Sebastian Leitner

hi there. i have to chime in here because i feel the need of clearing up something.   do not judge picture quality from looking at the raw footage only! the bad nikon 24bit codec will easily break apart in color correction and certainly in grading in post! where it might be enough for web, a high quality (cinematic) production starts off by transcoding to a sound format (respectively prores 422) - 5DtoRGB offers the best quality and i'm sure after that the nikon footage will not longer look that similar.   also: is the nikon moire free? i daubt it, the 5dmk3 is and has beautiful details (even without sharpening, who needs that kind of sharpness on a big screen anyways) and no aliasing whatsoever! on neither of the possible resolutions and framerates. if you use the 5dmk3's interframe option, the IPB it offers the same technical specs as the nikon (24bit, smaller filesize, good compression quality). difference gone.   in april there is an update coming for the 5dmk3 that will probably bring fullHD hdmi out - hey say it will be 422, but i seriously doubt that, like it was on the nikon d800, where it was confirmed that it is the same signal just put in a 422 container. but there goes the advantage of the fillHD out of the nikon.   bottom line: the video quality is nothing like "the same". it is very similar in the low setting. but with the intraframe ALL-I codec (also together with magic latern) you have a wonderful cinematic picture (with the right picture profile for more dynamics) that holds up beautifully in post: no aliasing added when sharpened, nearly broadcast standard (100mbit foor ALL-I, BBC), less banding and artifacts, practically noise free at ISO derivates of 160.   of course the prize point is a huge argument, but again: the quality is not even closely the same (built quality and video quality). i'm sure there are a lot of other aspects i did not mention besides the video features (i only use the mk3 for that).

[quote name='Xiong' timestamp='1345745557' post='16300'] Totally agree, it was also used to hide moire, but now we wont have to :D Having a shallow depth of view should only be used when the shot/composition needs it, excessive use can reveal the amateur within the DP. [/quote] i absolutely second that. big hollywood movies are all rather flat, nothing has the style of a 5D - why? because it's fricking impossible to pull focus. there are even contracts for pullers that state nothing smaller than f5.6 is used! but to contribute to the topic: PROXIES also work well for davinci, color and smoke! smae trick, same results. also, for windows there is that: [url="http://eyepatchfilms.com/?p=903"]http://eyepatchfilms.com/?p=903[/url] i thinks it's amazing to have that possibility but it's still a rather big pain in the ass...aren't we just happy to get over the h264-transform workaround? i wouldn't care about RAW much i think. but having it is still great...even if it's bigger than anything before...forget a SSD-only macbook.