Video Shmideo

osv wrote in post #6455265
yes, i did, and i even gave you a perfect example of it from canon... what part of those specs did you not understand?

quote us the specific features that didn't make sense to you, and i'll do my best to talk you through it.

the 5d presents a bit of a dilemma for canon, because if they actually do produce a real zoom lens for it, will people buy the 5d, or the successor to the xl-h1s? at some point, there will be a blurring of the product lines.

one of the huge weaknesses with the 5d is the cmos sensor, with it's rolling shutter issues:
http://dvxuser.com/jas​on/CMOS-CCD/

it will be interesting to see if canon keeps the ccd block with the upcoming redesign of the xl-h1s.

It's like you're not reading my posts. A zoom lens is a lens that can be changed from one focal length to another. It has nothing to do with whether it is 20x is manually operated or whether it is motorized. Period end of issue.

I wanted you to state what you thought was a "real" zoom lens was, which you obviously believe is one with 20x and motorized but refused to say.

Also the rolling shutter doesn't seem that great of an issue on the 5D II if you've seen any video from it, and it is much better than the D90.

gooble wrote in post #6455359
It's like you're not reading my posts.

it's like you're not reading that canon link that i posted.

again, what is it on that link that you don't understand?

i'd like to hear the logic behind how rolling shutter could somehow be "better" on the 5d than it is on the d90... or even with the red camera, for that matter.

gooble wrote in post #6455359
It's like you're not reading my posts. A zoom lens is a lens that can be changed from one focal length to another. It has nothing to do with whether it is 20x is manually operated or whether it is motorized. Period end of issue.

I wanted you to state what you thought was a "real" zoom lens was, which you obviously believe is one with 20x and motorized but refused to say.

Also the rolling shutter doesn't seem that great of an issue on the 5D II if you've seen any video from it, and it is much better than the D90.

...he clearly isn't talking about the literal meaning of a "real" zoom lens here: he's referring to one that's made for video. And yes, you really do need to have motorized zoom for video. With the event video work I've done, the only place I've ever been able to get away with manual zoom is at rock concerts. Everywhere else, you need smooth, and there's no way you're gonna get it without a motor, especially handheld.

bieber wrote in post #6456127
...he clearly isn't talking about the literal meaning of a "real" zoom lens here: he's referring to one that's made for video. And yes, you really do need to have motorized zoom for video. With the event video work I've done, the only place I've ever been able to get away with manual zoom is at rock concerts. Everywhere else, you need smooth, and there's no way you're gonna get it without a motor, especially handheld.

Then whay don't they say that? I gave them several chances to do so and they just keep repeating that I didn't read the Canon xl-h1s page etc. The xl-h1s page does not conain the word "real" ok. Their definition of a "real" zoom lens is made up. That's my point.

I don't recall ever saying a motorized zoom wasn't necessary or useful for video I was taking issue with the definition of a 'real' zoom. Where is the definition of a real zoom lens that says it's motorized? Is there a special definition of a video zoom lens where real means it's motorized?

osv wrote in post #6456052
it's like you're not reading that canon link that i posted.

again, what is it on that link that you don't understand?

i'd like to hear the logic behind how rolling shutter could somehow be "better" on the 5d than it is on the d90... or even with the red camera, for that matter.

Just look at videos from the two cameras! The videos I've seen from the D90 are pretty horrible and the 5D II videos are barely noticeable if at all. What more do you want? Why are you arguing?

gooble wrote in post #6457053
Then whay don't they say that? I gave them

"they" and "them" understand the point that's being made here.

it's obvious that you don't shoot video, but try to imagine how shutter speed, frame rate, and camera handling might have an effect on how rolling shutter is perceived.

is it smart to make a purchasing decision based on comparing two completely disparate video clips that you know nothing about?

Regarding CMOS readouts and rolling shutter...
The key difference between D90 and even the CMOS readout in the HV10 and HV20 vs the 5D or RED is how quickly the CMOS is read out in relation to the overall exposure time.

When the readout is slow, there is substantial undesirable offset within a frame directly related to the readout timing over the course of the exposure time. This is very noticeable in the D90 and HV10 & HV20 CMOS cameras. This effect also makes creating seamless visual effects on shots from these cameras nearly impossible.

The readout speed of the 5D II and RED is a fraction of the fraction of a second that each frame is exposed. To the point where really, the only way to "see" the rolling readout is to fire a strobe during the readout process. I've worked on visual effects on shots from RED cameras, mostly on shots taken with a moving camera requiring 3D matchmoving and tracking, and can say with confidence that the rolling CMOS readout is NOT a problematic factor in that camera.

Of course I haven't worked on shots from the 5d II, but what little I've seen on the net looks to have the readout performance of the RED ... very promising.

NickJushchyshyn wrote in post #6452370
Having a sub-$3000 camera that shoots digitally using fast (dramatic bokka), interchangeable glass is revolutionary for this market.

um, not quite... the xl-h1 has a factory eos adapter for mounting 35mm canon glass... as did the canon l1, l2, xl1, xl1s, xl2, etc... the adapter has been around for years.

so canon video cameras with removeable lenses can use the exact same 1.4 glass that canon still cameras can use.

since the ccd block has a smaller footprint than a 35mm frame size does, there is a multiplier effect that's similar to what happens with aps-c cameras... xlnt for long distance like wildlife shooting, but not so good if you want wide angle shots.

osv wrote in post #6457637
um, not quite... the xl-h1 has a factory eos adapter for mounting 35mm canon glass... as did the canon l1, l2, xl1, xl1s, xl2, etc... the adapter has been around for years.

so canon video cameras with removeable lenses can use the exact same 1.4 glass that canon still cameras can use.

since the ccd block has a smaller footprint than a 35mm frame size does, there is a multiplier effect that's similar to what happens with aps-c cameras... xlnt for long distance like wildlife shooting, but not so good if you want wide angle shots.

It's something like x7 (the multiplier). With video the bigger the sensor the better, so I guess (unless they crop the sensor a lot) the 5D mkII should be (theoretically) better than the other "real" video cameras.

Also (someone correct me if I'm wrong here) one of the good things about FF is the DOF control (ie less DOF). So you're getting much more control over your DOF over a dedicated video camera. Just changing the lenses using the adaptor does NOT give you this effect (you need to have some special set up - expensive - to get the narrow DOF associated with things like FILM).

Therefore (if it turns out to be good enough) the 5D mkII videos DOF control trumps "real video cameras" ability to clamp on other lenses.

You are correct in what you say though. You can exchange the lenses, it just doesn't have the same effect that it would with a DSLR.

Note: I own the XL2 and I have only taken the kit lens off once (when I sent it in to be repaired). I've had it for about 2 years and I am a video professional.

BTW: I'm not attacking your post, just adding points to it.

osv wrote in post #6457485
"they" and "them" understand the point that's being made here.

it's obvious that you don't shoot video, but try to imagine how shutter speed, frame rate, and camera handling might have an effect on how rolling shutter is perceived.

is it smart to make a purchasing decision based on comparing two completely disparate video clips that you know nothing about?

Why don't you share it with us.

Are you saying the D90 has bad wobble becuause it is 24fps and the 5D II is better because it shoots in 30fps?

Matthew Jeppsen Jan 10th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
For a little perspective on this rolling shutter strobe failing of CMOS sensors, have a look at this footage from a RED camera.
http://ftp.datausa.com​/imageshoppe/outgoing/​SHUTTER_STUDIES/STROBE​&ROLLING_SHUTTER.mov
Let me remind you of the price points we’re talking about here…
XDCAM EX1 = $6500-ish for a basic setup (SxS card, battery).
RED One = $25,000 - $30,000-ish for a basic setup (body, lenses, rods, CF storage, batteries, follow focus, etc).

it's old news... but do i really want to spend $30k for video gear that can't handle a still camera flash? no models on runways, no after-game locker room shots, etc.

"Spoken like someone who truly has never used a RED ONE. Well, I've had them side-by-side for two weekends... YES, the RED has the same issues. Pan the RED fast and you get skew."
http://dvxuser.com …hread.php?t=140​020&page=3

osv wrote in post #6457740
Matthew Jeppsen Jan 10th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
For a little perspective on this rolling shutter strobe failing of CMOS sensors, have a look at this footage from a RED camera.
http://ftp.datausa.com​/imageshoppe/outgoing/​SHUTTER_STUDIES/STROBE​&ROLLING_SHUTTER.mov
Let me remind you of the price points we’re talking about here…
XDCAM EX1 = $6500-ish for a basic setup (SxS card, battery).
RED One = $25,000 - $30,000-ish for a basic setup (body, lenses, rods, CF storage, batteries, follow focus, etc).

it's old news... but do i really want to spend $30k for video gear that can't handle a still camera flash? no models on runways, no after-game locker room shots, etc.

"Spoken like someone who truly has never used a RED ONE. Well, I've had them side-by-side for two weekends... YES, the RED has the same issues. Pan the RED fast and you get skew."
http://dvxuser.com …hread.php?t=140​020&page=3

I'm not even sure what you're arguing for or against anymore and you seem to keep arguing for or against things that I'm not even sure someone is opposing you on.

The 5D II is a really compelling video camera for someone who is primarily interested in still photography. I don't think it'll disuade serious video shooters from buying a dedicated video camera. I don't care that it doesn't have motorized zoom capabilities.

gooble wrote in post #6457756
I'm not even sure what you're arguing for or against anymore and you seem to keep arguing for or against things that I'm not even sure someone is opposing you on.

The 5D II is a really compelling video camera for someone who is primarily interested in still photography. I don't think it'll disuade serious video shooters from buying a dedicated video camera. I don't care that it doesn't have motorized zoom capabilities.

Primarily I guess we'll all agree the 5D mkii is a still camera first, video camera later.

There are applications I think it may (MAY, who knows at this point) trump a dedicated video camera (special shots, low light etc.). But usually, a proper video camera is a better option (XLR anyone?).

I personally see it as a compliment to my XL2. The XL2 is a SD video camera (here in Hong Kong HD isn't as big/needed as it is in the States) so something like the 5D mkII will be a good specialist camera (special shots that is). NOT a very good event video camera (I mean filming an event). Unless it doesn't have problems with overheated sensor and it can connect to a computer to capture.

I don't need HD all that much (which is why I said it would compliment my XL2) so when I do need to do something in HD (ie a talking head or something) it might be better than the XL2 in that case. Because I could blur the background more and make it look like film (in terms of DOF) and keep the colour saturation that is popular in the asian culture (the "film look" isn't so popular here).

Well that's my hope at least.

hey, i'm impressed that there are actually video people on this forum i've owned all of the canon cameras up to and including the xl1s, and i just jumped off the deep end for this vixia hf11... rolling shutter issues and all, lol, gotta start checking out hi-def sometime.

with a 7x multiplier effect, the dof will be shallow, because of the length... and there is no light loss, so you would still get the fast 1.4.

i would also point out that you can't begin to touch that amount of zoom when you are shooting video on a 5d.

Stealthy Ninja wrote in post #6457687
It's something like x7 (the multiplier). With video the bigger the sensor the better, so I guess (unless they crop the sensor a lot) the 5D mkII should be (theoretically) better than the other "real" video cameras.

Also (someone correct me if I'm wrong here) one of the good things about FF is the DOF control (ie less DOF). So you're getting much more control over your DOF over a dedicated video camera. Just changing the lenses using the adaptor does NOT give you this effect (you need to have some special set up - expensive - to get the narrow DOF associated with things like FILM).

Therefore (if it turns out to be good enough) the 5D mkII videos DOF control trumps "real video cameras" ability to clamp on other lenses.

You are correct in what you say though. You can exchange the lenses, it just doesn't have the same effect that it would with a DSLR.

Note: I own the XL2 and I have only taken the kit lens off once (when I sent it in to be repaired). I've had it for about 2 years and I am a video professional.

BTW: I'm not attacking your post, just adding points to it.

i agree, and i see an advantage with the 5d when it comes to shooting film-style, where you might need extreme dof in certain circumstances... it would also make nice b-roll at high-end weddings.

but shooting film-style means all of the attendant headaches with dedicated focus pullers and such... does the 5d have in-body stabilization like my pentax does? do the short canon primes that will be used in that situation have stabilization in the lense?

Stealthy Ninja wrote in post #6457779
Primarily I guess we'll all agree the 5D mkii is a still camera first, video camera later.

There are applications I think it may (MAY, who knows at this point) trump a dedicated video camera (special shots, low light etc.). But usually, a proper video camera is a better option (XLR anyone?).

I personally see it as a compliment to my XL2. The XL2 is a SD video camera (here in Hong Kong HD isn't as big/needed as it is in the States) so something like the 5D mkII will be a good specialist camera (special shots that is). NOT a very good event video camera (I mean filming an event). Unless it doesn't have problems with overheated sensor and it can connect to a computer to capture.

I don't need HD all that much (which is why I said it would compliment my XL2) so when I do need to do something in HD (ie a talking head or something) it might be better than the XL2 in that case. Because I could blur the background more and make it look like film (in terms of DOF) and keep the colour saturation that is popular in the asian culture (the "film look" isn't so popular here).

Well that's my hope at least.