Bye bye XHA1, Hello 5D MKii?

[Roger Lee]

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

Generally the 5DII footage makes the XHA1 stuff look like crap. Not because it is intrinsically bad but because the look especially the fantastic clarity & sharpness of the 5DII is so different to that of the XHA1. We have found it impossible to mix footage in the same scene as the 'look' is utterly different. It is possible to shoot e.g. exteriors with the XHA1 & interiors with the 5DII & then mix the footage but not a 2 camera shoot of the same scene.

Nigel,

I agree.

And Dom, you'll love the 5D2.

Take care all.

Rog Lee

[Wayne Avanson]

As for your question re the hard drive/laptop scenario. I just bought one of those NexTo 2725 500gig hard drives with built in card slots.

Brilliant.

OK the ergonomics are a bit 'nineties' but you can't beat plug and play back up.

Taking mine to Turkey next week and to Canada for a job in September. The advert is at the top of the main 5D2 forum page

Avey

[Eric Chan]

What about the work flow of mixing the 5D2 footage with the A1s? Don't we need to convert the 30p footage to HDV 60i? Will the audio in sync when we do that?

I agree the 5D2 image is far superior than the 5D2, but I still think that A1 is more reliable as it is built for taking video in specific. 5D2 will be a great company of A1 in certain situation.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Eric Chan

...I still think that A1 is more reliable as it is built for taking video in specific. 5D2 will be a great company of A1 in certain situation.

Given manual control Magic Lantern firmware, a good preamp, and a good rig with a loupe or monitor, the 5D Mark II is quickly catching up to traditional camcorders. The only things lacking are 24/25p, and long, continuous recording times.

Hopefully 24/25p will be available from Canon before long. The only limitation to remain is likely to be the recording length.

As far as reliability is concerned, anything can break at any time. For top reliability, bring backup equipment, no matter what you use.

[Chris Barcellos]

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

As far as reliability is concerned, anything can break at any time. For top reliability, bring backup equipment, no matter what you use.

And an extra 5D body is a heck of bargain for backup.

[Will Gallego]

Great info, I love the expertise on this site.

This may be a silly question, but I was considering buying an Gpro or Letus35 adaptor for my XHA1 for DOF purposes. Should I just fork up the few extra $$$ and get the 5D. Considering some of you have both, what would you do?

Shooting a music video soon. Not sure if it is worth investing any more money into the XHA1.

Thanks for you time.

[Ken Diewert]

Will,

I have the 5d2, an HV30 and an XLH1, and while I love my H1... I'm blown away by the 5d images. I was considering adapters for either of my hdv cams, but I had some EOS glass anyway so I stepped up to the 5d. Wow! is all I can say. The number one thing (for me) is low light performance. I've shot the 5d in impossible light with a 50mm f1.4 and was simply amazed at the performance and low noise. Even the best 35mm adapters require extra light.

Whether you use an adapter or 5d, you'll be manually focusing everything, so a monitor would be nice, esp with the fast lenses and shallow DOF are concerned. This camera reminds me of shooting on 16mm back in film school. Shorter shots, no handheld, critical focus, and beautiful images. Of course you use the 5 and 10 times zoom feature for focus assist which is nice, and you can review immediately, which also beats the heck out of shooting on film.

I still use my H1 and HV30 a lot, especially for audio. But it seems now I think... geez it's ok but it would have looked so much better with the 5d...

Everybody's situation is different, but it's the 5d for me. A music video would be a great application for the 5d, as you're not recording audio, and the deep dof 'video look' of standard video cams shows up and screams low budget.

While there are issues (form factor, weak factory audio), there are enough available workarounds or just tolerate them in exchange for absolutely kick-ass images.

[Rickey Brillantes]

Originally Posted by Eric Chan

What about the work flow of mixing the 5D2 footage with the A1s? Don't we need to convert the 30p footage to HDV 60i? Will the audio in sync when we do that?

I agree the 5D2 image is far superior than the 5D2, but I still think that A1 is more reliable as it is built for taking video in specific. 5D2 will be a great company of A1 in certain situation.

I always mix my footage with the 5D and FX1, I use XDcam HD via MPEG Streamclip to encode. I just drop the 5D clips to any timeline sequence Im working on, and do some color corrections and rendering. The audio will sync just make sure you convert the auto to 29.97
before conversion.

[Will Gallego]

Thank you Ken,

Excellent advice and you just reaffirmed my decision. I really appreciate the feedback.

I figured what I save on purchasing an DOF adapter and possible on some lighting(rentals) I can make my money back on the 5D.

Anything else you can share? such as any sweet spot settings.

[Tom Roper]

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

Generally the 5DII footage makes the XHA1 stuff look like crap. Not because it is intrinsically bad but because the look especially the fantastic clarity & sharpness of the 5DII is so different to that of the XHA1.

I don't agree at all. First of all I know the 5D2 isn't sharper because I've tested the resolution of it and the XH-A1 with Imatest. Second, the 5D2 in my mind is fatally flawed for video because of harsh aliasing artifacts. Situationally, you can get unique results from it, dof control and low light, close ups. But as for 'fantastic' clarity and sharpness, it loses on those counts to the XH-A1.

I wanted the reverse to be true. I sold my XH-A1 although I still use the Sony PMW-EX1.

I think what you're confusing with sharpness, is the very high contrast potential and dynamic range of the 5D2.

The XH-A1 needed to be used at f/4.4 and wider apertures to avoid diffraction softening. Maybe that was the problem. I'd see a lot of posts where people were using it f/8.0 and above.

I was reviewing some beautiful HD video I shot with the 5D2, on a 50 inch Pioneer Elite Plasma, then suddenly switched to an XH-A1 video, and it was then I got the first clue after going back and forth, the 5D2 image was not as finely detailed. That prompted me to test the 5D2 using Imatest and a 50mm 1.4 prime. The surprising result was that the horizontal resolution was even less than my Canon HV10, although the vertical resolution of the 5D2 was very good. But the bigger problem is the aliasing artifacts. You can manage them with softening filters, but you can't keep all your detail that way, no free lunch.

The 5D2 may make the XH-A1 video look like crap, for all the creative possibilities the 5D2 brings, dof control, dynamic range, low light. But not sharpness. Not at all. Not compared to my XH-A1 videos.

I started a thread on this a few months back with the imatest results. I also posted still images from the video of the HV10, the EX1 and the 5D2. It was pretty obvious the differences.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Tom,

I think you're right. From what I've seen, the 5D Mark II is no resolution king. The horizontal filtering is simple, so it's softer than need be, and there's no vertical filtering at all.

That said, the large sensor, high sensitivity, low noise, solid compression, and available lenses can make pictures that are really pleasing to the eye. For shooting in daylight, stopped down, the 5D Mark II is nothing special, but open the aperture, and things get magical.

It's good to understand the camera's limitations - for instance, this isn't the right camera for a documentary on the detail of fine lace. On the other hand, we shouldn't get caught up in the limitations either. A small minority of people really hate the 5D's aliasing artifacts. The large majority love the images it produces. I'd rather shoot for the majority. :)

[Tom Roper]

I could not agree more Jon. We've seen videos from the 5D2 that are magical, no question about that.

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Tom Roper

The 5D2 may make the XH-A1 video look like crap, for all the creative possibilities the 5D2 brings, dof control, dynamic range, low light. But not sharpness. Not at all. Not compared to my XH-A1 videos.

I started a thread on this a few months back with the imatest results. I also posted still images from the video of the HV10, the EX1 and the 5D2. It was pretty obvious the differences.

I recall & we had the same discussion then. It doesn't matter that still photos taken off the video timeline show less detail with 5DII footage. The perception for the vast majority of people who view 5DII footage is that it is sharper, detailed & more realistic. Whether this is due to higher contrast edge-sharpening or whatever it is clear as several other people have posted in this thread agreeing with my statement that the difference between the XH-A1 & 5DII footage is so extreme that the former looks like crap & that it's all but impossible to mix the footage. You may hate the anti-aliasing & moire but the vast majority of people viewing 5DII footage won't even notice.

Film & video is just an optical illusion & the fact that the 5DII doesn't fool your brain in the same way that the majority of others get fooled is just a fact of life I suppose. I am glad to be in the majority & like John I'd rather shoot for that majority.

[Tom Roper]

Jon,

As an option to the softening filter, thinning the DOF by blurring everything out except the shallow focus plane worked pretty well for me. I used the 85LII 1.2 lens. You can still see the aliasing artifacts, but with the focus plane targeted on three dimensional subjects, not flat surfaces like walls and architecture, only the in-focus parts of the subject will have the aliasing, which then ends up looking more like local compression artifacts, and far less noticeable overall.

I only mention this as another option to the softening filter, since it permits the part of the picture you want to be in sharp focus, whereas the softening filter is indiscriminate. It's a good idea to have some neutral density filters, or it may not be possible to shoot at the wider apertures in strong lighting conditions. You would already know all that.

Would also just add, I prefer the neutral style setting for video. I'm a PC user so I don't know if this is pertinent it is for the Mac world, but the Cineform NeoScene also takes care of the fixing the PC RGB color space problem, thus in combination with the neutral style setting brings the excessive contrast under control, and converts to NTSC 29.97 fps, audio stays in sync, and avoids the blended frame artifacts. My $0.02

[Jon Fairhurst]

Good point about throwing things slightly out of focus to avoid aliasing. I worry that I might go too far though. I think this technique would require testing and practice. The nice thing about a given filter on a given lens is that it's predictable.

Of course, focus and diffusion are two different effects. Focus works equally on all light levels. Diffusion works more on the light than the dark areas.

I can't wait to see what Canon has in store at NAB 2010 and 2011...