|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 3rd, 2010, 07:12 PM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Watchung New Jersey
Posts: 50
|
XF300 50mbs vs. 35mbs?
Hi,
We just got a new Canon XF300 a week ago - we love it! We've upgraded from a Panasonic HVX200. The XF300 seems to focus much faster and more accurately on fat moving objects - like horses running! Has anyone shot at 50mbs and then compared it to 35mbs? We edit with FCPro, export as a self contained movie (it seems to come off the timeline at about 70mbs as a self contained movie) Why would someone do that, shoot at 35mbs - just to save a little data on the CF Card? We have 2 Sandisks - 32 gig - they last about 80 minutes each (at 50mbs). When we lower the Canon's settings to 35 mbs - the card says about 110 min. Any other advantage other than just getting a little more time out of the card? I don't get it? Why would someone shoot at lower data rate?? Just buy a second card! I must not understand something . . . hmmmm . . . We did a real quick test, nothing critical, and in general saw very little difference between the two. Anyone have any thoughts? Oh, after the clips are "Transferred & Logged" into FCPro - they both play at 70mbs in the self contained movie. Has anyone played with this feature? Thanks, Larry |
|
|
|
August 4th, 2010, 11:58 AM
|
#2 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Reading, PA USA and Athens, Greece
Posts: 269
|
i wouldnt bother with 50mbps if i was shooting a commercial for SD broadcast or web content; why bother keeping all that extra data and dealing with it in post?
if it was an event or wedding or HD commercial, then yes 50mbps all the way |
|
|
|
|
August 4th, 2010, 12:13 PM
|
#3 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 44
|
If you're going to L&T to ProRes anyway, shoot w/ 50. Why throw away data at the beginning when you'll be using the same amount of storage either way? Straight from camera you probably won't see much difference, but the increased bit rate and color space of the 50Mbps codec will probably allow a little more wiggle room in post.
|
|
|
|
|
August 4th, 2010, 12:14 PM
|
#4 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 2,130
|
I disagree Panagiotis- might as well capture in the best quality possible. Hard drive storage is so cheap, what's the problem. I wouldn't even consider shooting 35 mb/s for anything, but maybe that's just me.
Steve |
|
|
|
|
August 4th, 2010, 01:10 PM
|
#5 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK
Posts: 4,957
|
The XF305 is not at it's best at 35Mb/s, why spend a lot of money on a high end camera only to not bother making the most of it. The difference in storage between 35Mb/s and 50Mb/s is really quite small.
__________________
Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com |
|
|
|
|
August 5th, 2010, 11:05 AM
|
#6 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London UK
Posts: 430
|
Why would someone do that, shoot at 35mbs - just to save a little data on the CF Card
Perhaps if you were cutting it with an EX1 and wanted to keep everything the same?
Personally, id never dream of shooting anything other than 50, since that is one of the chief things you're paying for when you buy the camera. Also UDMA 64 GB card's have become pretty cheap, so why bother. |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
