Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Canon 80D video quality still atrocious

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, jax_rox said:

Use what you want to use and who cares what anyone else is using.

The internet cares. Why do you think there are presets being sold for everything? Lightroom presets, plugins for color grading. People want the quick fix. "Shoot with this cam, it will make everything beautiful - No it won't!" and there we get the arguments.

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
11 hours ago, forofilms said:

This is a $1,200 camera in 2016. I expect quality at least at the standard of a $1000 camera in 2013 (GH2). 

I haven't used the 80D and probably never will since Im not into Canon gear all that much. But I seriously doubt that the GH2 is a better stills camera than the 80D.
Please prove me wrong, but I doubt it.

(And yes I know you meant video, but these are stills cameras, that's their job. That's why people buy them.)

11 hours ago, forofilms said:

It begins with resolution. If acceptable resolution isn't there, none of the qualities you listed matter all that much. People don't buy TV sets for wider DR and and better color rendition. They buy for better image clarity. Everything you enumerated does indeed matter, but the starting point is resolution. 

Yes they do. When people stand in front of the 50 TVs at Best Buy they look at the "Image". The entire "Image". All of them have generally the same resolution. So they choose the one that "Feels" best.
Otherwise explain this, why do Hollywood DPs that can choose what ever they want to shoot with, still choose film or the 2K Alexa. In the Oscar nominations 2016 it was 50% film.
If "Resolution" is all that matter and disqualifies everything else. why does this happen?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, hmcindie said:

Am I just wrong or...? What's going on? I really have no idea why people are raving about the [insert camera brand here] cams. For example the [camera model] seems to be the best camera ever if you just look at youtube comments. But it's not. I can see several things I like about the [other camera model] more

It's personal preference. Some people live and die by their RED. Others Alexa. Others again Varicam. Still others F55. Some love the C300. Or C100. Or 5D. Or A7s. Or a GH4

The smart people do their own research, decide what they like best and use it. There's no such thing as an objectively best camera. I like my A7s and my F3 for day-to-day photo/video low budget stuff.

When I have a budget, I'll rent an Alexa. Or a RED. Or an F55. Depends on the budget, depends on the project, depends on the needs of the script.

You can spend all day arguing about which camera is better at this or that, but at the end of the day it comes down to what you like the most, and what helps get you the best images possible.

I hated what I saw of the F5 and F55 when they came out. Now that I've used them, I appreciate them for the tools they are. You can get great things out of both of those camras. It's just that the original footage I saw didn't have someone behind the camera getting great images.

Conversely, I liked what I saw of the Blackmagic cams when they were announced/released. Then I used them a couple times and determined that I hated them. 

Use what works for you

6 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Yes they do. When people stand in front of the 50 TVs at Best Buy they look at the "Image". The entire "Image". All of them have generally the same resolution. So they choose the one that "Feels" best.
Otherwise explain this, why do Hollywood DPs that can choose what ever they want to shoot with still choose film or the 2K Alexa. In the Oscar nominations 2016 it was 50% film.
If "Resolution" is all that matter and disqualifies everything else. why does this happen?

 

People who buy purely on resolution are simply following marketing gimmicks. Even then, if money were no object they'd go for the one with the 'richest blacks', 'most vivid colour' etc.

--
Resolution's not everything. You can't tell me my iPhone gives me better images than an Alexa because it's 4k and an Alexa's not. Majority of cinema is still projected at 2k. Netflix caused controversy by specifying that all new original material must be 4k. Many people are up in arms because technical 4k resolution doesn't actually mean a picture is any good - and actually having 4096 pixels doesn't mean you actually have '4k resolution'. As many will attest to Canon not having 1080p resolution, despite the video files having that many pixels, the same is true for 4k. That's why the Alexa can scale up to 4k so well, but you're better off scaling down a 5k-6k RED Epic, because if you shoot at 4k it'll be just a tad soft..

Share this post


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

So I salute the 80D guys. I even want one because it seems so easy to use I can save on crew and pay myself more. But I also think it's sort of criminal that we still put up with such a soft picture, and that Canon won't offer more. All I need is GH2 sharpness and 80D everything else and I'm sold.

Weird... really weird... that that isn't available even now. It should be.

what?  Actually you can  just buy a EOM3 or a  T6s instead ,the same CMOS and the same DPAF as 80D , but much cheaper price, not 4K anyway,but guys like you  obviously don't care

Even there are no log or any auxiliary features on it, I believe it still work fairly OK,right? 

I do agree sharpness is not everything though,the same as the colour science~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi
1 hour ago, gelaxstudio said:

what?  Actually you can  just buy a EOM3 or a  T6s instead ,the same CMOS and the same DPAF as 80D , but much cheaper price, not 4K anyway,but guys like you  obviously don't care

Even there are no log or any auxiliary features on it, I believe it still work fairly OK,right? 

I do agree sharpness is not everything though,the same as the colour science~

M3 & t6s have a completely different CMOS chip from the one in the 80D. t6s/m3 are regular imaging sensors with a punch of phase detection AF points scattered on top (about a 100), the 80D uses each single pixel as a phase detection AF point, so it's about 40 million points vs a 100, that's the technology behind Canon DPAF. The 80D sensor has a significant pump up in dynamc range & lowlight performance due to the new On-chip ADC converters as on the 1DXII sensor. In other words, AF isn't great on the Canon models below 80D. DPAF is only available in the 70D, 80D, 7DII, 1DXII, C100, C300. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

 DPAF is only available in the 70D, 80D, 7DII, 1DXII, C100, C300.

ops,my mistake,I did not check that details ,it sound the same to me :(

BTW, I saw a 80D VS A6300 test on youtube, the sony 4D foucs  is still better than the DPAF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

M3 & t6s have a completely different CMOS chip from the one in the 80D. t6s/m3 are regular imaging sensors with a punch of phase detection AF points scattered on top (about a 100), the 80D uses each single pixel as a phase detection AF point, so it's about 40 million points vs a 100, that's the technology behind Canon DPAF. The 80D sensor has a significant pump up in dynamc range & lowlight performance due to the new On-chip ADC converters as on the 1DXII sensor. In other words, AF isn't great on the Canon models below 80D. DPAF is only available in the 70D, 80D, 7DII, 1DXII, C100, C300. 

It only sounds impressive until you consider what the competition did years before when nobody was looking because it didn't reach the popular conscious yet and have a Canon or Nikon badge.

The on-chip ADC converters were pioneered by Sony years ago and it has taken Canon, dragging their heels along the floor for 6 years, to implement the technology. and then only in a very small selection of high end models in 2016.

By the way, we've moved waaaay beyond on-chip A/D per row, to gluing and integrating DRAM directly to the back of the sensor as seen on the latest 1" CMOS from Sony. So Canon are only just catching up to yesterday's advancement in CMOS deign. Yesterdays.

The on-chip ADC cleans up the readout noise so you have more usable blacks. If people choose to interpret this as more dynamic range then fair play to them, that's their interpretation. I would never max out the dynamic range of any digital image, because it creates Digital Sick™

In reality for all the quoting of 14 stops by DXOmark for Sony and 12 stops for Canon, there's not as much difference as the specs imply.

However as soon as Canon start doing sensors that might get closer to 14 stops on DXOMark like Sony have been doing for almost half a decade, everyone pisses themselves. The power of the brand manifest!

As for the number of phase detect AF points, you need millions of them on the sensor because they get so little light and are so small, compared to the smattering of a few of them in the viewfinder of a DSLR. Needless to say I find the 400+ on the A6300 work better than the millions on the 80D, so go figure.

It's as if Canon have turned up to a party 5 hours late with a 2 euro bottle of fizz.

There's no denying Canon get the ergonomics right in a very solid way mostly, but as for the images... The facts are:

70D = shit video
80D and EOS M3 = slightly less shit
7DII = 2012 vintage softness
C100 = Same, but very expensive 2010 vintage Panasonic GH2 resolution (albeit better in low light)
C300 = exactly the same but even more expensive
1D X II = slightly worse than the 1D C's image quality, but $6k and will likely be superseded in under 6 months by the 5D IV, GH5, A7S III or any number of others

And this my friends is why I will not be wasting my money on any of them.

Although the AVCHD quality on the C100 is very nice given the specs, I must admit that much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

And this my friends is why I will not be wasting my money on any of them.

 

Didn't you just buy a XC10? I think you bad mouth Canon to push the prices down so you can buy them on the cheap ;)

I'd place money on you owning a 1D-X II within the year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much Canon bashing here. Why? Go buy something else if you hate Canon. I for one will be picking up a 1DX Mk II. If it's horrible, I will sell it. But most likely it's going to be with me for a few years. Sony's are obsolete  in six months... Well resale value is anyway. That's why I get my monies worth out of them, and then sell and get the next model. Relax. 

PS: I also bet AR will be getting a 1DX MkII within the year;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8 April 2016 at 1:26 AM, Andrew Reid said:

"A shame you feel the need to shove this back in my face, just because it doesn't quite align with your choice of purchase."

"The core EOSHD readers get it. You're just an ungrateful hanger on with 19 posts to his name who feels he can leech all the knowledge from others on the forum, without giving anything constructive back in return."

"Ah you have an FS7 in the office though! But I thought 80D is all you need?!"

"Oh but it's "bashing". Bash bash bash!! Can't mention the moire! Oh noooo"

Wow. Quite a response since I last dropped by. Sorry my opinion isn’t welcome and you feel i've caused trouble. I'll quiet down, but wanted to address one or two of the more personal comments made toward me.

@DayRaven I comprehend fine. My point being (as it has always been) that it’s about the content we create rather then the cameras used to create it. Yes, it was done as something as a stunt. But Would that documentary have been any more or less compelling if it was shot on an FS7 or Alexa? As for showing you my work, I’m not going to link to any client videos to prove something to a stranger on the internet. I’m not even sure how showing you my work (or you showing me yours) proves either of our points of view?

@Andrew Gee, that's quite a post. The last few comments posted here also mention 'canon bashing'. I hope you don't attack those posters too. You post some wonderfully insightful articles here, some great comments too, but occasionally it’s like a switch is flipped and it’s almost as though a different person is replying.  I’m just some guy at the end of the day. You run one of the major filmmaking resources on the web. I guess I never expected you to openly mock your audience.

My point is and always has been the 80D is fine.. Maybe not if you're shooting the latest Marvel movie. but fine none the less. Perhaps I have low expectations. It’s not cutting edge as you define it, no. I never claimed it was. I never claimed it didn't have moire/ clipped highlights/ect compared to the latest cutting edge tech available.  I just pointed out it seemed unfair to trash it so hard and rave about the equivilant Sony while overlooking the sony's flaws.

I don’t have a dog in this fight.  I never said the 80D was all I need. I shoot with an 80D and 70D. And yes, as you pointed out I also mentioned shooting with an FS7, GH4. PMW500, 101 and more. I use the right tool for the job as I deem it. There's no need to hit a nail with a sledgehammer in every instance. Perhaps every single job you take on absolutely needs to be shot with a cinema level image and mastered in 6k. And thats great for you. Much of my work includes same day event coverage. I simply don't have time to deal with RAW/ Log footage when I need to produce something that looks good in a limited amount of time. 

I don't need to leech off the knowledge of the forum as you put it. I have years of experience working in the industry. I do visit here for an unbiased opinion on the latest camera tech. But like you said I probably don't get it.

Again, sorry for any offence caused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mkabi said:

Really? That bad? How is it compared to the video IQ of the t2i? Anyone can answer that, cause I'm really interested in the 70D.

It's about the same, which is to say good enough for almost anything that's going on web or tv, but very unsatisfying as a hobbyist or technophile because it's still really mushy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8 April 2016 at 0:12 PM, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

M3 & t6s have a completely different CMOS chip from the one in the 80D. t6s/m3 are regular imaging sensors with a punch of phase detection AF points scattered on top (about a 100), the 80D uses each single pixel as a phase detection AF point, so it's about 40 million points vs a 100, that's the technology behind Canon DPAF. The 80D sensor has a significant pump up in dynamc range & lowlight performance due to the new On-chip ADC converters as on the 1DXII sensor. In other words, AF isn't great on the Canon models below 80D. DPAF is only available in the 70D, 80D, 7DII, 1DXII, C100, C300. 

That's not how it works.

There are not 40 million AF points on the 80D but 40million half pixels. you need many of them to get a phase information.

Same goes for OSPDAF (what all other sensors use). You need to mask hundreds if not thousands of pixels for one single AF point. So there hundreds of thousands AF pixels on those sensors too. 

 

But yes, the 80D seems to have finally caught with Sony designed Exmor sensors when it comes to read noise at low isos (dynamic range)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2016 at 0:48 PM, Policar said:

because A-listers have little patience and probably don't know what aliasing is.

 

oh they know what aliasing is - we drum it into them before every interview on what to wear ie: no checks or stripped shirts or fine lines etc.. they all know.. :) :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tony Anastasi said:

oh they know what aliasing is - we drum it into them before every interview on what to wear ie: no checks or stripped shirts or fine lines etc.. they all know.. :) :P

Good point! Then I guess they also know to expect it, at least. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi
On 4/9/2016 at 4:53 AM, frontfocus said:

That's not how it works.

There are not 40 million AF points on the 80D but 40million half pixels. you need many of them to get a phase information.

Same goes for OSPDAF (what all other sensors use). You need to mask hundreds if not thousands of pixels for one single AF point. So there hundreds of thousands AF pixels on those sensors too. 

 

But yes, the 80D seems to have finally caught with Sony designed Exmor sensors when it comes to read noise at low isos (dynamic range)

The 80D uses ALL these millions of Phase detect AF points to aquire focus, then after it's done, they shift and work as normal light gathering pixels. That's the thing about Dual Pixel AF technology. 1- Using millions of AF points vs hunders 2- Not masking any sensor pixels and still use these millions of AF pixels as normal light gathering photosites. Having that huge number of AF points gives Canon DPAF cameras to aquire focus incredibly fast but most importantly, smoothly, with zero hunting and pixel-level accuracy. No other Normal Phase Detection system on a mirrorless cameras can perform that reliable AF (reliable for pro work) in all lighting condition and with complete consistency, Some do well at certain sittuation and give good results, but you wouldn't use them on a real shoot. The a6300/a7rii do a pretty good focus pull specially under daylight with high contrast normal subjects. So Scattered Phase detection AF point system isn't all that bad, it's actually pretty good. Just not DPAF good for video AF. 

On 4/9/2016 at 4:07 AM, mkabi said:

Really? That bad? How is it compared to the video IQ of the t2i? Anyone can answer that, cause I'm really interested in the 70D.

It has this video quality. The only problem is aliasing/moire on fine patterns. See for yourself if it's enough of image quality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

The 80D uses ALL these millions of Phase detect AF points to aquire focus, then after it's done, they shift and work as normal light gathering pixels. That's the thing about Dual Pixel AF technology. 1- Using millions of AF points vs hunders 2- Not masking any sensor pixels and still use these millions of AF pixels as normal light gathering photosites. Having that huge number of AF points gives Canon DPAF cameras to aquire focus incredibly fast but most importantly, smoothly, with zero hunting and pixel-level accuracy. No other Normal Phase Detection system on a mirrorless cameras can perform that reliable AF (reliable for pro work) in all lighting condition and with complete consistency, Some do well at certain sittuation and give good results, but you wouldn't use them on a real shoot. The a6300/a7rii do a pretty good focus pull specially under daylight with high contrast normal subjects. So Scattered Phase detection AF point system isn't all that bad, it's actually pretty good. Just not DPAF good for video AF. 

It has this video quality. The only problem is aliasing/moire on fine patterns. See for yourself if it's enough of image quality. 

Brilliant AF is not helping much when the image is generally soft like off focus all the time?

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...