Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 05 Dec 2008 (Friday) 20:48
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5D MKII Poor Video

 
hitmanh
Member
136 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Cambridge, UK
     
Dec 08, 2008 08:17 |  #76

Goshawk wrote in post #6835058 (external link)
Yeah the DSLR video cam, I got involved in some heated debates a while ago about this topic. Except if you film a very interesting incident which will be appreciated on Youtube(and which you can film with your phone anyway) I do not know why they have even bothered. I am sure they would have been able to sell/produce the 5D II at a much cheaper price without the video feature.

Becuase there are plenty of people who want good quality video and stills while not carrying a lot of gear? In all honesty I very much doubt the camera would have been much cheaper without the video... as has already been mentioned, it's just an extension of existing technology, very much an exercise in software development with a little hardware.

As to why they bothered? It's a unique selling feature in a market rapidly filling with full frame cameras.


"In Photography, as in all arts, the quality of the human imagination is the only thing that counts - technique, and technical proficiency, mean nothing in themselves." CLARENCE JOHN LAUGHLIN
www.hitmanh.com (external link)
40D and some luck

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TheHoff
Don't Hassle....
Avatar
8,804 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 08, 2008 11:47 |  #77

A good quote pulled from FredMiranda:

I think some people are looking at this tool as one would use a camcorder. That is not at all what it is and you will be disappointed if expecting that.

Use the camera as a cinematic tool and shoot accordingly (locked down exposure, off camera audio, actors move within the scene (not the camera), use supplemental lighting to add drama and/or effect exposure, etc) and you'll be happy with what can be achieved.

If you intend on filming hour long wedding ceremonies with pans and zooms, this is not the camera for you.

his blog with comments: http://crystalclearmed​ia.net/blog/?p=106 (external link)


••Vancouver Wedding Photographer  (external link)••| [gear list] | Latest blog: 5 steps to stopping image loss (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elwuero
Member
43 posts
Joined Mar 2006
     
Dec 08, 2008 13:55 |  #78

Jesse Webb wrote in post #6823332 (external link)
You may want to check this board out: http://cinema5d.com/in​dex.php (external link) and here: http://www.dvinfo.net …to-hd-video-d-slr-others/ (external link)

For example: http://www.vimeo.com/2​393099 (external link) and http://vimeo.com/24183​04?pg=embed&sec=241830​4 (external link)

Some nice video results over there and some good info. I have been playing around with mine tonight in low-light indoors and I'm very happy with the results so far. I'll try to get something posted tomorrow.

Great links - especially the cinema5d. I just bought some used Nikon lenses at my local camera shop - adapter on the way. It seems the lens will be the key.


DVIproductions.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
californiajay
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
29 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
Dec 08, 2008 16:44 as a reply to  @ elwuero's post |  #79

OK, my latest take on all this...

Last night I did some real extensive viewing of vimeo files from the camera. The thing that I began to realize is that what I was doing was looking at these files on my computer, but at my own files on my 46" HDTV. What looked good on vimeo may or may not look good once shown on a 46" tv. So, frankly I am not sure that viewing much of anything on a computer screen is very valid as anything is going to look better at that size. When I play files on my computer with quicktime, I can still see the moire effect, but it's not as bad looking as it is on the tv. When I viewed the many vimeo files last night, I did notice some of the moire when I looked closely enough...so maybe it is something that is just inherent in the camera. Oh well!

At any rate, I do appreciate the attempt at help that some of you provided, or tried to provide and do apologize for not posting anything that you can judge for me. But at this point I don't think I am going to pursue video on this camera anymore, it's just frankly just not worth the effort. It's a nice camera otherwise, and as others have mentioned, if you really want high class video, the best way is with a high class video camera.

Thanks again.


5D MKII, 16-35L, 24-105L, 70-200 f4L, 35 f1.4L, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.2L, 100 macro, 135 f2L, 200 f2.8L, 300 f4L, 300 f2.8L, 65 macro
Nikon D700, 14-24, 24-70, 17-35 f2.8, 85 f1.4, 105 f2, 180 f2.8, 300 f4.5MF
Leica M8, 28 f2, 35 f2, 75 f2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Goshawk
Senior Member
Avatar
841 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Tanzania
     
Dec 08, 2008 23:54 |  #80

elwuero wrote in post #6838014 (external link)
Great links - especially the cinema5d. I just bought some used Nikon lenses at my local camera shop - adapter on the way. It seems the lens will be the key.

Do not tell me you are buying those Nikon lenses just to be able to take better video clips ???


1D Mk III - 100mm 2.8 Macro - 24-70mm 2.8L - 70-200mm 2.8L IS - 500mm 4.0L IS - 430EX, 580EX II, ST-E2, Stroboframe, Quantum Turbo (external link)
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/deonnaude/ (external link)http://www.flickr.com/​photos/deonnaude/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Goshawk
Senior Member
Avatar
841 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Tanzania
     
Dec 09, 2008 00:56 |  #81

hitmanh wrote in post #6836029 (external link)
Becuase there are plenty of people who want good quality video and stills while not carrying a lot of gear? In all honesty I very much doubt the camera would have been much cheaper without the video... as has already been mentioned, it's just an extension of existing technology, very much an exercise in software development with a little hardware.

As to why they bothered? It's a unique selling feature in a market rapidly filling with full frame cameras.

How much space does a cam take, I have one permanently in my camera bag, takes all of about 5 sec to get it out and to start filming.
But as I said in a earlier post I respect the fact that some people do like the feature and have no problem with that, hey some people even liked the "print" button :lol:
And being a unique selling feature -- I think you are very correct and I fully agree with you, the more goodies they can stuff into it, the better they can market it and of course they have to rival Nikon :lol:
Mm yes Canon is lucky in the sense that they have been making superb video cams for many years already so I do presume they had all the tech at their fingertips already.:cool:


1D Mk III - 100mm 2.8 Macro - 24-70mm 2.8L - 70-200mm 2.8L IS - 500mm 4.0L IS - 430EX, 580EX II, ST-E2, Stroboframe, Quantum Turbo (external link)
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/deonnaude/ (external link)http://www.flickr.com/​photos/deonnaude/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hitmanh
Member
136 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Cambridge, UK
     
Dec 09, 2008 12:08 |  #82

Goshawk wrote in post #6841857 (external link)
How much space does a cam take, I have one permanently in my camera bag, takes all of about 5 sec to get it out and to start filming.
But as I said in a earlier post I respect the fact that some people do like the feature and have no problem with that, hey some people even liked the "print" button :lol:
And being a unique selling feature -- I think you are very correct and I fully agree with you, the more goodies they can stuff into it, the better they can market it and of course they have to rival Nikon :lol:
Mm yes Canon is lucky in the sense that they have been making superb video cams for many years already so I do presume they had all the tech at their fingertips already.:cool:

It depends, often I only have a camera with me, no bag of goodies with it. Othertimes I do have a bag with plenty of kit and sticking in a digicam is no real issue. I think a good way at looking at this is a technology demonstrator... Canon my never make another camera with video modes in again (rather like the eye-control stuff they did in the past). On the other hand they may make a dedicated range of cameras to go along side the current selection. As for why people are buying up Nikon lenses for use on this camera? Decent manual focus primes. Great for videography.


"In Photography, as in all arts, the quality of the human imagination is the only thing that counts - technique, and technical proficiency, mean nothing in themselves." CLARENCE JOHN LAUGHLIN
www.hitmanh.com (external link)
40D and some luck

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheHoff
Don't Hassle....
Avatar
8,804 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 09, 2008 12:24 |  #83

hitmanh wrote in post #6844410 (external link)
On the other hand they may make a dedicated range of cameras to go along side the current selection.

don't they? (external link)


••Vancouver Wedding Photographer  (external link)••| [gear list] | Latest blog: 5 steps to stopping image loss (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TAZorich
Member
237 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Middletown, DE
     
Dec 09, 2008 13:03 |  #84

californiajay wrote in post #6833295 (external link)
Coder, I have shot mainly with the 24-105 in most of my testing, but have also tested with the 85 F1.2 and a Leica 35mm F2 with adapter.

Can you (please) confirm that you saw the moire issue with the 85/1.2 and/or the Leica lens? I was thinking that the (relatively) crappy optics of the 24-105 could be at least partially to blame...


5DM2 | 7D | 600/4.0 IS | 50/1.4 | 24-70/2.8 | 70-200/2.8 | 580EXII (x2) | Quantum Qflash | Sekonic L-358 | Photogenic monolights | Tamrac bags | Bogen/Manfrotto supports

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Goshawk
Senior Member
Avatar
841 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Tanzania
     
Dec 09, 2008 13:33 |  #85

TheHoff wrote in post #6844508 (external link)
don't they? (external link)

:lol::lol:


1D Mk III - 100mm 2.8 Macro - 24-70mm 2.8L - 70-200mm 2.8L IS - 500mm 4.0L IS - 430EX, 580EX II, ST-E2, Stroboframe, Quantum Turbo (external link)
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/deonnaude/ (external link)http://www.flickr.com/​photos/deonnaude/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Goshawk
Senior Member
Avatar
841 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Tanzania
     
Dec 09, 2008 13:43 |  #86

TAZorich wrote in post #6844740 (external link)
Can you (please) confirm that you saw the moire issue with the 85/1.2 and/or the Leica lens? I was thinking that the (relatively) crappy optics of the 24-105 could be at least partially to blame...

That is the first time I have heard someone calling the 24-105 crappy :cool:


1D Mk III - 100mm 2.8 Macro - 24-70mm 2.8L - 70-200mm 2.8L IS - 500mm 4.0L IS - 430EX, 580EX II, ST-E2, Stroboframe, Quantum Turbo (external link)
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/deonnaude/ (external link)http://www.flickr.com/​photos/deonnaude/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TAZorich
Member
237 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Middletown, DE
     
Dec 09, 2008 13:52 |  #87

Goshawk wrote in post #6844978 (external link)
That is the first time I have heard someone calling the 24-105 crappy :cool:

Relative to the 1.2 and the Leica - and even the 2.8 Canons, yes.


5DM2 | 7D | 600/4.0 IS | 50/1.4 | 24-70/2.8 | 70-200/2.8 | 580EXII (x2) | Quantum Qflash | Sekonic L-358 | Photogenic monolights | Tamrac bags | Bogen/Manfrotto supports

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Poe
Goldmember
Avatar
1,956 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Modesto, CA
     
Dec 09, 2008 15:58 |  #88

I was watching Paula Deen's show on food network(HD, btw) and they had some shutters over the windows in the background and whenever the camera moved it would cause that undulating moire effect on the shutter panels. Looks like more cameras than just the 5D2 are affected.



Nikon D750, D7200 | Nikon-Nikkor 14-24G, 60G Micro, 70-300E | SIGMA 35A, 105 OS, 24-105 OS | ZEISS Distagon 2.0/25 Classic, Apo-Distagon 1.4/55 Otus, Apo-Planar 1.4/85 Otus, Makro-Planar 2/100 Classic, Apo-Sonnar 2/135 Classic

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bacchanal
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,284 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
     
Dec 09, 2008 16:51 |  #89

Poe wrote in post #6846017 (external link)
I was watching Paula Deen's show on food network(HD, btw) and they had some shutters over the windows in the background and whenever the camera moved it would cause that undulating moire effect on the shutter panels. Looks like more cameras than just the 5D2 are affected.

Was this before or after she added the 3 sticks of butter to the mix? ;)


Drew A. | gear | photosexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
californiajay
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
29 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
Dec 09, 2008 17:16 |  #90

TAZorich wrote in post #6844740 (external link)
Can you (please) confirm that you saw the moire issue with the 85/1.2 and/or the Leica lens? I was thinking that the (relatively) crappy optics of the 24-105 could be at least partially to blame...


Yes I got the moire effect with the 85 f1.2 and the Leica lens. If I had not, the issue would have been solved as far as I was concerened.

BTW, I woult not consider the 24-105 to be a 'crappy' lens at all. It's actually pretty good.

As far as seeing moire on other video cameras is concerned...I have both an HF100 and an XHA1. I see it far more on the 5D MKII than on either of the other two. As a matter of fact, I have seen it on the HF100 but haven't yet seen it on the XHA1.


5D MKII, 16-35L, 24-105L, 70-200 f4L, 35 f1.4L, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.2L, 100 macro, 135 f2L, 200 f2.8L, 300 f4L, 300 f2.8L, 65 macro
Nikon D700, 14-24, 24-70, 17-35 f2.8, 85 f1.4, 105 f2, 180 f2.8, 300 f4.5MF
Leica M8, 28 f2, 35 f2, 75 f2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

10,702 views & 0 likes for this thread
5D MKII Poor Video
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is TarynRose
1175 guests, 297 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.