hand and they're ancient by most standards.

I also don't really know how Canon could improve on the 5D mk2. The 7D is great for video and the 5D is an awesome stills camera...it would seem pointless to merge them in any way.

If you're purely looking at a cheap/decent video camera then I'd recommend the 7D/60D as it has better video control. The 7D is a great semi-pro camera and is quite well built. The weather sealing is ok, not as good as the 5D or 1D's but better than none, but it isn't going to mean much unless you're using weather sealed lenses too because water can still get in between body and lens.

The advantage/disadvantage over the 5D is that you get more zoom...great for distance, bad for tight space. TBH the higher FPS when taking photos means barely anything unless you're doing sports and can't plan your shots. I've read loads of interviews with pro sports photographers and they usually joke about the blunderbus approach to taking shots, it's sloppy.

I was taking pics at a wedding last weekend...the guys doing the video were using professional Sony HD cameras for locked off shots and two 7D's for hand-held. They didn't feel as solid as the 5D's but the video controls appeared to be more intuitive. They also excelled in the low light during the evening, as do most Canon DSLR's in video mode.

JBT27
07-11-2011, 12:20 PM
That's very true about hardware and whatever else ... it doesn't deteriorate in ability, but does get superseded and improved upon ... hence the gnashing of teeth if I went for a MkII only to find the uber-fab MkIII's out a month later ... it wouldn't happen that quick anyway ...

But, it's a moot point ... full-frame right now is not an option ... my lenses are not optimal for that, and new lenses are out of the question.

So it is down to the 60D/7D ... weatherproofing is irrelevant for me, partly on grounds that you cite, and partly because other than by accident, I don't shoot in open bad weather anyway, not habitually.

Cost is probably going to do it, and the 60D has that advantage, as well as pretty much most of what I need, so it seems ...

Julian.

RebelHill
07-11-2011, 01:49 PM
Having done THOROUGH investigations of the different DSLRs going, I can only say STAY AWAY FROM THE 60D...

Ok, so Ive not tried out its video performance, but in stills mode its possibly the WORST dslr currently on the market (actually, the 550D is the same)... reason, the sensor... too many megapixels (18) on too small a sensor (apsc) has a very big impact on image quality.

The 5D is great, beautiful, but its 21MP means that a lot of pixels are "skipped" when knocking down to normal HD res...

7D would be my recommendation.

kosmodave
07-11-2011, 03:58 PM
Having done THOROUGH investigations of the different DSLRs going, I can only say STAY AWAY FROM THE 60D...

Ok, so Ive not tried out its video performance, but in stills mode its possibly the WORST dslr currently on the market (actually, the 550D is the same)... reason, the sensor... too many megapixels (18) on too small a sensor (apsc) has a very big impact on image quality.

The 5D is great, beautiful, but its 21MP means that a lot of pixels are "skipped" when knocking down to normal HD res...

7D would be my recommendation.

The 7D has the same sensor as the 550D I think, according to canons spec sheets. Same physical size and the same No of pixels so I would have to say the 5D is the recommended unit to have.
Actually I own a 550D and it does produce fantastic results although I am not convinced about it for recording video though.

Dave.

JBT27
07-12-2011, 05:37 AM
The 5D would be my choice ... if I had the budget for the body, and quite alot extra to buy lenses for full-frame, I'd go for it. Funds and circumstances dictate otherwise, so it's between the 60D and the 7D.

What would be really handy with all these comparisons is Canon, or whoever, posting the full 1080p unprocessed footage for download, so we can directly compare each camera shooting in different situations. These idiot Youtube postings of squished to hell 7D whatever Flash encoded footage to show the quality is completely pointless ... why even bother?

Julian.

biliousfrog
07-12-2011, 05:53 AM
they did have some when the 5dmk2 and 500D were released

T-Light
07-12-2011, 06:06 AM
kosmodave -

Having done THOROUGH investigations of the different DSLRs going, I can only say STAY AWAY FROM THE 60D...
...in stills mode its possibly the WORST dslr currently on the market (actually, the 550D is the same)... reason, the sensor... too many megapixels (18)...7D would be my recommendation.
The 550D, 600D, 60D and 7D all have the same imaging chip, identical in every way. As I mentioned above, it was in Canon's interest for a few years to keep people guessing about this, however, Canon engineers released this info earlier this year. The only difference in any of them is with the new 600D, where they didn't so much alter the chip as it's aliasing filter (for the new crop mode).

biliousfrog -

I also don't really know how Canon could improve on the 5D mk2. The 7D is great for video and the 5D is an awesome stills camera...it would seem pointless to merge them in any way
The same reason Canon needs to improve all it's video DSLR's, along with Nikon, Sony etc. Aliasing / Moire and Rolling Shutter.
The 5D mkIII may not have all three, but it certainly needs the first two or it's not going to sell (over the mkII). People are looking to the 5D mkIII for the next gen. The fact that Panasonic have done their utmost to handle the first two gives a good indication of where the market will go. The 5D mkIII will not be a mix of 5D + 7D, that would be irrelevant for the market and they could have released it years ago.

biliousfrog -

TBH the higher FPS when taking photos means barely anything unless you're doing sports
That's what higher fps is for :thumbsup: Sports photographers saying it's a blunderbus approach is weird though, it's how it's always been, right from the very first motorwinds on SLR's. The SALT cameras are much worse for this as they show an electronic image instead of a mirror / pentaprism. Rather than seeing the actual image between the mirror popping up and down, you see the recorded image that you've just taken. ie You're always out of sync with the action. I don't know if I could get used to that.

On a slightly different note, but related to the 5D mkIII and all other Canon ranges beyond that. A bit of maths to show what Canon's up against with the next gen.

Image size of a current APSC Canon = 5184x3456.
Multiply that by 3 colours x 2 bytes per pixel*Gives us 5184 x 3456 x 3 x 2 = 107495424 bytes
Multiply that by 60 frames a second means we get
6449725440 bytes or approx 6Gb of info processed by the camera every second. that's MASSIVE. To process that well into a 1920x1080 movie frame, Canon will have to have a huge amount of horsepower, worse, it can't overheat or it will degrade image quality.

The Panny GH2 has three processors in there and to be honest, it's not there yet. The GH2 is capable of horrible aliasing. I suspect the long wait for the 5DmkIII is down to Canon wanting to get this right. They have a lot riding on it.

* Using 16 bits for easy maths. The Canons sensor is 14 bits so the figures above are higher than reality. Still huge numbers involved though.

RebelHill
07-12-2011, 06:14 AM
Well, if its some comparisons folks wanna see, then here's some pics I still had kicking around from a testing round I did a while back.

For info, these images are taken on the Canon 550D and the Sony Alpha A55... both reasonably similar in spec (but the Sony's about £150 cheaper). In all situations both cameras were set to the exact same ISO (400) and aperture settings were set the same on each comparison pair of shots to eliminate any discrepencies caused by differnt settings. All images are crops at 1:1, full size.

Anyhow.

The first pair (D550-18/A55-18)... These are shot on the stock supplied lens (18-55) at the 18mm end. First thing to notice on the 550D is the purple fringing present at high contrast borders, and the second is the definition of the strings (christmas street lights). The Sony shows higher contrast, but with no fringing, and clearer definition of the strings.

Second... (D550-55/A55-55)... the same shot, but taken at the 55mm end of the lens. Again, the main problem shown is the definition and resolution of small details. Notice particularly the two strings close to each other above the toads head, clearly visible as 2 strings in the sony image, much less so in the canon.

RebelHill
07-12-2011, 06:19 AM
Next we have (D550-50/A55-50) This is a shot of a 60inch LCD HighDef Tv set (with price ticket), using 50mm/1.8 lens (in the canon case thats the gold rim lens, not the L). Again, we see the 550 is very blurry, whereas the sony is much sharper, allowing us to see the individual pixels on the screen itself, and the dividing lines between them, that the canon totally obscures.

And just for those who'll doubtlessly scream at me "youve got the canon out of focus"... (D550-18b/A55-18b)... is the same shot taken again on the stock lens at 18mm. The exact same soft image is visible from the canon... though interestingly in this particular situation, that may be considered desirable, as it causes the moiré pattern to vanish, the sony gets this pattern owing to its sharper result.

...

RebelHill
07-12-2011, 06:29 AM
And lastly we have (D550-Sig/A55-Sig)... where I go back to the frog, this time using each camera with a Sigma 10-20mm lens, in order to remove any differences between the sony and canon lenses from the equation. Once again, the thing to take note of is the 2 strings right next to each other above the head of the beastie... in the Sony image, they are clearly 2 strings, but in the Canon one they're much more blurry.

So why???

Well, here's the lowdown.

Canon's 18MP APSC sensor packs WAY too many pixels onto it for the sensor size, this has an effect on image quality. Most specifically, it has a tendency to cause halos, and fringing. Canon attempted to fix this problem by altering the low pass filter on the sensor (for those that don't know, this is a piece of almost clear plastic infront of sensors that ever so slightly blurs the light coming in the reduce artifacts and moiré that are a natural effect of the way sensors work).

In the case of Canons 18MP apsc... this filter has been made a lil more blurry... completely wrecking tis ability to capture fine details, and there's NOTHING you can do to fix it.

In the end, this comes down to Canon playing the "numbers game"... they're one of thsoe that use consumer ignorance, and belief that more megapixels=better pictures to sell their cameras, hence, while you'll generally find that Canon cameras tend to lead the way in megapixel numbers much of the time.

Ofc they usually play this carefully, and close to the line regarding image quality, but the case of their 18MP sensor, they've strayed too far... so my best advice, having tested jsut about ALL dslr cameras going on the market is to stay well away from any of the canon models featuring this sensor, as it delivers the worst images of ANY of the current crop of dslr cameras.

RebelHill
07-12-2011, 06:32 AM
kosmodave -

The 550D, 600D, 60D and 7D all have the same imaging chip, identical in every way.

Yes you're right... I was confused about the 7D... for some reason my memory was telling me that it was their previous 14MP chip in there...

But yes, all these cameras suffer the same issue I should imagine (Ive only tested the 550 and 60 both of which were CRAP, and for the reason of the sensor).

JBT27
07-12-2011, 06:56 AM
Thanks for posting these ... on this basis then, given T-Light's comment about the Canon engineer's admission earlier this year, the 7D is also out ...

I guess it's down to how bad is it, in subjective terms, and how much can you do with the footage once you have it in post ...

The packed megapixels is an issue I agree, and that was flagged up in the Zaguto DSLR Shootout last year ... pandering to the ignorance of the larger consumer market doesn't do anyone any favours in the end, but there's no point telling that to marketing people ...

Julian.

T-Light
07-12-2011, 07:04 AM
There's a couple of problems there though. Softness and chromatic abberation are always possible with the kit lens. You really need to test the sensor with an L lens to show what it can do. As I don't have a Sigma I have nothing to comare, however, many lens have front and back focusing issues due to the focusing meters on the canons being at a different position to the image plane, not something you get with the Sony or other SALT cameras (I believe).

These days, I focus manually using the sensor if possible.

All in all it's down to user preference. JBT27 and myself are looking at this from a decent camera with solid colour control that shoots decent motion pictures at 24 and 25fps. Not something many of the Salt cameras do I believe (ie film frame rates) :)

Here's a comparison from imaging resource between the 550D and the Sony
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Here's an example screen grab, doesn't look like there's too much in it. :)

Edit - Canon on the left, Sony on the right
Edit mkII - The Canon is actually showing more resolution, look to where the horizontal stripes meet, the Sony cops out at around marker 24.

RebelHill
07-12-2011, 07:10 AM
Well its funny cos... (first off the reason I have so mucha ccess to so many cams over the years is cos I used to work for a shop who sell all sorts, cams comps, tvs, kinda like a best buy/comet, and I still pop by to train their staff once or twice a year, and can use/borrow anything I want, which i frequently do)...

Anyhow... many years ago I was at Canon HQ in the UK when they were rolling out some of their first DSLRs, and at the time their top model had 10MP (which was HUGE at the time), and the guys there, both the tech guys, and marketing guys, were all in agreement about the "pixel size" issue, and had examples of billboards that had been shot using the camera in question, and were all unanimous in saying that, in their opinion 10, or maybe (a forthcoming) 12 MP was as high a resoltuoin as you could really need for just about any kind of work, and in their (Canon's) opinion anyone trying to play the megapixel game was just leading users on with false promises that would be detrimental to the actual resultant images.

Seems they were right.

biliousfrog
07-12-2011, 07:24 AM
Even though the 7D has the same chip the quality of image is far superior to the XXD and XXXD models. I borrowed one for a day before getting the 5Dmk2 and will possibly get one to use alongside it in the near future for the longer focal length. I think that most people would struggle to see any image quality difference between the 5D and 7D in all honesty, I just preferred the feel of the 5D and the extra 'width' offered by the fullframe sensor...I'm also not interested in the video features much.

As for the photos posted above...a lot of the issues you've hilighted are almost certainly due to the 18-55 kit lens. The original 18-55 was terrible, the newer IS version is just average.

The Sony also has inbuilt stabilization which, if used, could explain the lessened blurriness in the Sony images.

My dad owns one of the Sony Alphas and it is a brilliant camera, it also has a much better kit lens. I hate sounding like a lens snob but you really do get what you pay for and you can't expect to make a reasonable judgment on a camera body when you're using a throw-away lens.

The Sigma 10-20 is a decent enough lens for the price but we're still comparing a camera with stabilization versus one without. The photos are also heavily compressed which doesn't help much.

RebelHill
07-12-2011, 07:25 AM
There's a couple of problems there though. Softness and chromatic abberation are always possible with the kit lens. You really need to test the sensor with an L lens to show what it can do. As I don't have a Sigma I have nothing to comare, however, many lens have front and back focusing issues due to the focusing meters on the canons being at a different position to the image plane, not something you get with the Sony or other SALT cameras (I believe).

Well, you'd still expect the kit lens on the canon to outperform the one on the sony wouldn't ya... assuming you know Sony's god awful reputation for lens manufacture (OK, the SAL lenses are actually minolta, but still).

Also, this says nothing for the same issue shown with the 50mm prime 1.8... no I wasn't using the L version... but the gold rim is £250 whilst the L of the same is over £1K... Honestly... if you're buying L lenses, wtf are you doing with a 550D??? Get a 5, or a 1.

And no, the sony uses the exact same AF method as other cameras, it doesnt just focus with the sensor all the time, so again, you'd expect canon to do better (seeing as I wouldnt even rate the saony cams as a pro solutoin at all, great consumer/hobbyist kit, but not pro).

Plus, the only pics I have are from a comparison test I did between the sony and canon... but I did do the same test with sony canon and nikon, and the canon came bottom of the pack... WAY at the bottom.


All in all it's down to user preference. JBT27 and myself are looking at this from a decent camera with solid colour control that shoots decent motion pictures at 24 and 25fps. Not something many of the Salt cameras do I believe (ie film frame rates) :)

Well if the users preference is for crap images, then power to them... As for video though... yes the sony 24/25/30 no problem. It however has another issue in there with that...

When shooting video, CMOS sensors in SLR cameras have a tendency to overheat... you see this sometimes in canons as the image starts to break up and turn to crap... nothing u can do. In nikon, a time limit is placed on video recording, usually 5 mins. The sony, interestingly, monitors the sensor and just kills the recording when it starts to get hot (no warning, just cuts out)... so those differences are interesting too.


Here's a comparison from imaging resource between the 550D and the Sony
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Here's an example screen grab, doesn't look like there's too much in it. :)

Edit - Canon on the left, Sony on the right
Edit mkII - The Canon is actually showing more resolution, look to where the horizontal stripes meet, the Sony cops out at around marker 24.

Fascinating... and given lab conditions where you can use the highest grade lens, perfect lighting setups, take as long as it takes to perfectly fine tune the focus, maybe things are indeed different... but lets be honest, how many folks can get things set up with that kind of precision on any given shoot?

I should make an effort at some point to do some video recording on different models and makes and post the raw footage for folks to try out and see for themselves.

RebelHill
07-12-2011, 07:29 AM
As for the photos posted above...a lot of the issues you've hilighted are almost certainly due to the 18-55 kit lens. The original 18-55 was terrible, the newer IS version is just average.

The Sony also has inbuilt stabilization which, if used, could explain the lessened blurriness in the Sony images. .

Again... the kit lens argument doesnt stand up for the images that use the 50mm prime lens... nor the fact that the same features are seen when both cameras have the SAME lens fitted (the sigma)...

And its not stabilisation either as all shots were ISO 400 and with shutter times between 1/160 and 1/1000, which would eliminate almost ALL motin blur.

Oh, and just to be clear incase it gets lost... Im not saying "dont get canon, get sony"... not at all. Im just saying stay away from teh 550/60... go for the 5 (or 1 if you can stretch it)... as for me, I dont own either make... ive got the nikon, F5, D300s, and D700.

biliousfrog
07-12-2011, 07:46 AM
ok, just for comparison...here's two images from my old 550D, one with a cheap n' cheerful Sigma 28-300mm (my first lens after the kit one) and a 100% crop from one with a Sigma EX 24-70 2.8

I think that it's fairly obvious that the camera is not the issue.

kosmodave
07-12-2011, 11:15 AM
Interesting discussion, and thank you biliousfrog for posting those images they look really good. I must say I have been happy with my 550D and it's image quality however it's the only camera that I have any real experience with. I have found it easy to overexpose the image though and some of Craigs images from the 550D look a little over exposed which I guess would have an effect on the image quality. I'm still learning all this exposure and ISO stuff but it's all good fun.

Dave.

JBT27
07-12-2011, 11:40 AM
Those images are nice biliousfrog - thanks for posting them.

Trouble is, alot of these comments are quite right, but T-Light nailed it when he said I'm/we're just looking for decent DSLR video, good colour control, and in my case with some other provisos attached which relate to pure economy and practicality, like the lenses I already have.

I'm used to a 20D, which is long-in-the-tooth now, and obviously no video, but I love it, and with my lenses, including the wholly horrid 17-85 kit lens that came with it and DxO, I get some great stuff out of it.

So it's still going to be down to the 60D/7D ... because I also do alot of stills work, and use flash gear, the 7D is looking more likely after I realised about the flash sync socket (thanks RebelHill).

Well, when I get one, whichever it is, the very least I can do is post some 1080p footage to help people decide ... as I say, a collection of that would help enormously, and as RebelHill points out, not shot in a lab but under normal circumstances with the kind of lenses that most people are likely to have or be considering ...

Julian.

RebelHill
07-12-2011, 12:02 PM
ok, just for comparison...here's two images from my old 550D, one with a cheap n' cheerful Sigma 28-300mm (my first lens after the kit one) and a 100% crop from one with a Sigma EX 24-70 2.8

I think that it's fairly obvious that the camera is not the issue.

Not obvious at all Im afriad.

The pics I took (although boring) on the 550 look fine (at full frame size), on the surface, they look great, and it does take nice enough pics... but once u get into the finer detail, and start comparing the camera with other models at this level, it falls down.

biliousfrog
07-12-2011, 12:19 PM
I'm about to take the conversation slightly OT for a moment...


I have found it easy to overexpose the image though...[snip]...I'm still learning all this exposure and ISO stuff but it's all good fun.

Dave.

I use Av mode a lot but the internal metering can only do so much, if your subject is wearing a lot of black the camera will assume that it needs to over expose to bring it back to mid-grey. If the subject is wearing a lot of white it will under-expose to get the mid tones back...it's not a problem with the camera but a lack of understanding of how metering works. In those situations you'd look for something mid toned (grass is always good) or the part of the subject you wish to be exposed correctly and "lock" the exposure...there's a button for that ;)

Shooting in manual will help you understand the relationship between ISO, aperture and shutter speed better. You'll hear people talk of "stops", the meaning of it is unimportant to start with but you need to understand how "stopping up and down" affects the image.

Here's the science bit (if you need it)...

The aperture affects the depth of field and how much light enters the camera...the smaller the aperture, the more 'depth' but less light. Large aperture means less focal depth but more light. The confusing part is that F/22 is a small aperture, F/1.4 is very large.

Shutter speed controls how quickly an image is taken. A slow shutter speed will allow more light to enter but allows more time for subjects to become blurred, a fast shutter will freeze a moving subject but allows less light into the camera. 1/50 sec is about as slow as most people will go for handheld shots, moving objects would require something at around 1/500sec +

ISO affects the film/sensor's sensitivity to light. Low ISO's of 50-100 are not very sensitive so are ideal for very bright conditions, High ISO's of 800-1600 are more sensitive and are better for low-light. The increased sensitivity means that more noise is created so a low ISO is often preferable.

When assessing a shot you need to weigh up your options with those three factors. If your shot is over exposed you can increase the aperture which will reduce the amount of light but also sharpen more of the image...this is sometimes not desirable if you're doing portraits.

You could decrease the exposure time by speeding up the shutter...sometimes a little motion blur is desirable to add movement to an image, sports for example.

You could lower the ISO. This is usually the least likely option for over exposure but raising it is very likely for under exposure.

The stops come into play when working this all out. If your exposure is correct but you want to adjust your aperture or shutter speed you 'stop up' one and 'stop down' the other...once you've got that relationship sorted you'll really start to understand how it all works. :thumbsup:

T-Light
07-12-2011, 01:43 PM
Biliousfrog -

Even though the 7D has the same chip the quality of image is far superior to the XXD and XXXD models
No it isn't :D
It's always worth comparing various camera types with this site, it's an eye opener. Pop in 7D on the left and 60D on the right, show me the difference :) . Seriously, I'm not up for a fight, if you see the difference I want to know where to look :)
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
There's a large group of people out there who are looked on as gods, they're information is treat as gospel and their words become folklore amongst retailers and the public. Their magical prowess in only matched by their complete lack of knowledge and total incompetence. You and I know them better as 'Reviewers'. They have a lot to answer for.

There was a debate raging a while ago about the 60D being better than the 7D. Yup, that is the right way round. The 60D has improved thermal tech, so perhaps it just gives slightly less noise. The only physical difference between the 7D and the 60D in a picture quality sense, is the 7D has built in back and front focus correction, that would make a difference in clarity depending on your lens. Of course for motion picture work, auto focus is a non starter.

RebelHill -

Well, you'd still expect the kit lens on the canon to outperform the one on the sony wouldn't ya...
No :D
I don't know how long you've all been in the game (I'm 43, been using SLR's for about 30 years). Back in the day, Every lens I had seemed superb, the max we would all print would be about A4. Didn't matter they weren't pin sharp at that size, it was all about the 'image' rather than the quality. These days, if you stick one of our old lenses on even an 8 megapixel DSLR, they will look dreadful, really awful. However, it's all a bit mute, this is all about the moving image. Old lenses are now really sought after as the resolution we're filming in is approx 2 megapixel rather than 18 or 21. There's an awful lot of give there :thumbsup:

JBT27 -

Well, when I get one, whichever it is, the very least I can do is post some 1080p footage to help people decide
The truth is, when Canon footage is examined under lab conditions, the 1080p clarity is practically non-existant. It has problems even matching good 720p footage.
Here's the problem.
We go to Vimeo and see the most amazing footage that looks exactly like the style we want to create. It looks sharp, the contrast is amazing, the colour is brilliant, it looks like film, this could be in a cinema. We read pieces by Philip Bloom about him showing 7D footage at Skywalker Ranch and He explains how excellent it looks. After a while we look around and listen to other people (especially panny fans, they lurk everywhere), they say X or Y is better.
To really see the difference in clarity from two 1080p cameras, here's a great example.

1080p Canon 550D...
http://vimeo.com/9699574
Now you may say, "Hang on Brent, there's nowt wrong with that!". And you'd be right. But here's 1080p from a camera that really makes use of the resolution, ...
The Panasonic GH2...
http://vimeo.com/18345432

As I mentioned earlier, I bought a GH2 first a temp test. It wasn't for me.

As the guys here have mentioned, the Canon's are open to beaten by many other brands. However, If you want FULL manual control at 24 or 25fps at full 1080p resolution, you'll keep coming back to either the GH2 or the Canon line.

Here's something worth considering. There was a german guy on a blog a couple of months ago. He's bought a GH2. His problem was
"Why can't I make my footage look like film".
The rest of the people on the blog kept chipping in and stating He could, it was all about the lenses, the fps, the shutter speed and post processing. He kept posting back it wouldn't work, They kept restating it did, He was just doing it wrong. In the end He posted a link to a film made with a Canon 7D and Canon 5D mkII. He said...
"I want to do this!"
The board was quiet for a while and a top bod from the forum came back and said...
"That's not what a GH2 is for" :D
It's what a Canon's for though, And that's it right there. When it comes down to it, the Canon is capable of beautiful motion pictures, it's not a video camera.

JBT27, you have to ask yourself this. Would I be happy if this footage is the best I could achieve with my camera? For me, the answer is "H*LL YEAH!", and here it is, the link that brought the thread above to a standstill...
http://vimeo.com/9856236

kosmodave
07-12-2011, 01:53 PM
I'm about to take the conversation slightly OT for a moment...



I use Av mode a lot but the internal metering can only do so much, if your subject is wearing a lot of black the camera will assume that it needs to over expose to bring it back to mid-grey. If the subject is wearing a lot of white it will under-expose to get the mid tones back...it's not a problem with the camera but a lack of understanding of how metering works. In those situations you'd look for something mid toned (grass is always good) or the part of the subject you wish to be exposed correctly and "lock" the exposure...there's a button for that ;)

Shooting in manual will help you understand the relationship between ISO, aperture and shutter speed better. You'll hear people talk of "stops", the meaning of it is unimportant to start with but you need to understand how "stopping up and down" affects the image.

Here's the science bit (if you need it)...

The aperture affects the depth of field and how much light enters the camera...the smaller the aperture, the more 'depth' but less light. Large aperture means less focal depth but more light. The confusing part is that F/22 is a small aperture, F/1.4 is very large.

Shutter speed controls how quickly an image is taken. A slow shutter speed will allow more light to enter but allows more time for subjects to become blurred, a fast shutter will freeze a moving subject but allows less light into the camera. 1/50 sec is about as slow as most people will go for handheld shots, moving objects would require something at around 1/500sec +

ISO affects the film/sensor's sensitivity to light. Low ISO's of 50-100 are not very sensitive so are ideal for very bright conditions, High ISO's of 800-1600 are more sensitive and are better for low-light. The increased sensitivity means that more noise is created so a low ISO is often preferable.

When assessing a shot you need to weigh up your options with those three factors. If your shot is over exposed you can increase the aperture which will reduce the amount of light but also sharpen more of the image...this is sometimes not desirable if you're doing portraits.

You could decrease the exposure time by speeding up the shutter...sometimes a little motion blur is desirable to add movement to an image, sports for example.

You could lower the ISO. This is usually the least likely option for over exposure but raising it is very likely for under exposure.

The stops come into play when working this all out. If your exposure is correct but you want to adjust your aperture or shutter speed you 'stop up' one and 'stop down' the other...once you've got that relationship sorted you'll really start to understand how it all works. :thumbsup:

Thanks for the tips there Biliousfrog. I think I have my weekend of fun lined up now, trying out the different settings and controls. :thumbsup:

Dave.

JBT27
07-12-2011, 03:33 PM
That GH2 footage is just stunningly sharp, no two ways about that ... but I hate it ... seriously - the sharpness really grated on me after a couple of minutes. That's not the look that I need, or want.

'February' and 'City of Lakes' is exactly the kind of thing I'm after ... it's still a subjective call because the subjects are very different and the handling is different, but that's the look I like ...

There's still that niggling thing over do I want to use it as a stills camera as well, in which case there's the flash synch issue of the 60D ... but then we do have the 20D and that does have it.

The one thing that seems variable and debated is the overheating issue. I have this problem of many saying they keep spare bodies on a shoot ... a luxury I can't afford. So the 60D has improved heat dispersion tech? Some say theirs still overheats. Bloom says he's shot for 2hrs straight with a 7D, got the warning light but no cutout or problems otherwise. The suggestion is that the 7D is prone to overheating though, as is the 5D.

The HD HDMI signal dropping to SD is stated as a potential problem and something to be aware of when choosing. I know this has been covered in this thread to some degree, but who and where would actually count that as a serious downside to the 60D, versus the 7D which does have it?

We have a shoot in two months (which is one of the things this is for) where clients and producers and others are present ... it's not a high-end commercial shoot, and we will shoot, download, then playback on a monitor via whatever player ... maybe that's sufficient ... live monitoring at HD probably is a step too far for us for now ...

You can't win ... the 7D seems to have it all for me, except the doubt on the overheating ... as I'm only buying one body, it's a tough call ... I guess at a real push, said he flinching at the thought, two 60D bodies is just about viable, and provides redundancy ... maybe that's paranoia :D

Julian.

T-Light
07-12-2011, 04:58 PM
JBT27-

the sharpness really grated on me after a couple of minutes. That's not the look that I need, or want.
It's weird isn't it. It's incredible resolution but there's something strange about it. Even when you tick all of the technical 'film' boxes, that camera just seems to scream 'video'. Some say it might be the codec.

JBT27-

I want to use it as a stills camera as well, in which case there's the flash synch issue of the 60D
Can't help you there. The PC Sync, 8fps stills and back/front focusing were all in my 'not needed' box. I've never taken studio shots, not my bag. The 60D has multi channel wireless flash sync built in though and I believe you could add a hotshoe to PC sync adapter (but don't quote me on that :) )

JBT27-

The HD HDMI signal dropping to SD is stated as a potential problem and something to be aware of when choosing
The HD out is a funny one. If, like Philip Bloom you intend to do a lot of shoulder rig run and gun type shooting it makes sense as it's easier to focus looking at a larger screen. Another area people use them in is studio work where the camera / crane operator can get on and do their thing while you sit back and watch everything unfold on a super large 1080p monitor. That would be nice, no use to me though as I'm a one man band.
One important thing for me though, the big benefit of the 60D is the swivel screen, once you've used it you really don't want to go back, you can set up shots accurately that would be impossible on a 5D, 7D and 550D without an external monitor. If weight can be an issue, Why carry an external monitor and all those batteries if you don't need to?
Slightly off topic but I have a cheap pair of MyVu video glasses which I tested with the 60D before I bought a viewfinder, might be useful with a GlideCam (if you don't mind the strange looks) but at 320x240 resolution they're not much use for anything else. A better set with 640x480 might be useful though.

JBT27-

The suggestion is that the 7D is prone to overheating though, as is the 5D.
Apparently the 5D is the worst for overheating (not much warning) with the 550 and the 7 coming in second. The 60 and the 600 are said to have a slightly different internal design which dissipates the heat better. There's other things which may make a difference though. The 60 and the 600 have swivel out sreens which may keep the LCD heat away from the camera body. Adding a battery grip to a 5D or 7D could also help with overheating as warm batteries are kept well away from the processor, that's pure speculation on my part though.


It's your call old man. If I was in your shoes I may take the plunge with a 7D and a lilliput monitor, they seem to tick all your boxes. We live in Britain, not a lot of heat most of the time. So long as you don't leave the live view on for ages in direct sunlight or hot studio lights you should be fine :thumbsup:

Best of luck :)

T-Light
07-12-2011, 06:51 PM
Some other stuff to calculate into that budget.

Spare battery : £60 for Canon or approx £15 for a fully chip compliant copy.
Viewfinder : for £20 you can't go wrong, especially if it's just for checking exposure. Expect to pay at least a couple of hundred if you want a name brand.
Battery grip : £200 for a Canon or £30-£40 for a copy. They both do the same job, it's your call.
Neutral Density filters : Don't leave home without them. To get the film quality you need the shutter set at 1/50th. If your filming with Technicolor then your lowest ISO is 160. To lower the massive amount of light now hitting your sensor you either have to shutdown that iris (wider depth of field) or invest in Neutral Density filters, or both, be prepared.
Lot's of people reckon Cokin ND's have a purple colour cast. I shopped around for a brand that didn't and wouldn't cost more than my camera. I ended up with UK made Hi-Tec filters (Turns out they do have a colour cast :bangwall: Auto whiteballance and post processing can get rid of it but still!). I bought a Cokin mount for them because I thought that would be best (Add more filters to cut down more light). It was a bad idea as more filters = abberation and more colour cast!
You have three choices. Buy a very dense single ND (say about 6-8 stops) buy multiple ND's like me (can be a pain to assemble if your rushed) (or buy something like a 'Lee' set, for which you may have to sell your Granny), finally there's also variable ND's but they can have a problem of changing density as you angle the camera, good one's can cost about £200.
Matte Box. If you haven't sold your Granny yet then get Her packaged and ready, these things (essentially a few simple bits of metal) can cost many hundreds of pounds. They are essentially a posh lens hood that hold ND's or other filters. Lots of DSLR shooters love them, although I suspect it's because they look 'cool' rather than sheltering the lens and filters from light. I just made a simple one from a small nylon draw string bag with the end cut out, the bag loops over the Cokin adapter and draws tight at the back, does the job and cost nothing, other people use whatever they have, hands, baseball caps etc.

There's other things of course, slider, heavy weight tripod, glide cam, studio lighting, jib, focus pull, reflectors and on and on an..........it never ends :D

biliousfrog
07-13-2011, 02:25 AM
Spare batteries are really cheap, I got two for under £19 on ebay which are rated the same as the Canon ones and last just as long.

If you're purely looking to use a grip for holding batteries then a cheap one is fine but my experience has been that they aren't as reliable for shooting vertically as the buttons and wheels often don't register. I'm not sure that the genuine Canon ones are 200%-400% better but they do feel like part of the camera and do work reliably.

Something you definitely need to factor into your budget are cards. The 60D uses SD cards (afaik) and the 7D uses compact flash. I'm not sure of the transfer speed differences between card types but CF appears to be used most in 'pro' cameras although SD's are much cheaper. Anyway, you'll want reliable cards. Sandisk and Lexar are widely regarded as the most reliable and fastest. The last thing you want is for a card to corrupt after you've been filming for hours (like one of the guys at the wedding last weekend using a Bytestor card).

I've been using these Samsung cards: http://www.gomemory.co.uk/samsung-8gb-high-speed-233x-compact-flash-card?___store=uk&___store=uk

I've been extremely happy with them shooting stills, the performance has been comparible to my Sandisk Extreme III and they have a 10yr warranty. The only downside is that they seem to have all been bought up...Park Cameras are now selling them for £80 each! Worth keeping an eye out though.

JBT27
07-13-2011, 04:16 AM
Hmm ... yes, the other essential things to add to it, which are likely to add top tens or more likely an extra couple hundred quid and more.

Oh yes, my call ... :D ... and the balance of what do I really need to get started and importantly get these jobs done.

A 7D and monitor does, in truth, tick all my boxes, plus the rest as above.

That said, the intent is to get into DSLR video shooting ... our two 20Ds already fulfill most of the stills need, including the flash synch ...

If I take the view that I'm buying to add that capability to our kit, then it's the 60D. The foldout screen is a massive bonus ... I'm not doing shots where the camera is over the shoulder and I'm chasing after stuff - alot of it is going to be locked off or slow moves. Clients being able to monitor stuff live is not for now ... though I'm sure we can sort something where they quickly review what's been shot.

We're a one man and one woman band, so also, the notion of camera operator out with the gear, with DP and director huddled around a cosy 1080p watching the action unfold, is not seriously on the cards, and we rarely do shoots where such setups are even feasible, or costed into the budget.

I suppose the truth is also that if we see a job like that coming down the line with a decent budget, then we can simply indulge in a 7D body and monitor ...

There's the matter of the £400 difference between the 60D and 7D ... and that edgy matter of when the new Canon range is likely to hit the shelves. Given what others have said, and the amount of time it's been rumoured, and the logic that says that Canon are not going to rest on their laurels, there's a moderate chance it'll be sooner than later ...

But, as it turns out, 60D bodies are in short supply ... Calumet has none and doesn't know when they will ... they have one 7D in the Manchester store. They do have plenty of 60D with the 18-55 kit lens, which adds £94 to the spend, but means I can get it sooner, albeit with a crap lens ... I will need the camera within a fortnight, so I'm more backed into a corner on that.

Hmm ...

Julian.

biliousfrog
07-13-2011, 06:05 AM
But, as it turns out, 60D bodies are in short supply ...

Hmm ...

Julian.

You'll likely find that a lot of Canon and Nikon gear is in short supply due to the Tsunami. I still don't know whether the two main factories are actually open.

I started looking at 5D's a few days after the Tsunami and I could get one for £1500, within a week they were at £1600, I got mine for £1650 from a UK store soon after and it was the last one they had with no idea when they could get more...The same stores are now selling them for £2000. From what I could gather only a month ago the stores are relying on existing stock to filter through while both companies shift production to other factories. I *think* that the 7D is made in a different plant but I'm not 100% sure.

...that's why I can't see any major new cameras arriving from Canon this year at least. Both companies are juggling production and have lost important facilities.

JBT27
07-13-2011, 07:18 AM
Well, the deed is done - 60D with 18-55 ordered ... I can't wait for bodies only. I phoned around but I'm hearing tales of woe and don't know when, so I can't risk waiting with jobs looming ... I imagine the 18-55 will come in handy for something ... lighting a fire, holding a door open, whatever :D

This is a great thread ... thank you all.

Julian.

BigHache
07-13-2011, 07:31 AM
I imagine the 18-55 will come in handy for something

It's always good to have a normal lens. A fixed normal would be best case, but meh, get what you can get and shoot.

biliousfrog
07-13-2011, 07:55 AM
... I imagine the 18-55 will come in handy for something ... lighting a fire, holding a door open, whatever :D

Julian.

This?

http://coyphotography.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/broken_lens_6.jpg

Congrats, I'm sure you'll be very pleased with it. At least the new kit lenses have IS, that will be useful for shooting video handheld. :)

JBT27
07-13-2011, 08:08 AM
Haha!!! Now that is funny! I could do with a new pencil holder as well ... :D

Thanks! I'm very happy with the choice ... it will do well enough, more than well enough, for what we need right now ... very exciting - been wanting to get into DSLR HD shooting for ages!

Julian.

T-Light
07-13-2011, 09:57 AM
JBT27 -

But, as it turns out, 60D bodies are in short supply
They are, even when I bought mine back in late May / June, PC World in Teeside checked around for branch stock, Nowhere local, nowhere in the region, even the London stores didn't have any. Ended up buying the diplay model in Jessops for zero cash discount. Can't get them without a lens for love nor money.

biliousfrog -

I started looking at 5D's a few days after the Tsunami and I could get one for £1500, within a week they were at £1600, I got mine for £1650 from a UK store soon after and it was the last one they had with no idea when they could get more...I was shocked at how quickly everything dissapeared and the prices started rising. The ebay stores were selling the 60D in the UK from about £620, the week after the trouble they were upto £670 then well over £700 a couple of weeks after that. Jessops upped their price recently to £850!

biliousfrog -

This?
:D


Best of luck with it all Julian :thumbsup:

JBT27
07-15-2011, 02:21 AM
<snip>

Best of luck with it all Julian :thumbsup:

Thanks very much! It arrived early yesterday, but I was out all day, so I shall begin taking a look today :D

Julian.

Hieron
07-15-2011, 05:17 PM
Hey guys, nice thread.

Most of it is Canon based experience.. being a Nikon user for a while I went with the D5100. No manual exposure :/ but it can be locked.. Loving it so far, yet it sucks a battery dry in no time :) Got a 18-200 VR Nikor and a 10.5 Nikor Fish eye... that last one should be nice when filming underwater in about 3 weeks... Will probably get a Steadicam Merlin soon as well...

No Nikon users here?

dsol
07-17-2011, 11:32 AM
I got my Canon 550d late last year and have been getting into the wonderful world of optics ever since. Understanding how lenses (and the physics of light) work and the impact of combinations of aperture size, sensor size, exposure and (to a lesser degree these days) ISO makes a massive difference and helps you know what lenses you need most. I'm a massive fan of wide aperture photography, so Primes (fixed focal length lenses) are generally my preference. Shooting video at anything less than f2.0 is generally near impossible, given the incredibly shallow depth of field. It's great for certain abstract shots though.

I currently have (all Canon lenses):

18-55mm 3.5-5.5 (kit lense - came with camera) - OK as a general purpose zoom, but the narrow aperture means it doesn't produce shots that are really much nicer than my iPhone4!
50mm 1.4 - gorgeous portrait lense - beautiful bokeh. If you can't afford that, The 1.8 version is super-cheap and still pretty good too!
28mm 1.8 - a bit soft, but great in low light and wide enough to be a good general-purpose prime on my APS-C sensor body.
And lastly... my most expensive lense purchase so far:
70-200mm 2.8 MkII L series. I wanted a decent zoom, then made the mistake of trying this sucker when I called into Calumet to pick up a tripod. Once I'd tried it, there was no turning back. It's horribly expensive compared to the primes, but freakin' awesome. The next cheapest zoom down - the 70-200 4.0 - is horrible in comparison. And the ultra wide aperture (for a zoom) and amazing optical stabilisation means you can get amazing portrait shots of people - all the way from the other side of a room! (great for stalking celebs I'm sure!!)

My next purchase will be an upgrade for the camera body itself. I'd really like to get a model with a full-size sensor, but the 5dMkII is so damn old these days (given the rapid evolution of tech) I rather resent the idea of paying big bucks for one. And of course the 5dMkIII is rumoured to be just around the corner...