Want Canon to add 24fps to 5D Mark II?

[gooble]

You can find directions on how to let them know by going here: http://prolost.blogspot.com/2008/09/dear-canon-24p-please.html

The main site is here: http://prolost.blogspot.com/

[MClassImages]

Is 24 even possible without the mirror flying off? :lol:



Oh wait.. you mean video. Sorry I feel stupid now.

[siuleung]

If we're gonna do this video thing, we might as well do it all cinematic like. How about some XLR plugs while we're at it, and a large shotgun mic in a shockmount on the hotshoe. And a script writing program in the camera menus. And a director's chair. And a Jean Cleade Van Damme mask so your friends can star in a cheesy action flick about some kinda revenge on some kinda bad guy.

[LuxuryGlass]

:D no need for anti-dust.. maybe safety wiring

[DoomMan]

they will probably add 24fps option to the new 1d/1ds line.

[ceriltheblade]

Why only 24?! :)

[NeoTokyo]

I musta missed something, I thought it shot at 30fps in movie mode....

[NeoTokyo]

OK! I get it now, 24p is film speed.

GOTCHA! :P

[davidinjp]

You can easily resample video from 30p to 24p in any NLE software. It is much easier than going from 60i to 24p.

Not sure what the fuss is. Anyone wanting to use 24p to get the movie look is probably already using an NLE to edit it anyway! But Canon should just make a simple firmware change to add the 30p option, if they can.

[tedBalog]

I'm a newb when it comes to videography - but what advantage is 24 > 30? Wouldn't it be nicer to slow down the frame rate (from 30) to do some "slow motion" type of work?

[davidinjp]

I'm a newb when it comes to videography - but what advantage is 24 > 30? Wouldn't it be nicer to slow down the frame rate (from 30) to do some "slow motion" type of work?

30p is technically better. 24p is artistically better for those who want movie look for their production.

Lack of 24p is common complaint against the many camcorder models that do not have 24p either.

[gooble]

If we're gonna do this video thing, we might as well do it all cinematic like. How about some XLR plugs while we're at it, and a large shotgun mic in a shockmount on the hotshoe. And a script writing program in the camera menus. And a director's chair. And a Jean Cleade Van Damme mask so your friends can star in a cheesy action flick about some kinda revenge on some kinda bad guy.

:rolleyes:

Why only 24?! :)

Cause I didn't feel like including 25, 29.97, 23.976 etc.

You can easily resample video from 30p to 24p in any NLE software. It is much easier than going from 60i to 24p.

Not sure what the fuss is. Anyone wanting to use 24p to get the movie look is probably already using an NLE to edit it anyway! But Canon should just make a simple firmware change to add the 30p option, if they can.

I'm not real knowledgeable about video and frame rates etc. but the reading I have done indicated that the exact opposite is true of what you said. Apparently if you have 24 you can go more easily to other frame rates and avoid ghosting. But what do I know.

[LuxuryGlass]

to summarize (please google to find out more): lots of wedding and indie folks use cameras that have 24p and they use it in that mode. However having a 2nd or 3rd camera that can do shallow DOF is desirable (enter 5dmk2) but.. cutting footage between 24p and 30p is ugly. doesn't really work.

you cannot just take 30 and turn it into 24. the NLE will let you do it, but .. ugh.

You can take 60 and turn it into 24.. but 60 is usually quite demanding. 24 is just very easy. less frames. less data rate. easy firmware fix?

[airfrogusmc]

Why not just shoot video and freeze the frame that you think the photograph is :rolleyes: .

The 5D is not meant to be a sports camera. Never has been. Proper tool for the job a D series for sports.

[_aravena]

Or go out and buy a f'ing camcorder to your desire. My word, they just release a movie mode and there's already more demands. :rolleyes:

[jcolman]

Or go out and buy a f'ing camcorder to your desire. My word, they just release a movie mode and there's already more demands. :rolleyes:

Exactly. Just because it can shoot video doesn't make it the best camera to shoot video.

[dr_morbius]

Why this interest in 24 fps? Is there anyone who don't realize 30 fps is better?

Living in Europe 25 fps would suit the PAL system better. When showing movies on TV they simply speed them up from 24 to 25 or 30 fps. That's why cinematic releases are slightly longer. The higher pitch of the sound is not noticable in PAL and probably adjusted for in NTSC. No big deal for the big movie makers appearantly.

[airfrogusmc]

Hey I got a better idea but it takes some time to learn. How about the decisive moment instead of all those FPS. Train your eye and your hand to capture the moment instead of shooting through it. 1 frame per second but make it the right frame. ;)

[jcolman]

Why this interest in 24 fps? Is there anyone who don't realize 30 fps is better?

Living in Europe 25 fps would suit the PAL system better. When showing movies on TV they simply speed them up from 24 to 25 or 30 fps. That's why cinematic releases are slightly longer. The higher pitch of the sound is not noticable in PAL and probably adjusted for in NTSC. No big deal for the big movie makers appearantly.

Many filmmakers/video guys like shooting in 24p instead of 30p in order to achieve the "cinema look".

[jcolman]

Hey I got a better idea but it takes some time to learn. How about the decisive moment instead of all those FPS. Train your eye and your hand to capture the moment instead of shooting through it. 1 frame per second but make it the right frame. ;)


That's not the intent of the video function of this camera. While it is possible to take a still frame from the video, you really don't want to do it.

[_aravena]

^Pst! that's coming from someone that doesn't know what the topic is actually on.

But adding to that FPS has it's purpose. When you shoot sports you'll realize that.

[airfrogusmc]

It was meant as sarcasm. Learn to see the moment. That's were the mojo is not holding the machine gun trigger down and shooting through. One well placed round instead of 24 not so well placed ones.

And isn't 30 fps approaching video?

[_aravena]

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/banghead.gif

You know this is about the movie mode right?

[jcolman]

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/banghead.gif

You know this is about the movie mode right?

Yes. Do you know about video and how it's a totally different file structure from RAW or JPEG?


edit. I think you meant that comment for airfrog, not me.

[_aravena]

The bottom one yes. The top one was for you informing you that they didn't know. And why'd you quote something that obviously had nothing ...

I give up. People...........

[jcolman]

The bottom one yes. The top one was for you informing you that they didn't know. And why'd you quote something that obviously had nothing ...

I give up. People........... It's the internet. Serious business.

[elbirth]

Why not just shoot video and freeze the frame that you think the photograph is :rolleyes: .

The 5D is not meant to be a sports camera. Never has been. Proper tool for the job a D series for sports.

Hey I got a better idea but it takes some time to learn. How about the decisive moment instead of all those FPS. Train your eye and your hand to capture the moment instead of shooting through it. 1 frame per second but make it the right frame. ;)

It was meant as sarcasm. Learn to see the moment. That's were the mojo is not holding the machine gun trigger down and shooting through. One well placed round instead of 24 not so well placed ones.

And isn't 30 fps approaching video?


LOL... awesome
This whole thread is about the movie mode, which IS 30fps on the 5D Mark II. The lack of actual reading done here is quite amusing

[airfrogusmc]

You're right..

I no nothing of what I'm talking about..

Allot of folks out there shooting lots of FPS but I'm not seeing anything better than what was done before all of these FPS. Thats my point. And FPS are approaching video so soon thats what it will be. Just point in the direction of the action and let it go. Then find the photo in all the frames. Sounds like allot sports guys should be very nervous. And this topic was FPS right?

[elbirth]

You're right..

I no nothing of what I'm talking about..

Allot of folks out there shooting lots of FPS but I'm not seeing anything better than what was done before all of these FPS. Thats my point. And FPS are approaching video so soon thats what it will be. Just point in the direction of the action and let it go. Then find the photo in all the frames. Sounds like allot sports guys should be very nervous. And this topic was FPS right?


seriously, wtf? are you trying to be funny (and failing horribly), or are you just this clueless?

The topic of this thread is the FPS in the 5D Mark II's VIDEO MODE. It shoots VIDEO at 30fps. This has nothing to do with the camera's STILL PICTURES that can be shot at 3.9fps

[jcolman]

You're right..

I no nothing of what I'm talking about..

Allot of folks out there shooting lots of FPS but I'm not seeing anything better than what was done before all of these FPS. Thats my point. And FPS are approaching video so soon thats what it will be. Just point in the direction of the action and let it go. Then find the photo in all the frames. Sounds like allot sports guys should be very nervous. And this topic was FPS right?

:rolleyes: The camera shoots under 5 fps in still mode. Movie mode and still mode are two different animals.

[airfrogusmc]

You are missing my point. What diff does it make if its motor drive or movie mode if the quality is exceptional. Am I the only one seeing that this could be the death of the traditional FPS or the new FPS? Its just a matter of time don't ya think?

[elbirth]

You are missing my point. What diff does it make if its motor drive or movie mode if the quality is exceptional. Am I the only one seeing that this could be the death of the traditional FPS or the new FPS? Its just a matter of time don't ya think?

not quite. If this was the case, HD camcorders would have already done this. It's capturing a lower quality image, not the full 21MP

[airfrogusmc]

Give'm time.;) So the camera at some point in the future is 30 mp and the video image is 10. Good enought for a 300 dpi 8X12 don't ya think?

[zacker]

Or go out and buy a f'ing camcorder to your desire. My word, they just release a movie mode and there's already more demands. :rolleyes:


Ahhhhh haaaa haaaaa... thats Humans for ya.. never happy!!! :lol:

[davidinjp]

Woah, this thread got kind of trippy while I was sleeping last night...

[gooble]

Give'm time.;) So the camera at some point in the future is 30 mp and the video image is 10. Good enought for a 300 dpi 8X12 don't ya think?

The RED cinema camera already shoots video on a 12MP sensor and they're at work on a DSMC or digital still motion camera (I think) that will do basically what the 5D II does only will probably have a form factor more like a video camera, maybe.

[circles_of_confusion]

I hope they add the option for both 30p and 24p, although the point may be a bit moot without a 180 degree shutter.

We can then have our "filmic" 24fps as well as the option to overcrank to 30fps. And with an intervalometer we can have our stop motion too =)

[lennythelens]

Just shoot animation. you'll get 21MP quality and you can choose how many FPS you want. ;-)

[HyperYagami]

:rolleyes:
Cause I didn't feel like including 25, 29.97, 23.976 etc.


23.97 will be much better than 24. 24 is limited to only blu-ray while 23.97 works with BR and standard DVD.

[Collin85]

Funny thread.

[ScrewDrvr]

i feel dumber after reading this thread.

[gooble]

i feel dumber after reading this thread.

Because of what?

[davidfig]

Yes... and of course 1/2 HD also and while we are at it. They should add 1/2 HD at 60pfs. ;)

Oh! Wait and they can add 1/2 stills at 7.8fps. ;)

[rondo221]

Why would you want 24fps in the first place? Are you transfering your final product to film and watching it from that medium? I would guess no.. so Why do you want to shoot at that speed? You're probably viewing it back on DVD or your Computer. so why limit your framerates? (just to make it look like its flickering?) I never understood the need to record in 24 fps or 24p. if your final out put isnt going to be film then why shoot like it is? doesnt make it film like...

[gooble]

Why would you want 24fps in the first place? Are you transfering your final product to film and watching it from that medium? I would guess no.. so Why do you want to shoot at that speed? You're probably viewing it back on DVD or your Computer. so why limit your framerates? (just to make it look like its flickering?) I never understood the need to record in 24 fps or 24p. if your final out put isnt going to be film then why shoot like it is? doesnt make it film like...

Uhhh, yeah it does.

[rondo221]

Uhhh, yeah it does.
What I meant to say is there is no benefit to shooting in 24fps. Granted you are shooting 24fps progressive and it gives you better image quality per single frame. Allowing for nicer motion blur. As soon as you create a DVD, edit it on a NLE (Non-Linear Editor) or create a .mov/avi/wmv file to display on a monitor, your 24fps video always plays back as interlaced 30fps.

IMO and thats all this is,
Why would you want to shoot in something where your final output loses 20% of its data?

[Pekka]

A good article about 1080p: http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ:_Whats_the_Big_Deal_About_1080p24/1015

[NickJushchyshyn]

Here's the thing .... there is presently no HD video camera on the market at the 5D price point that can natively use the Canon lens family, so that makes the 5D instantly attractive for video image quality. Even the Canon XLH1 requires an adapter and still it only has a sensor size that is a fraction of the 5D chip. But that's only half the equation....

Feature films are shot at 24p. The "look" of 24 fps with a 180degree (1/48th second) shutter speed, combined with the depth of field qualities of shooting 35mm ("full size sensor") is integral to the feature film aesthetic and so far has been basically unatainable with video cameras. Entire industries have formed around creating very high-end digitial feature film camreas (Viper, Dalsa, CineAlta etc ... generally with a dollar price tag in the 5-6 digit range .. without a lens) and post processing software to fake "film look" from video camera footage.

This is why many TV shows, even today, are shot on film or 24p HD rather than "video". (Consider the "look" of ER, Law&Order, & 24 compared to a game show, or soap opera ... this is largely from film/24p vs video .... even though the final delivery format is identical!)

This aesthetic has been recognized for a long time, so much so that many less expensive video cameras offer 24p shooting .... but they lack the sensor size and lens options of the 5D (not to mention the very convenient CF card workflow!)

Since this 24p aesthetic doesn't "push" the hardware any harder than 30p (it's not like we're asking for 60p/120p or faster for slow motion) it should (in theory) be a near-zero cost adjustment to the firmware that would SIGNIFICANTLY broaden the usefulness of the camera.

[Pekka]

Nick, can you point to any examples on the net showing how much better 24p looks compared to 30p?

Frankly I'm not sold on 24 frames' superiority, to me this sounds like tube amplifier vs. transistor. Last film I went to see was Indiana Jones IV at the best theater in Finland and I hated the jerkyness on pans and blurry action - I get much better quality with my Blu-ray + 100Hz LCD.

I just would like to know what is that "aesthetic recognized for a long time" in 24p!

[NickJushchyshyn]

I'm not sure that "superiority" would be the the right word.
It's just .... different.

Absolutely, 24p can be stuttery.
Many of the classic, slow moving, "dramatic" camera moves used in film establishing shots are slow precisely to AVOID 24p stutter.
Of course, some directors have been known to dial down the shutter speed (not the same as fps) to INDUCE stutter (Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, etc.)

Watch a DVD of the original Raiders of the Lost Ark, Law&Order, 24 etc (all shot on 24p film) and compare that to a DVD of say ... a Nickelodeon live action series ... or Home Shopping network or some game shows on TV (the same TV you watch the DVDs with) and you'll get a sense of the difference.

Many video professionals HATE "film look".
Video is often considered "smoother", "cleaner" ... especially for sports.
Others, however, feel that 24p (and full size sensor depth of field) creates more drama and allows for more creativity in creating a shot.

Another note is that 24p conversion to 30i has been around for as long as there has been video tape. Virtually ALL movies shown on TV were shot 24p film and telecined to 30i. It's something we've been used to seeing for generations. There really is no president for 30p. Video cameras shoot 30i (60 frames per second, with every pair of frames interlaced together so that even numbered rows come from one frame and odd numbered rows come from another frame). 30p doesn't cleanly convert to either 30i OR 24p ... so ... 30p is just not something that has never been commonly seen like 24p and 30i.

I don't have any internet examples handy off the top of my head ... and due to the compression on most internet video, I'm not sure how comparisons would pan out. DVDs or TV may be your best bet for hunting down comparisons.

[joc4zul]

first of all, this is my number one post here, so i just want to say hello to everybody.


about the video, i dont think i fully understand this 24p vs 30p "issue" ppl are talking here.

from what ive seen, theres no technical problem its just that 24p video looks more to a film while in 30p we have a more raw video, is that it?

[Duder]

I'd rather they added the option to shoot in 720p, than have 24fps.

[mattmerk]

There are basically two viewpoints happening here with a little bit of crossover. There seems to be the group of people who think that this camera is primarily a still camera, and it is. It most definitely is. Those people don't seem to care about the video capabilities all that much beyond it being a nifty side feature, from what I can tell in the comments.

Then there are those rarer people like me who are filmmakers, trolling the internet looking for new cameras with which we could make movies. I would personally love to see this camera get a firmware upgrade (if that is even possible) to shoot at 23.98 or 24fps in movie mode. For film making, 30 fps is nearly useless.

And no, it is not easy to do frame rate conversions. You either have to skip print the footage, dropping frames which leads to nasty temporal aliasing, or you have to do pixel flow retiming which is hit or miss, depending on the software you use. Even then it is a lot of render time just to get your footage. Anyway you slice it, the footage gets manhandled quite inelegantly.

I mostly do visual effects for a living. I even got an Emmy nomination for it a long time ago. I shoot a lot of material on lots of different cameras. This camera would be great for low budget filmmakers who wanted to shoot with a shallow depth of field with what looks like a great image sensor and canon makes pretty respectable glass.

I would buy this camera today if it merely were capable of shooting 24 fps. Since it doesn't I won't, but the day it does, I will gladly shell out the cash to line Canon's pockets.

[stokestack]

"You can easily resample video from 30p to 24p in any NLE software."

Wrong. Going from 30 to 24 FPS is very awkward and will result in artifacts.

And the people crying for NTSC-specific hack rates like 24.976 and 29.97 simply dilute the message that they're trying to send to Canon. Those rates aren't necessary, and we shouldn't be encouraging their use past the North American digital switchover that's coming in a few months. These frames rates (and interlace) should be dead and buried, but sadly we will continue to be saddled with these relics from the '30s. Better to slightly retime your audio than perpetuate these ridiculous frame rates.

24P on DVD, by the way, is just that: Most DVD players have progressive output, and they obviously can insert the repeated frames for playback at 30.

Film folk need 24 and 25. In fact, given that the camera can shoot 30, there's no reason not to have it variable from 1-30. And as you reduce the number of frames, you can record a higher-quality image because you can compress each frame less.

[jcw122]

It's mainly a still frame digital SLR and people are complaining it doesn't have 24fps video? What in hell is going on?

[gooble]

It's mainly a still frame digital SLR and people are complaining it doesn't have 24fps video? What in hell is going on?

You must not have read any posts in this thread. It's explained why people want 24 & 25 fps.

It'd be like a video camera coming out that did stills but without a shutter speed faster than 1/200 and video people saying "Yeah it won't capture sports or action but it still takes stills so don't complain!"

[salexande867]

I think if someone is serious enough to be shooting 24p, they are probably not using an SLR to shoot their video. That is what the XL2 is for... ;)

[mattmerk]

I think if someone is serious enough to be shooting 24p, they are probably not using an SLR to shoot their video. That is what the XL2 is for...

Check the sensor size on the XL2 and you may begin to understand why your viewpoint could use some further thought. the XL2 has a tiny sensor and hence very deep DOF. A big sensor like the 5D give you a much shallower DOF and therefore looks more like 35mm film.

I've said it before in this forum, I get paid to make movies for a living. I'm also pretty serious about it.

[FlyingPhotog]

Just to further muddy the waters:
http://www.dvdfile.com/news/special_report/production_a_z/3_2_pulldown.htm

[mattmerk]

If we're gonna do this video thing, we might as well do it all cinematic like. How about some XLR plugs while we're at it, and a large shotgun mic in a shockmount on the hotshoe. And a script writing program in the camera menus. And a director's chair. And a Jean Cleade Van Damme mask so your friends can star in a cheesy action flick about some kinda revenge on some kinda bad guy.

Demeaning half of the people on this forum seems like a bad idea. 24fps for the video mode is a great idea to those who want it, and they want it for good reasons.

Here are a few:

1) The necessary data rate for 30fps video is actually higher than 24fps, so video shot at the lower frame rate could be compressed less and therefore be of higher image quality.

2) 24fps is the same frame rate at which motion picture film is shot. When shooting at 30fps, it looks different; not better or worse, just different. The decision to shoot at 24fps is an artistic decision. Some people here want that artistic decision as an option, that's all. And for those who don't think they look different, just watch an HD sporting event or soap opera, which are shot at 30fps, and compare that to an HD movie, shot at 24fps of course, on Bluray or in the theater. Those examples definitely look different and frame rate plays a big part.

3) Motion picture cameras and HD cameras with large image sensors (similar in size to the 5D) cost tens of thousands, sometimes even hundreds of thousands of dollars. A camera like this in the hands of independent filmmakers, shooting micro budget short films gives them the ability to at least make their movies look a little more like the big movies in theaters at a far more affordable price.

I could go on and on.

Can I politely ask however that you don't demean the desires of others merely because you don't see their merits? Please? And no professional story telling filmmaker would ever record audio from a shotgun mic on a hotshoe. That is what boom poles are for.

[mattmerk]

Just to further muddy the waters:
http://www.dvdfile.com/news/special_report/production_a_z/3_2_pulldown.htm

Allow me to unmuddy the waters. No one here is asking for 3:2 pulldown to be introduced into the shot image stream. This is something one would add if authoring an NTSC DVD or delivering SD footage for broadcast.

IT IS A TERRIBLE IDEA TO ADD IT TO THE SHOT FOOTAGE IN CAMERA.

If anyone really wants to know why this is a terrible idea, email me directly and I will explain. I don't want to put it here and open up that Pandora's box of off-topic nonsense.

mattmerk2000@yahoo.com

[FlyingPhotog]

In what way is this off topic?

The entire crux of this round robin discussion is 24fps Vs 30fps.

3:2 Pulldown is exactly how you get from one to the other. Or at least it always was when I was doing film to tape transfers...

[mattmerk]

Why would you want 24fps in the first place? Are you transfering your final product to film and watching it from that medium? I would guess no.. so Why do you want to shoot at that speed? You're probably viewing it back on DVD or your Computer. so why limit your framerates? (just to make it look like its flickering?) I never understood the need to record in 24 fps or 24p. if your final out put isnt going to be film then why shoot like it is? doesnt make it film like...

Yes, I would be transferring to to film. I actually want to record the footage back to 35mm motion picture film! I would also be cutting it into other footage actually shot on film. I know it is hard to believe, but it is true. Just because you never understood the need to record in 24 fps or 24p, that doesn't make it a bad idea.

And yes, shooting at 24fps does in fact make it more film like.

Trust me on this. Here is my website:

http://mattmerk.com

[mattmerk]

In what way is this off topic?

The entire crux of this round robin discussion is 24fps Vs 30fps.

3:2 Pulldown is exactly how you get from one to the other. Or at least it always was when I was doing film to tape transfers...

Oh boy. I even gave you my email address so I wouldn't have to get into this here, but with the greatest respect, here goes.

It is very much off topic because this was a discussion of shooting frame rates, not time base conversion or film to tape transfers. You are very correct about how you convert 24 fps footage (which is actually 23.98 ) to 30 fps (which is actually 29.97) by adding 3:2 pulldown, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the frame rate at which the camera captures footage. The camera should shoot at 24fps and if you want to cut at 30fps for whatever reason, adding 3:2 pulldown becomes the editor's responsibility. It should definitely not be introduced by the camera.

In fact, this would be true of a 35mm motion picture camera as well. Or the Sony f900. Or the RED. None of these deal with 3:2 in any way. The 3:2 discussion is strictly a post production discussion. It does not belong here.

Now I worry that someone from Canon will read this and assume that somebody is asking for a shooting mode similar to the DVX 100 where it shoots at 23.98 but records a 29.97 video stream to tape with 3:2 pulldown in it. It is such a bad idea in fact, Panasonic concocted a special 24p advanced mode to make it possible to discard every 4th frame to revert back to a 24fps image stream and avoid unnecessary extra compression on the newly created 3:2 frames.

So, yes, this is off topic. The topic being discussed was whether people wanted 24fps and other frame rates when in video shooting mode. Furthermore, I can see this discussion further aggravating those who don't even want to hear the conversation of additional frame rates. (And if that is true, I am truly sorry to anyone I have offended, and that goes for you too FlyingPhotog.)

What people are asking for here is simple. They want the camera to shoot at 24fps (along with some other requested frame rates). Nothing more. Nothing less.

[FlyingPhotog]

Oh boy. I even gave you my email address so I wouldn't have to get into this here, but with the greatest respect, here goes.

Well, thanks for that! ;)

It is very much off topic because this was a discussion of shooting frame rates, not time base conversion or film to tape transfers. You are very correct about how you convert 24 fps footage (which is actually 23.98 ) to 30 fps (which is actually 29.97) by adding 3:2 pulldown, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the frame rate at which the camera captures footage. The camera shoots at 24fps and if you want to cut at 30fps for whatever reason, adding 3:2 pulldown is your responsibility. It should definitely not be intruduced by the camera.

Fair enough...

In fact, this would be true of a 35mm motion picture camera as well. Or the Sony f900. Or the RED. None of these deal with 3:2 in any way. The 3:2 discussion is strictly a post production discussion. It does not belong here.

By that logic, I'll grant you are correct.

Now I worry that someone from Canon will read this and assume that somebody is asking for a shooting mode similar to the DVX 100 where it shoots at 23.98 but records a 29.97 video stream to tape with 3:2 pulldown in it. It is such a bad idea in fact, Panasonic concocted a special 24p advanced mode to make it possible to discard every 4th frame to revert back to a 24fps image stream and avoid unnecessary extra compression on the newly created 3:2 frames.

And that would be the "Varicam" correct? In my world, we hate them...

So, yes, this is off topic. The topic being discussed was whether people wanted 24fps and other frame rates when in video shooting mode.

What people are asking for here is simple. They want the camera to shoot at 24fps (along with some other requested frame rates). Nothing more. Nothing less.

But when all is said and done, and people want to create an NTSC DVD, they still have to get from 24p to 30p in some fashion. That's the only reason really that I offered the link regarding 3:2 pulldown in the first place. Can't say for sure, but my guess is that not too many people even know how it's done. It really was meant to be informational more than anything else.

Oh and congrats on the Emmy nomination!

My Working World: http://www.pbase.com/flyingphotog/scenes_from_the_road

[mattmerk]

I'd rather they added the option to shoot in 720p, than have 24fps.
It already does that, if you consider that you can merely downrez your movie clips from 1920x1080 to 1280x720.

[mattmerk]

But when all is said and done, and people want to create an NTSC DVD, they still have to get from 24p to 30p in some fashion. That's the only reason really that I offered the link regarding 3:2 pulldown in the first place. Can't say for sure, but my guess is that not too many people even know how it's done. It really was meant to be informational more than anything else.

Thanks for the congrats.

Incidentally, DVD players add 3:2 automatically to 23.98 fps mpeg video. It is handled in the DVD player hardware and actually shouldn't be added while authoring DVD's sourced from 24fps footage. It requires a more compression and really looks terrible on the 3:2 frames.

But that too is off topic.

Canon, if possible, please make this camera shoot 24fps! That is on topic.

[FlyingPhotog]

Thanks for the congrats.

Incidentally, DVD players add 3:2 automatically to 23.98 fps mpeg video. It is handled in the DVD player hardware and actually shouldn't be added while authoring DVD's sourced from 24fps footage. It requires a more compression and really looks terrible on the 3:2 frames.

But that too is off topic.

Canon, if possible, please make this camera shoot 24fps! That is on topic.

JMO, but I think you're worrying too much about On Topic/Off Topic here...

It's new, yes but it is a "Digital Video" forum and not a "Still Cameras That Shoot Video" forum...

There's a whole new world out there that folks who choose to get a 5DMkII (and choose to shoot video) are going to learn. If folks think still photography is rife with acronyms and buzz words, wait until they begin to dabble in video...

"I need an MCU establishing shot for B-Roll. I need you to boom up, tounge right, pan left, dolly back, crab left, tilt down, zoom in and rack out..."

"Then we're gonna "L" cut this footage with the stuff we shot the other day, rag the audio for a couple of beats, lap desolve to this, key that, layer these, "J" cut back to that, Lum Key that graphic (whatya mean it has a veil?), ok make it an alpha key then..."

Also, just as a point of reference, you'll find there are folks here who are quite capable of being either artistic or process driven at times so a little nuts and bolts language isn't a bad thing.

Remember everyone: The Four Basic commands to know in order to be a successful video professional are:

- Pan
- Tilt
- Zoom
- Invoice

;)

[salexande867]

Check the sensor size on the XL2 and you may begin to understand why your viewpoint could use some further thought. the XL2 has a tiny sensor and hence very deep DOF. A big sensor like the 5D give you a much shallower DOF and therefore looks more like 35mm film.

I've said it before in this forum, I get paid to make movies for a living. I'm also pretty serious about it.

Let's see how many indie movies are made on the 5D a year from now. Since you get paid to make movies, I am sure you understand it takes much more than sensor size to make a video camera.

[zcp m3]

Why not.

[mattmerk]

Let's see how many indie movies are made on the 5D a year from now. Since you get paid to make movies, I am sure you understand it takes much more than sensor size to make a video camera.

Yup. I do.

[mattmerk]

JMO, but I think you're worrying too much about On Topic/Off Topic here...


With all due respect, the subject line is: "Want Canon to add 24fps to 5D Mark II?"

It isn't: "Let's discuss filmmaking."

I'd be happy to listen to reasons why people agree or disagree with adding the ability to shoot 24fps.

[FlyingPhotog]

With all due respect, the subject line is: "Want Canon to add 24fps to 5D Mark II?"

It isn't: "Let's discuss filmmaking."

I'd be happy to listen to reasons why people agree or disagree with adding the ability to shoot 24fps.

Horse = Flogged = Done = Bye + Good Luck

[arizona85224]

With all due respect, the subject line is: "Want Canon to add 24fps to 5D Mark II?"

It isn't: "Let's discuss filmmaking."

I'd be happy to listen to reasons why people agree or disagree with adding the ability to shoot 24fps.

if that's what you want, then start your bussiness and make the thing already. I'm sure Canon doesn't care what you want.

[gooble]

Here's what some people just don't seem to understand. Let me explain.

I took a film photography class in high school. This was still several years before digital. I loved it but even though I loved it I didn't have enough disposable income or the time and patience to deal with the film world.

So I went several years without doing any meaningful photography. Several years passed and good afordable digital cams came around. I got a Fuji s602z for $700 and was blown away by it but soon learned it's limitations. Finally the Rebels came down in price and I got a Rebel XT for about $700. I've since moved on to bigger and better cameras but the point of the story was that without digital I would not be into photography.

Now, we have DSLRs that can shoot HD video and I see myself in about the same position I was in regarding film vs. digital.

I have always wanted to dabble with video. It's only been in the last several years that video cameras have become very affordable but I have had no interest in SD video whatsoever. HD cams are now affordable but they are crippled, have no changeable lenses etc. Good HD video cameras are still expensive. Until now.

I feel I'm about in the same position now that I was in when I made my first digital camera purchase. I'm excited about the possibilities of shooting HD video with the 5D II. It's not perfect but it's pretty good. And when stuff like this http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=6586215&postcount=17 is coming out it will make it easier to make quality movies with the 5D II.

I think there are a lot of people like me who are excited about the possibilities opened by the 5D II and the comments telling people to get a 'real' HD cam if they want to shoot HD video and have it look like film with 24fps etc, etc are just really pointless. I don't want a so called 'real' HD camera. I don't want to spend $9,000 plus on just the camera plus all the other associated gear. I don't want to lug around a very large camera. I'm very happy that with the 5D II I can shoot HD video and fantastic still images. You can't do that with any HD video camera. And the 5D II has fantastic high iso video quality that appears to be almost unmatched by cameras costing twenty times more money.

So to me there is a reason to have 24fps available. People are going to make amazing quality movies with the 5D II. The least Canon could do is provide them with a basic creative feature available in lesser cameras.

[ben_r_]

Meh, I dont really care as Im not going to try and make movies with my 5D... The movie feature is just going to be for fun.

[jeremyhattingh]

I think the problem is the divide between stills and video. These devices should be seen as "capture systems" rather than "cameras". Bring it on ! Now lets see logarithmic, Pro-rez quicktimes at 2k please Canon. And for those arguing about frame rates, please rather spend your time reading a good post production book, like Ron Brinkman's excellent Art and Science Of Digital compositing.

Jeremy Hattingh. VFX sup etc. 20D etc, Mac Pro, Shake, FCP, etc..etc..

[oculusman]

I have to agree--I'd love to see the 5D MKII shoot in 24p. I'm a student filmmaker, and I know from experience that converting from 30fps to 24fps is NOT easy at all, and usually results in artifacting and terrible image quality (and drives a director crazy). A portion of one of my recent films was accidentally shot in 30fps (those responsible have been shot :P) and being unable to reshoot, we had to come up with a complicated workaround using FCS2. The final product was OK, but the average watcher could definitely tell the places where the conversion was made.

Ok, I'll get off my soapbox now.

[maverick678]

I want 27p or maybe 28.2p.