Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Canon 80D video quality still atrocious

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, jax_rox said:

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...

I've used auto focus when appropriate for the last 15yrs in everything from independent films to broadcast work to corporate. I'm sure the internet would say I'm not professional. I use whatever tools I have to make my job easier and concentrate on the creative side of things. That's what it's all about right? 

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

@CMB the T2i was around for a long time and it had its day, a lot of great stuff shot on it, in the same way there were great Pixar animations developed on very old 90's workstations.

This does not excuse Canon in any way.

If Apple for example had neglected the quality of their stills on iPhones since 2009 as Canon have done with video on their APS-C DSLRs, it would be seen as totally strange behaviour, really bizarre and unacceptable to all iPhone users interested in photography.

The only reason content producers and YouTuber's still care about the 80D is that a lot of people don't care about perfection or the details. They just want to grab a brand they trust and make content as quickly and as easily as possible with the lenses they already have.

The other companies have put in a less than solid showing to be honest, in fighting back against Canon and Nikon. Flakey and disjointed. Panasonic only have the GH line, which doesn't have a broad appeal to the masses due to the lenses being massively overpriced, complexity of the spec, odd sensor crop vs the rest of the market and less than stella ISO 1600-6400 performance indoors. Meanwhile Sony have too many models, very confusing, reliability issues on top of that like overheating, over complex specifications and menus, poor usability and again incredibly expensive lenses. Canon have had it easy.

The people who will buy a 80D probably see 4K as slowing them down in the edit, when a lot of the material is quite time critical. I can't see them lusting after an A7S II any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO auto focus and 'cinematic' shouldn't really be uttered in the same sentence.  However for things like an impromptu talking head in a run and gun environment with a large sensor, a good af system capable of tracking focus of a face will always be welcome.  I highly doubt I'd ever use such a thing since I actually like the aesthetic of a human being pulling focus by eye.  

If people like to think a Canon will make their colours nicer without having to learn how to set up wb, profiles and learn how to use curves that's up to them.

The fact here isn't about af or colour.  It's about the fact that the image from the 80D doesn't even deliver true 720p.  it's mush.  and is noisy.    The lack of video ergonomics of a mirrored camera can be worked around when the image is worth working around for - the 1dc, 5dmk3 in raw, etc.  But entertaining any positive discussion about Canon cameras not of the Cinema EOS range or ML hacked for film making is madness.  Those still buying such devices for cinematic type film making are either ignorant to what else is available, blind or buying out of sympathy for Canon.  I see no difference between the 80D and the 550D/T2i in terms of video performance.  Canon hasn't made any worthwhile video improvements on their non cinema eos cameras since the 5Dmk2!    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Auto Focus gets invented I will try it.

 

But to be serious there are times when AF can be usefull. On small chip camcorders it can be nice. In selfie mode with good face detection. Just to name two.

But there is no such thing as Automatic Focus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Zach Goodwin said:

The reason why all those automatic settings exist is not for the filmmaker... It's for your mother wanting to film her kid for soccer.

Quite a sweeping statement to make. So not for anyone wanting to use a gimbal solo with no focus puller then? Only soccer moms have Movi's right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CMB said:

Quite a sweeping statement to make. So not for anyone wanting to use a gimbal solo with no focus puller then? Only soccer moms have Movi's right? 

There are many ways of film making, but traditionally, a shot will be planned to an extent where a gimbal is a hinderance compared to solutions that you can use when you have that much control over the scene. Why use a gimbal and have to rely on autofocus when you can build a track for your camera and retain control? I say traditionally, because things like Canon's autofocus, affordable gimbals and the modern revolution of film making has led to tiny crews shooting gorilla movies in locations where they have no control, and then such tools become useful. There comes a point however where you can't just roll up to a location and shoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said this a bunch of times, but I always felt the beauty of Canon "color" is due to the large user base back when they were the only option. Between vision and Cinestyle and Prolost Flat, the best settings were defined by extensive R&D by some of the best DPs, colorists and enthusiasts that gave a neutral starting point for grading or just simple lens selection to achieve a desired "look." For someone like me... A beginner in practical terms... This made the entire process palpable.

When Magic Lantern became a viable, stable option, the opportunities were tremendous. But in some ways, the implementation of ML may have hurt Canon's video segment growth because I am almost convinced that the pencil pushers felt the video popularity of their cameras since 2012, was based on their own internals and were oblivious to the impact that ML had on their video segment sales. 

Well, that and their innate desire to protect their cinema line and their lack of market placement in the consumer 4K television market, led to stagnant development in their video segment. 

Either way, I hope Canon extends their lines and update their video functions because I would love to use Canon again. 

As far as auto focus... When I started the hobby, I couldn't afford any good native lenses... So I went with manual vintage lenses. Just recently, after I bought my G7, I picked up a Sigma 30mm f2.8 and although I use it primarily with manual focus, sometimes for a quick punch, I'll hit the af button and get it close... Very useful. And with my recent purchase of the FZ300, the continuous AF is so spot on, it's like having a focus puller following you around with a tape measure. And as long as you're judicious and creative with your shots, I can't see why it couldn't be cinematic. So, I can understand why a filmmaker of any level or discipline could find it useful.

Share this post


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

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+

There are significantly more Sony lenses on the market, especially in APS-C crop format. There are less E-mount full-frame, though significantly more than four.

A 'quick google' doesn't really count as extensive research...

11 hours ago, CMB said:

I've used auto focus when appropriate for the last 15yrs in everything from independent films to broadcast work to corporate. I'm sure the internet would say I'm not professional. I use whatever tools I have to make my job easier and concentrate on the creative side of things. That's what it's all about right? 

If you look through the history of my posts, I couldn't agree more that any camera is simply a tool, and I think too many get bogged down on here in things that, in the overall scheme of things, don't particularly matter. I think you should test what works for you and make a purchase decision based on that. An 80D probably isn't that for many people - an a6300 isn't for me, despite the fact that I have an A7s and perhaps should be more interested in it than someone who has no investment in the Sony ecosystem.

That doesn't mean these cameras aren't THE camera for some people, or can't be. Too many people have their opinions tinted through their own purchases, and instead of recognising the strengths cameras, they often blame the camera for their own inadequacies (i.e. I have no idea how to colour grade, but instead of acknowledging that, I'll pretend I do and blame Sony for giving me bad colours).

My overall point was merely that native Autofocus is still quite good, and there are a number of Sony lenses you can use with the camera.

And also that only a couple of years ago, Canon was excused for having mediocre auto focus performances with their own native lenses in video mode, with people saying 'it doesn't matter because you should be shooting manual all the time anyway'.

Now Sony has decent auto focus on their native lenses, but average auto focus on lenses that are adapted via a third party adapter, and it's suddenly a reason the camera is sub-par.

I just don't understand how something that is/was not an issue for Canon, is an issue for Sony? How good is the auto-focus on adapted lenses for Canon?

It simply amazes me the lengths some people will go to defend a brand or product. Everything is a tool in the end, so why do you care so much if someone uses something else? I don't care what anyone uses, I just want people to have as much un-biased information as possible.

If I was looking for something with high-quality 1080p, there are few Canon cameras I would consider because the vast majority of them are not really giving that. Does that make them awful cameras? No. It just means there may be other cameras (including from other manufacturers) that give you what you want.

That's why this camera may be big with YouTubers - they don't care about most of the things that we do. That can make it the best camera for them. If so, good on them. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have its issues.

Share this post


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

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. 

Actually, Canon has zero G lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/2/2016 at 4:32 PM, Oliver Daniel said:

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.

I had a Sony A65 for a bit and it's AWB was very inconsistent. Back to back stills shots looked noticeably different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, richg101 said:

The lack of video ergonomics of a mirrored camera...

That just cracked me up. As all the mirrorless cameras I've used have been less ergonomic than a 5d (A7s, a6300, nex7)

12 hours ago, Zach Goodwin said:

Hahahahahahahahaha...... You can pull off that same shot with a shoulder rig you know at 17-35mm at f/2.8 to f/5.6 you know? 

Oh okay, is this a competition about what you can do? I just shot a one man operated three camera shoot and I had the a6300 handheld with autofocus on a certain point on 35mm f1.8 lens. Worked actually pretty great and I could check the other cameras with my third hand while shooting.

I wonder what you would've done differently, atleast the focus would've taken a lot more of your brains processing power.

Why would you say you can pull off "that same shot" with a shoulder rig at f5.6? It's not the same shot as a gimbal at f1.8. That's just unnecessarily boosting yourself instead of discussing the issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/31/2016 at 5:14 PM, David Bowgett said:

Just when we think Canon's thrown us a bone with the improved video quality on the 5DS(r), they have to go do something like this. Yay for non-progress!

As an aside, the actual first video-capable APS-C from Canon was the 500D. Insomuch as a camera that has no manual video exposure, no microphone socket, and video resolutions that include either a useless 1080p20 mode or a truly awful-looking 720p24 mode can be considered "video-capable" anyway. :tounge:

Yep, I owned it .... it was impossible to match footage from the 500d with my friends 550d (T2i for you americans). 720p with magic lantern was "sufficient" though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Andrew!  With such an hate to Canon, you must change the name of you site... QUICKLY!   LoL!  What is behind it ?... Do you know any REAL PERFECT CAMERA? If so, tell us, please. Did you know Arri Alexa or Red or Black Magic or Pana Varicam or something like that has also their own flaws?...  Have you already heard something about importance of MAN behind the Camera?  Come on, let's Make Movies and forget pixel-peepers analisys with much less relevance than colour of our caps !...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ANGELO SANDE said:

Hi, Andrew!  With such an hate to Canon, you must change the name of you site... QUICKLY!   LoL!  What is behind it ?... Do you know any REAL PERFECT CAMERA? If so, tell us, please. Did you know Arri Alexa or Red or Black Magic or Pana Varicam or something like that has also their own flaws?...  Have you already heard something about importance of MAN behind the Camera?  Come on, let's Make Movies and forget pixel-peepers analisys with much less relevance than colour of our caps !...

Comon, he doesnt hate Canon. He loves the 1DC, 5Dmkii/iii and Im sure if the c300ii was a bit more affordable he would be on it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ANGELO SANDE said:

Hi, Andrew!  With such an hate to Canon, you must change the name of you site... QUICKLY!   LoL!  What is behind it ?... Do you know any REAL PERFECT CAMERA? If so, tell us, please. Did you know Arri Alexa or Red or Black Magic or Pana Varicam or something like that has also their own flaws?...  Have you already heard something about importance of MAN behind the Camera?  Come on, let's Make Movies and forget pixel-peepers analisys with much less relevance than colour of our caps !...

Last time I checked this was a gear blog that analyses the performance of different cameras, lenses etc - mostly those devices in the affordable price range. 

The blog reports that Canon is still behind Sony & Panasonic in terms of video quality in this range. Don't see anything wrong with that. 

We all know that the best video quality from Canon is reserved for professionals, but we're a bit grumpy because we wish they actually did improve their video at the lower end, but it's more likely Arri will release a sub $5k cinema camera than Canon doing just that. 

We all know that the man/woman behind the camera is obviously the most important. But this isn't the blog for that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ANGELO SANDE said:

Hi, Andrew!  With such an hate to Canon, you must change the name of you site... QUICKLY!   LoL!  What is behind it ?... Do you know any REAL PERFECT CAMERA? If so, tell us, please. Did you know Arri Alexa or Red or Black Magic or Pana Varicam or something like that has also their own flaws?...  Have you already heard something about importance of MAN behind the Camera?  Come on, let's Make Movies and forget pixel-peepers analisys with much less relevance than colour of our caps !...

I think Andrew is a bit disheartened that Canon seems to be holding back features on many of their more reasonably priced cameras. That is perhaps tainting his views. I do wish he had done a real review of this camera, instead of just saying it's crap, nuff said.

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...