Asmundma

On September, 15, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Oliver Daniel said:

Indeed. 

The main reason I consider a Canon is color, which us why I'm interested in this camera. It's far beyond the Sony A7's (of which I own an A7SII), although lacks key video features. I guess this is something like a SmallHD 501 would sort out. 

The bitrate isn't much of an issue to me - just have a couple of Transcend 256gb Cfast 2 cards and transcode to ProRes straight from the card, deleting the MJPEG masters.

Do you know if external monitors view the live view information overlay (f-stop, shutter, frame rate, autofocus) from the Canon 1DX II? Just wondering if you used the joystick for autofocus, that you could see what you were operationally doing on a monitor too? 

Why transcode to ProRes ?  I tested and is only 10% smaller (using Compressor on Mac). That was with 4k60p. Do you get other results ??

Did a revisit on my grading of the clips easier in this tread. I did not clip the highlights and was wondering if the colour information still was in the clips. By not using any LUT only grading, but now used the vector based grading in Colour Finale (the last clips), I was able to recover more then in versjon 1. I not sure at all if we get any more dynamic range using the clog picture style vs the standard - too me it looks the same. So when using clog or similar may only help if you want to adjust to another camera - as it may be easier to get the same look, or if one want a special look it may pay off to use the logs. (as you reduce the sharpening and saturation.)

1dx2 have an exellent picture for sure, better the the A7x in 4K. However, these log profiles may not be call logs- I suspect the picture is compressed and burnt in before the picture style is applied, so no extended dynamic range is achieved. We most probably could use neutral picture style and use a lut and some grading and have the same result. Its the film emulation lut + some grain that gives the look. I suspect we all are cheated.............

At least according to this Canon rep. 

18 hours ago, Souto said:

A quick test with the very good EOSHD C-LOG on a Canon 60D. The limiting factor in some situations: the 8-bit codec.

 

 

Did you test against a standard Canon picture profiles?  As shown here, the highlights are burned and the value of the c-log is questionable. Still to see if we can squeeze more dynamic range out of it. Actually, you may lose color information. i.e. if you want vivid colors.   

On 9/4/2016 at 7:01 PM, IronFilm said:

Why not an a7S for video and an a7R for stills? That way you have two bodies, but get to share the same lenses.

That's what I have. However, the A7R2 is the favour, 2 video modes, and exellent stills. Canon camras are somewhat more snappy to shoot with (5d4 and 1dx2), the A7r2 take time to write the stills to the card, like the 5Dsr. So my two favourite camras are the A7r2 and the 1dx2. As the Canon lacks Evf, its less flexible for run and gun, but have the Dpaf which is better then A7r2 AF. The Af In A7r2 is fully useable in many situations. You can support the evf to the eye, have excellent stabilisation, 1/5 of the filezise of 4K Canon. So the ultimate combination of still and video camera has still to be made. For travels, you can pick lenses that give you less weight then a Canon. What's nice with Canon 1dx2, I can now shoot action sport and wildlife with one body, both excellent video quality and stills.

Hm, I bought the c-log the first day and installed it on the 1dx2. So far I am not convinced that c-log give higher dynamic range. Is there a difference between compressing high lights and shadows into an S-curve or the real canon- log? (Do we lose color information using s-curve?)  Has it been proved to be similar??  or is this just a fake?  Please prove me wrong!  

It could be useful to match different cameras going via c-log...?  However, if Canons color tech is so fantastic, why not use another PS and get the same results without much grading.   

Most of the post in this thread only shows use on rather low contrast scenes.

Now, Andrew has to prove that this make sense.

3 hours ago, Danny G. Taillon said:

Received my 5DMK IV today
I will try the 4K once I get my faster CF cards.

but for now, trying out the 1080p ALL-I, 23.98fps. I find it very sharp compared to what I saw in my 6D. 

Those images are just basic screen grabs from Final Cut X (I added the 2:35 ratio aswell)

First image is using EOSHD C-log.

I'm very surprise how it handles the C300 C-LOG Impulz luts I have.

Second image is using C300-CLOG-Fuji PRO 400_FC lut from Impulz

Of course, those are just out of the box basic tests under poor light

ISO 8000, F2.8...

But I'm eager to test this in good light and see the performance against VisionTech and VisonColor profiles which I've been using on my 6D.

Cheers!

Sorry to say, but this does not look good in my taste. Horrible brown tint and probably the white balance is way out. Its not sharp either. 

Its not good publicity for c-log - 

Apologize for the negative feedback, but there is a lot of competent people on this forum to learn from.

Actually with low shutter speeds, capturing mpegs from video on 1dx2 can give to much motion blur. I use ND filter it sometimes, but only expensive Tiffen filters do not colour in my experience. its also a problem if you take still and video with the same camera, so I also ignore it quite some times.

2 hours ago, Jimmy said:

Anybody can create an S-curve. Only the manufacturer, or possibly a hacker, can add an actual log profile.

sorry, that was what I meant - your right -:) 

Ok example of clog - but you need to find a high dynamic scene that has content in the very low end of the histogram and the very top end using e.g. Canons standard profile. By using clog, the shadows will be raised. Then you need to expose correctly and revert it back to something similar as the standard profile (punch)  with the given luts (or manually grade), but with higher dynamic range. Unless you not able to get back to what is told to be "canon color science" (or correct colors) nothing is proven. Anybody can create a log profile and use whatever lut and show something- We can do this with any Sony camera as well.

I will try this with my 1dx2, but challenge other to do the same.... over the next days.

 In my previous example, earlier in the thread, I did not expose correctly and even if it was not clipping, I was not able to get correct colors for the light part of the picture.

What I see in the examples over, none of them seems to have a big dynamic range, and as such a log profile is not needed. You can just grade to your taste.

.

9 hours ago, jcs said:

The A7R II's AF works much better than the A7S II:

A7R II AF (Skintones and color aren't too shabby either)

A7S II vs C300 II AF (1DX II AF is similar to C300 II)

Canon's PDAF is clearly the best, the A7S II's isn't really usable unless the subject is relatively still.

Thanks for those. This proves it for face detection, but if you follow a subject with a focus point, like sports, what your experience then? (For Sony) - it did not take me long to figure out that 1dx2 is much better. 

(

1 hour ago, Jaime Valles said:

Not usually, but I wanted to try it out and it worked great. But for stills photos it's better not to shoot in live view mode. The normal AF for stills is ridiculously fast and accurate.

I may use this as it give face detection and its very easy to change focus point with your finger. Kind of mirrorless camera. 

4 hours ago, DBounce said:

Call it what you want. I have both so I do get to regularly compare the two. 

PP plays fine with MJpeg. Set your ingest settings from Project Settings>Ingest Settings

When the window opens select ingest, next from the drop down menu select create proxies. I generally select 1536x720 H.264.

FCP creates proxies by default. That's why the playback is smooth. I use both.

That's not correct. In FCPX you have to turn proxies on, either when you import or generate them later. Actually FCPX renderes more effectively then PP on Mac. 

Does phase AF really work in video mode on A7r2, I don't think so. I find the AF similar in for video on A7S2 and A7r2, but not for stills, only video. 

40 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The grass shot still looks buggered...

I would have exposed it very differently and the white balance is clearly wrong for daylight.

Ah I see what you mean! Good idea about one-shot push focus.

Thanks for the comments. Could be wrong regarding the white balance, yes. I used AWB, so the camera decided. However the RGB looks balanced, but the vector scope is not. I checked the histogram before shooting and there was no clipping as far as I could see, but maybe i should have lowered the exposure even more. 

By the way, this is then opposite to slog for Sony as there one shall shoot 1-2 stops lighter ? 

18 minutes ago, dvcrn said:

Just bumping this again in the hope anyone can answer this

I am 99% sure you will be able to download them via the EOS utility to the Canon 80. However its still up for jugdement if they help getting a better frame. If you look at my video, I get better results with standard picture style. I am not able to get the green color back of the grass using clog and out & grading, but with standard I am. But I may have done something wrong, so you should wait for other testers. 

Test of clog :  

Tried to find som contrasty scenes - when I was out with our dog this morning. 

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

VERY similar dynamic range benefit to Canon LOG.

Did a test today on the 1D C, a very contrasty scene, the white building was extremely brightly lit in the midday sun.

Ungraded frame grabs from DCI 4K...

Official Canon LOG:

C-LOG:

Looks like I will be getting a 1D X Mark II after all!!

Did you take a RAW image of the scene and check if you could grade back to similar result, i.e. could you get e vivid or punch look? Is it enough color info in the files?

Nice, upgraded to 1dx2 (from 1dx) a couple of days ago. I have also Sony A7r2 and A7s2. Testing now, and are impressed with the colors of 1dx2, will for sure buy the clog tomorrow. I hated the soft image of 5D3 (when shooting distant footage) and therefore went to Sony.

How come that the rest of us get nice colours with Sony ? Else you can try some of the other picture profiles first and see how that works for you.

I think most of us want Canon to be more competitive for video. That said, Canon DSLRs needs rigging to be usable for video as there is no EVF which makes it difficult to shoot handheld - way more shaking then Sony with 5-axes stabilisation. What i like with Canon is snappy speed for still shooting e.g. sports / events. Where is my need for a Canon video DSLR? shooting sport events from quite a distance e.g. 70-200 lense or 400mm. Then the PDAF could be excellent - Downside is the big file sizes. I hear people complain about Sony and video AF, I find it rather good and useable using FE lenses- I don't have any Sony 400mm lense and have to use Metabones - that solution has its limitations. Thats where Canon could be more useful for me. Pretty much anything else is covered by Sonys. 

18 hours ago, joema said:

As a former experienced Premiere editor who moved to FCPX, this can be a difficult transition. It's not like moving between other track-based editors such as Avid or Vegas. The paradigm is radically different, and for some users entails a lengthy learning curve. They are both good products. It's true FCPX is faster at various things on the same hardware but whether this produces the end product any faster is more complex. Premiere users often depend on After Effects or other components of the Adobe suite, so it's often easier to stay with that. They may be part of a workgroup so changing editing software is not an individual decision.

Re 4K XAVC-S, I have terabytes of this and while FCPX on a top-spec iMac 27 can handle a single stream without transcoding to proxy, it still it still requires proxy for smooth editing of 4K H264 multicam.

Premiere users on Windows can easily build or buy whatever hardware they need to obtain good performance. On Mac the options are more limited. However since Premiere now has integrated proxy support, that will solve most performance problems, at the time and space cost of transcoding the files. However the transcode is a background process so you can continue to work while that runs.

I  have used Vegas and Premiere before - but there is no doubt that FCPX editing is fastest (for me). I am also very experienced in DAW - eg- Reaper and latest years Logic, so in that respect use to track based software.  

I can run 3 4k streams - it start to struggle on the 4th.   top spec iMac, but only 500MB/s SSD, not that one with over 1000MB/s  (very latest model) 

Else agree about the eco system - we're not alone. 

9 minutes ago, ricardo_sousa11 said:

I just asked Philip Bloom on FB what his choice would be between the A7RII and A7SII, he says the A7RII is better than the A7SII, with slightly inferior lowlight performance. This was his actual comment :

 

I have both cameras, and agree

On 11/6/2015 at 11:23 AM, Andrew Reid said:

Thanks Don nice post.

Meanwhile on a Mac I recommend to simply use EditReady, transcode to ProRes 422 LT and you will be able to playback full quality full res 4K on a laptop. There's no quality loss from XAVC-S.

The only way you can lose quality from XAVC-S is to go backwards significantly from H.264 100Mbit/s and that is quite hard to do

Why not use FCPX, there no problem editing full resolution 4K  xavc-s files. It also faster to use for editing as well (after some learning). Renders faster according to many tests.

if your on Mac, it's a no brainer. 

On 7/18/2016 at 11:03 AM, Matt Holder said:

My Imac FCPX  edits GH4 4k like its 1080p - natively and like butter.  

I put some A7s II 4k footage in there and it was stall city - no creative flow on the timeline - i hated it! Seriously bad implications for workflow, productivity and client turn around.

Tip of the hat to Panasonic for an awesome easy to edit 4k codec.

i am sure transcoding would sort the A7s footage out but its a pain...

 

No problem here with 4K A7s2 files....and FCPX 

Amazing story, any comment from Mr. Reid ?