Okay, so I'm taking the plunge and getting my 5D MkII today. I'm ready to shoot HD video with this amazing little critter. I just sold my XHA1 to upgrade to this camera. I have used Sony Vegas for some time and feel pretty comfortable with it for basic editing.

Will the 5D .mov files import right into Sony Vegas 8.0 or do I need to be aware of a lot more software I will need?

The files can be edited on Vegas 8, but you will not have a very satisfactory playback.

I have been using Cineform's NeoScene to convert to an intermediate Codec. You can buy it for something like $ 99 to $ 129, Check out sponsor Video Guys who have it for $ 99.00

http://www.videoguys.com/Item/CineForm+Neo+Scene+PC/54E4543435F454E4.aspx

If you had another Cineform product, upgrade has been around $ 69.00

So you cannot edit the raw .mov files out of the camera and then 'render as' a QuickTime video, or Windows Media Video and have good playback (better quality than the XHA1?)
I am about as basic a 'newbie' to this as you can find, so I'm needing some good advice starting out.

So you cannot edit the raw .mov files out of the camera and then 'render as' a QuickTime video, or Windows Media Video and have good playback (better quality than the XHA1?)


No... Playback of the native MOV files is (on my system) about 1-3fps. Using Cineform NeoScene, I get 29.97 or 23.976 depending on my timeline. Even with a bit of color correction, I'm still rockin' at full frame rate.
You CAN indeed edit with the native files, but you will expect to do a LOT of ram rendering. It's not much fun.
I suggest investing in NeoScene. I THINK you can try before you buy. Check it out at cineform.com
You'll be a happy editor.

He means the playback on the timeline won't be good. Once you render out, all will be fine. I use .mov files on the timeline in my normal workflow and just live with the poor playback performance or use online/offline workflow if it's a bigger project.

There is another reason to use Cineform... and that is it takes filters, correction, and multiple rerendering processes better.

There is another reason to use Cineform... and that is it takes filters, correction, and multiple rerendering processes better.

Better than what?

Better than codecs with long GOP structures like what comes out of the camera.

Better than codecs with long GOP structures like what comes out of the camera.

Ah yes.. agreed!

Okayyyyy......... oddly enough, I can play back the raw .mov files off the camera just fine on my laptop. I just double click the file and it opens with QuickTime player and plays without a hiccup. No jerks, no slow frame rates, etc. - it's working fine playing back the files and the video looks INSANE (awesome) compared to the XHA1 quality-wise.

Ah ha... now I see what you mean by playing it back IN Vegas... slow frame rate (video appears strobed at best.) But again, just double clicking the raw .MOV files coming off of the camera, it plays back fine on my computer (laptop) playing in either QuickTime or VLC Media Player.

Now for the test just rendering what I have on the timeline, the raw file, into a more compressed .mov QuickTime file. Anxious to see how it plays back.
Will it strobe? Will it remain good quality?

Okayyyyy......... oddly enough, I can play back the raw .mov files off the camera just fine on my laptop. I just double click the file and it opens with QuickTime player and plays without a hiccup. No jerks, no slow frame rates, etc. - it's working fine playing back the files and the video looks INSANE (awesome) compared to the XHA1 quality-wise.Are you actually using a Windows laptop? Macs don't have a problem playing the .MOV files straight off the camera just Windows systems.

Yes, I'm using a Windows XP laptop. Dell M6400.

I've tested five video clips now, and all of them play back just fine. The raw files, original files transferred off the camera, show up as a .MOV file. I double click them, and they launch in QuickTime and play back just fine. Not a hiccup at all.

Playback in Sony Vegas is strobed. But... after rendering, the playback of whatever file I render to plays just perfect!

Right now, I'm VERY happy !!! :-)

So does the 5D II only do video in 30p?

So does the 5D II only do video in 30p?

Yes, which is it's significant limitation right now.

And yes, the .mov files should do just fine on the Dell. I have the same one. Did you get the NVidia Quadro card in yours also? Great laptop. (SDHC is a problem though)

Glad you're happy with how everything is working.

Just downloaded the Cineform Neoscene software trial. I see it converts my raw .mov files to .avi files. Is this a LOSSLESS codec transfer? In other words, does the quality remain uncompressed TRUE HD 1080p ??? I play it back and it looks great, but just curious.

I have A LOT of learning to do about this camera's video capabilities and I appreciate everyone's patience with the new guy. This is a great forum where people can share and no question seems to be a dumb one. Thanks everyone!

I do have another question....... so how are you guys monitoring your audio with no headphones jack?????

Just downloaded the Cineform Neoscene software trial. I see it converts my raw .mov files to .avi files. Is this a LOSSLESS codec transfer? In other words, does the quality remain uncompressed TRUE HD 1080p ??? I play it back and it looks great, but just curious.


No, it is not lossless. It is very good though, as you can see.


I do have another question....... so how are you guys monitoring your audio with no headphones jack?????

Record audio separately.

...so how are you guys monitoring your audio with no headphones jack?????

The AV jack can output audio during recording, if you use Magic Lantern firmware. With most headphones, you need a headphone amplifier, like the Boostaroo.

So if the converting of the raw .MOV files out of the camera is NOT lossless using Neoscene, it's only function then is to improve the playback while editing?

If I were wanting to keep the best quality, wouldn't it just be better to import the raw .MOV files into Sony Vegas and then 'render as' whatever format I choose?

I know this question has no real answer, but for the most part, what type of file association are you rendering to that gives you the HD quality look that I'm seeing on examples such as... Zelo Cinema Sample Clips on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/5699357) ?????

Is the final product rendered into a FLV file? If so, using what format/codec?

So if the converting of the raw .MOV files out of the camera is NOT lossless using Neoscene, it's only function then is to improve the playback while editing?


That is one of it's functions


If I were wanting to keep the best quality, wouldn't it just be better to import the raw .MOV files into Sony Vegas and then 'render as' whatever format I choose?


That is an option. But it would be nearly impossible to tell the difference between lossless and cineform with your naked eye. You're talking about a codec that was used for capture and edit for an Oscar winner last year. It's pretty darn good man.


I know this question has no real answer, but for the most part, what type of file association are you rendering to that gives you the HD quality look that I'm seeing on examples such as... Zelo Cinema Sample Clips on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/5699357) ?????


If you are finishing to anything other than 35mm film (and maybe even for that) Cineform is as good as uncompressed, without the pain. Vimeo... forget it. AVCHD would be good enough.

The cool thing about Cineform is that the codec is "visually lossless", and that it plays back with low overhead. You can also scale the output to half or quarter size for real time playback very effectively, due to its wavelet coding. By scaling smaller, you leave more CPU for color correction and effects.

Often people use an intermediate format which is visually lossless in addition to low-res proxies, which play back easily. With Cineform, you get both characteristics from one file.

So in 'newbie' terms, once the raw file is in Sony Vegas 8.0, when I'm ready to render, what file type and codec should I be using to get this kick-butt quality I'm seeing?

I encode to Sony AVC, 1280x720 at 4Mbps. Audio is AAC at 128 kbps.

But I never put the raw files into Vegas. NeoScene has no negative effect on quality and makes editing a joy.

In fact, the levels will be incorrect if you put the RAW files into Vegas. At a minimum, you need to "rewrap" the MOV files to an MP4 file in Quicktime so that Vegas decodes the correct levels without contouring problems. NeoScene eliminates the MOV decoding bug.

Will rendering to Sony AVC file format give you the best quality for YouTube and Vimeo uploads for sharing video?

EDIT: No luck rendering to Sony AVC, as I cannot get the file to play back on my computer. Any thoughts?

You might try uploading it anyway. As long as Vimeo can decode it, they will put it in a format that Flash can play from your browser.

I've uploaded sony avc to vimeo just fine. But it plays back on my commputer just fine too.

Finally got some basic test footage uploaded to Vimeo using their tutorial. I rendered via MainConcept H.264 and it looks okay, not anything to write home about..........

Untitled on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/5883504)

Finally got some basic test footage uploaded to Vimeo using their tutorial. I rendered via MainConcept H.264 and it looks okay, not anything to write home about..........

Untitled on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/5883504)

Looks about as good as one could expect. Good job.

HD video o Vimeo is 1280x720 H.264 at 5Mbps so for best picture quality you should convert your video to that specification before uploading.

HD video o Vimeo is 1280x720 H.264 at 5Mbps so for best picture quality you should convert your video to that specification before uploading.

Why is that?

Nigel,

That's exactly what I did, per the Vimeo tutorial. I used Sony Vegas 8.0 and rendered the avi files as a MainConcept .mp4 file with those settings... 1280 X 720, etc. etc.
Once that file was rendered out, I then uploaded onto Vimeo website.

* Wonder if it would have been better to render in 1920 X 1080 on the MainConcept .mp4 file instead ???

HD video o Vimeo is 1280x720 H.264 at 5Mbps so for best picture quality you should convert your video to that specification before uploading.

Why is that?Perhaps I could have phrased that better.

If you convert to H.264 at or a little higher than the target 5Mbps rate for Vimeo 1280x720 video then you will see next to no difference in quality between what you upload & what Vimeo hosts. So when you are happy with the quality at 5Mbps then you know that Vimeo won't mess it up. The other advantage is that it will take less time to upload than if you upload a higher bit rate file. You have no way of knowing how Vimeo will recompress your video or what the quality will be like especially if it's not H.264.

What about Adobe Media Encoder; anyone using that? I basically can create my own Flash video with this tool. Video quality looks outstanding!

What about Adobe Media Encoder; anyone using that? I basically can create my own Flash video with this tool. Video quality looks outstanding!

If you can create your own flash at around or under 1mbs, then Blip.tv is your friend. You can upload your flash file and they will stream it WITHOUT re-encoding the file. Plus, they'll play it back at 30fps (whereas Vimeo will both re-encode and play it back at 24fps). Although Blip won't do "HD", but I get GREAT results from 640x360 1mbs FLV uploaded to their servers when it comes to streaming content.

Plus, they'll play it back at 30fps (whereas Vimeo will both re-encode and play it back at 24fps). Vimeo apparently no longer converts HD video to 25fps but leaves it unaltered if it is up to 30fps.

Vimeo apparently no longer converts HD video to 25fps but leaves it unaltered if it is up to 30fps.

I'm skeptical considering the terrible stuttering I see in most 5D2 videos on Vimeo. Where'd you get that info? Any links to their faqs or ? I'm not saying it isn't true, but I'm not convinced either.

Also, I've yet to find any other FREE video resource than Blip.tv that will stream my file verbatim without re-encoding it. That right there is worth trying Blip.tv alone.

I'm skeptical considering the terrible stuttering I see in most 5D2 videos on Vimeo. Where'd you get that info? Any links to their faqs or ? I'm not saying it isn't true, but I'm not convinced either.One of the Vimeo staff stated in their forum that now that they convert everything to H.264 & not FLV that they don't force the frame rate to 25fps for HD but leave it unchanged up to 30fps. I don't have a link but remember it well for I was involved in the conversation as I had been bitching about the terrible juddering on 5DII videos & even got a refund on my Vimeo Pro account because the quality was unacceptable. It seems OK now provided that you have the latest Flash Player installed & a decent network connection (1280x720 is 5Mbps)

One of the Vimeo staff stated in their forum that now that they convert everything to H.264 & not FLV that they don't force the frame rate to 25fps for HD but leave it unchanged up to 30fps. I don't have a link but remember it well for I was involved in the conversation as I had been bitching about the terrible juddering on 5DII videos & even got a refund on my Vimeo Pro account because the quality was unacceptable. It seems OK now provided that you have the latest Flash Player installed & a decent network connection (1280x720 is 5Mbps)

Thanks for following up. This intrigues me, maybe I've give them a second look now.

So I notice my raw files, the .MOV files direct from the camera, appear to 'flicker' or pulse/jerk about once every second. Is this due to playback, write speed to the CF card, etc. ??? Please help ???