|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 23rd, 2009, 04:00 PM
|
#1 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 32
|
HDMI --> HD-SDI for best results?
I was wondering if any here uses an HDMI-SDI converter such as this one to get the best quality signal from their 5D2. Is it let compressed than the file save to the CF card? Is it 4:2:2 compression, and is it long GOP?
Any info is appreciated.
__________________
~ CB |
|
|
|
June 23rd, 2009, 04:24 PM
|
#2 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Camas, WA, USA
Posts: 5,513
|
The problem is that the HDMI signal mimics the LCD screen - which is 4x3. That means that the result is "pillar boxed" (as compared to letter boxed), so the video doesn't fill the full HD output.
What's worse, when you hit record, the HDMI output devolves to standard def. If you capture the HDMI output in Live View when not recording, the result has even worse aliasing than the CF card files. On the other hand, there are no blocking artifacts. With fine detail, the CF card is probably better. When filming sky and clouds, capturing HDMI and upscaling would win.
__________________
Jon Fairhurst |
|
|
|
|
June 25th, 2009, 06:06 PM
|
#3 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 32
|
Thanks, Jon. So, the best results are from the CF card? I'm hoping Canon will simply make a camera body with an HD-SDI port for max IQ.
__________________
~ CB |
|
|
|
|
June 25th, 2009, 10:15 PM
|
#4 |
|
Inner Circle
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Camas, WA, USA
Posts: 5,513
|
I'd love to be in the Canon product planning meetings these days. The video division has to be salivating over what they will be able to do with large sensors in a video-specific body. I know that we are!
__________________
Jon Fairhurst |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
