Jump to content

Canon C300 vs Blackmagic Cinema Camera - chart test


Andrew Reid

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators
[url="http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/c300-vs-blackmagic-cinema-camera.jpg"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/c300-vs-blackmagic-cinema-camera.jpg[/img][/url]

The Canon C300 produces a very clean 1080p image from a 4K sensor. How does the Blackmagic Cinema Camera compare in raw mode?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In real world situations.... I really don't think there is going to be any aliasing situations. I just downloaded Philip Blooms test video and it looks amazing... resolving the tiniest of details with

When it comes to OLPFs, less is moire.

BMCC suffers a black (or false color) eye here, but iiuc, these are RAW captures for the BMCC and MXF for the C300. False color is an artifact of debayering and you can get better algorithms to suppress it. E.g. Sony is especially good at suppressing false color in its cameras.

So I'm not sure this result is the final word in this matter. The debayering on the BMCC Philip Bloom just reported needs to be updated to correct a magenta shift in the highlights (which results from the fact luma is measured in the twice-as-numerous green pixels and they are adding them rather than averaging them, resulting in their clipping and causing a minus green color shift). The RAW conversion both in-camera (for ProRes etc.) and in post can be improved to suppress false color, correct green clipping, etc.

But I applaud BMD for allowing the real state of their camera to be visible prior to delivery.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, it has to be remembered that at no point is anyone actually seeing raw, just a software interpretation of raw from the ACR or other chosen defaults in the raw development process from bayer interpolation, RGB multiplication factors that if chosen wrongly will produce clipped channels in RGB that were't there in the raw file leading to magenta color casts, shiny skin tone etc, black handling, white balance and color space choice from the more limited sRGB to Wide Gamut and ACEs.

Advantage of raw development outside of camera is control, setting the RGB multipliers correctly for any given shot to avoid clipped channels and color casts, choice of bayer interpolation method, whether that is ACR in AE or Premiere, Resolve or a free raw development tool like dcraw used in numerous commercial apps also gives a lot of control. dcraw will even provide low level output before bayer intetpolation for analysis if required.
Link to post
Share on other sites
BMCC doesn't have have AA filter ... BMD decide to go LEICA way for best resolution and color separation ....
[url="http://www.digilloyd.com/blog/2010/20100121_5-MaxMaxD700HR.html"]http://www.digilloyd...xMaxD700HR.html[/url]
we will see some moire in charts but in real world almost never ....
and dont forget that c300 resolves 1200 lines of resolution over nyquist limit ...
that makes BMC even more impressive ....
[url="http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/quick_review_canon_c300_super35mm_lss_cine_camera/P3/"]http://provideocoali...cine_camera/P3/[/url]
Link to post
Share on other sites
oh, the joy of shooting RAW!!!

with the BMC, a better demosaic algorithm can get rid of that moire
(better in the sense that it's geared towards reduced moire, instead of towards maximum detail)

and if said better algorithm is released six months from now, you'll be able to apply it to the RAW footage you shoot today
Link to post
Share on other sites
Your diagram and the sentence:
[quote]
"In terms of area it is similar to the difference between Micro Four Thirds 2x crop and Super 35mm 1.5x crop."

[/quote]

Is wrong. The C300 has a _larger_ sensor than the Black Magic.
You're getting confused about resolution, sensor size and what 'crop' means.

Similarly your resolution comparison is flawed - of course the Black Magic shows more details, you've effectively used a longer lens.
Link to post
Share on other sites
[i][quote name='Mei Lewis' timestamp='1346919218' post='17428']
Your diagram and the sentence:

Is wrong. The C300 has a _larger_ sensor than the Black Magic.
You're getting confused about resolution, sensor size and what 'crop' means.[/i]
[i][/quote][/i]

[i]He was using an analogy so it it is obviously something else.[/i]


[i][i][quote name='Mei Lewis' timestamp='1346919218' post='17428'][/i][/i]

[i]Similarly your resolution comparison is flawed - of course the Black Magic shows more details, you've effectively used a longer lens.
[/quote][/i]

[i]Maybe you should take that up with John Brawley?[/i]
Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Mei Lewis' timestamp='1346919218' post='17428']
Your diagram and the sentence:


Is wrong. The C300 has a _larger_ sensor than the Black Magic.
You're getting confused about resolution, sensor size and what 'crop' means.

Similarly your resolution comparison is flawed - of course the Black Magic shows more details, you've effectively used a longer lens.
[/quote]

Actually no, sorry, you've misread. Andrew says "raw image" not "sensor size", he's quite clear about that, the image you get from BMC is larger than what you get from C300. My 5D has a much bigger sensor than the C300, that doesn't mean it resolves more detail in it's 1080P file, in fact it resolves much less as it resizes (badly) in camera to 1080.

I believe you're wrong here too, I believe the whole test chart has been shot so the BMC will be using a wider lens in the test shot because of it's smaller sensor. The reason it looks bigger to you is because the image is bigger, in that example it has not been scaled down to be the same size as the C300 image, they are both being viewed at 100% and it's not the whole image, just a crop at 100%. To be more clear, I suspect you think the same lens has been put on both cameras so the BMC camera is effectively zoomed in more, I don't think this is the case, the BMC has a wider lens on so they have the same field of view, but as we're comparing a 2.5k image at 100% to a 1080p image at 100% the 2.5k image will look more zoomed in as it's larger. if the images were uncropped you'd be able to see all of the test chart in both shots.

Hope that helps.
Link to post
Share on other sites
BMC is more nad more impressiv...
so in next 6 Months we see many thirtparty adons plugs and
crasy idea .. what happens..when the BMC is hacked..

overdose- raw-extreme-situation-to get the last out of it..
anti-moire-setting
and a way to bring it in a duality-mode on 2 differnt memorys

so i would have the chance to decide...
i see many littel helpers and some will be modular Gear from Black Magic.
(and yes i go everyday to church becauc i hope my 2 gh-2 get a big sista with 4:2:2
and hm... 10 bit ..please it is a so littel tiny codec...i will be honest and brave next
3 weeks--no wuski no cigarettz.no g.. no drugs)

for me the spped of revolution-turn-arround is almost a bit to slow.
please more warp-speed..and
as we se on the last show ( yes i was there) the COMPANIES have
the typical market speed-also when you ask the motivated personal in front..
it is sell sell sell
and sometimes not fine continuity to make it pice for pice better..
the canon c100 is on this way..begun as a good but unreachable machine
now( c300/500) and that is clear in 2013 then a c105 ore call it 107..
second is my glasses. the way up to fullsensor YES
but
four firth / bmc/ aps-c / sony a paradise of costable LENSES...

Samyang 35mm F1.4
Tokina 11-16 F 2.8

and my old canons nikors and 2 russian 35/50 anamorphics dwarish ( need love)
if you do not bring love to the soul of a lense you kill the picture..

To concluse the BMC ( black mamba) brings in its formfactor all to one point, where we can start.
That is the part of our work 2012 2013 2014..okay..

and for the others ( if they do it then- because if canon sonny nikkon says yes
we make money with the I-SUMER ( consumer mix with i-pad/phone/androids/were do you think
the new FILMY-WOOD will be in first?? RIGHT 10 inch highres pads everywhere..so produce
for this billion FANS the litte film..) ( and then GIUGARRO CAPONE and RUBINZ SEIDELSTEIN
somwhere behind the doors of holly ore bolly ore dont know begin to react)
and in my livingromm a litte 100k superfast 8:8:8 64bit 6d holoprojector brings the big film..)
so go on

this all had be done 1999... when i was a boy..

now i want the real guns...

out
Link to post
Share on other sites
[u]With the lens used[/u]
the resolution of the BMCC stops between 'D' and 'E', whatever that means (if it is a '4k'-chart really, the narrowest lines would indicate 4k, where are E and D, could you explain, Andrew?).

Nobody really believed the resolution of the BMCC to be 2432 x 1366 in the first place, or did you?

Read the ancient [url="http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20"]article[/url] about what resolution means from DVXuser. Moire is always poor resolution, it's the tip of the iceberg indicating that a lot of false detail is in the image.

But what contributes to this to a seldom discussed degree is the lens. My english vocabulary is not big enough to explain it properly. Read what Wiki says about the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_confusion"]circle of confusion[/url] (a.k.a. video forum) and combine this with the comprehensible concept, that the coc must be within the spatial dimensions of a 'pixel' on the sensor.

If it is 1:1 - which is practically impossible (the lens on the Canon might have had a better calculated frequency), you still could depict a natural grain of sand only if the signal of the one pixel could describe all three RGB values at once - which it obviously can't.

So please stop raving about the 2,5k the BMCC has.

On the other hand, resolution is overrated. You want an image to show all the necessary detail without aliasing and without looking too harsh. That's pretty much it. The figures are window dressing.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
[quote name='peederj' timestamp='1346908072' post='17418']The RAW conversion both in-camera (for ProRes etc.) and in post can be improved to suppress false color, correct green clipping, etc. But I applaud BMD for allowing the real state of their camera to be visible prior to delivery.[/quote]

Yes this is a great point, you can easily suppress the false colour in post because it is a raw codec.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
[quote name='Samuel H' timestamp='1346916816' post='17425']
oh, the joy of shooting RAW!!!

with the BMC, a better demosaic algorithm can get rid of that moire
(better in the sense that it's geared towards reduced moire, instead of towards maximum detail)

and if said better algorithm is released six months from now, you'll be able to apply it to the RAW footage you shoot today
[/quote]

Correct.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
[quote name='Mei Lewis' timestamp='1346919218' post='17428']
Your diagram and the sentence:


Is wrong. The C300 has a _larger_ sensor than the Black Magic.
You're getting confused about resolution, sensor size and what 'crop' means.

Similarly your resolution comparison is flawed - of course the Black Magic shows more details, you've effectively used a longer lens.
[/quote]

So so wrong! On so many levels.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I tried to edit the raw dng's last night in AE. It was hilarious... Absolutely beautiful though and I can't wait to get my hands on this thing. The C300 might've resolved the chart a little better, but it still looks like video and i don't know anybody that paid to see "Charts" this year...

Afterglow looked marvelous, and after pushing the dog piss out of the images last night just to see what you could do, my only concern is the rolling shutter. Phillip Bloom said it was bad. But, his was a beta, and he used long lenses which are like magnets for RS. So long as it isn't ridiculously touchy on pans, i'm fine.
Link to post
Share on other sites
EXPRIMENTOS EST!

Zoomatar 1,3/180
Leitz
Schneider-Kreuznach this old 1989
and for my ex aaton 35 / 50 and the midlong i sit in the cad to think about right mount for the BMC.
2 stoneold ZEISS think 1970. each 4 kilos ( 8,5lbs) heavey...
Aluminium is not so expensive....

i pusha corner-question in?
what happens if the BOYS ( not from BRazil) in Aussi would have had not the idea..in a sunny afternoon
sitting arround with 345 gallons of Heineken and began to smile..draw and dream?
question two... WILL I SEE the ENTERPRISE E in first flight?

next week i go second time to china... want to see the cineRAW35....

can we have a chance for experiment buddys..please...
question3

if LOTUS would replace my ELISE with something that looks like ALFA ROMEO 4c
twinengine-700kilo car ( 40 hps electric/ 2lita boxer porsche 200hps/ 1literon 100 km) and it
costs only 14.900 euros hm?
yes
no

what?

out
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...