C100: In-Camera Sharpening?

[Nicholas de Kock]

I film on the Wide DR profile, overall I'm happy with the look but the images appear somewhat soft at times, I then apply post sharpening. Would you consider pushing the Wide DR in-camera sharpening to +6 with 3 noise reduction, will this be overkill? By default it's set at -2. I would like to minimize my rendering time & post sharpening adds to my renders.

[Andy Wilkinson]

I'm amazed you think the images look soft at times! I mainly use WDR too. Some recommend turning the sharpening setting DOWN from the default (for the look they are after).

What sort of F stop do you typically shoot at? Also, maybe you could post a frame grab of something you regard as somewhat soft - it might help with peoples suggestions.

[Nicholas de Kock]

Here is a comparison between a post sharpened image. Filmed on the Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS possibly at F2.8 or F4 can't remember the exact F-Stop but I tend to go F4 to F5.6 on speeches. There is a big difference between the two images, the unsharpened image almost looks out of focus but it was definitely in focus. Sharpening makes it pop.

[Andy Wilkinson]

I agree, in those two samples the left hand image does indeed look soft, almost slightly out of focus.

I don't have that lens (I have the F4 IS version). I have borrowed it in the past and it's not razor sharp at F2.8, especially at the edges, sharpens up a lot at F4 and above, particularly on a full frame like a 5DMkII. However, the s35 sensor on the C100 (as you know) uses just the centre area of the lens circle which (should) be the best bit optically. [As an aside, the newer II version of the 70-200 IS is better (borrowed one very recently - but the F2.8s are just too blummin heavy on a C100 for my personal liking - for any hand held/run-n-gun anyway].

Certainly post sharpening was necessary here/does indeed make them pop.

I'm just wondering why it does not appear to be nailing the focus/looks soft in the original clips? How does this particular lens behave on a Canon DSLR? (if you have one)?

Also, and please forgive me if this is obvious - I'm just trying to help and it's difficult to tell from just two stills - but are you shooting 25psf and making sure your NLE interprets the footage as progressive? There are many C100 videos out there on the web where people have not spotted that their NLEs think the footage is interlaced, with a big hit on the resulting resolution (and artefacts etc. in scenes with movement)...just checking!

Anyone else got some suggestions for Nicholas?

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Can't comment on the C100. However, I use the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM with C300 as well as back up 1D Mark IV and 5D III bodies. I often use it with 2xII TCs. I have used it extensively for photography as well. No problem at all with the lens. It is one of the best lenses of Canon.

In the frame grabs uploaded, the focus may be slightly ahead and locked on the microphone. You may need to check the original file to confirm.

Did you use the EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM lens or the previous version EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM? The new version ie. Version II is sharper.

[Jim Snow]

It's a focus issue. Use your zoom focus assist with peaking and peak on the guys beard for example and you will be happy with the result. Shallow depth of field looks great when focus is managed properly.

[Eric Coughlin]

I generally add 10-15 sharpening (in Premiere) in post to all of my Wide DR (with default settings) footage. I'm also interested to know if in-camera sharpening can provide results as good as post sharpening. In-camera sharpening would be particularly useful for me when I'm delivering to people I freelance for who aren't going to do any color correction (sharping in post).

[Matt Davis]

@ Nicholas - yes, you can if you wish bring detail up from -2 to 0, but I think we're all in agreement here that sharpening should, where possible, be done in post.

All cameras will benefit from some sharpening - less so for narrative, more so for corporate. My markets want sharp colourful pictures, period. Sigh. The point, though, is sharpening in post will always be superior to sharpening in camera because it can take its time and do it right. Hence, the render times. Also, some shots need more help than others - a texture or pattern can be over emphasised, or conversely a wooly shot can benefit from a bit of 'ironing'.

You can dial back if you're sharpening in post, but if doing it in the camera, any over-sharpened clips stay that way for ever. Maybe +6 could be overcooking things, so just lifting to 0 or +2 will give you enough to work with, only sharpening a few shots in post if it really needs it.

[Nicholas de Kock]

I haven't done any comparisons yet but I did do a shoot at +6 sharpness (given that the C100 has a +50 range I guess +6 isn't over doing it). I agree that post sharpening is the best option but given my workflow schedule compromises are needed.

+6 is crisp & sharp to my eye probably too much so for high end productions but it's a good look for run & gun event work on a tight budget & schedule. Images pop a little more. I'll be sticking to in-camera sharpening for events.