Video Shmideo

gooble wrote in post #6490152
Yes, but you can take a picture during a video clip which starts a new video file after the still is taken. If you're the only shooter then you could splice the clips together but you'd have a second gap or so.

However if you're doing this professionally and had two shooters you could simply jump to the other camera and avoid any interuptions.

Assuming that you wanted to be at that camera angle at the time in question.

gooble wrote in post #6490164
I'm not a video expert but what's wrong with the .mov wrapper? Is there also something wrong with h.264?

Video compressed like that is simply unideal.

pastanley wrote in post #6396064
Agree 100%. Get a point and shoot camera if you want video/pictures.

This is such horrendous advice one can't help but wonder if you're kidding or not. It certainly didn't look like it.

So here, we have an excellent dSLR which also happens to do excellent movies (BETTER than many dedicated camcorders) due to the larger sensor and interchangeable lenses.. and you're telling me to go buy a P&S?

bieber wrote in post #6490610
Assuming that you wanted to be at that camera angle at the time in question.

Video compressed like that is simply unideal.

How much is too much compressed? Isn't all video compressed to some degree or another? Isn't h.264 very good at compression? Isn't it less compression then is used on DV tapes?

i think that by bridging dslrs and video cameras you create a new niche. one that has been dieing to be opened since the pocket xacto hd camcorders were first introduced. Effectively, canon and nikon are being the dominant leaders and stepping up to consumer demands, realizing the need for video and still image recording that offer more flexibility to professional photographers and as a result: better, sleeker, more wow images. the 5d mk2 will definitely be hard to top in the current market, however i think that as both nikon and canon become more confident in their videoing capabilities; they will ultimately feature Auto focus in their camera/lens abilities.

c2thew wrote in post #6491531
i think that by bridging dslrs and video cameras you create a new niche. one that has been dieing to be opened since the pocket xacto hd camcorders were first introduced. Effectively, canon and nikon are being the dominant leaders and stepping up to consumer demands, realizing the need for video and still image recording that offer more flexibility to professional photographers and as a result: better, sleeker, more wow images. the 5d mk2 will definitely be hard to top in the current market, however i think that as both nikon and canon become more confident in their videoing capabilities; they will ultimately feature Auto focus in their camera/lens abilities.

The 5D II has AF during video recording.

gooble wrote in post #6490164
I'm not a video expert but what's wrong with the .mov wrapper?

from a post i made a couple of pages back: "5dmkII mov container... google "quicktime gamma shift", there is a thread on dvinfo.net about this with 5dmkII video."

i'll try to make it relevant to this forum... how would you like to be shooting stills that always had a gamma shift in 'em? what if you had to shoot everything in raw, to make sure that there was no permanently lost picture info, like you get with jpegs? is this gamma shift issue only a problem if you are editing video on a pc?

as for af, can it do continuous autofocus while recording, like a video camera does? ...not that a pro shooter would want to use autofocus, unless absolutely necessary.

osv wrote in post #6494442
from a post i made a couple of pages back: "5dmkII mov container... google "quicktime gamma shift", there is a thread on dvinfo.net about this with 5dmkII video."

i'll try to make it relevant to this forum... how would you like to be shooting stills that always had a gamma shift in 'em? what if you had to shoot everything in raw, to make sure that there was no permanently lost picture info, like you get with jpegs? is this gamma shift issue only a problem if you are editing video on a pc?

as for af, can it do continuous autofocus while recording, like a video camera does? ...not that a pro shooter would want to use autofocus, unless absolutely necessary.

I don't know if it has continuous AF or not but it does AF during shooting.

As for the QT gamma issue, like I said I'm not a video expert. I read a little about this issue and don't know enough about it to know what problems it would cause 5D II users but I do know that h.264 is not tied to QT. The camera just puts the files in a mov wrapper. You can change the file extension to m4v from mov and open it up in any player that plays mpeg4 video and I assume in any video editor that supports mpeg4 video. You don't ever have to touch Quicktime as far as I can tell so is the problem for people playing back a finished video in Quicktime?

all good points... the thread made it sound like there had to be a proper conversion from .mov to .whatever, fwiw... i have a simple software utility that allows me to convert sd video from .avi to .mov without re-encoding, so there must be something out there for hi-def.

taking a different tack... according to steve jobs, don't be looking to author hi-def dvds on your mac with that 5d mkII video any time soon:
"Straight from El Jobso's mouth at today's notebook keynote: "Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt. It's great to watch the movies, but the licensing of the tech is so complex, we're waiting till things settle down and Blu-ray takes off in the marketplace." Phil chimed in with "We have the best HD movie and TV options in iTunes."
http://www.engadget.co​m …ls-blu-ray-a-bag-of-hurt/

another good reason to dump the .mov container... and the mac, while you are at it.

osv wrote in post #6502955
all good points... the thread made it sound like there had to be a proper conversion from .mov to .whatever, fwiw... i have a simple software utility that allows me to convert sd video from .avi to .mov without re-encoding, so there must be something out there for hi-def.

taking a different tack... according to steve jobs, don't be looking to author hi-def dvds on your mac with that 5d mkII video any time soon:
"Straight from El Jobso's mouth at today's notebook keynote: "Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt. It's great to watch the movies, but the licensing of the tech is so complex, we're waiting till things settle down and Blu-ray takes off in the marketplace." Phil chimed in with "We have the best HD movie and TV options in iTunes."
http://www.engadget.co​m …ls-blu-ray-a-bag-of-hurt/

another good reason to dump the .mov container... and the mac, while you are at it.

Quicktime's .mov is not a video compression standard it's a wrapper only. You don't convert from mov to whatever. You can't convert from mov to anything; .mov is not a codec. It just so happens that the 5D II wraps the h.264 compressed mpeg4 file in a mov wrapper they could have just have easily put the .mp4 or .m4v extension on them and they'd work just the same in software that supports them no conversion necessary.

wrong, you can't just change the name to another container type, and always maintain full compatibility.

that's like telling us that you can make a .jpg into a .tif or .tga by simply renaming it.

osv wrote in post #6506674
wrong, you can't just change the name to another container type, and always maintain full compatibility.

that's like telling us that you can make a .jpg into a .tif or .tga by simply renaming it.

Well I took Vincent Laforet's Reverie (all he did to my knowledge was open in a video editor and export to the same type of file as he started with) which I pulled out of the cache which had a .mov extension. I changed it to .m4v and .mp4 and played it in Quicktime and the Zune software no problems. Changing the file extension like I did did not tell the software that its a different type of file which is what happens if you change an image file extension so you're just flat wrong.

you don't have a clue how those apps interpreted what you did... and you sure don't know if renaming the file affected the gamma shift problem, much less what caused it in the first place.

if renaming the file extension worked like you claim it does, there would have been no need for qt pro to have a export dialog choice called passthrough, which allows you to do an export to mp4 without re-encoding the data streams.

osv wrote in post #6508599
you don't have a clue how those apps interpreted what you did... and you sure don't know if renaming the file affected the gamma shift problem, much less what caused it in the first place.

if renaming the file extension worked like you claim it does, there would have been no need for qt pro to have a export dialog choice called passthrough, which allows you to do an export to mp4 without re-encoding the data streams.

Yeah, I don't know and I don't give a rat's a@# about Quicktime or Apple so it matters little to me.

My main point was that although the 5D II files had a .mov extension this does not tie you to Quicktime in any way. The videos are encoded in mpeg4 h.264 which is an industry wide standard that is not exclusive to Apple or anyone else.

no, if the .mov container farked up the gamma at the time that the video was recorded, it can't be fixed by simply renaming the file... and without a proper conversion, you are indeed stuck with quicktime.

but don't take my word for it, here it is on the red forum:

"Ok, I know there is not one single answer to the Quicktime Gamma Issues, and I know everyone has heard this a thousand times and the Red Forums aren't specifically the place to vent - but when looking at my screen my mind nearly just snapped.... And seeing as there are some movers and shakers in the post world who frequent here I figure maybe SOMEBODY will be able to point out the following insane contradiction to Apple and get them to fix this stuff.

So, I have a Quicktime output from AVID (using Same as Source on an Avid 1:1 timeline) that I move it over to my Mac - surprise surprise, QT Gamma shift issue crops up, blacks are grey, everything is washed out."
http://www.reduser.net​/forum/showthread.php?​t=18513

here, this guy thinks that he has a fix for it, but i doubt it:

"Using mp4 or h.264 when compressing through QuickTime can make the final video look washed out."
http://www.videocopilo​t.net/blog/?p=197

77 responses, look at the last post:
"This tip didnt work for me at all. Im rendering my reel out of final cut using compressor. All the other codecs work, but h.264 gives me the gamma shift. I use this tip, close and save. Opening up the file again, and it still looks exactly the same, washed out compared to the same video with a motion jpg export. I am on a mac using QT Pro 7.5. Any other solutions that work?"