Mark III, Not happy with video output. Insight/Advice ?

[Mike Niles]

Fair Warning this is going to be a long read. So I appreciate in advance you taking time to read this and giving me some insight.

Video Link Here -

5D Mark III - CineStyle Test w Sharpen. Noise = Fail ? on Vimeo

So little back story behind this. I won't say this is my first DSLR that shoots video but it's my first Canon I had held out on the Mark II and waited what seems like forever for the Mark III. So again not my first DSLR that has video but the only one that matters.

I had taken a break from video all together due to codec compression. Creating videos for the web and to share with others in small format was fine but as my talents and skills grew my work some how seemed to grow with it. Artifacts I was getting from AVCHD and other delivery formated codecs started to bug the hell out of me. So consumer grade cameras stopped appealing to me. Sold my lot of video cameras and figured I'd save for something with a higher bitrate codec or better codec like AVC-intra etc. During the wait my love for video faded when I was not shooting expensive cameras for work - I never touched a video camera but my love and skill for Photography grew at a fast right and I decided to pre order the Mark III not thinking much of the video features.

Fast fwd to today. I had the first 5D Mark III sold in florida and until this past weekend had not shoot video on it at all. I knew the ALL-I codec had my intrest due to the high bitrate but just never had the need or intrest to shoot with it. Logged back on to Vimeo to see what others have been creating with the 5D3 and the video bug bit me again..

I figured since my photography has paid for the camera already anything i get out of the video aspects of it as in extra bonus. Did a little research, loaded up some profiles and settings and went on my way filming.

My Issue is my video looks like junk. I did all the right things that I knew how to do. ISO 160(etc) 50 shutter, noise reduction off, sharpness dropped and added in post, Even with the ALL-I codec I just seem to hate the artifacts i'm getting and not sure if it's codec or sensor noise. I heard that CineStyle introduced noise but I even added a flat profile to the mixture of clips above and it's still noisy.

Now on the web the video looks OK-ish and same for the computer but once I output to TV. It just seems to look like garbage and so many other videos here on Vimeo with the Mark III look breathtaking.
I didn't add grading to this clip or mess with the colors beyond the lut. I know how to finish my videos the look is not the issue its the quality or the noise.

It might just be me that I'm rusty or just suck at the video thing but any input after watching the above video would be great and much imprecated. If your still with me by this point thanks for reading down this far.

[Bill Grant]

What about them do you not like, just you think there's too much noise? The majority of the shots are overexposed, so surely you are losing some info in the overexposed areas. I thought the shot of the baby was great. Long post but can you point out specifics in these shots that you didn't like?
Bill

[Robert Turchick]

What lens and aperture setting did you use? Also need to know your workflow. What NLE? Are you transcoding? How much sharpening did you add? The answers will help us zero in on what the cause might be.
Been using DSLRs for video for a few years now and the mkIII is becoming my favorite tool. Even testing it for greenscreen and it's really doing a nice job. (Not quite up to my XF300)

There are a lot of factors that seem to add noise even in direct sun shoots. One thing I discovered was how bad transcoding to pro res looked. In FCP7 it was necessary. Now that I'm on PP CS6, it's a whole new camera! As for sharpening in post, I generally go +15-20 in PP.
FCP7 was about +10.

Output is the other place to look. What are the specs for the file you are outputting? Running through my Matrox to my Sony TV, it looks amazing playing in PP. There is a bit of loss if I compress to an h264 (double pass high quality) and play from my laptop to the TV. Burning to DVD, it looks like crap!
Going to an mp4 scaled down at a lower quality (generally what I send to clients for approvals) it looks fine.

The other thing I want to point out is your video is full of extremely fine detail shots and that's kind of a nightmare for any camera. Not that they shouldn't be able to handle it but after looking at true pro level video cameras the DSLRs will fall short on this kind of subject.

I'm extremely happy with the noise/quality of the mkIII. Hopefully we can figure out a solution for you.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Can you give us the full list of settings on the camera? Does the camera take great still photographs?

[Mike Niles]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for reading and providing some feedback. I'm going to provide a full list of settings from camera to NLE below.

Camera: Cinestyle Profile , Sharpness all the way down. Shot at ISO160 Shutter 50. To get my meter to show proper exposer along with histogram my aperture was at around f/22 outside, By my pool I think the lowest I went was f/14, Inside with my kid I was around f/4.0(ISO was higher around 320 I think) Lens used for most the video was 24-105 L but for one of the shots I tossed on my Zeiss for giggles. Recorded in ALL-I 1080 24Fps.

NLE: PP CS6, Sequence Preset "Digital SLR - DSLR1080p24" Decided to leave the footage native out of camera and skipped 5DtoRGB. So no transcoding of media into timeline.

As far as how I exported the footage to my TV. Uncompressed out of PP and then used a bunch of presets to test on various devices. For Vimeo, I exported with H264 Vimeo preset out of PP. I don't like H264 much it seems to increase the brightness or change the gama. My pool water was blue as blue can be but on the vimeo h264 it looked light blue(another issue all together) Sharpening was never higher then 16 expect for the 2nd clip that I used to make the side by side.. that was sharpness of 30(wanted to push for a side by side)

What I don't like is not the look. I know that it needs some grading and some attention it's more the quality of the footage. As far as I know I have done everything right Oh and as asked above. The camera takes fantastic stills. So good in fact the pictures have paid for the camera twice over already and making the move from Nikon to Canon trust me it was more expensive then just buying the camera lol.

I have experience with REDS and i'm not comparing to a red by any means at all but I saw a few vimeo videos with the 5D3 that blow me away and look like they are shot on the red. Of course they look better on the computer small screen. I have been playing with the idea of using Neat Video to clear up some noise.

Maybe I just need a better workflow with the Cinestyle or try a different Picture Profile. I heard Natural Flat? produces almost no noise just don't know how about getting that.

[Robert Turchick]

Well, the first red flag is shooting at f22. You really need ND filters for outdoor shooting. That's why you're overexposing. Also, the detail is going to be affected by closing the aperture down that much.
Sweet spot for most lenses is f8-f16. Typically I shoot around f8 -f10 in full sun.

As for workflow, I'll read further but it seems ok.
Gamma shifts are going to plague all of us until a standard for all devices is set...in other words forever!
I have had no issues with h264 shifting gamma. I do not use the presets though, I made my own.

The indoor shot with the baby looked good and made sense with the settings you describe.
I've shot workable video up to iso1600. Neat video does an amazing job at cleanup.

[Mike Niles]

f/22 produces darker image correct? not understanding how I'm over exposing at f/22. I understand detail loss I guess. I know it's not the sweet spot for the lens.

Shooting a Still image of a landscape f/22 to get foreground and background as much in focus as I can produces a good result. Is that not the case with video then ? Maybe I'm thinking too much like a photographer now.

I'm guilty of using larger f-stops to control my brightness since I didn't have any ND filters with me(wife gave me half hour to run around the backyard and film) I would have loved to been at f8 but going back for my ND filters would automatically put me on daddy daycare duty. But like I said I guess I'm thinking to much like a photographer now because I'm seeing Aperture as controlling the amount of light I need and how it effects my DOF. I never really assumed shooting f/22 would create more noise on my video since in a still it's not much of a difference. I guess I'm also spoiled by coming from Canon's DV line where we had built in ND filters. I wasent really thinking about it at the time.

Taking a break from video has put me back in amateur status and I apologies for sounding like a NOOB , I guess I am lol.

I really do appreciate any and all feedback. I absolutely love video and I feel like such a loser having this amazing tool at my disposal and producing such sub pair results.

[Robert Turchick]

To clarify, in photography (which I do as well) shutter speed can be freely adjusted along with aperture and ISO to control light. With video, you're essentially taking away shutter speed as it should remain constant. That leaves ISO and aperture. Aperture controls DOF and does affect light. ISO controls light and affects noise. That's why the ND filters are so important. I know you already know this.
Shooting at f22 doesn't increase noise. It does affect detail as its effectively limiting what light the sensor sees. Kind of like choking off a garden hose. I think what's happened is you've lost a bit of detail and by trying to get it back by sharpening is allowing you to see the artifacts. Just my guess based on what I've seen my DSLRs do outdoors.
I'd recommend a new test with the nD filter and setting to f10-ish to see if that makes a difference. :)

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Originally Posted by Mike Niles

The camera takes fantastic stills. So good in fact the pictures have paid for the camera twice over already and making the move from Nikon to Canon trust me it was more expensive then just buying the camera lol.
...

Maybe I just need a better workflow with the Cinestyle or try a different Picture Profile. I heard Natural Flat? produces almost no noise just don't know how about getting that.

Robert's answer is well worth investigating. The 5D line-skips in the sensor, and the best it can be stretched - in still photography - before diffraction is noticeable at 100% on screen, is f/11 to f/16. I'd say for video anything beyond f/8 might be too tough to use because:

You are using Cinestyle, and this needs major tweaking in post for the right look. Try Neutral picture style instead, and aim to get closer to the look you want while shooting. Sharpening will also sharpen artifacts!

Furthermore, the lens you are using has a sweet spot too, and I think it's at about f/5.6 for the 24-105L, so ideally you should be shooting at f/4 or f/5.6 tops.

Try to get a vari-ND filter - good ones are expensive but you can rotate the ring and change the ND without taking off the filter. A circular polarizing filter is also worth a try, depending on what direction you're shooting in.

The great videos you see on the web are carefully thought out and executed. A simple change from 24-105 to 24-70 f/2.8 can make a huge difference to the look of the piece. But I'm sure you know this already.

[Charles W. Hull]

I wonder if the noise issue is CineStyle/LUT. I don't use CineStyle so I haven't seen it, but I question whether the sensor/codec can be stretched as far as CineStyle requires without some noise or banding now and then. I've been using Laforet's style and getting good clean video from the 5DIII, edited with PP. The style is:
Neutral
Sharpness all the way down
Contrast -4
Saturation -2

[Matt Lawrence]

"One thing I discovered was how bad transcoding to pro res looked"

Has anyone else had this experience? I'm working with FCPX and transcoding to ProRes, so I'd be interested to know if anyone sees a difference using a PP workflow (or any other workflow for that matter), using either the 5DM3's native codec or another editing codec. For any serious color grading or effects, the common wisdom seems to be transcoding to a proper editing codec.

[Robert Turchick]

If you're in FCPX, don't bother transcoding to pro res. just take a clip and look at the difference between leaving it native and transcoding. Maybe it's the way I transcoded but it always seemed to add a bit of noise. I do a ton of greenscreen work and the noise would hamper the keying a bit. That was with my XF300. Leaving it native it's better quality. I'm even able to pull useable keys with the mkIII leaving the footage native.
In FCP7 it was necessary for smooth playback but the new generation of NLE's can handle the native just fine. Even mixing codecs, FCPX and PP CS6 are happy.
And as far as "serious color grading and FX" in my workflow I can't think of a harsher test of footage holding up than greenscreen keying in AE using Primatte Keyer Pro and grading the result with Colorista. Works very well and not transcoding saves me a step. Render times are about the same as when I used to use pro res.

[Nigel Barker]

Forget about Cinestyle unless you are going to use heavy duty colour grading & noise reduction i.e. you have a feature film budget for this post-produstion work. Cinestyle will just add noise. Get the look right in camera as you don't need mess around too much in post. I like Faithful with default settings as it gives nice skin tones & a decent contrasty image without being over-saturated. Many like Neutral with contrast & saturation reduced to taste. As you are using a 5D3 do add sharpening in post. This was a no-no on the 5D2 because of aliasing & moire but makes the 5D3 image pop. IPB gives better images than All-I especially for low motion. Finally the 5D3 image is a bit soft which is one reason why it is so flattering with close-ups of people. Compared to any 'proper' video camera let alone a Red there is a marked lack of resolution.

[Brian Brown]

I always carry an ND8 and and an ND32 with me for outdoor shoots. The ND32 will let me shoot at f1.4 1/50 on the brightest of days. As has been suggested here, anything over f8 can lead to diffraction on video.

I don't think that the 5D3 will ever approach that "looking out a window" feeling of rich detail in wide, deep scenes I see with other HD cameras. There's just not enough detail captured. Perhaps it's because of the very, very good moire-reduction they've pulled off with this camera compared to the other Canon's, or it could be how the skipping/binning works. This is a shame, because still taken with the camera are full of detail.

If I shot a lot of landscape stuff, I'd invest in a Panny GH2 for the wide, deep shots. The detail from that little camera is impressive. It'd be a lot more "packable", too.

For faces, close-ups, and shallow DOF shots, the 5D3 looks phenomenal. So, maybe it's just the idea of choosing the right tool for the job.

[Kris Koster]

I echo Sareesh's advice. Invest in a vari-ND filter, they are a godsend. I use mine on nearly every outdoor shot in bright conditions.

Recommendations? Anything you find necessary to put in front of the lens, especially the L class, needs to be of superior high quality. I highly recommend the Lightcraft Fader ND. I used it for years before upgrading to the Singh-Ray which is the ultimate. If you invest in the Lightcraft, make sure you get the mark II and make sure you buy from a reputable source - There were always a lot of fakes around. If your budget permits, there really is no better than the Singh-Ray IMHO.

The great thing about using vari-NDs as opposed to static NDs is you can 'dial in' the exposure after setting the lens to its sweet spot aperture. Also, get the one that fits your highest lens diameter and buy step-up rings so it will fit lower diameters.

At the very least you should get a HD polarizer. But you know this as you're a photographer!!

As for camera settings, I've tried Cinestyle, but I keep going back to the Prolost flat settings.
Prolost - Blog - ProlostFlat
I can't find a better config than that.

Hope this helps!