Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Comparing Actual Camera Resolutions

37 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

I remember having a funny debate with someone about 550D vs 7D. He just couldn't accept that there was no difference in video quality, and that in fact the 550D was better due to having Magic Lantern hacks. Actually refused to acknowledge the higher bitrate when put in front of him. Much as when one tries to argue with a religious fanatic, it was pointless.

 

The ideas were fixed and things like reason or actually seeing evidence didn't come into it.

 

It was a sign of someone being completely blinded by the religion of capitalism! More expensive must  be better right? :/

 

On the other side, as nice as resolution comparisons are though, it's the codec implementations that make more difference at the low end. Really different aesthetic feels from each company i think.

 

Alexa, for example, has lower stats than Red Epic, but I do prefer the footage on the whole. Though I hated how it looked in Skyfall, it was beautifull in The Hunt and Drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

mark- lol, wish I had the free time! I'm happy to have kicked this off, hopefully the community can take over and contribute to making it more accurate and complete.

 

hmcindie- thanks for the provideocoalition link- found FS700 charts: http://provideocoalition.com/awilt/story/high_speed_and_low_light_with_the_nex-fs700/

 

http://provideocoalition.com/awilt/story/review_sony_nex-fs700_super35_lss_avchd_camcorder/P3 : he states 800 TVl/ph (horizontal resolution) and 1000+ vertical resolution.

 

Another chart: http://provideocoalition.com/awilt/story/high_speed_and_low_light_with_the_nex-fs700/P2 .

 

From both charts, it appears the FS700 has more vertical than horizontal sampling resolution.

 

Since the straight line chart (vs. curved/trumpets) had better results, it would appear the de-Bayering and image processing may have something to do with the behavior. Note in the trumpet chart near the numbers, resolution is highest- extending past 1000 lines.

 

Thus, it would be helpful to have both charts available when testing resolution.

 

jgharding- I understand what you mean. I have an FS700 and it's hard to believe the strange trumpet chart results, but there they are. The FS700 does OK in the straight line charts, and it looks much better than the 5D3 for real imagery, so I'm happy with the upgrade. The secret to the ARRI is their color science- they've got highlight falloff and skin tone control nailed- that's why it's used so much in Hollywood.

 

Thanks for the links guys- found this which is helpful in better understanding the FS700 camera picture profiles: http://provideocoalition.com/awilt/story/review_sony_nex-fs700_super35_lss_avchd_camcorder/P2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

FS100:

camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_lumi

 

GH2:

videodslr-testueberblick_luminanz_aufloe

 

From these charts, the FS100 has higher peak resolution but the GH2 has more area under the curve and thus better overall accutance.

 

5D2:

videodslr-testueberblick_luminanz_aufloe

 

5D3:

camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_lumi

 

Similarly, the 5D3 has more contrast at higher frequencies (peak resolution), however it has lower area under the curve. Thus the 5D2 has better overall accutance straight from the camera.

 

Sharpened 5D3 footage looks more detailed than 5D2 footage (which can't be sharpened much). Thus, overall peak accutance depends on how much the image can be sharpened in post. Sharpening increases microcontrast (but not peak sampled resolution) and will thus affect these types of tests.

 

In summary, the FS100 provides higher peak resolution, and the GH2 provides better accutance.

Out of the camera, the 5D2 provides better accutance and after post sharpening the 5D3 provides similar accutance and higher peak resolution. It might be possible to post-sharpen FS100 footage to bring accutance up to GH2 levels.

jgharding likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

What about 6D?

6d is gonna be in the same area as mkII and mkIII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Updated top post for recent discoveries with FS100/FS700 and C100/C300.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?47529-EPIC-and-Alexa

 

Here we have a comparison of a 5K RED sensor compared to a 3.5K ARRI sensor. At first glance one might think the RED is sharper and more detailed, and is thus better. The RED sensor is indeed sharper and more detailed: 5K pixels can sample 2.5K resolution before aliasing. The 3.5K ARRI sensor stops producing contrast changes (resolution) right where we'd expect from Nyquist- right around 3.5/2 = 1.8K. After that, the ARRI goes flat, producing almost no detail. If we look at the ring charts, we see zero aliasing for the ARRI, and lots of aliasing with the RED.

 

Thus, ARRI does an excellent job of cutting off frequencies above the sampling resolution of their sensor- this is very important to eliminate aliasing and moire. Their sensor is pretty trick as well (16-bit HDR): http://www.arri.com/camera/digital_cameras/technology/arri_imaging_technology/alexas_sensor.html

 

Which is better in practice? For moving images, aliasing is a major give-away for a digital vs. film experience. When cost is no object, it appears ARRI is used the most. It's also the most expensive camera in this list, despite not providing the highest sampling resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Dropped the F55, F5, and FS700 "4K" down to 2.xK estimated based on sensor photosite count and Nyquist (resolution before aliasing).

 

8.9M photosites means 3978x2237 photosites*, or max pixel resolution before aliasing of 1989x1118.

 

While the F65 comes closest to 4K, it's still not there: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?296935-F5-F55-Sensor-resolution-and-bayer-pattern/page8

 

*Computed using Wolfram Alpha: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%2Fy+%3D+16%2F9%2C+x*y+%3D+%288.9*1000*1000%29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I don't get why there are 2 lists. In the pro audio quality list, there is the 1DC, Hero 3, GH2 etc. How are they different from 5D3 and others in the 2nd list? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

 

<all cameras below have pro audio quality. Listing SNR & noise floor would be helpful)
F65 - 3.9K (8K sensor with a few tricks, not true 4K) - 16-bit RAW
 

 

 

I assume you meant 8K sensor with a few tricks, not true 8K Of course F65 does true 4K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0