# Canon EOS 5D Mark III vs Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 22, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/09/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-vs-blackmagic-design-cinema-camera/"></g:plusone></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/09/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-vs-blackmagic-design-cinema-camera/"></a></div>
<strong>From OneRiver Media


</strong>The folks at OneRiver Media decided to compare the EF model of the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/855879-REG/Blackmagic_Design_BMD_CINECAM26KEF_Cinema_Camera.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera</a> with the Canon EOS 5D Mark III. They put both cameras through a battery of tests to compare sharpness, dynamic range, lowlight performance as well as a few others.</p>
<p>OneRiver recommends that you download the video to your computer, as they weren’t completely happy with the compression on Vimeo. Although, even the compressed file shows the differences in the two cameras pretty easily.</p>
<p><iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/49875510" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Release Information</strong></p>

<blockquote><p>After several DAYS of trying to upload this video to Vimeo, we’ve ultimately had to reduce the bit-rate compression down to 18mbps (Vimeo recommends 5mbps, ha!), which is down from our minimum quality level of 40mbps. This means the SOURCE file you can download will also inhibit some amount of compression blocking and smearing, even in the Cinema Camera footage, which doesn’t originally exist in our ProRes master file. We’ve tried EVERYTHING, multiple types of uploads, different encoding methods, you name it. This is as best as it will get unless someone can host our 40mbps H.264 file (about 3GB) on their server that the world can download from.</p>
<p>Although the downloadable source file is a little better than the streaming version, it still doesn’t compare to the original ProRes source file which imposes no banding, compression artifacts, or chrominance sub-sampling (down from 4:4:4 to H.264′s 4:2:0 space). Please keep this in mind when viewing.</p>
<p>Unfortunately Vimeo only allows 100 downloads per day, so check back to download the 2GB file if the queue is filled. And remember to always watch in FULL 1080 HD or you will have added scaling and moiré issues on some of the tests than what is already been added by Vimeo and our horrid bit-rate restrictions.</p>
<p>Background: This video compares the Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera and the Canon 5D Mark III in several tests. This includes dynamic range, sharpness, pushing levels, banding, artifacts, rolling shutter, chromakeying, wide/telephoto lengths, DOF (depth of field), low light, macro blocking, contrast, and more.</p>
<p>Thanks for watching. Hope this is as informative for you as it was for me making it.</p>
<p>Marco Solorio</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Source: [<a href="http://blog.planet5d.com/2012/09/the-blackmagic-cinema-camera-vs-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii/" target="_blank">Planet5D</a>] via [<a href="http://www.onerivermedia.com/blog/" target="_blank">OneRiver Media</a>]</strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## NormanBates (Sep 22, 2012)

The BMC has 14 stops of DR. Only Canon and the m43 guys are stuck at 10-11 stops of DR (and the GH3 may break away from this too).


----------



## dirtcastle (Sep 22, 2012)

Considering the fact that the Blackmagic camera has an EF mount... it looks like the era of still cameras competing in the video-only market might be over. It's hard to beat specialization.


----------



## quartzie (Sep 22, 2012)

I really wonder what a comparison of 1D-C footage would look like. Canon should be able to pull out more color detail using different raw processing, but I'm skeptical about matching the dynamic range.

I'm not forgetting about the 5x higher price that Canon is asking for 4K video, but I wonder if the quality is really there...


----------



## Axilrod (Sep 22, 2012)

quartzie said:


> I really wonder what a comparison of 1D-C footage would look like. Canon should be able to pull out more color detail using different raw processing, but I'm skeptical about matching the dynamic range.
> 
> I'm not forgetting about the 5x higher price that Canon is asking for 4K video, but I wonder if the quality is really there...



The short I saw shot on the 1DC looked amazing even with Vimeo compression. But I have to say this BMCC footage looks awesome too, I may have to pick one up, although the 2.3x crop is still pretty annoying.


----------



## JasonATL (Sep 22, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> But I have to say this BMCC footage looks awesome too, I may have to pick one up, although the 2.3x crop is still pretty annoying.



If it weren't for the workflow, I would have ordered a BMCC immediately after seeing this video. But, the workflow is just something I'm not sure I want to deal with. But, now I know what I am missing. I have a feeling I'll figure out how to justify the workflow soon enough.


----------



## Axilrod (Sep 22, 2012)

JasonATL said:


> If it weren't for the workflow, I would have ordered a BMCC immediately after seeing this video. But, the workflow is just something I'm not sure I want to deal with. But, now I know what I am missing. I have a feeling I'll figure out how to justify the workflow soon enough.



I agree, the RAW workflow can be a pain, and SSD space is pretty expensive (but getting cheaper). But I'm sure the 1080p ProRes files look much better than the 5D3 also, and that's probably how I'd shoot most of it. I'll probably end up getting one, although I'd like to check out the C100 too. 

It's such a strange time right now with cameras, so many choices. Not sure what I want to do, but I'm leaning closer to getting rid of the 5D3/5D2. D800 footage from an external recorder looks amazing, BMCC footage looks amazing, it's a tough choice. I was considering a D800 and Panasonic GH3, or just add the BMCC and keep the 5D3. Decisions, decisions.


----------



## JasonATL (Sep 22, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> It's such a strange time right now with cameras, so many choices. Not sure what I want to do, but I'm leaning closer to getting rid of the 5D3/5D2. D800 footage from an external recorder looks amazing, BMCC footage looks amazing, it's a tough choice. I was considering a D800 and Panasonic GH3, or just add the BMCC and keep the 5D3. Decisions, decisions.



Add to that the developments with Magic Lantern. If I read the development forums (and the ML code) correctly, ML is the verge of getting much higher quality files out of the 5D3, perhaps even higher resolution than we currently have (this is my speculation, not official news from ML).

As you said, strange and interesting times. I'm not spending money right now. Beginning of 2013 looks like about when the picture should be clearer for me (pun intended).


----------



## Etienne (Sep 23, 2012)

I want to see how the GH3 does.... Panasonic has deep pockets, is eager, hungry, and talented. Canon cannot hold back, the competition is fierce and getting hotter.
I wish I was 30 years younger, such an exciting time for video and photography.


----------



## Midphase (Sep 23, 2012)

Problem with both GH3 and Sony a99 is that to me they both still look kinda video-y. At least, despite the small sensor, the BMCC does have a nice cinematic quality to the footage that I've seen so far.


----------



## nicku (Sep 23, 2012)

The Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera is blowing away the 5D3. at a lower price tag. Is normal... considering that 5D3 is primary a photographic camera not a video camera.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 23, 2012)

nicku said:


> Is normal... considering that 5D3 is primary a photographic camera not a video camera.



A pity they added such a strong aa filter on the 5d3 then, and no 5d3e in sight :-o



JasonATL said:


> ML is the verge of getting much higher quality files out of the 5D3



"On the verge" might be too early, but the most important thing about the 5d3 (and maybe 650d) is that the digic5 is much faster so that's no barrier anymore - think custom codecs and 1080p/50.


----------



## NormanBates (Sep 23, 2012)

So far, the ML team has never been able to control the ASIC part of the Digic processors.
They've been very successful playing with the ARM part, but that's the one you use for the UI and for controlling the shot, and does nothing to process the footage.
So, unless the image processing in the ASIC can be tuned by parameters set from the ARM part, the image will be basically the same (as it was with the old models), and all you'll get are usability features (very welcome, in any case: I've already donated to the ML team at least a couple times).

The only way for better image is if the "decode the image for me" instruction includes a parameter for "with this final resolution" or "using this value in the quantitizer". We'll see...


----------



## JasonATL (Sep 23, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> "On the verge" might be too early, but the most important thing about the 5d3 (and maybe 650d) is that the digic5 is much faster so that's no barrier anymore - think custom codecs and 1080p/50.



Depends what we all take "on the verge" to mean . I know you that you know what ML has been able to do (e.g., alter quantization parameters and bitrate of the 5D3 codec). And, yes, they are being very professional about testing their hacks before calling them stable. So, they'll release it when they release it. "on the verge" to me means in the next year. Not tomorrow, not next month.

@NormamBates: while they can't process the footage directly (well, maybe they "can" by bypassing the encoder altogether), they can alter the encoder's parameters. I've used early beta versions of this on my 600D/T3i. I've been shooting ALL-I @100+Mbps on my 600D/T3i for a couple of weeks now and the results are quite impressive. To me, these are significant. As Marsu says, it isn't ready for primetime yet. But, it is enough of a "proof of concept" for me.

I still go back to my original comment. The BMD CC looks stunning. If I can get part of the way from the current 5D3 to the BMD CC with some improved image quality due to ML, I'll be happy I waited. But, I might not wait... I might just find a way to justify the headaches that come with a BMD CC.


----------



## JasonATL (Sep 23, 2012)

I just took another look at the video (topic of this thread). I put it on my NLE timeline.

The most striking comparisons to me were the night shots and the shots from the mountaintop. With regard to the latter, the differences are not quite as dramatic as they appear in the video. I applied sharpening and contrast to the Canon shot and it improved. Also, this is just my attempt to grade the Canon clips. Someone with better color grading skills could probably do better. Constrast and saturation are the main adds with a bit of color changing.

Shot comparison (no grading or sharpening): https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/eiBM_Pwg4tjhQOD2B6SfjdMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlink
Shot comparison (Canon graded and sharpened): https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/eiBM_Pwg4tjhQOD2B6SfjdMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlink

Still not to the level of the BMD camera, but closer. Also, the light was quite different in these two shots, contributing to differences (not necessarily favoring one over the other, but maybe). I'm not suggesting that there was any deception here. Rather, it is my own conclusion that the differences are not quite as stark upon closer inspection. They are still there, though.


----------



## clicstudio (Sep 23, 2012)

*Multiple Sensors for better Dynamic Range?*

Man the 5D III was blown away...
I am not a videographer so my view on the subject is purely impartial and for fun...

I am very disappointed that after 150 years of photography, nobody can come up with something close to what the human eye sees. I have been dreaming of a photographic camera that can deliver the kind of dynamic range the Blackmagic camera has.

No matter how expensive the camera, the dynamic range is still limited. HDR is a joke. Who has time to post process 3 photos to create what should be done in camera, and in real time.

I think it is totally possible to have a professional camera with 2, or 3, smaller sensors: One for highlights, one for shadows, and mid tones with a real time preview and on the fly processing.
I wouldn't care for huge megapixels or frames per second. 
I would rather take a 7MP camera with this kind of dynamic range than a huge 40MP camera that still "sees" One light... 
No matter the price... a $199 pocket camera or a $7000 1DX, the problem is still the same. You have to choose just one exposure...
I really dream of the day where the output of my camera is the same thing I see thru the view finder. 
For example, take a picture of a well lit interior on a bright sunny day or a silhouette against a sunset without using a flash...
Maybe the technology is already out there. Even cheap video cameras can get close, and now seeing this amazing Blackmagic camera makes you realize the original 5D II was used by cinematographers because, at the time, it was cheap in comparison.
Who would use a photo camera to do video if they had a choice? Nobody...
The Blackmagic will dethrone the 5D II and III as the inexpensive cine camera alternative... 
As I understand, the workflow can be a pain but then again, videographers spend countless hours editing, so they should be used to it... And with results like these, who cares?


----------



## dirtcastle (Sep 23, 2012)

Here's a good article comparing the Blackmagic and 5D3...

http://www.eoshd.com/content/8841/5d-mark-iii-or-blackmagic-cinema-camera

It will be interesting to see how this whole sensor/codec shakeup plays out between Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Blackmagic, and anyone else who joins the fray.

While I feel like my 5D3's video capabilities are about to be dated, the bottom line is that you can make great videos with even modest equipment. Imagination still trump specs.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 23, 2012)

clicstudio said:


> No matter how expensive the camera, the dynamic range is still limited. HDR is a joke. Who has time to post process 3 photos to create what should be done in camera, and in real time.
> 
> [...]
> 
> As I understand, the workflow can be a pain but then again, videographers spend countless hours editing, so they should be used to it... And with results like these, who cares?



Well, at least you can do hdr video with Magic Lantern - and if ml manages to get 1080p/50 or /60 out of the 5d3 at least the current dynamic range would be much higher. And in comparison to merging photo hdr shots the workflow on video is so time-consuming another step (merging & motion-compensating hdr) doesn't make that much of a difference?


----------



## Axilrod (Sep 23, 2012)

Etienne said:


> I want to see how the GH3 does.... Panasonic has deep pockets, is eager, hungry, and talented. Canon cannot hold back, the competition is fierce and getting hotter.
> I wish I was 30 years younger, such an exciting time for video and photography.



I've heard nothing but good things thus far, apparently their new ALL-I codec is very solid. Detail levels on the hacked GH2 were ridiculous, comparable to the C300. 

Here's a short Philip Bloom shot with a pre-production model (I'd recommend downloading it, as Vimeo's compression definitely affects color/sharpness): https://vimeo.com/49420579


----------



## Axilrod (Sep 23, 2012)

*Re: Multiple Sensors for better Dynamic Range?*



clicstudio said:


> As I understand, the workflow can be a pain but then again, videographers spend countless hours editing, so they should be used to it... And with results like these, who cares?



It doesn't matter how long editing normally takes, time is money, either way the extra time to process footage is still an inconvenience. And it's not so much the additional workflow as it is the cost of SSD space, I think 30 min of footage in CinemaDNG is 200GB. Not to mention you need some serious processing power to even work with the files, it'll bog down even very high-end machines. 

It's definitely not a perfect camera (but there isn't really such a thing), but I'm still interested. I may end up opting for the MFT mount instead of the EF. I'd probably end up shooting in 1080p ProRes most of the time, but true 1080p is still going to look much better than the 5D3.


----------



## hutjeflut (Sep 24, 2012)

makes you wonder how much better dslr's cn do when the software on the camera gets a totalo redo.
the sensor is obviously better yet the immages dont lie (unless they are falslky edited on purpose to favor the ciname cam.)

so with better software or better raw data management the 5d2 should be a LOT better then the cinemal cam.
if the photo's are that much better thn the ciname fram captures than the movie in theory should be able to be be much better also as its nothing more then stitched togethet photo's after all.

all this movie shows to me is that either he wants to discredit the DSLR filmers or that the DSLR video software needs a LOT of improvement and when it does it wil be better as the sensor simply is better.
if not i want this sensor in a dslr as its mucgh sharper with the same lenses  
somthing is just off here either canon firmware or video editing of the 5d as it simply doesnt match the theory.


----------



## risc32 (Sep 24, 2012)

I'm not a video guy, but i've been taking little clips of my kids in the backyard, and at their sports, and they look pretty darn good. I must be missing something, as the 5d's video quality in these videos looks pretty bad. When shown in this fashion every little thing is noticeable(as should be done) but that seems to be a bridge to far. I mean, that 5d footage REALLY sucks compared to the BM.


----------



## dhofmann (Sep 24, 2012)

When the 5D3 downscales the raw image data from 22MP to 2MP for video, I wonder if it's throwing away information that could be used to increase the dynamic range. Removing 91% of the pixels creates bigger "virtual pixels" and that ought to add at least a few stops of dynamic range.

So if the 5D3's processor is fast enough, maybe we'll see a new firmware that improves the dynamic range of video.


----------



## lourenco (Sep 24, 2012)

The DR of the 5D Mark III does not seem that great. DXOMark shows it only DR of 11.7 at best. It just gets worse at the higher iso. I was considering of upgrading to the 5d Mark III. I am not sure now after seeing this video. I am now waiting for Canon to come out with DSLR camera with 1080p at 60 fps under $3k. 60fps with MagicLatern HDR video would allow someone to cheat a little bit to increase the DR. I am hoping that Canon is going to come out with something better next year.

If I was just into doing video I would consider the Blackmagic. I currently need something to do both video and photography.


----------



## Policar (Sep 24, 2012)

lourenco said:


> The DR of the 5D Mark III does not seem that great. DXOMark shows it only DR of 11.7 at best. It just gets worse at the higher iso. I was considering of upgrading to the 5d Mark III. I am not sure now after seeing this video. I am now waiting for Canon to come out with DSLR camera with 1080p at 60 fps under $3k. 60fps with MagicLatern HDR video would allow someone to cheat a little bit to increase the DR. I am hoping that Canon is going to come out with something better next year.
> 
> If I was just into doing video I would consider the Blackmagic. I currently need something to do both video and photography.



These lighting conditions were meant to stress the cameras, and they really don't get much more punishing, and the 5D would have done much better were highlight tone priority set to on although that would also make the dark areas noisier (if it was, then these tests reflect really poorly...), but it's clear that the BMC camera does very well. It's the softness that really gets to me, though. If Canon can fix that a bit I can surely live with the poor DR. The DR is also much better for stills, particularly when shooting raw.

I think the issue is that Canon's sensors have a ton of read noise and the technology to prevent it is proprietary to Sony sensors. It's introduced between the sensor and the ADC and it's not terrible in stills, but since the sensor bins on-sensor, in effect the read noise is 4X more present (or scaled up 4X larger) for video. And when using highlight tone priority it really gets noticeable, but that can help the highlight detail a lot.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 24, 2012)

The little GH cams have crop modes, but can Canon give their DSLR crop mode video? Nope. Marketing would slap the engineers silly for daring to try to take anywhere near close to full advantage of the hardware. The 5D3 sensor actually has an ASP-C section that could be read exactly the same way as the C300 in 2x2 blocking since it is the same 8MP in the APS-C crop portion.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 24, 2012)

Midphase said:


> Problem with both GH3 and Sony a99 is that to me they both still look kinda video-y. At least, despite the small sensor, the BMCC does have a nice cinematic quality to the footage that I've seen so far.



The GH2 was a touch on the video-looking side, true. While the 5D3 kind of soft, the GH2 is sort of almost a touch too video-crisp.


----------



## NormanBates (Sep 24, 2012)

lourenco said:


> The DR of the 5D Mark III does not seem that great. DXOMark shows it only DR of 11.7 at best.



I love DxOMark tests, but they're only relevant for stills. When shooting video, you can't record RAW, you can only record debayered, processed, compressed H.264. The curve that Canon (and Nikon, and Sony) apply when debayering kills a lot of the DR captured by the sensor.

On the Canons, in video you actually get around 11 stops, if you don't mind running some NR to clean the shadows. For Nikons and Sony the difference is much bigger: the D800 has a DR advantage over the 5D3 of a bit less than one stop; the NEX-5N is on par with the Canons.

If the BlackMagic is actually recording 14 stops of DR, as they claim, that's nearly 3 stops more than the best DSLRs.

Check my measurements of the D800, T2i, GH2, NEX-5N, at the end of this:
http://www.vimeo.com/similaar/shootout2012


----------



## lourenco (Sep 24, 2012)

> Check my measurements of the D800, T2i, GH2, NEX-5N, at the end of this:
> http://www.vimeo.com/similaar/shootout2012



It is interesting to see how bad the GH2 did. I was somewhat suprised that the D800 did not do any better. The 550D results look good. 

The guys at MagicLatern are currently working on increasing the bit rate I believe on the 600d. They are currently limited to the max limit of the SD card of 20MB/s or 160mbits/s. It would be very interesting to see what happens if they can apply that to the 5d Mark III where the CF card is much faster. It is not fast enough for raw though.


----------



## facedodge (Sep 24, 2012)

https://vimeo.com/38989476#

This test shows the 5D3 can reveal more detail with post sharpening. The video says he did color grading but didn't mention sharpening.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Sep 24, 2012)

The writing is on the wall for Canon, as it has been for some time now. But now, many people (including myself) have gone to greener and much better pastures for video (Sony, BMC, Panny, Nikon, etc....)

Canon needs to start competing in video instead of riding on their fast fading name. Cut prices and start making competitive products. Even in stills, Nikon has the better bodies now. That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.

Canon had to do so little to own the video market, but the way they played their cards was like going into the NBA finals with a 30 point lead in the fourth quarter and somehow losing. Seemed almost impossible to do, but they lost the video market they should have owned.


----------



## Nishi Drew (Sep 24, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> The writing is on the wall for Canon, as it has been for some time now. But now, many people (including myself) have gone to greener and much better pastures for video (Sony, BMC, Panny, Nikon, etc....)
> 
> Canon needs to start competing in video instead of riding on their fast fading name. Cut prices and start making competitive products. Even in stills, Nikon has the better bodies now. That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.
> 
> Canon had to do so little to own the video market, but the way they played their cards was like going into the NBA finals with a 30 point lead in the fourth quarter and somehow losing. Seemed almost impossible to do, but they lost the video market they should have owned.



I, along with those countless others joined Canon on the journey of HD-DSLR video, and it was awesome, right at the beginning. Canon somehow lost out on the point of the 5D being popular because it was a "Cheap 35mm sensor with HD video" and decided the world wants the Cinema cameras instead, not the same camera system with improved specs and usability of the new feature. Soon after, every other manufacturer embraces the roll of putting video in their still cameras and moves forward with the evolution, even m4/3 looks to be better what's up with that?


----------



## jhines (Sep 24, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.



Amen! 

Canon's cinema line has alienated pretty much of all Canon's customers who bought their DSLR's for video. The sad thing is that in order for the DSLR's to step up their quality they will be stepping on the toes of their Cinema line (C100,C300, etc). You can't even get 1080p 60P for less than $15,000 with Canon and that's utterly absurd when every cheap point and shoot from Sony has had it for the last 3 years for a few hundred dollars. Time for Canon to wake the F up.


----------



## lola (Sep 24, 2012)

Unfortunately for me; I'm not surprised even a bit...
Fortunately for Canon, there are so many fanboys who won't get anything out of this video...


----------



## sb (Sep 24, 2012)

This is embarrassing to watch. Not that an SLR needs to be able to compete with a dedicated video camera, but at least put up a fight in the DR department.... And the price point - OMG... At sub $3000, this video camera is probably the best bang-for-buck on the market. 5DMK3's footage looks like it's been downsized to 720p and then stretched to 1080p. I dont understand what Canon was doing for the past 5 years.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 24, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> The writing is on the wall for Canon, as it has been for some time now. But now, many people (including myself) have gone to greener and much better pastures for video (Sony, BMC, Panny, Nikon, etc....)
> 
> Canon needs to start competing in video instead of riding on their fast fading name. Cut prices and start making competitive products. Even in stills, Nikon has the better bodies now. That's really sad for a company that accidentally started a revolution with the 5D2, but failed to follow up on it because of greed.
> 
> Canon had to do so little to own the video market, but the way they played their cards was like going into the NBA finals with a 30 point lead in the fourth quarter and somehow losing. Seemed almost impossible to do, but they lost the video market they should have owned.



Yup.
They had the market, until their marketing realized it and then they went and tossed it (not completely but a lot). As you say they could've so utterly entrenched themselves as THE player in the small pretty high quality little body video field. Instead they went to their internal segmentation, cripplings, delaying until they absolutely must release something game and now they are just going to be one of many side players quite likely.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 24, 2012)

Nishi Drew said:


> gene_can_sing said:
> 
> 
> > The writing is on the wall for Canon, as it has been for some time now. But now, many people (including myself) have gone to greener and much better pastures for video (Sony, BMC, Panny, Nikon, etc....)
> ...



Exactly. Idiotic. The world already had the other stuff. That ws NOT their revolution and now they need to cripple their revolution to protect the other stuff. And we have the 5D3 video and video features not at all what they could have been (even with the given hardware) and the 1DX needs a $6000 firmware update, etc.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Sep 24, 2012)

The funniest thing is that if they did the 5D3 right, it would have probably been the biggest selling large sensor video hybrid camera in history. For every C300 they sold, they would have sold 100 5D3s if it was done right.

But now as it stands, nobody really cares about their cameras for video and the 5D3 has very lukewarm sales for the video crowd (not even close to the 5D2 or the 7D). Not only did they lose huge amounts of sales, they lost a huge amount of respect from their video customers and once people leave, it's hard to get them back.

For me, I bought a Sony FS700 and I absolutely LOVE it. Great camera for the price. It's been about 1 1/2 years since I've bought anything Canon, and that's not going to change until they make something worth buying.


----------



## willis (Sep 24, 2012)

Should make that test again and change 5D3 to C100.


----------



## Woody (Sep 24, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> It's been about 1 1/2 years since I've bought anything Canon, and that's not going to change until they make something worth buying.



For me, the 6D will be the last Canon purchase I make. After that, I don't see myself getting anything from them until something worthwhile comes along.

I am however not so certain if the marketing folks are at fault. I suspect the recent spate of retiree is making its toll on the company.


----------



## PVS (Sep 24, 2012)

THIS^ is a lot of difference canon has to catch up with.


----------



## risc32 (Sep 25, 2012)

Again, I'm not a video guy, but while i see the blown out stuff here and the crushed stuff there in the 5d image, this BM image looks hdr artificial to me. It's almost all mid-tones. Is that the end target, or from that they can make something really nice? because if that's it, i'm not so sure i'd take the BM over the 5d in this shot. Can't they just put a wicked tone curve on the the 5d and get something pretty close. again, just a photo guy here, so try and take it easy on me 





PVS said:


> THIS^ is a lot of difference canon has to catch up with.


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 25, 2012)

risc32 said:


> Again, I'm not a video guy, but while i see the blown out stuff here and the crushed stuff there in the 5d image, this BM image looks hdr artificial to me. It's almost all mid-tones. Is that the end target, or from that they can make something really nice? because if that's it, i'm not so sure i'd take the BM over the 5d in this shot. Can't they just put a wicked tone curve on the the 5d and get something pretty close. again, just a photo guy here, so try and take it easy on me



You mean you don't like the picture because it seems HDR? I think the BM picture is nearer to what the human eye can see than the one produced by Canon. I think BM has its DR expanded that's why it almost look like a "natural" HDR. I think the end target should always be the performance of the human eye and from what I see, BM is nearer to reality.


----------



## PVS (Sep 25, 2012)

it's not just the highlights area, there's noticeable difference in darker shadow areas too.


----------



## cayenne (Sep 25, 2012)

*Re: Multiple Sensors for better Dynamic Range?*



Axilrod said:


> <snip>
> 
> It's definitely not a perfect camera (but there isn't really such a thing), but I'm still interested. I may end up opting for the MFT mount instead of the EF. I'd probably end up shooting in 1080p ProRes most of the time, but true 1080p is still going to look much better than the 5D3.



I'd read something about them coming out with a different mount...the MFT.

What exactly is a MFT mount...and why would you want it over the EF? If not the EF, you'd not be able to use all your Canon glass...which is good stuff, no?


----------



## weekendshooter (Sep 25, 2012)

*Re: Multiple Sensors for better Dynamic Range?*



cayenne said:


> Axilrod said:
> 
> 
> > <snip>
> ...



MFT = micro 4/3. These cameras are going to be operated mostly manually anyway, so choosing mft and then getting an mft -> eos adapter will allow for the same operation as native eos but with the added possibility of using 4/3 glass, which has some neat choices for that sensor format. That and EOS lenses are generally not optimized for video, while I think m4/3 has a few that are.

EDIT: in addition to simply being able to use an EOS adapter, the short flange distance of mft allows for the use of an adapter to almost any mount imaginable, so that's why it would be the preferred choice. The longer flange distance of EOS limits the choices of adapters compared to mft.


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 26, 2012)

*Re: Multiple Sensors for better Dynamic Range?*



weekendshooter said:


> cayenne said:
> 
> 
> > Axilrod said:
> ...



I think your only problem with MFT is that if you need a very wide angle, you can't match that of an FF but on the other hand, I don't think anybody shoots that much wide angle anyway.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Sep 26, 2012)

willis said:


> Should make that test again and change 5D3 to C100.



That would be even more embarrassing for Canon. 

The only thing the c100 would win on would be rolling shutter.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 26, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> The funniest thing is that if they did the 5D3 right, it would have probably been the biggest selling large sensor video hybrid camera in history. For every C300 they sold, they would have sold 100 5D3s if it was done right.
> 
> But now as it stands, nobody really cares about their cameras for video and the 5D3 has very lukewarm sales for the video crowd (not even close to the 5D2 or the 7D). Not only did they lose huge amounts of sales, they lost a huge amount of respect from their video customers and once people leave, it's hard to get them back.
> 
> For me, I bought a Sony FS700 and I absolutely LOVE it. Great camera for the price. It's been about 1 1/2 years since I've bought anything Canon, and that's not going to change until they make something worth buying.



yup


----------



## preppyak (Sep 26, 2012)

risc32 said:


> It's almost all mid-tones. Is that the end target, or from that they can make something really nice?


That's the point of a more flat profile, you can always add contrast, but taking it away is where you introduce noise, banding, etc. In the Canon shot, you'll never really recover the blown highlights by the sign or the crushed shadows, unless you are working with really high end gear. With the Black Magic, I could easily re-create that Canon shot if I liked the look...can't do the opposite though.

That means the BM is way more versatile. If you're doing high-key TV work, it produces a nice image with less light (and less light is cheaper). If youre doing grittier work, you can introduce that contrast while being able to keep details. That versatility is everything, because its rare to shoot the exact same video style over and over.


----------



## dirtcastle (Sep 27, 2012)

preppyak said:


> risc32 said:
> 
> 
> > It's almost all mid-tones. Is that the end target, or from that they can make something really nice?
> ...



Well-put!


----------



## NormanBates (Sep 27, 2012)

^ that


----------



## daveswan (Oct 4, 2012)

I was wondering how I was going to finance a 5DIII then the BMC hit. Now I'll be going with that and doing my photography with my 5DI. I'll probably sell my 550D for peanuts.


----------



## risc32 (Oct 5, 2012)

While i don't think that one shot of the city at night looks any more like reality than the canon shot, i do understand what you guys are saying. thanks. 

one thing though. the guy starts out by saying that the 5dmk3 is better for high iso work, then doesn't show any samples. at what iso does the BMC start to fall down, and how far?

-daveswan- now it looks like you'll have to finance a super computer, and a BMC.


----------

