# Why so many complaints about no external recording on the 5D Mark lll?



## BRNexus6 (Mar 3, 2012)

I'd agree if the camera's built in compression was AVCHD at 24Mb's, but we are talking about H.264 All-I at 90Mb's, so what's the problem? Also, I'm sure an eventual Magic Lantern hack may improve this even more.


----------



## NormanBates (Mar 3, 2012)

because it may very well be only 8-bit 4:2:0, whereas the D800 can do 8-bit 4:2:2 (which is twice as much color information) through an external recorder (and still end up cheaper than a 5D3)

and ML probably won't fix that
* it never got to play with the encoder in the digic 4 processor, only with the ARM part (I think that's why the qscale parameter never actually delivered increased image quality)
* even the GH2 hack, which gets super-high bitrates and all-intra footage out of the camera, can't change the fact that it's 8-bit 4:2:0


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 3, 2012)

I'm not into video, but if I were, I'd compare with the D800 carefully. It is claimed to autofocus while doing video, which is needed for non pro level video of the kids soccer games, etc. Even wedding photographers might want AF during video. The full res output would certainly be wanted for pro level video.

Even Canon video evangalist vincent Laforet is annoyed about this.


"I obviously didn’t choose to thrown my hat into the ring in the quest to shoot a sequel to Reverie for the launch of this camera - and that is due to four main reasons:

1. I find it foolish to mess with a good thing…

2. The specs on this camera don’t necessarily warrant it.

3. No clean HDMI out… why…why…why? (not!?)

4. I thought that the Canon C300 was a bigger leap forward – and therefore chose to throw my hat in the ring to shoot "Mobius" just a few months ago for the Hollywood launch of Canon’s Cinema EOS line at Paramount in Hollywood. Canon’s move into the cinema market was a much bigger development in my book – pretty spectacular given how quickly it happened, following the MKII’s launch a few years earlier. The C300 is in effect the Canon 5D MKII all grown up – but a pure video camera (not a still camera.)"

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/


----------



## peederj (Mar 3, 2012)

I am very interested to learn if the All-I mode is 4:2:2 or 4:2:0. 4:2:2 would be a great help for green screen work.

Canon can always send out a firmware update if their calculations indicate Nikon is hurting them more than cannibalism of the C series would be.


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Mar 7, 2012)

External recording also lets you get around the 30 minute limit and CF/SD card size limitations. I probably won't record video often with 5dm3, but I'm still disappoined that the option isn't there. I don't think a firmware fix will necessarily work because the video has some processing done to add the menus/etc, so it may not be possible to get a raw video feed from chop to hdmi output even if you can turn the menus off.


----------



## Leadfingers (Mar 7, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> It is claimed to autofocus while doing video, which is needed for non pro level video of the kids soccer games, etc.



You guys REALLY need to get off your high horse about this. There are a lot of good, proper, videographers in the world who do a lot more than shoot soccer games and need this feature.

-1


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 7, 2012)

Leadfingers said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > It is claimed to autofocus while doing video, which is needed for non pro level video of the kids soccer games, etc.
> ...



I was pointing out that a lot of people, including Canon Maker of light Vinvent Laforet want clean video out, and that the Nikon D800 has it, as well as autofocus for non video makers.

Whats your problem?


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Mar 7, 2012)

peederj said:


> I am very interested to learn if the All-I mode is 4:2:2 or 4:2:0. 4:2:2 would be a great help for green screen work.
> 
> Canon can always send out a firmware update if their calculations indicate Nikon is hurting them more than cannibalism of the C series would be.



Using AVC-Intra100 as a benchmark, which is 100mbps with 10 bit intra-frame sampled @4:2:2, the 8-bit Canon coding would need to be 4:2:2 to be close to the 90Mbs claimed on the Canon specs.


----------



## psolberg (Mar 9, 2012)

IMO, they should have this feature because I doubt any camera will ship without it from now on 
The external recording market will explode and offer a lot of flexibility. You will no longer be at the mercy of firmware hacks and OEMs making the right choice very 4 years.


----------



## Neeneko (Mar 9, 2012)

Leadfingers said:


> You guys REALLY need to get off your high horse about this. There are a lot of good, proper, videographers in the world who do a lot more than shoot soccer games and need this feature.



This is photography.. probably the field with the most high horse riding around....
The problem is careers are made or broken by trying to convince people that you are better then 'those guys with cameras', which means drawing lines between twue and not twue and making sure that you and your buddies are on the correct side, preferably with as few people as possible so you can share the spoils (which is usually either money, attention, or hot young models).


----------



## iso79 (Mar 19, 2012)

Spelling helps too. Vivent, twue, etc.. Cripes.


----------



## dr croubie (Mar 19, 2012)

BRNexus6 said:


> Why so many complaints about no external recording on the 5D Mark lll?



Because people are never satisfied.
Those "budding filmmakers" who had to put up with a crappy home-video recorder (or shell out thousands for professional equipment) a few years ago, then got a "cheap" 5D2 with all the wonderful EF lenses suddenly realised how good they could have it for IQ, ISO, DOF.
But somehow, after 4 years, that's not good enough anymore. Considering we're at the point where anything shot is "good enough" in the eyes of Joe Moviegoer, the difference in dropping a bit or two of resolution is going to mean diddly squat.
And that's not even taking into account that 80% (conservative, probably closer to 98% or higher) of people who buy 5D3+d800 combined are going to use it for photos and home-movies and never watch it on a colour-calibrated TV screen or 3m+ screen.
(one day people might realise that a good script costs nothing, and will bring in more people than an extra bit of colour detail...)

This is the internet, we got whingers...


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Mar 19, 2012)

I saw a video where they confirmed that it outputs 1080i when recording, by connecting and external Zacuto monitor. It displayed "1080i" on the screen. I don't know if that's quite what people are looking for, but it's certainly an improvement over the 480p of the Mk II.

Realistically, this is an issue for a very small percentage of shooters. How many people have that kind of recorder? And who wants to deal with carrying it? I think those who do are quite possibly in the range of possible C300 customers. 

We'll find out more about the quality of the new camera's video soon enough.


----------



## peederj (Mar 19, 2012)

FYI, the vaunted D800 "clean HDMI output" has been confirmed to be only 1080i, which a strong argment can be made is actually weaker than 720p. So nix that heavily touted "advantage."


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Mar 19, 2012)

peederj said:


> FYI, the vaunted D800 "clean HDMI output" has been confirmed to be only 1080i, which a strong argment can be made is actually weaker than 720p. So nix that heavily touted "advantage."



Oh wow, straight from the owner's manual, too. Page 257. And from what I've read, it disables internal audio recording altogether, so you'll need a completely separate device to record audio.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/7489/first-test-of-nikon-d800-hdmi-output

Looks like one of the D800's advantages may not be an advantage after all, since the Mk III also has 1080i output from the HDMI port.


----------



## Policar (Mar 19, 2012)

1080i via hdmi is probably really 1080psf so with a little pulldown removal you're okay.

External recording might be important to someone. It certainly makes a difference if you're recording in log mode. But it's the type of feature that seems more at home with higher end cameras and throwing too much (sound recorder, external video recorder, monitor, etc.) on a dSLR negates its greatest advantages (size, ergonomics, ease and speed of use).

Things that don't appear in specs (subjective look, resolution, skew, aliasing, etc.) are far more important to most users. When someone starts worrying about clean hdmi out but not about the fuzzy images coming out of the 5DIII you have to wonder about their priorities. Are there more interested in specs or IQ?


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Mar 19, 2012)

dilbert said:


> Stephen Melvin said:
> 
> 
> > Oh wow, straight from the owner's manual, too. Page 257. And from what I've read, it disables internal audio recording altogether, so you'll need a completely separate device to record audio.
> ...



I'm very inexperienced with the process, but it seemed a lot easier to sync video/audio tracks when all video contained their own audio. And you get backup audio, even if its awful.


----------



## psolberg (Mar 23, 2012)

BRNexus6 said:


> I'd agree if the camera's built in compression was AVCHD at 24Mb's, but we are talking about H.264 All-I at 90Mb's, so what's the problem? Also, I'm sure an eventual Magic Lantern hack may improve this even more.



read this
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7551/canon-5d-mark-iii-review


----------



## AG (Mar 23, 2012)

Leadfingers said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > It is claimed to autofocus while doing video, which is needed for non pro level video of the kids soccer games, etc.
> ...



There are a lot of bloggers out there that classify themselves as journalists too but its not really the same now is it.

AF in video is not needed because true Video lenses such as these Zeiss CP.2 ones...





Do not have the ability to auto focus, everything is manual... thats also why you hire a focus puller etc.

End of the day the 5D3 has a few issues but no more than the 5D2 had when it first came out. Lets just hope that they don't take almost a year to release a firmware update that resolves most of these.


----------



## psolberg (Mar 23, 2012)

interesting thoughts by philip bloom.

http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/22/5dmk3/

I think it is safe to say the 5DIII isn't really a big leap forward in video. canon is clearly protecting its entry into the high end video market that is dominated by sony and red. thus it cannot allow its line to be canibalized the the 5D any longer.

I think the lack of clean uncompressed HDMI is more of a hardware limitation than a marketing decision though. It is unlikely it will happen either way.


----------



## peederj (Mar 23, 2012)

To be quite honest with you, what matters is the subjective viewer experience, and to my own eyes the Panasonics including the GH2 look like Camcorder video and the 5D2 and 5D3 look like moving SLR photographs. Which is vastly preferable to my tastes. Pixel peepers get out.

And remember, the whole problem with Camcorder video was it was over sharpened. Sharpness is no always what you want subjectively...and even when you do, what you usually want is a steep gradient of sharpness which a full frame sensor is much more able to provide than a dinky m43 sensor ever could.


----------



## psolberg (Mar 24, 2012)

peederj said:


> To be quite honest with you, what matters is the subjective viewer experience, and to my own eyes the Panasonics including the GH2 look like Camcorder video and the 5D2 and 5D3 look like moving SLR photographs. Which is vastly preferable to my tastes. Pixel peepers get out.
> 
> And remember, the whole problem with Camcorder video was it was over sharpened. Sharpness is no always what you want subjectively...and even when you do, what you usually want is a steep gradient of sharpness which a full frame sensor is much more able to provide than a dinky m43 sensor ever could.



Depends on what you do. Shallow dof is meaningless for a lot of shots. The GH2 is not sharpened, it is more detailed. Different things. According to eoshd, the 5d3 is not true 1080, more like upscaled 720. The gh2 is true 1080. You can always soften video. But once resolution is gone, it us gone.


----------

