Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

Canon interview at Photokina 2014 - 7D Mark II - Magic Lantern - and moire

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

Canon has always done some kind of dick move just to create marketing distinctions, but I'm pretty sure you can make exposure changes in 1/3 stops since forever, and MFA has been around since the 7D/5DII days.

 

The 60D lacks MFA, I believe, and the Rebels lack MFA and 1/3 stop exposure increments.... 

 

70D looks pretty nice right about now, though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> almost like Canon OWE them something.

 

They do, the relationship between company and consumer is not a one-way street. You buy a product with the expectation that it will live up to its advertising and be fit for the purpose it was intended.  If Canon wasn't claiming that their DSLRs are designed for videographers and are excellent for that task (read their ads for the 7D Mk II) then there would be no problem, but they are so there is.

 

> Compared to 10 years ago we are living in a dream land...

 

If we are, it is only because consumers have learned to start pushing back on some of the less-than-nice business practices of the major camera makers.  I think we have the Internet to thank for that - it's provided a place for people to gather and discuss these issues and work on unofficial unauthorized hacks like Magic Lantern to get more out of the hardware than manufacturers like Canon are willing to provide. In the interview Andrew did, note Canon's hostile reaction to the mention of Magic Lantern. They are taking active steps to stop ML, for example by requiring that the higher-priced cameras be sent in to get firmware updates.

 

Remember, the first push for "affordable" ($20K) digital cinema cameras came from a little company called Red, not from the major players like Sony who were charging close to $100K for CineAltas that were less capable at the time.

 

So yes, go out and "shoot", but also keep in mind what it took to get to where we are, and that Canon's policies are unlikely to change if we don't continue to speak out regarding these issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 60D lacks MFA, I believe, and the Rebels lack MFA and 1/3 stop exposure increments.... 

 

70D looks pretty nice right about now, though...

Rebels could always do 1/3 stop exposure increments, I'm sure! Unless this is specific to the Rebels only, but that'd just be weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

70D looks pretty nice right about now, though...

 

Does it? Big shortfall in image quality for video to the Nikon D5300, not to mention the others.

 

And dual pixel AF is too slow for stills, too unreliable for filmmaking.

 

But apart from that... yeah... wow... amazing. etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And dual pixel AF is too slow for stills, too unreliable for filmmaking.

Is it that slow? I sat down with a 70D indoors at a food court (someone else's camera) for a full 30 minutes and compared it to my GH3. For stills the speed difference isn't that much, though it cannot do lowlight AF as well as the GH3.

 

For videos (not filmmaking), I'm the guy that uses the GH3's AF from time to time and am happy with it. I'm sure the EOS 70D will be more reliable with phase detect, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Only difference is it doesn't hunt when it snaps onto focus, but it snaps on a lot slower than the best contrast detect AF and is hopeless in low light.

 

What are you hoping to use it for? If it is casual holiday snap shot video time, then fine it works well. If it is filmmaking, then no, you need MF. And if it is stills forget it, just look through the optical viewfinder instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it? Big shortfall in image quality for video to the Nikon D5300, not to mention the others.

 

And dual pixel AF is too slow for stills, too unreliable for filmmaking.

 

But apart from that... yeah... wow... amazing. etc.

 

I mean for stills. It's a stills camera (unless I'm missing something). Includes both MFA (missing from 60D) and a vastly improved AF algorithm over the 60D, much sharper sensor, etc. and like $800 now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For stills the 70D is totally overpriced and outperformed by any aps-c camera from the last 4 years.

 

Name another camera that's compatible with as wide a range of good lenses (that means Canon or Nikon only), has a better AF system, better viewfinder, better build quality, longer battery life, and better ergonomics for $800 (which is what you can get a 70D for these days if you look around)?

 

Or are you getting caught up on two stops of shadow DR that I've never found any use for in a properly exposed image?

 

I mean this as a serious question because I've considered selling my 5D Mark III kit after buying a vast number of APS-C-only lenses for my C100. If there's a better system out there, or if (as you state), the 60D, t3i, t4i, and t5i all outperform the 70D, I'd like to know.

 

How much worse is image quality at base ISO in your experience than on the Mark III? Is the autofocus system that bad? What I like about the Mark III is its amazing viewfinder and autofocus system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> The Vixia is a video camera. The 7dmk2 is a stills camera.

 

Your statement directly contradicts what Canon's advertising says about the 7D Mark 2.  Here is the very first thing Canon says about the camera on their official product page:

The Canon EOS 7D Mark II digital SLR camera is designed to meet the demands of photographers and videographers who want a camera that can provide a wide range of artistic opportunities.

 

From the very interview this thread was created to discuss:

 

Is the 7D Mark II predominantly a stills camera then?

Yes

 

 

The 7dmk2 is a stills camera that happens to take video. It was designed primarly for still photography. It is not a video camera. It was not designed as a video camera. It is not intended to be used as a video camera. It is a stills camera that happens to include a video feature.

 

Out of the 18 paragraphs in Canons press release for the 7dmk2, exactly two of them were dedicated to video.

 

If you want video features, buy a video camera. Don't buy the wrong tool for the job then complain it doesn't do the job correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Name another camera that's compatible with as wide a range of good lenses (that means Canon or Nikon only), has a better AF system, better viewfinder, better build quality, longer battery life, and better ergonomics for $800 (which is what you can get a 70D for these days if you look around)?

 

Or are you getting caught up on two stops of shadow DR that I've never found any use for in a properly exposed image?

 

I mean this as a serious question because I've considered selling my 5D Mark III kit after buying a vast number of APS-C-only lenses for my C100. If there's a better system out there, or if (as you state), the 60D, t3i, t4i, and t5i all outperform the 70D, I'd like to know.

 

How much worse is image quality at base ISO in your experience than on the Mark III? Is the autofocus system that bad? What I like about the Mark III is its amazing viewfinder and autofocus system.

 

There are many options, let's say pentax k3, nikon d7100, fujifilm X-T1 and quite a few more. Of course, if you handle expensive canon glass the 70D can be an option if you need to have long reach. But for a person who spends 800$ on a camera that expensive glass is usually out of the question, why would you want to use such a camera anyway if you have the money and there are excellent teleconverters. Maybe you can think of a reason and in that case the 70D would be great, but it just doesn't come to my mind.

 

Btw you should try the extra dynamic range and lowlight performance. I bet you didn't know that dynamic range is used for something more than correcting a wrong exposure, give some raw files a try and see how they hold up and look more clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many options, let's say pentax k3, nikon d7100, fujifilm X-T1 and quite a few more. Of course, if you handle expensive canon glass the 70D can be an option if you need to have long reach. But for a person who spends 800$ on a camera that expensive glass is usually out of the question, why would you want to use such a camera anyway if you have the money and there are excellent teleconverters. Maybe you can think of a reason and in that case the 70D would be great, but it just doesn't come to my mind.

 

Btw you should try the extra dynamic range and lowlight performance. I bet you didn't know that dynamic range is used for something more than correcting a wrong exposure, give some raw files a try and see how they hold up and look more clear.

 

I'll stick with the Mark III then. :)

 

The Nikon D7100 does look nice, but I much prefer the images from the Mark III to the D7000, so if the 70D is way below both, then it's out.

 

I've never had the need for 14 stops of dynamic range in stills. For video, yes, which is why I'm a big Alexa fan, but for stills I just haven't found the need for more than 10 stops, 5-6 for most purposes. But I grew into the Mark III shooting 4x5 Velvia, which has 4-5 stops of dynamic range so I come at this with a different approach from most, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I thought this was going to be some troll-flame war. Try that 70D in person and if it really suits you then hell... but personally I wouldn't dump a 5dmkiii for a 70D even if I only had the 24-70 2.8 or some prime for the mkiii.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I thought this was going to be some troll-flame war. Try that 70D in person and if it really suits you then hell... but personally I wouldn't dump a 5dmkiii for a 70D even if I only had the 24-70 2.8 or some prime for the mkiii.

No, I get that some people want a lot of DR for landscapes, but for me since most prints have 4-5 stops of contrast at absolute best, I try to shoot scenes that are as evenly lit as posible. I don’t like tone mapping, either. For video you’re looking at displays with 10 stops of contrast and you have have less control over light because you can’t use strobes or wait on light most of the time. So for video I’ll use things (ND grads, polarizers, power windows, etc.) that I wouldn’t use for the types of stills I like and I just find the Alexa’s image to be nicest and the post workflow a dream. I like Canon’s autofocus (lightning fast with the old 70-200mm f2.8, even faster with the 70-200mm f2.8 II IS) and ergonomics. I just wish they’d update their 50mm f1.4. For stills it’s a nice package, yes video is very soft. I get that people want a lot of contrast if they post images online, but even then I’d rather wait on good light than dodge and burn.

 

I just feel goofy carrying around this awesome 18-35mm f1.8 Sigma (and 11-16mm Tokina) and having no camera to use them on, except that dreadful EOS-M I’m now trying to unload. Which, btw, has surprisingly great image quality, significantly exceeding the 7D… but it’s basically unusable due to poor AF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What surprises me the most about 7D2 is not the lack of 4K ( half-expected it ) but lack of low-light capability. Right now D4s, D810, Df and A7s are radically changing photographic conventions by delivering acceptable noise-free ISO1600 images...I didn't believe the hype until I rented a D4s and tried it myself...wow...Nikon truly raised the ISO bar here with not one, but three of its cameras. I'd go as far as call this low-light development as next-gen, and it made me excited about photography again, while Canon is refusing to compete. 

 

I already knew that my next video camera was going to be non-Canon, what i didn't know is that my next stills camera might be non-Canon too...and that I still find hard to digest... 

 

Last hope for that 5D4 announcement in Feb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> I honestly don't understand why people are so upset over what Canon are doing or not doing

 

I think people are upset because they bought the 5D Mk II and invested in Canon lenses thinking that Canon would continue and improve upon what they started, in the same relatively affordable price range.  Instead, Canon put the next version of the 5D on ice for almost four years and told Canon DSLR videographers that if they wanted any improvements, they would need to take out a second mortgage on their house and get into the high-priced Cinema Series.  To rub salt in the wound they withheld basic video features on their DSLRs that they were happy to give to the cheap small-sensor camcorder crowd.

When you can get a head-phone jack on a $249 Canon camcorder but not on the $2,000 6D (like the 7D also advertised by Canon as being designed for videographers), there is no way that can be explained away.

 

Yes, you can sell all your Canon gear and buy something with more up-to-date video features at a more reasonable price from a different manufacturer.  But for true Canon fans, it's a sad occasion when they have to do that, reflecting on what could of been if only Canon had stuck by the folks who helped them start the whole DSLR video revolution in the first place.

The important part of your point is customerfs buying into the Canon ECO System with lenes etc. at an affordable by the masses price point then down the road finding that they have been priced out of the market.  Now clients want a more updated look ......... so its frustrating but time to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the very interview this thread was created to discuss:

 

 

The 7dmk2 is a stills camera that happens to take video. It was designed primarly for still photography. It is not a video camera. It was not designed as a video camera. It is not intended to be used as a video camera. It is a stills camera that happens to include a video feature.

 

Out of the 18 paragraphs in Canons press release for the 7dmk2, exactly two of them were dedicated to video.

 

If you want video features, buy a video camera. Don't buy the wrong tool for the job then complain it doesn't do the job correctly.

 

I think you don't understand the whole concept of DSLR filmmaking.  And you are ignoring Canon's own advertising. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The important part of your point is customerfs buying into the Canon ECO System with lenes etc. at an affordable by the masses price point then down the road finding that they have been priced out of the market.  Now clients want a more updated look ......... so its frustrating but time to move on.

 

I agree, it probably is time regrettably for serious videographers to "move on" from Canon due to their decision to "price the masses out of the market", as you put it.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...