Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Canon 80D video quality still atrocious

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, BenEricson said:

Below is what I see so often. The entire scene looks sickly. A C300 in that scenario would look beautiful, right out of the camera...

C300 vs FS7, by looking at the color of the images alone, which is which? Please show your working ;)

1.png2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
1 hour ago, BenEricson said:

Below is what I see so often. The entire scene looks sickly. A C300 in that scenario would look beautiful, right out of the camera...

Sony.png

The simple fact that this shot has been graded introduces a factor that is totally independent of the camera itself. I think the problem is people were so damn keen for Slog and never learned how to properly grade things.

I recently saw a commercial shot on an FS7 and was surprised it wasn't shot on an Alexa. The F3 was, for a time, considered a 'mini-Alexa' and has very similar colours to that which you can get out of an A7s.

If you've been a Canon shooter for a number of years, you may find it more difficult to get the colours where you want, but the same goes for anyone switching manufacturer. Every manufacturer has different colours and different colour science. I can't think of one manufacturer that has objectively bad colours, it's just that some people are used to one or another, and when the Sony footage they've spent 2 months working with takes a bit longer to get where they want it to than the Canon footage that they'd been working with for 5+ years, it's the camera's fault.

You may find the Sony a bit more difficult to get where you want it to be, but that doesn't mean that it's the camera that's bad, or faulty.

Also, how can you possibly take at face value the grading attempts of an amateur colourist? I wouldn't expect an amateur colourist to get amazing looking results out of anything, let alone base a purchase decision based on their results. The 'ungraded' versions of those images look significantly better.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand, a video A6300 vs 80D has been posted in the first page. Myself and at least 3 other people asked if the thing is legit since the 80D looks clearly better (which is a huge statetement when you know a6300 quality and how andrew speaks about 80D) Was this because A6300 was in 1080p? But in any case the image of the 80D is fine in the video. 

If you know me on EOSHD you know I criticise a LOT canon especially for DR and video. But then I bought an A7R II, hated it and now honestly if I had to choose between 80D and A6300 I would choose the former. I would rather have amazing AF an colours agains absolutely hideous ergonomics and unreliability of Sony. 

So I am sorry Andrew but aliasing is not everything. I feel more creative with 80D than A6300 that is a piece of spec but nothing else. 
I am surprise you dont agree since I remember an old time ago you liked the EM1 even though the quality was horrible but for the creativity allowed by the 5 axis stab....

Oh and look at the T2i video above and tell me it looks bad. At the end of the day what counts is the guy behind it..... But it does not mean I do not want a 5 axis stab mirrorless canon 5Dx with 15 stops DR / 4K Prores 10 bit / Dual P AF :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wolf33d said:

I don't understand, a video A6300 vs 80D has been posted in the first page. Myself and at least 3 other people asked if the thing is legit since the 80D looks clearly better (which is a huge statetement when you know a6300 quality and how andrew speaks about 80D) Was this because A6300 was in 1080p? But in any case the image of the 80D is fine in the video. 

If you know me on EOSHD you know I criticise a LOT canon especially for DR and video. But then I bought an A7R II, hated it and now honestly if I had to choose between 80D and A6300 I would choose the former. I would rather have amazing AF an colours agains absolutely hideous ergonomics and unreliability of Sony. 

So I am sorry Andrew but aliasing is not everything. I feel more creative with 80D than A6300 that is a piece of spec but nothing else. 
I am surprise you dont agree since I remember an old time ago you liked the EM1 even though the quality was horrible but for the creativity allowed by the 5 axis stab....

Oh and look at the T2i video above and tell me it looks bad. At the end of the day what counts is the guy behind it..... But it does not mean I do not want a 5 axis stab mirrorless canon 5Dx with 15 stops DR / 4K Prores 10 bit / Dual P AF :)

I think that clip is real - he shows the cameras, and why would he fake the test if he has them both - there is I suppose a question as to whether the a6300 is really an a6000, but I would say it is real. As to which looks better, well, the clips marked as coming from the 80d have something off about the edges to my eye, it may appear as sharp as downsampled 4k, but it looks very artificially sharpened. That's to my eye and I am in no way dismissing the opinions of people who can see past that/ can't see it/ see it and prefer it - after all, we all use cameras for different jobs and in different ways and all have different preferences.

These sorts of tests are just too limited anyway, what was the sharpness setting on both cameras, what was the gamut used, it would be no wonder the canon looked better if he was using one of the wider colour spaces avaliable on the sony, we don't have the information we ned to judge these cameras based on the videos this type of youtuber tends to produce. What we need is exact tests to get the best out of both cameras at differing effort levels, treated with someone who knows the ins and outs of post process to demonstrate the limitations of the footage captures.

That being said, it's cool you like the Canon footage, and colours and if you feel more creative with your 80d, then I'm happy for you :) It would be a particularly dull world if we all liked the exact same camera. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This forum is all about filming & so the 80D offers absolutely nothing new - we all know this and there are far better options out there for video, at a cheaper price. You can buy a secondhand T2i for £190 (30k shutter count), but not everyone wants to do this - they want something new.

But as its been said, time & time again, Canon make photography cameras with video bolted on. If you want to film something, then they have the C series (still 8-bit, which beggers belief in this day & age), so they are never going to release something that steps all over their other camera lines - it would be absolutely crazy!

The one thing Canon has going for them is that they are a well known brand - their colour science is great & their cameras just work straight out of the box. People are going to buy the 80D regardless of what people say - you stick with a trusted brand, because they are a trusted brand. Look at Kendy Ty, when he moved away from the T2i, he upgraded to a 5D! He could have gone to so many other makes of camera, but stuck with Canon.

The Moire & Aliasing debate is only cared about by us - there are so many Films/TV series that have it. Try telling someone you know, who is clueless about camera tech, about M&A and they just won't have a clue about what you're on about - they don't notice it or care. The thing i'm finding funny at the moment is the absolute lack of BMMCC footage out there - strange, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When looking at the leaf and lime test, it's important to realise how the reach of the lens compensates for the lack of resolving power of the camera.

Wider angles and infinity focus shots are an appropriate test of resolution. Lime trees on end of a 50mm or 85mm with shallow DOF? Not so much.

As for colour it is true Canon have this better sorted than Sony but there's no way that is saving the 80D as a filmic choice.

The shot Ben posted demonstrating A6300 colour has hardly any colour in it, it's a horribly overcast grey day, grey street, grey building and white van!! Come on people, common sense should start prevailing.

There are no convincing tests or samples so far that show the strengths and weaknesses or either camera.

When Canon get the video image right, they really do get it right. The 80D is not one of those cameras.

The 1D C, C100 II, C300 II, XC10 all have a beautiful look to their images. It's no coincidence they are all Cinema EOS cameras.

Canon's strategy quite clear I think!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

 

The 1D C, C100 II, C300 II, XC10 all have a beautiful look to their images. It's no coincidence they are all Cinema EOS cameras.

Canon's strategy quite clear I think!

1DX II looks awful? :) 
Let's at least see the 5Dx before we decide to throw Canon in hell or not 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1D X II of course it doesn't look awful, but it does have an awful codec. It should have had the XF 300Mbit/s 4K codec of the XC10 but the processors aren't fast enough and there's no room for an XC10 style exhaust vent & fan due to the weather sealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

There are no convincing tests or samples so far that show the strengths and weaknesses or either camera.

Agreed. Then why write two 'hate' posts about the poor quality of the 80D?

The first came when it was announced and detailed how the 6300 had the Canon's auto focus beat (without trying either one) which proved to be wrong. And now again in this post.

Is it really just click bait?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CMB said:

Agreed. Then why write two 'hate' posts about the poor quality of the 80D?

The first came when it was announced and detailed how the 6300 had the Canon's auto focus beat (without trying either one) which proved to be wrong. And now again in this post.

Is it really just click bait?

It wasn't proved wrong in this video,maybe you can point me to another test.Or are you speaking of still AF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, jax_rox said:

Develop your own Picture Profile... you know, the exact purpose for Picture Profiles?

I don't really understand how it was so acceptable to tweak your Picture Profiles on a Canon to get the look you wanted, but on a Sony it's a reason that a Sony camera is terrible?

Shooting flat on a 5D became the defacto standard so that you could get the best DR and colour range. But now, if you don't shoot flat (or in one of the many designated Cine gamma modes) and you happen to get different colours than a Canon (remembering that they're two different companies and the colours you get out of an A7s are really not all that different to any other Sony on the market), it's an awful, unusable camera...

Nikon have different colours to Canon too..

A skilled person can make the Sony cameras sing, but having been a user of Sony for years, there is definitely something about their colour that isn't quite right, especially the mirrorless range. 

White balance on the A7 series does not work properly. I have an A7SII and I'm forever tinkering with white balance on set. It's never quite right and is what I believe many users are getting very wrong, hence all the very poor "sickly" footage out there with "bad" colour science. FS7 and upwards are vastly superior and are pleasant to use (for colour). Bit muted and cold in the spectrum, but very nice indeed.

Canon DSLRs have a very punchy, yet pleasing colour rendition. Cinema EOS are fantastic and generally beautiful. They offer a quick road to pleasing colour. I do like how you can pick more of a look with the Sony cams, as Canon seems more baked and stubbornly accurate. It depends if you are willing to do more of the work in post (which I personally enjoy). 

It's all subjective though. Whatever camera is best for the job and best for you is the way to go. Not what the Internet says is the best. The 80d will be best for many. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zach Goodwin said:

Well I can't seem to understand why people think I have a biast view on cameras and seem to believe that I am on side with any camera company and give the appearance that I deserve to be beaten with a chain and put on a pole. Jesus Christ, my belief is math is the best tool for cinematography.

Everyone is going to be a bit biased toward what they own or choose to use because it took all their research and money to get to that decision (plus the additional time and expense of buying and selling and renting and demoing everything under the sun before making the right decision). But while everyone's choice is usually eventually right for their needs–it gets pretty exhausting deluding yourself and going down the wrong path–many cameramen will then embrace the strengths of their given instrument the more they use it and their bias will only extend as their needs are changed by their choices, rather than the other way around. If you've got an A7S you're gonna shoot low light; if you've got a Dragon you definitely won't.

There are a lot of talented guitarists, each using and loving completely different guitars, and to what extent choice informed aptitude and aptitude informed choice is debatable there, too. It goes both ways. Causation, correlation, and whatnot.

I think the only mistake is believing everyone shares your needs and your taste (and your finances). I like just about everything if it's done well, maybe it's a lack of cultivated taste, so it's easy for me to say "do your thing," but I also think everyone is going to do their thing anyway so being too set in your beliefs won't help unless you're making your own decisions (which you don't need a forum to make). No one else's needs are your own, so every recommendation is going to vary.

You seem like someone who is very thoughtful but also opinionated, and it's good to think before drawing a conclusion. But don't be too quick to dismiss those who form their opinions intuitively rather than intellectually. A lot of the greatest filmmakers operate that way when picking coverage, directing performance, etc.–choices far more important than codec. I think Paul McCartney never learned to read music. Bias is good, it shows intelligence. Intransigence isn't, it reveals solipsism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, EyeSoul said:

It wasn't proved wrong in this video,maybe you can point me to another test.Or are you speaking of still AF?

That pretty much proves it right. "Cinematic" I believe he calls it. And in many other reviews it's mentioned the a6300 struggles in anything but excellent light. 

"Continuous focus during video is still pretty useless for subjects that stop moving; it constantly hunts in and out and completely ruins the shot." From the Tony Northrup review. http://northrup.photo/sony-a6300-review/

Also remember you only get the performance demonstrated above in low light if you use Sony lenses. Obviously the 80d autofocus works with the majority of canon lenses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CMB said:

That pretty much proves it right. "Cinematic" I believe he calls it. And in many other reviews it's mentioned the a6300 struggles in anything but excellent light. 

"Continuous focus during video is still pretty useless for subjects that stop moving; it constantly hunts in and out and completely ruins the shot." From the Tony Northrup review. http://northrup.photo/sony-a6300-review/

Also remember you only get the performance demonstrated above in low light if you use Sony lenses. Obviously the 80d autofocus works with the majority of canon lenses. 

I'm guessing the 80D autofocus works less well with Sony lenses.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, CMB said:

Also remember you only get the performance demonstrated above in low light if you use Sony lenses. Obviously the 80d autofocus works with the majority of canon lenses. 

Yeah, because Canon cameras work really well attempting to autofocus Nikon lenses....

Again, not all that long ago it was blasphemy to even suggest one would use autofocus when shooting video. Now, Canon having better AF is a major plus point for Canon...

I just don't get it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really no expert on Sony G lenses. A quick google found a page on sony site with 4 in the range. Canon has like 100+ ?

the point being. Everyone rushing to buy the A6300 to use with a speed booster and their own lens collection (which I've seen reccomended a few times around the net) whether it's Nikon or canon isn't going to get any autofocus.

Lets all look at Kendy Tys work again, of which the majority is shot on 'lowly' t3i with no stabilisation and a battered old 30mm lens.

Everyone remember guys, these are tools at the end of the day. You have a Sony tool, fine. I have a canon tool, fine. I also use a Panasonic 101, a PMW500, a gh4 and an FS7K. They're all just tools with different uses. The point of my original post was rebutt how easily the video quality of the 80d was dismissed. When actually it's fine for this price range and preferable for many. 

Share this post


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...