Would you buy a 5d mark III now?

[giostrante]

For weddings I stay with my d800 over the 5d all the time, as I said, small files, better quality, an entire wedding is 20-25 gb of footage with standard bitrate, less then 50 with the new hack, is perfect for that use. There's no need for 4k or other formats, the price people pay me for a wedding is right  just for a h264 video. 

I work alone and with one nikon, a tokina atx-pro 35-70 f 2,8 (an unknown lens, build like a tank, light, with an outstanding quality even wide open and the best and smoother zoom and focus rings I've ever seen in my life, if anyone is so lucky to find one grab it immediately), a tamron af 20-40 f 2,7-3,5 (another masterpiece of lens, almost zero distortion, great sharpness, another tank-made glass and is like having 3 primes in a single package, 20, 24 and 28 at f 2,8, go for it also if you need wide lenses) a nikon 50 f 1,8 series E for extra low light and a shoulder mount. 

I make wedding reportage and it's a perfect combo, all in a backpack, with 2 batteries, a viewfinder, a videomic pro and I can shoot all the day in every situation. 

 

I'd like to have raw and prores but not for the weddings, mainly for other works like videoclip, little movies and so on.

But I think that in the future using a black magic pocket camera for wedding could be an idea, batteries are cheap, lenses are cheap, ultra light, great dynamic range and good in low light, it would be interesting.

 

Anyway, I have considered various factors in this days, and after all the posts here now I know what to do, I stay with my beloved d800, until the photokina in september at least, then we'll se what nikon, canon and other brand will do. In the meanwhile we'll have more information and test on gh4, sony a7s and so on. 

 

I think that buying a 5d mark III now just for raw video would be a mistake,specially considering the standard h264 which is really outdated and overrated. And who knows what will happen during and after this summer? Maybe there'll be chances to see new 4k canons and nikons, or a nikon raw mode, maybe with an official firmware update (in my dreams), who knows??

 

So for now let's using what we have to make beautiful things!

[giostrante]

Canon (and the 5D3) has the nicest color processing in the price range, especially for skintones. In good/bright light, the 5D3 H.264 sharpens nicely and looks really good on a large HDTV at a normal viewing distance. It's very important to use sharp lenses and to nail focus. The 24-105 F4L is ok for closeups, but not so good for anything else (sharpness). The 16-35 F2.8L II, 24-70 F2.8L II, and 70-200 F2.8L II are very sharp and really help the 5D3 H.264 look its best. Nikon and Zeiss primes are also very sharp; the new Sigma 50mm should be spectacular.

Canon L lenses with H.264 (IPB): looks good on HDTV:

I also shoot with the Sony FS700 and Speedbooster. The FS700 is sharper and has greater dynamic range (at least 2 stops) along with smaller H.264 files. When white balance is set properly, color processing is decent but still can't match Canon, especially for skintones.

The Odyssey 7Q (haven't used one yet) takes the FS700 to another level, though from footage posted so far the color processing is still not as good as 5D3 14-bit raw.

The GH4 has resolution to spare but falls short on color processing and DR and has a tiny sensor (only S35 with a Speedbooster- an issue if needing full frame FOV). The A7S looks to have excellent color processing and DR though has a fair amount of rolling shutter.

For run and gun, the 5D3 is better than the FS700 as it's lighter and easier to focus when using a quality viewfinder loupe. The FS700 can use autofocus lenses but they are slow and don't always focus on the desired object.

5D3 14-bit raw is spectacular, especially when processed with ACR. The tradeoff is card and disk space and processing time. For the price, this is the closest one can get to an ARRI Alexa/Amira- the best cameras in most people's eyes.

(GH4 can't compete with this color; processed with Resolve- ACR wasn't used)
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?322289-Wedding-(RAW)&s=6bee780c6bd52fdfdd928bcee7cec245 (Low light raw, processed with ACR).

 

Anyway, the first video is gorgeous but the wedding, let me say, it doesn't even seem raw, not a good example!

[jcs]

Anyway, the first video is gorgeous but the wedding, let me say, it doesn't even seem raw, not a good example!

 

Many folks thought it looks excellent- did you watch the whole thing?

It's typically not possible to get that much clean detail in low light with H.264 (usually turns to blocky artifacts and is hard to clean up, even with Neat Video. Note some of the clips are pretty clean due to NR, however it still has detail on edges so it looks pretty good for the conditions).

 

Perhaps post a D800 wedding video so we see can compare?

[rak_heri]

I also do a lot of photography (portraits, studio, events)

 

If you are planning to do short movies, art pieces and anything that involves long time commitment, the 5D Mark III would be great. It has the full frame image for photography, and you can push the image in post as much as you want for videos. For me, the problem is the post-production and the bugs. It will take time and careful organization to the point where you *hate* the experience. A world of difference with AVCHD, H264 or Prores.

 

If you can wait a few weeks, I would see the reviews for Sony A7S. It doesn't do pixel binning, the sensor should be as good as Nikon D800, and the Zeiss ZE lenses are extraordinary; however nobody knows how moiré and rolling shutter will be (forget 4K...). Maybe the best of both worlds

[giostrante]

Many folks thought it looks excellent- did you watch the whole thing?

It's typically not possible to get that much clean detail in low light with H.264 (usually turns to blocky artifacts and is hard to clean up, even with Neat Video. Note some of the clips are pretty clean due to NR, however it still has detail on edges so it looks pretty good for the conditions).

 

Perhaps post a D800 wedding video so we see can compare?

 

Well, look at this, look other wedding video from this guy, it's always a gh3 with a 25mm and a 50mm, for me that's no comparison, no way.

 

 

I don't know what is "excellent" in the video you post, speaking just about image quality of course. The steady parts in the church are really poor, I have to say, I can't believe it's raw!!

 

I know what the 5d raw can do, I know it's amazing but this is definitely one of the worst examples I've ever seen, always speaking just about image quality of course, I don't comment the video.

 

A d800 can't do raw, unfortunately not yet, but I can assure you that you could easily compare the h264 nikon footage with some parts of this video, like the church part as I said.

 

And as you can see in the link you can also be outclassed from a little beast like the gh3!

[fuzzynormal]

just about image quality of course, I don't comment the video.

 

On the contrary, it seems to me I'm hearing criticism of the video content.  I'll elaborate.

 

The camera is only a tool and the examples are more a preferential testament to the filmmaker production abilities rather than the actual cameras IQ.

 

It's not the camera "outclassing" one video over another.  They both look fine.  The lighting and environment in the GH3 video is more interesting and dynamic though.  The art design of the work is considered and successful.  That's the MUCH bigger difference to me.  Is that aspect of the vid influencing one's bias of the image?  I think it might be.  (It should, should't it?)

 

No layperson that I know is going to pixel peep at their wedding video and complain that a 5DIII has less perceived IQ than a GH3. No way.  There are more important things they worry about.  Like, you know, the created content.

 

Besides, the GH3 video in this wedding video, to my eye, is a tad over sharpened anyway and, for a romantic wedding, I actually prefer the gentler and deeper DOF image from the 5D.  I believe the word that sums all this up is called "subjectivity."

 

Must be me.  I just don't get the brand "vs." brand stuff and asserting that one certain camera is so much superior to this other camera.  All newer cameras produce incredible worthwhile results and to quibble about what are ultimately pretty inconsequential IQ differences seems like a waste of time.

 

You buy the gear that does what you want it to do.  You feel you need RAW, you choose RAW.  You want ProRes422, go get it.  8 bit gets you by, no problem.  Simple.  Different needs, different cameras.

 

Ultimately both of the filmmakers responsible for the videos above went out and created something with their gear and were successful at it.  To me, that fact is so much more important than anything else.

[jcs]

giostrante- the beauty of this reality is that we are all the same- in that we each see reality with a unique perspective :)

 

Scott's video on vimeo looks like he didn't 'upgrade' it to 1080p (it's 1280 vs 1920 pixels wide). However you can download the full res MP4: by clicking on Vaughn and Laura here: https://vimeo.com/search?q=cinemaworx (a direct embed, as before, won't allow you to get to the vimeo page to download the original).

 

While the GH3 footage you posted is indeed lovely, it feels like video due to most of the shots having a deep depth of field and perhaps more importantly, there are image artifacts and aliasing. It's also mostly in sunlight/shade which is much easier to make look good vs. lowlight+indoors. The GH3 video is H.264- no H.264 examples for the D800? The D800 is a really nice still camera, however I haven't seen (great examples) or heard folks raving about the video performance compared to the GH3 or 5D3.

 

Panasonic skintones don't quite match Canon's. When watching Scott's video (the original downloaded from vimeo), it has no aliasing or artifacts, which goes a long way toward the much desired film look. The skintones are overall very good. Watching this artifact-free, shallow DOF footage with excellent skintones and plenty of detail reminds me of just one other camera: the ARRI Alexa. Many others see the similarity as well, calling the 5D3 a 'baby Alexa'. The 'excellent' comment regarding his video comes from reading folks comments on dvxuser.com (all positive). I agree the bright church shots aren't as good as some of the others (I'm guessing he exposed to make people's faces look better), however that doesn't take away from the other shots.

 

While the GH4 has very good detail, it's still behind Canon for color processing. The Sony-produced A7S demo video on the other hand looked very, very good. Artifact-free, excellent skintones and great dynamic range (probably better than the 5D3, even RAW). I also shoot with the Sony FS700 + Speedbooster and Canon lenses. While the slow motion is great as is the resolution and great quality from tiny AVCHD H.264 files (and 14 stops DR), the color processing is not as good as Canon, again especially for skintones. Someone ranked color processing as follows: ARRI, Canon, Sony, Panasonic. This matches my experience as well.

 

For shooting video, other than excess rolling shutter in 4K, the A7S looks like the best all-around value-priced camera soon to be on the market (unless Panasonic ups their color game to match or exceed the A7S by the time the GH4 is launched). If one needs to shoot stills and already has Canon lenses, the 5D3 with RAW is a fantastic value for video. RAW is indeed more work for post, however it's getting better all the time. I just shot and edited my last projects using RAW and edited everything directly from CinemaDNG in PPro CC: no transcoding. The files are still large, so for larger projects it is more work, however for a 90 minute feature and 10x shot ratio, that's 900 minutes, which works out to about 4.8TB. 4TB is $149, so it's not really a cost issue. Fast CF cards are expensive, with Komputerbay cards being more affordable (though may need to sent some back to get good ones).

 

Folks cutting 5D3 with Alexa: 

 

And using the 5D3 for Ford-level model fashion shoots:

http://johngress.com/fashion/new-5d3-raw-fashion-music-video/

 

While I'm sure some folks are using the GH3 and D800 for these types of shoots, for the above reasons the 5D3 is getting the press as it looks closest to the top cameras from ARRI.

[dafreaking]

The softness of the 5Dmk3 is a plus point as far as wedding films are concerned. I tried sharpening some of the videos in post and the years of torture (by beauty products, etc) started sticking out like one of those beauty product before and after ads.

[giostrante]

Ultimately both of the filmmakers responsible for the videos above went out and created something with their gear and were successful at it.  To me, that fact is so much more important than anything else.

 

Absolutely true, that's why I'll stay with my d800 and probably buy an Atomos Ninja or a Star. But we were discussing about image quality, just a technical point of view, some useless nerd stuff ;).

 

giostrante- the beauty of this reality is that we are all the same- in that we each see reality with a unique perspective :)

 

 

Another great truth!  :D

 

While the GH3 footage you posted is indeed lovely, it feels like video due to most of the shots having a deep depth of field 

 

Well, this is another point, from the beginning of the dslr video story all people went crazy for this absurd and extreme reduced depth of field. To me is a nonsense, it's just something for dreamy look images, videoclips and weddings, but the cinematic image is another thing, try to watch every good movie ever made, pay attention and you'll see, deep depth of field is in 95% of the images, that's why they use tons of light and money!

 

 

The D800 is a really nice still camera, however I haven't seen (great examples) or heard folks raving about the video performance compared to the GH3 or 5D3.

 

 

Poor d800, its look is really underrated, I know, but is a capable camera. It's a coincidence but just today Andrew decided to give it a second chance, there's a new post here with a couple of good examples (with Atomos Ninja), give it a look!!!

 

And there is a small videoclip I made and a video test of the new hack of a friend of mine. I'm going to post soon on vimeo some recent wedding or a show reel.

 

 

 

As you can see, considering that is internal recording is not so bad, even for the low light parts, of course is better download the files as you said. And especially the second video, I doubt that the 5d h264 can reach that sharpness and detail, even if sharpened in post.

But I'm a nikon guy, so... :P

 

Anyway, let's see what Andrew will do and let's keep shooting, down with cameras, people rule!