Full HD on Canon EOS 5D Mk. II -- officially announced

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Prashanna Jayaseelan

how will the Mark II change a wedding videographer industry? When a photographer will offer the clients both photos and video as a package?

Photographers can already offer both (by buying a video camera) and the Mark II won't make that any easier, but it may inspire more photographers to try their hand at video. What's more interesting is what this camera offers to videographers in terms of depth of field control, as a supplement to proper video cameras which are more practical for the demands of recording a wedding.

[Jim Giberti]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Sorry but that's incorrect, as demonstrated here: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/929807-post172.html (from our Nikon D90 discussion thread). The referenced CNEN tax limit applies to devices which record 30 minute clips or more, and this is not the case with the Canon 5D Mk. II or the Nikon D90.

I could be wrong, but I think people are misunderstanding this. What Canon has said (and that supports the tax concept) is that "continuous" shooting would be limited to 29 minutes 59 seconds or 4 gig - whichever comes first.

This is clearly not an overheating issue and that has been shown with the D90 too. You can begin to record immediately after the 5 minutes with the Nikon - over and over so there's no cool down time.

With the 5DII the word "continuous" would seem to be clear that there isn;t a 4 gig card restriction (really good news) but a 4 gig or 29:59 clip length - but both are stipulated a "continuous" and "clip length". with 1080p averaging about 12 minuted per 4gig.

In other words in in HD you are limited to a 4 gig (buffer, FAT ?) clip size and in SD a 29:59 Clip length. -as they say, "or which ever comes first."

It would make sense that you can shoot with a 16 gig card and put as much as 48 minutes of 1080 footage on it, in as many clips as you like, as long as none surpass 4 gigs.

That's how I read it anyway

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti

... Canon has said (and that supports the tax concept) is that "continuous" shooting would be limited to 29 minutes 59 seconds or 4 gig - whichever comes first.

Well, the CNEN tax argument is supported by the 29:59 limitation, not the 4GB limitation.

And as I mentioned previously, I think they're needlessly confusing things in their press release by mentioning the potential recording capacity of a 4GB card in the same paragraph as the 4GB file size limitation.

To some folks it gives the mistaken impression that a 4GB card is the maximum usable size, which wouldn't make any sense. Of course it can use CF cards that are 8GB, 16GB, 32GB etc. Their copy writer would have done better to mention the potential recording capacity of one of those cards instead.

[Jim Giberti]

Originally Posted by Chris Sorensen

The 100/2 is $350, not over a grand.

And you don't need $20,000 in lens. The 35/2 is $200. The 50/1.4 is $300. And the 85/1.8 is $350. All great lenses that are close to the L primes in quality and as good or better than the L zooms.

It's part of the game - photographers always list their arsenal of expensive glass. But countless films have been shot with a fraction of the range he listed...in fact most I bet.

I've directed a number of commercial projects with three Zeiss Super Speeds. A 24mm, 50mm, 85mm is a great core for film making and has been for ever. My current kit of Nikon primes for all uses is 20mm, 28mm, 50mm, 85mm, 105mm and 135mm.
They range from 1.2 (50mm) to 2.8 (20mm) and the whole kit cost less than $3000.

You could put a killer set of L glass together for 1/2 that.

[Jim Giberti]

<<Their copy writer would have done better to mention the potential recording capacity of one of those cards instead.[/QUOTE]>>

That would be "ex" copy writer at my company.

[Mark Williams]

Help me validate what I have heard so far about the MarkII's video capability.
-Aperature - selectable
-Shutter speed preset at 1/30, 1/60 or 1/125, (don't know for sure which one)
-ISO set by camera based on proper exposure.
- Exposure can be locked.

[Simon Wyndham]

Okay, I'm coming around to the idea now.

I was also thinking that for audio you could use a Beach Tek box so you can hook up XLR mics. Though of course we don't know how noisy the audio circuits in this thing are.

[Charles Papert]

Originally Posted by Kevin Shaw

Photographers can already offer both (by buying a video camera) and the Mark II won't make that any easier, but it may inspire more photographers to try their hand at video. What's more interesting is what this camera offers to videographers in terms of depth of field control, as a supplement to proper video cameras which are more practical for the demands of recording a wedding.

It will be interesting to see how a generation of photographers who have been weaned on ever-improving autofocus will manage with pulling their own focus while shooting video with this camera...

[Evan Donn]

Originally Posted by Dalen Johnson

I dont get it...Michael at Luminous landscape said it was over 47 (the 5DII).
Dpreview said 35.

So between the two numbers thats how I came up with my theory...but now there is the bytes vs. bits. (Im confused now.)

Sorry about that, that was a typo - I meant to write 35-45 megabits/second (not 35-35). The camera native samples from dpreview are just under 40Mb/s - but I've seen several comments about the total recording time (approximately 12 minutes) being dependent on the complexity of the footage - this indicates they are using VBR. Both of the sample clips have little motion so they are probably at the lower range of the VBR. Doing a little math based on the 4GB limit we get the following maximum clip lengths:

47Mbps = ~11:54
45Mbps = ~12:25
40Mbps = ~13:59
35Mbps = ~15:58

((megabits per second)/8)/1000000 = megabytes per second
4194.304/megabytes per second = total seconds per 4GB file
total seconds/60 = total minutes per 4GB file (remainder x 60 = seconds)

So 47Mbs probably is likely the upper limit as that gives us just under 12 minutes. Low motion clips like the samples should give another minute or so per clip.

[Prashanna Jayaseelan]

I wonder what will happen to the 35mm adapter systems? When you can get a very DOF with the FF chip on the MARK II. Where with, for example Canon XH A1 (b/c I own it), you would need a the whole setup rig of 35mm adapter to get the nice shallow DOF. I ask this as I plan(ed) to get a 35mm adapter for weddings/commercials/corporate etc... - What effect will this have on these systems?

[Evan Donn]

Originally Posted by Simon Wyndham

I was also thinking that for audio you could use a Beach Tek box so you can hook up XLR mics. Though of course we don't know how noisy the audio circuits in this thing are.

That's my plan (pre-ordered the 5D yesterday with the thought that it will replace my XHA1) - although if the inputs are noisy a better option may be dual system with a zoom H4 or something and using vocalign (Synchro Arts - VocALign) to auto-sync to the scratch audio from the built-in mic. The best option probably depends on the type of stuff you're shooting.

Maybe even go for a hybrid approach - use the zoom instead of an XLR adapter, run it's output into the input on the camera, then you use the zoom's files in situations where the onboard track is too noisy (i.e. quiet passages).

[Kevin Shaw]

Originally Posted by Evan Donn

So 47Mbs probably is likely the upper limit as that gives us just under 12 minutes. Low motion clips like the samples should give another minute or so per clip.

Don't forget to account for the audio data in your calculations...

[Robert Sanders]

Originally Posted by Charles Papert

It will be interesting to see how a generation of photographers who have been weaned on ever-improving autofocus will manage with pulling their own focus while shooting video with this camera...

That's a good point.

[Evan Donn]

Originally Posted by Kevin Shaw

Don't forget to account for the audio data in your calculations...

Sample clips had no audio and I haven't seen anything detailing the format of the audio so I'm not sure what to base the calculations on. Even assuming they went with uncompressed 48khz 16bit stereo audio only adds 768kbps - compressed will likely take half that or less, so in either case it doesn't change the overall calculations too significantly. Adjust all the data rates I listed by -1 and it should account for the worst-case (well, actually best case in terms of audio quality) scenario.

EDIT: found on the canon site it is using Linear PCM - no word on sample rate but probably safe to assume either 44.1 or 48khz

[Gints Klimanis]

Originally Posted by Prashanna Jayaseelan

I wonder what will happen to the 35mm adapter systems? When you can get a very DOF with the FF chip on the MARK II. Where with, for example Canon XH A1 (b/c I own it), you would need a the whole setup rig of 35mm adapter to get the nice shallow DOF. I ask this as I plan(ed) to get a 35mm adapter for weddings/commercials/corporate etc... - What effect will this have on these systems?

Initially, I would guess that their sales will drop as people wait to hear more about the new SLR announcements. Then, when we relearn that camcorders are still better as specialist devices, the 35mm adapter makers will need to add more features: manual aperture controls of the SLR lens, larger/better achromats to allow use of the sharper center region, cheaper focusing accessories. The grainy glass look is interesting at times, but I'd rather have clear glass and add the dynamic grain as a DSP plugin. The grainy noise probably affects the video compression with its excessive motion.