Don't let it be so! The weak AA filter is what makes the 5D special.
pdmphoto wrote:
Concerning the Canon landscape sample, I see lots of pixels but very little detail. Maybe Canon have used a strong AA filter on the new 5D?
Be sure when looking at 100% samples that you bear in mind that you are looking at significantly higher magnification than with a 12 megapixel file. To really compare 100% samples with a 5D, you'll need to uprez the 5D file to 21 megapixels first. You can also downrez to 4368 pixels wide, but you're throwing away the whole the reason for 21Mpixel if you do it that way. This is probably why even very experienced photographers are criticising the centre-frame performance of the 24-105/5D2. We are used to looking at that lens's results at lower magnification.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Don't let it be so! The weak AA filter is what makes the 5D special.
No - you are just seeing the sharpness limit of the lens. Stick your Zeiss 21 on there and you only need the same sharpness setting as the 5D. We've been through all these issues with the 1Ds3. The sensor results look identical to me.
brainiac wrote:
Be sure when looking at 100% samples that you bear in mind that you are looking at significantly higher magnification than with a 12 megapixel file. To really compare 100% samples with a 5D, you'll need to uprez the 5D file to 21 megapixels first. You can also downrez to 4368 pixels wide, but you're throwing away the whole the reason for 21Mpixel if you do it that way. This is probably why even very experienced photographers are criticising the centre-frame performance of the 24-105/5D2. We are used to looking at that lens's results at lower magnification.
Despite all the complaints (about Ergonomics, something they can actually just ask photographers about) I'm glad Canon did what they do best, release a camera that smokes the competition in the numero uno in the camera world. Image Quality.
I'd rather they smack a sensor that will compete in 2 or 3 years into the camera then release a camera with features that in the end, don't really improve my end product or ease of use (like Geo-tagging, although I guess they stuck video in it!)
I'll probably eventually own one of these guys, so I like it
I don't think the 5DII will be able to do that for 2-3 years like the 5D did. The game is changing quickly and competition is mounting. Canon will either need to update the 5D more often or fall behind.
genoph wrote:
Despite all the complaints (about Ergonomics, something they can actually just ask photographers about) I'm glad Canon did what they do best, release a camera that smokes the competition in the numero uno in the camera world. Image Quality.
I'd rather they smack a sensor that will compete in 2 or 3 years into the camera then release a camera with features that in the end, don't really improve my end product or ease of use (like Geo-tagging, although I guess they stuck video in it!)
I'll probably eventually own one of these guys, so I like it
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I don't think the 5DII will be able to do that for 2-3 years like the 5D did. The game is changing quickly and competition is mounting. Canon will either need to update the 5D more often or fall behind.
I'm not so sure about that. I think we will be seeing product cycles lengthen, and not shorten -- as well as customer buying cycles lengthen. Digital technology is going to stabilize and there is going to be increasingly smaller benefits gained from new models down the road. I won't venture to say where we are on the technology curve, but I would say we are a lot closer to the inflection point than we were.
I agree with most of your assertions overall. The issue I see with the 5DII does not concern its ability to be competitive with its image quality or sensor for the next 2-3 years but rather the fact that its fundamental camera features are already now, upon announcement, far behind the competition. This would include things like frame rate, viewfinder, general responsiveness(mirror blackout and shutter lag), etc. Canon will be forced to upgrade these things with something like the mythical 3D and dramatically lower the price of the 5DII because Nikon will certainly offer them at the 3K price point and Sony already does.
Lotusm50 wrote:
I'm not so sure about that. I think we will be seeing product cycles lengthen, and not shorten -- as well as customer buying cycles lengthen. Digital technology is going to stabilize and there is going to be increasingly smaller benefits gained from new models down the road. I won't venture to say where we are on the technology curve, but I would say we are a lot closer to the inflection point than we were.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I agree with most of your assertions overall. The issue I see with the 5DII does not concern its ability to be competitive with its image quality or sensor for the next 2-3 years but rather the fact that its fundamental camera features are already now, upon announcement, far behind the competition. This would include things like frame rate, viewfinder, general responsiveness(mirror blackout and shutter lag), etc. Canon will be forced to upgrade these things with something like the mythical 3D and dramatically lower the price of the 5DII because Nikon will certainly offer them at the 3K price point and Sony already does.
Well, the 5DII is already lower in price and I think we will soon see that the image quality (the most important factor, in my mind) is superior to the competition. I also think that once the initial backlash against the video feature subsides, we will begin to see some really interesting stuff and many opinions will change.
I can already think of tons of great stuff that I could shoot with this "video camera". My mind is already imagining the scenes that I want to "film" with it. Is everyone forgetting that this is a 35mm movie camera with interchangeable lenses? So the cutoff is 12 minutes. I don't know about you, but I can get just about any "take" in 12 minutes. People speculate about the audio. Well, much of what I imagine shooting will be silent, or maybe have a musical score, so...
BTW, I am as surprised as you are that this is the feature that has me so excited. The idea was revolting to me in concept at first, but then these video sequences started popping up in my imagination and I began to think about how I could use all my different lenses.
If I want to explore the world of cinematography, this is how I want to do it. Not with some boring friggin' camcorder.
cogitech wrote:
Is everyone forgetting that this is a 35mm movie camera with interchangeable lenses?
A real Cinematographers might laugh if they hear you call a camera which shoots 1080P HD video "a 35mm movie camera". HUGE difference in quality there, and not on the side of HD video.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
A real Cinematographers might laugh if they hear you call a camera which shoots 1080P HD video "a 35mm movie camera". HUGE difference in quality there, and not on the side of HD video.
Let them laugh.
I see no reason why the source needs to exceed the quality of the destination.
I am highlighting the 35mm format for its creative advantages. The same advantages that a FF dSLR has to offer over a P&S camera. Sorry, but I can't wait to try it!
Those clips are not at 1080 HD resolution, though they look good at their tiny size. Is there somewhere one can download the actual HD footage? I'm sure if I end up with this 5DII, I would indeed enjoy playing around with the video function.
cogitech wrote:
Check out these video clips, and maybe you'll see the potential that I do:
There's a LOT more to creating a pro video than just picture quality: Storage, compatibility, conversion, audio. In these shots, the camera isn't even moving or panning. The Nikon video, for instance, looks like moving jello when you pan. We don't know about the Canon yet, but there's no reason to believe it will be drastically better. There are problems inherent with the technology itself, which will take time to work out.
How about focusing as you move?
How about no-compressed audio, and at the industry standard of 48K?
Nope & nope.
The mpegs this camera makes are miles away from something a videographer could use.
The technology is promising, no doubt. I am very excited about the prospects, but I need a camcorder right now, and this camera 'aint it. Not by a long shot.
I'm putting my money into ZE glass, and waiting for the next generation still/video cam.
First of all, I'm not talking about pro video. I'm not going to try to make "The Hobbit" with it or anything.
Storage? I don't see this as an issue. Buy more cards.
Compatability? Video can be transcoded into any format or resolution.
Conversion? see above
Audio? Well, it has stereo audio input, but if I was really serious about audio I'd use a separate device. I'm not serious about audio.
Actually, the fisheye shot does pan. No Jell-o. Time will tell if the Nikon Jell-o effect kicks in at faster pan rates.
Focusing as I move? Fortunately, I know how to turn a focus ring just fine, and choose to do that 90% of the time.
The h.264 mp4s that this camera makes are not miles away from what this videographer can use, and this videographer is incredibly excited to start using it. Give me this over even a Pro Series 3CCD boring, static lens POS any day.
