Jump to content

In depth test - 5D Mark III and 7D Raw vs Blackmagic Pocket vs GH3


Andrew Reid

Recommended Posts

Hi,

I have been reading this post, and I have two questions: 1.-  why not to use the sigma lense on the canon 5D III? (if you used on the 7D you could have been used it on the 5D III too, because the quality of the fixed 50 mm 1.4 Zeiss lens is better than zoom sigma...) 2.- I can understand about the resolution, etc, etc... but do you think all this is more important than a good story for a film or a good theme for a video or documentary? for example, any Canon (60D, 7D, 5D ,...) IS GOOD ENOUGH TO MAKE  A FUTURE FILM this is completely proved by filmakers around the world, even Hollywood used them as a secondary cameras in accion films like The Avengers, Iron Man, or drama films like The black Swan.

I feel this point should be a problem for engineers and not for filmakers or video makers about how make the cameras to be betters or how to find the best way to get the best from them, I feel that we should be planning good stories... THE CAMERA IS JUST A PART OF A PRODUCTION, anyone can have an Arri Alexa or a Genesis but if your story is not good... you could have the best resolution image, but that my friends is nothing... but now, you could have a nice and cheap good camera (the one you like: GH2, Canon, BlackMagic, GH3, I Phone, etc, etc...) and even low resources, but if your story is good... even Hollywood could buy it (for example: LIKE CRAZY, budget 250.000 dollars and sold by 4 millons dollars to Paramount Pictures, I read some guys writing about moire, and alliasing, etc in this film, but I repeat: SOLD BY 4 MILLONS DOLLARS...)

Technology is a never ending issue, falling in this "corporate game" is not good, we are the user of the technology and that´s it.! you can use the one you like more and is ok!! more resolution, less moire are just secundary points because all this cameras WORKS FINE!! if you know at least the strenghts and weaknesses of your camera you can do a good job!, a good director of photography can do a good job with all this cameras, no because of the camera, is because HE KNOWS WHAT MAKES... we need to learn about photography, directing, and writting and the camera will be the last problem in our carrer...

be fine!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

For real. Like we've never had the content is king rant here before. Thanks for stopping by bro. We had no idea.. Lol

If you expose for blown out highlights, push shadows, clean with neat video, you can capture just as much dynamic range from the GH3 as you can from Magic Lantern RAW.   https://vimeo.com/76030718

hello friend, you seem lost.   this is a thread about nuances in cinematography: its an "In Depth Test" of Camera A vs Camera B vs Camera C vs Camera D

"IS GOOD ENOUGH TO MAKE  A FUTURE FILM this is completely proved by filmakers around the world, even Hollywood used them as a secondary cameras in accion films like The Avengers, Iron Man, or drama films like The black Swan."

 

 Were not stock Canons. ML, VAF-5D2b filters and +25.000$ lenses. But its true, camera will not make u good film maker, its in your head ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

hello friend, you seem lost.

 

this is a thread about nuances in cinematography: its an "In Depth Test" of Camera A vs Camera B vs Camera C vs Camera D

 

I respect those who like to see and compare, but I have been reading about "Depth Test" for a long time here on EOSHD (Canon 7D vs GH2, this one vs that one..., etc) but rarely I have read this: I have done a film and I'm in official competition with my film in several international film festival. I am in that way... I wrote about a vision... Many people said GH2 is bettrer than Canon 7D and 5D, but how many films or TV shows have been done with a GH2 and how many with the Canon? tests are brong?, no, is just the people like more Canon... are they going to change? maybe I don´t know... There will always be comparisons between cameras but the repetitive speech which exceeds camera which is already very boring because it directs attention around the camera and not to the fact that the camera is just a tool ... Always speak with eagerness and requirement about " low quality lights" and I ask you: are you going to shoot a project and you have no lights? distortion in the colors , I ask: do you know white balance correctly ? know about how to make a color correction using professional programs ? , we can exploit the cameras, no matter what you use, these cameras provide a space for color correction, narrow or broad but you have the posibility to correct color, but you must do a good job with the photography, because mistakes in this area can be difficult to solve , and that applies to any of these cameras (we are not comparing a Genesis vs Arri). Repeat: I respect those who like to see and compare, but I'd like to see stories that achieve more success in festivals or theaters that were made with these cameras. Actually I read this article because I usually read most of the posts you can read , but I see so much eagerness to compare the cameras that I wonder if the artistic work they do is quality , I wonder if they are enjoying the democratization of cinema that can be due to the DSLR, that´s all... So if you think I´m lost, I'd rather to be like that...!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

luisrjm, wow I would love to have that guy in the room at an equipment test on the set of a big Hollywood production...

 

"Hey put that camera down!! The script needs more work. Hey! Stop evaluating the flare of anamorphic lenses. Can't you see Clooney isn't right for this role?? Hey stop messing with robot arms and projection systems Alfonso. You've gotta give the festivals I call, get a slot at Cannes!! HEY!! Don't you think Sandra's character needs a bit more balls? HEY?"

 

Give it a rest man!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

For real. Like we've never had the content is king rant here before.

Thanks for stopping by bro. We had no idea.. Lol

 

It takes stating the obvious to new unchartered territory.

 

When his wife gets in the car, he probably tells her to make sure it has wheels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...
 
 
I respect those who like to see and compare, but I have been reading about "Depth Test" for a long time here on EOSHD (Canon 7D vs GH2, this one vs that one..., etc) but rarely I have read this: I have done a film and I'm in official competition with my film in several international film festival. I am in that way... I wrote about a vision... Many people said GH2 is bettrer than Canon 7D and 5D, but how many films or TV shows have been done with a GH2 and how many with the Canon? tests are brong?, no, is just the people like more Canon... are they going to change? maybe I don´t know... There will always be comparisons between cameras but the repetitive speech which exceeds camera which is already very boring because it directs attention around the camera and not to the fact that the camera is just a tool ... Always speak with eagerness and requirement about " low quality lights" and I ask you: are you going to shoot a project and you have no lights? distortion in the colors , I ask: do you know white balance correctly ? know about how to make a color correction using professional programs ? , we can exploit the cameras, no matter what you use, these cameras provide a space for color correction, narrow or broad but you have the posibility to correct color, but you must do a good job with the photography, because mistakes in this area can be difficult to solve , and that applies to any of these cameras (we are not comparing a Genesis vs Arri). Repeat: I respect those who like to see and compare, but I'd like to see stories that achieve more success in festivals or theaters that were made with these cameras. Actually I read this article because I usually read most of the posts you can read , but I see so much eagerness to compare the cameras that I wonder if the artistic work they do is quality , I wonder if they are enjoying the democratization of cinema that can be due to the DSLR, that´s all... So if you think I´m lost, I'd rather to be like that...!

 
 I have actually spent far more on lenses then I will do on a camera. The real problem for me is I am camera less.
 
WHY?
 
Because the way manufacturers do business is so frustrating with there 8 bit compressed 420 formula for their self made consumer market.
 
Look at the Canon 1DC lovely camera then look at the price. Arrgh.
 
I still don't get how Canon made a high bit rate codec for the Canon 5D3 that actually puts the lens out of focus. Argghh.
 
After playing with the GH2 for a few years now and not being satisfied on working with it's shortcomings, IE 8bit 420 and having to light for exposure and get it right with limited colour correction I am well and truly fed up almost to the point of wanting my old EX1/ Letus adapter combo back. Arghhh. Arghhh.
 
I am climbing the walls waiting for the BMD pocket camera and their 4k camera fiasco. Arghhh.
 
So camera less and frustrated I have this need to constantly re evaluate other offerings but time and time again my mind locks my wallet as I face the crippledness of the main players err tools. Or are they the tools? Me? Noooooo. Arghhh. 
 
Nice though for you to guide me through this MEEESS by guiding me away from my tool petulance and into the world of don't worry be happy content is king, when I thought prince Charles was going to be king? Argghh.
Link to post
Share on other sites

luisrjm, wow I would love to have that guy in the room at an equipment test on the set of a big Hollywood production...

 

"Hey put that camera down!! The script needs more work. Hey! Stop evaluating the flare of anamorphic lenses. Can't you see Clooney isn't right for this role?? Hey stop messing with robot arms and projection systems Alfonso. You've gotta give the festivals I call, get a slot at Cannes!! HEY!! Don't you think Sandra's character needs a bit more balls? HEY?"

 

Anytime ... do you know what is to be in a set with dozens of people to make a shot that lasts less than 30 seconds in a movie? I speak based on what I've learned from the tests performed at the right time and what I experienced as a filmmaker as director as well as producer . I shared a vision for those who are new to the road or have traveled some of this road, and aspire to be directors or directors of photography, many great filmmakers made projects with simple cameras and a small group of collaborators, they didn´t need robotic arms or specialized projection systems... were only them, the script , some technicians, lights and actors ( Cloney and Bulock were not exactly one of these actors ... ) and are winners of Cannes, the Oscar, etc...

 

 
but I apologize because this blog is clearly not for filmmakers who want to advance as filmmakers, is basically for analysis of camera equipment, for people who want to share the results of their tests and for people who have not yet been able to make their own tests or require information to invest in economic camera equipment they can use to their productions.

I apologize again and remember, no disrespect to anyone, if anyone is offended is their business, I'm a filmmaker and I speak from what I have learned ...
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anytime ... do you know what is to be in a set with dozens of people to make a shot that lasts less than 30 seconds in a movie? I speak based on what I've learned from the tests performed at the right time and what I experienced as a filmmaker as director as well as producer . I shared a vision for those who are new to the road or have traveled some of this road, and aspire to be directors or directors of photography, many great filmmakers made projects with simple cameras and a small group of collaborators, they didn´t need robotic arms or specialized projection systems... were only them, the script , some technicians, lights and actors ( Cloney and Bulock were not exactly one of these actors ... ) and are winners of Cannes, the Oscar, etc...

 

 
but I apologize because this blog is clearly not for filmmakers who want to advance as filmmakers, is basically for analysis of camera equipment, for people who want to share the results of their tests and for people who have not yet been able to make their own tests or require information to invest in economic camera equipment they can use to their productions.

I apologize again and remember, no disrespect to anyone, if anyone is offended is their business, I'm a filmmaker and I speak from what I have learned ...

 

I think you are hoping someone here is involved professionally that can give you a hand up because they will recognise your greatness because it is you who is posting.

 

Of course this is a forum for testing analysing and comment. How the hell could it be about making films That is something done in the physical world You don't learn to drive a car on the internet.

 

Go find another forum and don't try to change shame this one into what your petulant behaviour wants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello eveyone

 

i always read that smaller sensor has poor low light performance compared to bigger sensor (assuming sensor technology is of the same generation) which seems logical because the surface to collect light energy is smaller

 

can someone explain why in this test the low light performance of the pocket camera with a 12.48x7.02mm

 sensor on a f1.8*0.71= f1.28 is better (less noise) than the 5d mark3 on a f1.4 lens (almost similar aperture) but 10x smaller sensor ?

 

the ratio of sensor surface is 36*24/(12.4*7) = 9.9 should not the image on the 5d mark 3 be 3.2 stop brighter (ln2(9.9)-(1.4-1.28)) and thus have less noise as explained here (http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.pixel.size.matter/#Introduction)

 

i also read that it is pixel size that determines the s/n ratio and not the sensor size . so pocket cinema camera has a pixel width of 12.48mm/1920 = 6.5um and 5dmark3 has a pixel width of 36mm/5760=6.2um so it should have similar noise ratio. but then if the 5dmak3 is multisampled by a factor of 3 ( 5760/1920) on each axis,when we average the 9 pixels, the noise level must be dived by 9. so why does this test shows bmpcc in low light with less noise than the 5dmk3 ? was there a noise reduction done in post process for the bmpcc and not for the 5dmk3 ?

 

thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Im slowly reading through this thread. I found it odd how you downplay the gh3 saying that "ease of use doesnt matter its the image", yet the main point you make when negativly speaking about the 5D3, Is its not so ease of use.

This article as many shoot out reviews do, has evoked many fan boy comments, it's almost like a comment section from IGN on the Xbox One vs PS4 debate.  it's clear that a lot of people on here aren't really being objective. The GH3 users are here to convince everyone and themselves that GH3 is king, even though it isn't. The GH3 produces a nice image and it's easy to use = best camera. I don't think so.

5DM3 is a fantastic camera and RAW makes it a beast, but again, is it the best RAW cinema camera? possibly but you also have to remember Magic lantern is not canon, if Magic lantern were to stop doing what they're doing, it would all be over. Which leads me onto my next point, it's a hack, so paid Jobs are something you most likely would never use it on. And before people start saying you would never use RAW on a paid job anyway? says who, you? a lot of people here seem to speak in absolutes. I work on paid Jobs and use RAW, but I do it with a BMCC. The workflow is a lot easier than converting the RAW files from canon DSLRs. Also it's not hacked, the software works with the hardware and it was intended to from the get go. I

 

I've been a DSLR shooter for years, Before that if I wanted the cinematic look, I had to set up a rail system with a 35mm adaptor from Redrock Micro with the Sony EX3 . What we can do now, it's mind blowing.

 

Again A lot of users here seem to be speaking in absolutes, like my way is the only way and what i'm saying is true because i've used X Y and Z camera therefore I know better. GH3 users saying the GH3 is the best because it's just as cinematic and it's so easy to set up and use with minimal accessories. What has ease of use have to do with the final image? 

 

I'm a narrative and advertisement film maker, we use blackmagic because despite their flaws, they work well and the final image is great, for people saying the 5DM3 blows it away in low light, I work in a stuido and we have lights, I thinnk huge sensors have made people lazy, not using lights because the sensor can cope in low light. I never shoot anything that doesn't have a proper lighting. We also have 5DM3 on set but we don't use them for filming in raw because it's paid. Why use RAW, you don't need it you say? we do because we do a lot of green screen work, I'm also a visual effects artist, anyone who is will know that working with 8 bit 4:2:0 DSLR footage will know it's terrible for keying, and before people say, I can key DSLR footage and it looks great, let me tell you, there is a big difference between, it looks ok, and something that looks professional.

 

I think people are downplaying a lot of what blackmagic does, Take the pocket cinema camera which I own (FAN BOY TALKING), It's under $1000 and shoots Prores 422 and will soon Shoot 12bit RAW CinemaDNG. No other camera does that, The GH3 is a lot easier to use and it produces fanastic images, it's also got a great view finder and it's files are smaller and easier to manage, guess what, I don't care about any of that stuff, I and my clients care about the end image, not how I got there, just what it is. The GH3 does not produce better images, I don't care what you say, it just doesn't. For me colour grading matters a lot, and RAW enables me to push it much further than any non hacked DSLR, the GH3 crumbles if you push it too much in the grading department. Even the pocket cams prores grades beautifully without RAW.

 

I thought I would just give a different perspective, I wasn't going to comment but I seen too many GH3 users saying why the GH3 is good enough and overall a better camera when you factor in it's easy of use. Like that's all that matters. I read someone saying in regards to Dynamic range, there was only a little difference between the 5D and the BMPCC, i'm sorry but I can tell a huge difference. 

 

I know i'll probably get shot down but i'm sorry I think a lot of people are missing the point, which is the end image. For run and gunners, yeah the GH3 is the way to go. For me, at the moment Blackmagic is my brand, expecting good things from the 4K version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://vimeo.com/77268402

68GB worth of material was used to get a studio based test this finely tuned, with the cameras matched in post as close as possible. This effort to remove the variables of grading and camera settings leaves behind a truer picture of the differences in hardware capabilities.

The 5D Mark III raw (from Magic Lantern), if it were a film stock, would be Fuji. Warm vivid colours which may need taming a bit in post. The Blackmagic is more Kodak, cooler and more muted, it often requires the opposite treatment in post to the Canon cameras. The 7D is totally back from the dead - with Magic Lantern raw and the Mosaic Engineering VAF-7D tested here, it offers lovely image quality from a Super 35mm sized sensor, at a similar price to the Pocket Cinema Camera. The Panasonic GH3 - best of the standard system cameras out of the box without modifications does a good job keeping up with them.

The scene was lit three ways to test resolution, dynamic range and low light performance.

Read the full article here

 

 

I intrested to see test whit black magic pocket camera RAW and others same camera, dynamic test. Can you doit. Or just record same test just black magic pocket camera RAW if you have same shooting place.

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...