It'll be interesting to see if you can do things with this like select which face to focus on in a scene... might allow for automatic rack focusing between two people.

I'd like to see a lot of the contrast detection techniques used in P&S cameras make their way into camcorders and the LiveView/MovieMode of DSLRs. Focusing is the hardest on these higher resolution cameras, and right now, the best solution is to buy an external HD monitor.

The Live view AF speed should be similar to the EOS50D, have a look at the end of this video YouTube - Canon EOS 50D First Impression Video by DigitalRev (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSKwmei0g-w&feature=related)

Should give you an idea.

Dan

Raw video from the Reverie short is up now:

Canon Digital Learning Center - EOS 5D Mark II: Full-Resolution Video Clips (http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=2127)

Pretty great looking stuff. Looks every bit as good as my Sony EX1 without having to lug around the big letus attachment on the front.

Any news whether it'll do 25p?

It is 30p only in all regions at time of writing.

Vincent himself asked for general public to leave a comment to his BLOG here Original “raw” clips from “Reverie” Now Available for Download Vincent Laforet’s Blog (http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2008/09/26/original-raw-clips-from-reverie-now-available-for-download/#more-1249http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2008/09/26/original-raw-clips-from-reverie-now-available-for-download/#more-1249) so Canon could see the reasoning why should the other framerates implemented and if there are people out there who would want such a feature, tell about the European users.

There are raw video downloads too now.

Cheers
T

The Live view AF speed should be similar to the EOS50D, have a look at the end of this video YouTube - Canon EOS 50D First Impression Video by DigitalRev (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSKwmei0g-w&feature=related)


Thanks for the link - assuming this is the same for the 5D I'm even more excited about it now (jump to ~6:30 in the video if you want to see the live view AF demo). I only use the autofocus on my XHA1 very occasionally, and even then I only use it with the push-auto so that it refocuses when I feel it's necessary, not when something moves in the scene. That looks like how it will work with AF in Live mode - i.e. you have to push & hold the AF button when you want it to focus, otherwise it should hold whatever the last focus is. I'm guessing this will prove to be the best way to focus with this camera (rather than going full manual) - my understanding is that a lot of SLR zoom lenses don't hold focus while zooming, which would make the typical routine of zoom in, focus, zoom out to compose a shot unusable.

Unfortunately it looks like if you're used to using autofocus continuously there isn't a mode where it does that without having to hold down the AF button.

Face detection mode looks to be continuous, no button press required, and appears to track the faces pretty well, so I definitely think it could be more useful than standard AF on most video cameras. Unfortunately based on that video it looks like face detection selects which face to focus on automatically, it's too bad it can't track multiple faces and highlight the one that's in focus so you could move the focus from face to face.

my understanding is that a lot of SLR zoom lenses don't hold focus while zooming, which would make the typical routine of zoom in, focus, zoom out to compose a shot unusable

They certainly hold focus. You can perform the zoom in to focus and then zoom out method with stills zooms. I use this technique all the time with my DSLR.

Pretty great looking stuff. Looks every bit as good as my Sony EX1 without having to lug around the big letus attachment on the front.

Definitely - I was looking forward to these to get a feel for the real impact of the rolling shutter. The second shot with the actor at the sink shows it the most - handheld with high-speed shake. You can see a little bit of compression/stretch going on (which generally bothers me a lot more than skew in pans) but it's very minimal, no worse than what I've seen in EX1 & even RED footage. I figure if I have to look hard for it the average viewer will never even notice or care.

In the blog comments someone mentioned running the footage (from the original film) through Bijou and getting better results than with the EX1, but I still see enough movement there that I think it may throw off tracking in a lot of situations.

They certainly hold focus. You can perform the zoom in to focus and then zoom out method with stills zooms. I use this technique all the time with my DSLR.

Good to know, the autofocus on my nikon is so good I haven't tried this technique in years with an SLR. Ken Rockwell's review of the 5D's 24-105mm kit lens mentioned that focus shifts while zooming so I assumed this was an issue with other modern lenses; maybe it depends more on the specific lens.

Here's a sample that shows the rolling shutter at its worst: 5d mark2 sample HD video on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/1815853)

I've also seen some full frame captures that show somewhat smeary noise reduction/compression artifacts. There are crisper camera options for 1080p.

That said, if you target the web and DVDs, have a story that doesn't require fast motion, don't plan on any extreme color correction, and your audio doesn't rely on the camera's 1/8-inch input, this is a heck of a tool - especially for night shooting with shallow DOF and a variety of lens looks.

Come to think of it, the half-scale Laforet video meets every one of the requirements in the above paragraph. The guy knows his stuff!

It's good to finally see a clip which really shows us worst-case rolling shutter artifacts. It's definitely there, although much better than the d90. I'd put it on par with the HV20 or EX1 though, compared to these test clips:

Rolling Shutter HV20 test 24p wobbling on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/819044)
Sony PMW-EX1 Skew and Wobble Test on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/1451404)

Despite the similar rolling shutter limitations I've seen some amazing work produced with both the HV20 & EX1... and I'm sure we're going to see a lot of amazing work produced with the 5D once it gets out in the wild.

Come to think of it, the half-scale Laforet video meets every one of the requirements in the above paragraph. The guy knows his stuff!

That's the key with this - it's easy to look at a test designed to highlight a flaw of the sensor and dismiss the camera outright, as many seem to be doing (not necessarily here but on some of the other forums). If you know what the capabilities & limitations (and they all have significant limitations at this point) of your equipment are you can do some amazing work despite those limitations. Laforet did this - in fact, he managed to do it without really having a chance to get to know the camera well, and he managed to produce a film that feels very dynamic without pushing the limitations of the rolling shutter.

I've been scanning through this entire topic, but am unsure of several things. First, is it generally agreed that the 5D Mk II shoots the best quality video among the current still camera contenders ? Second, is the video easy to ingest into one or more of the common professional NLEs ?

I think without a doubt the 5D Mark II shoots the best quality video of any still camera to date. I think that is nearly undeniable at this point even with the camera not yet released.

As for editing. I run Final Cut Studio on a Mac so that is the only thing I can comment on. I can drop the raw, right out of camera, full resolution video files into a FCP timeline, let FCP change the sequence settings to match the clip and play the video in real time.

The one drawback with FCP at least is that h.264 is not supported for RT effects, so although you can drop it straight in and start editing without any conversion you will need to render any effects in order to see them.

Evan is correct, and on that note, make sure you change your sequence settings to render into a quality codec like ProRes. You definitely don't want to render into H.264!

i can not view the 50DmarkII movie on Vincent Laforet's blog is there another address it is viewable at?
thanks
tito

Edius can reportedly work with the footage from this camera as being discussed on the Edius forums (Edius works with Canon 5DMII! - Forum Index (http://ediusforum.grassvalley.com/forum/showthread.php?p=52433#post52433))

They certainly hold focus. You can perform the zoom in to focus and then zoom out method with stills zooms. I use this technique all the time with my DSLR.

I looked into this some more and it looks like it varies from lens to lens - there's a list here of canon lenses that hold focus:

Parfocal Lenses (http://www.rogercavanagh.com/helpinfo/30_parfocal.stm)

looks like an older list and the kit lens isn't on it, but based on Ken Rockwell's review and a lack of any other info I'm currently assuming the kit zoom is not parfocal.

Even if its not parfocal, you can still set the aperture and then focus for film purposes. The 3rd party zoom lenses from Sigma, Tamron, Tokina should still be fine..
It really does not matter if you focus first and then set aperture or if you set aperture first and then focus.

I looked into this some more and it looks like it varies from lens to lens - there's a list here of canon lenses that hold focus:

Parfocal Lenses (http://www.rogercavanagh.com/helpinfo/30_parfocal.stm)

looks like an older list and the kit lens isn't on it, but based on Ken Rockwell's review and a lack of any other info I'm currently assuming the kit zoom is not parfocal.

Even if its not parfocal, you can still set the aperture and then focus for film purposes. The 3rd party zoom lenses from Sigma, Tamron, Tokina should still be fine..
It really does not matter if you focus first and then set aperture or if you set aperture first and then focus.

I'm not talking about changing aperture, I'm talking about changing zoom - the traditional way to focus with a video camera is to zoom all the way in on your subject, focus, then zoom back out to compose your shot. This only works though if the lens holds focus while zooming and my understanding is that if it's not parfocal this technique will not work.

yes it would be nice if some one could post a decent all purpose zoom the can hold focus,
could be from any manufacturer.

Do a Google search for "Canon parfocal zoom" and you'll find some good info on this topic.

For those of us that use VLC for video playback... you'll need to do the following to
get VLC to playback the 5D MkII footage... (gleaned from a different site)

H.264 codecs are pretty CPU intensive and VLC can't use multi-cores to decode it yet.

1. Open Tools/ Preferences
2. Click Show settings = All
3. Go to "Input/Codecs
4. Go to "Other codecs/ FFmpeg" subcategory
5. Set "Skip the loop filter for H.264 decoding" to ALL
6. Restart VLC

I thought I knew the answer to this, as Canon described it as an H.264/MPEG-4 format, using a 38.6 Mbps rate. However, another announcement by Canon, in describing its new Digic-4 processor, gives some confusing information. They say that the video format with Digic-4 cameras will be a non B-frame (keyframe) type of H.264. They also say that about 6 MB of storage is needed for each second of HD video in the SX1 camera, which would give it a 48 Mbps rate. Elsewhere, in the SX1 owner's manual, it says that a 42.4 Mbps rate is used. Doesn't all MPEG-4 encoding use a B-frame or keyframe system? Does the SX1 ultrazoom/fixed-lens camera (About $600.-$700. predicted price), have a different video encoding system than the 5D Mark II? And does the SX1 use an even higher bit-rate?

Maybe, someone can straighten this out for me. Actually, having an HD video-capable camera as low-cost as the SX1 and with its great lens power and such a high bit-rate, with non B-frame encoding, would interest me. Here's the link to this Canon annoucement:

Canon Tips Off Enhanced Capabilities of Its New Image Processor -- Tech-On! (http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080922/158348/)

Apparently, it uses only I and P frames. B frames look forward and backward, and are more complicated to create.

In compression, the decoder is specified. You can encode anything you want, as long as it can be decoded by a standard decoder. So decoders are required to understand B frames. Encoders aren't required to produce them.

Just a random tidbit, when I posted on the 12th that it would have it, it wasn't speculation, I knew someone who used it. This a comment based on the thread Chris closed (rightly so) where I criptically made it sound like speculation, I just couldn't reveal my sourse is all.

I freely admit that I haven't yet seen much from this camera, but it seems to me that comparing to an HD video camera is in the same sphere as comparing a DSLR stills camera to snapping a shot on a mobile phone. Or am I being a bit harsh?!
Steve

well it's more like if that mobile phone had 8 mega pix and mini interchangeable lenses. That's why this 5d is raising so many eyebrows. The only thing really missing is 24p

speaking of which does anybody know how that's going, any word from canon?

What does it need 24P for? Surely no-one is seriously thinking of using this for cinema release?!

Surely no-one is seriously thinking of using this for cinema release?!You're right. Instead they're seriously thinking of using the Nikon D90 D-SLR for cinema release, since it is indeed equipped with 24p.

What does it need 24P for? Surely no-one is seriously thinking of using this for cinema release?!

If you are going to make a low/no budget feature length film with a Sony EX1 with a Letus, why not use the Mark II 5D? Better control, better low light, less noise at high gain. You would be recording the audio separately anyway. Used properly I can see this camera giving better results than an EX1/Letus combo.

Of course, you still aren't going to really need 24p, because seriously, what are the chances of needing to really go out to a film print?

Isn't 24p motion part of the cine look?

But Honestly I am one of the guys that can't see the emperors new cloths. I have never really *seen* 24p or any frame rate difference for that matter. But I know what looks like film and what doesn't.

Tyler, you must be joking?!!!

Idono I think tyler might be right. I never liked the ex/lex combo almost perfferd a stock hvx.

Maybe it was a little tongue in cheek, but look at what Vincent Laforet did with the camera for 72 hours (and he is a self proclaimed still picture guy only). Now take Vincent Laforet's deal and make it an hour and a half with a quality story and good actors. All the audio is recorded separately, not in camera. It would look better than at least 65% of the no/low budget indie films I've seen. There are folks making feature length indie films with EX1/Letus combos that chew up and eat light leaving you to have to shoot at f/1.4 where everything looks blurry if an actor scrunches their nose. So, maybe I'm not joking!

I've never done anything outside of the broadcast television arena, but I'm definitely shooting my first short once I get my camera.

"I've never done anything outside of the broadcast television arena, but I'm definitely shooting my first short once I get my camera."

same here.

I still think think recording audio straight into the camera wouldn't be that bad. Unless I was using a cineform then I would send the audio into the recorder.

Fascinating thread. I hope the PR & Business Dev. honchos at Nikon & Canon and reading it carefully- including between the lines.
Over and over I keep heading a scream in my ear- "The Hybrids are Coming!"

Tyler, you must be joking?!!!

Have you seen the output of this camera full res Steve or are you just offering a blank opinion?

Of course this is a serious tool and of course it can be used for real production.

The specs a re real and the DOF and FOV are better than any adapter will deliver even very expensive P&S adapters.

Why wouldn't it be used to produce serious work...because it doesn't look like what you expect an HD camera to look like?

I said right at the start of my post that I hadn't seen much from you, I did admit that. But clips that I have seen have been dreadful. I wouldn't pay much notice to specs, there's much more to it than that. The way people are talking you'd think that the Sony and Panasonic broadcast engineers must be sitting at home kicking themselves for not coming up with a camera that could do all that there's can, but be a fraction of the size and price and have loads much advantages too! There's a reason why they haven't and it's because it ain't good enough to do a top-level job. It'll do top-level stills, same as a Motorola Razr will do top-level 'phone calls, 'cos that's what it's for. But it's just like your Motorola owner thinking, "wow, I won't need to carry a big expensive SLR around now 'cos my 'phone'll do it!"
But you are right, as I admitted right at the start, I don't know that much about it, and am prepared to be proved wrong - but I won't hold my breath!
Steve

I said right at the start of my post that I hadn't seen much from you, I did admit that. But clips that I have seen have been dreadful. I wouldn't pay much notice to specs, there's much more to it than that. The way people are talking you'd think that the Sony and Panasonic broadcast engineers must be sitting at home kicking themselves for not coming up with a camera that could do all that there's can, but be a fraction of the size and price and have loads much advantages too! There's a reason why they haven't and it's because it ain't good enough to do a top-level job. It'll do top-level stills, same as a Motorola Razr will do top-level 'phone calls, 'cos that's what it's for. But it's just like your Motorola owner thinking, "wow, I won't need to carry a big expensive SLR around now 'cos my 'phone'll do it!"
But you are right, as I admitted right at the start, I don't know that much about it, and am prepared to be proved wrong - but I won't hold my breath!
Steve


I don't agree with your assertions except your last sentence.

Trust me you'll be proven wrong.

Lets see what the next Hollywood blockbuster or Planet Earth for that matter is shot on, get the feeling it may not a 5D. But why not, if it's as good, a fraction a price and very compact, for the nature work at least it'd beat the competition hands down.
Steve

Steve, I think you may be missing what we are saying. We'd all love a 5 or 6 million dollar budget to film our new movies with. So of course "hollywood blockbusters" or Planet Earth are never going to be shot on a 5D Mark II. However, there is a whole world of anti-hollywood (thank God) independent filmmakers out there with excellent stories to tell shooting with camera like the EX1 and XLH1. They throw 35mm adapters on them to try to improve the look of their art. THEY are the people I think this camera is going to open up new opportunities for.

And you say clips you have seen have been dreadful... have you seen "Reverie"? No it doesn't look like it was shot with an arri... but then again the whole camera body costs about as much as 2 minutes of film stock!

But Planet Earth was shot on lowly Varicam, and a lot of the talk seems to be putting this in at least that class, and it's quite obviously not (even without having the seen the images I'd put money on that).
Steve

This is my opinion of all thats been writen so far, not just on this forum.

I think the winner of all the buzz on the 5D is Vincent Laforet, and he will or could probably shoot his next work with cinema camera and a much more big budget.
Me I am not decided on 5D or D90, and I know that improved version of those camera is
almost ready to be shipped by Nikon and Canon.
Its an interresting time to be a member of dvinfo

I agree with all of you:

- Steve, because the 5D2 is functionally hobbled by the video-mode being a mere adjunct to the camera's main function, which reduces it to just a promise of technologies to come;

- Jim & Tyler, because the image-quality of the sensor, not to mention the universe of available glass, compared to other available video cameras render those objections irrelevant—to some …

… like me.

Single sensor that has to be de-bayered. Also, how do they get down to 1920 res, if they window it you won't get your 35mm DoF anymore, if they down-convert then that has quality implications too. How good is that rolling shutter? Didn't look good from the (admittedly limited) shots I've seen.
If it's as good as a Sony 790/PDW700, or a Panasonic Varicam/HPX3000 etc. then I'd buy one (or several) straight away, but if it's not then it can't be considered a top-notch video camera. If it's as good as an XL-H1 then it may be considered a pro-sumer quality video camera, but I'm sure it won't even be close to that. How could it be, and just think how many XL sales Canon would be robbing themselves of.
Steve

if they window it you won't get your 35mm DoF anymore,Steve

However much they mask the frame the dof remains the same Steve. If they reduce the focal lengths to match the smaller gate then yes, the dof tables will be turned.

If you've got a smaller frame and the same angle of view you'll have more DoF. So for any given shot, say a head and shoulders, if you're 35mm frame say on an 85mm, at S16 frame you'd need around a 30mm lens and you'd have more DoF.
Steve

If you've got a smaller frame and the same angle of view you'll have more DoF. Steve

You're saying what I'm saying Steve. If you have the 'same angle of view' with a smaller frame, then you've reduced the focal length.