p.54 #1 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
RobAmy wrote:
Managed some footage of this Black Bear swimming in the canal. He was enjoying his time in there. All was handheld with the R1 and the RF 400mm f2.8.
p.54 #3 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
lemmy shoyu wrote:
?si=AJ4yV0-6uzfdDa-Z
Lemmy,
I do think the falcons were hungry.
Great viewpoint you have found.
The sound adds to the tension of the moment.
Thanks for sharing.
Dave
p.54 #5 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
Here is one from this morning with Kenzie. One of her favorite spots to swim. I used the C50 with the 70-200mm Z version. All footage handheld. Wrote my own lyrics using SUNO AI for the audio. A little bittersweet as it is the first time back without our other dog Rylee.
p.54 #6 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
RobAmy wrote:
Here is one from this morning with Kenzie. One of her favorite spots to swim. I used the C50 with the 70-200mm Z version. All footage handheld. Wrote my own lyrics using SUNO AI for the audio. A little bittersweet as it is the first time back without our other dog Rylee.
Don't know which I like more, Rob - the visuals or the music.... both are great.
Cheers,
Rudy
p.54 #8 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
Since shortly after I got my Canon R5II I've been shooting XF-HEVC S YCC420 10bit, 4K-U, Fine if possible or Normal if my frame-rate is too high. It was quite a while ago, but think I tried XF-HEVC S YCC422 10bit and couldn't get the clips to play in any of several Windows apps, or maybe I couldn't edit them in the free version of Davinci Resolve.
In any case, I recently purchased Davinci Resolve Studio, so I'm thinking about trying XF-HEVC S YCC422 10bit again. I assume it is "better" than XF-HEVC S YCC420 10bit, and I'm planning on doing my own comparisons, but I figured I ask here anyway
Should I expect to see a noticeable difference in quality between XF-HEVC S YCC420 10bit and XF-HEVC S YCC422 10bit?
What differences should I be looking for?
FYI, I predominantly shoot wildlife, mostly birds, but anything else when I have the opportunity.
p.54 #9 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
RobAmy wrote:
Here is one from this morning with Kenzie. One of her favorite spots to swim. I used the C50 with the 70-200mm Z version. All footage handheld. Wrote my own lyrics using SUNO AI for the audio. A little bittersweet as it is the first time back without our other dog Rylee.
Excellent Rob!
I'm sure it was a heavy heart shooting and editing this one. Thanks for sharing.
You really set a high bar on IQ and editing. I really enjoy your videos.
Dave
p.54 #10 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
vbnut wrote:
Since shortly after I got my Canon R5II I've been shooting XF-HEVC S YCC420 10bit, 4K-U, Fine if possible or Normal if my frame-rate is too high. It was quite a while ago, but think I tried XF-HEVC S YCC422 10bit and couldn't get the clips to play in any of several Windows apps, or maybe I couldn't edit them in the free version of Davinci Resolve.
In any case, I recently purchased Davinci Resolve Studio, so I'm thinking about trying XF-HEVC S YCC422 10bit again. I assume it is "better" than XF-HEVC S YCC420 10bit, and I'm planning on doing my own comparisons, but I figured I ask here anyway
Should I expect to see a noticeable difference in quality between XF-HEVC S YCC420 10bit and XF-HEVC S YCC422 10bit?
What differences should I be looking for?
FYI, I predominantly shoot wildlife, mostly birds, but anything else when I have the opportunity....Show more →
vbnut,
I switched to 422 on my R5 MKII. I felt the colors and IQ improved some.
Let us know after you try it.
I am amazed at some of the quality on the 1080p some folks shoot, so who knows.
Subject, IQ, steadiness and sound and story make such a difference, I think they override the very highest video quality.
( I lack in a lot of that, but still trying, !)
Dave
p.54 #12 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
dj63401 wrote:
I switched to 422 on my R5 MKII. I felt the colors and IQ improved some.
Let us know after you try it.
So I shot a handful of 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 clips at 119.88 and 29.97 fps, and I'm having a difficult time seeing any difference in the colors when viewing them in Media Player (Windows 11) or Davinci Resolve Studio. The difference that I am seeing is that DR seems to easily play the 4:2:0 clips smoothing (even at full screen on my UHD monitor), but stutters when playing the 4:2:2 clips, especially the ones at 119.88 fps. Media Player struggles even more with the 4:2:2 clips. In both apps, the fan in my Dell XPS desktop (with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER GPU) comes on loud when playing the 4:2:2 clips, but not for the 4:2:0 clips. I see the files for the 4:2:2 clips are significantly larger, even though the clips are about the same length.
Is processing 4:2:2 video really significantly more expensive that 4:2:0?
p.54 #13 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
vbnut wrote:
So I shot a handful of 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 clips at 119.88 and 29.97 fps, and I'm having a difficult time seeing any difference in the colors when viewing them in Media Player (Windows 11) or Davinci Resolve Studio. The difference that I am seeing is that DR seems to easily play the 4:2:0 clips smoothing (even at full screen on my UHD monitor), but stutters when playing the 4:2:2 clips, especially the ones at 119.88 fps. Media Player struggles even more with the 4:2:2 clips. In both apps, the fan in my Dell XPS desktop (with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER GPU) comes on loud when playing the 4:2:2 clips, but not for the 4:2:0 clips. I see the files for the 4:2:2 clips are significantly larger, even though the clips are about the same length.
Is processing 4:2:2 video really significantly more expensive that 4:2:0?...Show more →
It takes more horsepower in your computer to play the bigger files. You can have your timeline display in 1080 or maybe lower to help with playback. The finished product should look better after rendering with the 4:2:2. I had a laptop with the RTX 2060 and it struggled with 4:2:2. When I updated to a new desktop with a RTX 4070 video card it flew thru them.
p.54 #15 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
dj63401 wrote:
It takes more horsepower in your computer to play the bigger files. You can have your timeline display in 1080 or maybe lower to help with playback. The finished product should look better after rendering with the 4:2:2. I had a laptop with the RTX 2060 and it struggled with 4:2:2. When I updated to a new desktop with a RTX 4070 video card it flew thru them.
FWIW, I'm seeing the stuttering just playing the clips directly just to see what's there, before even putting them in a timeline, but I often like to type 'p" to see them full-screen.
I've known for a while now that it is just a matter of time before I would need to replace my aging Dell desktop, but I've been pleasantly surprised that a computer purchased in the spring of 2020 has handled all the new AI stuff Lightroom Classic has thrown at it without any problems. Admittedly it was a high-end machine at the time, but I was more concerned with having a Thunderbolt3 port to connect external drives, and didn't look that closely at the video card other than to confirm that it could drive a UHD (4K) display.
It looks like I'll have to stick with 4:2:0 until I'm ready to pull the trigger on a new machine. Hopefully I can hold out until the AI-induced prices subside. Fortunately I can't see the quality improvements in 4:2:2, so it won't bother me
p.54 #16 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
Has anyone else noticed that turning on pre-recording on the R5II disables some other functionality?
As I describe in this post, when pre-recording is on I can't use the control ring to change AF area, even though I have the set the control ring to do that. I haven't found any documentation about that restriction.
Today I discovered that when pre-recording is on, the Customize Quick Controls menu is disabled. Even worse, when pre-recording is on pressing the <Q> Quick Control button brings up a Quick Control screen that doesn't have the customizations I made with pre-recording off, and only contains two items: Headphone volume, and White balance. A mention of this restriction, without any details, is given in the Caution section of this page in the Advanced User Guide. Given these restrictions it's not surprising that Pre-recording (on/off) is not one of the items that can be added in the (Movie mode) Customize Quick Controls page.
I've already made use of nearly all the customizable buttons for various functions, so I was hoping to avoid adding pre-continuous shooting and pre-recording to buttons and just having them on the Quick Control Screen, but it doesn't seem that is possible. I also have a couple of other functions that are important to me on the control screen, but they aren't available with pre-recording is on. I really like the pre-recording feature as it allows me to avoid recording long wildlife video clips, waiting for something "interesting" to happen, so I'd like to keep pre-recording on all the time. I find it extremely unfortunate that it disables other important functionality.
Does anyone know how to complain to Canon about this (with the hope of some improvement in a future firmware version)?
p.54 #17 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters...
“Does anyone know how to complain to Canon about this (with the hope of some improvement in a future firmware version)?”
Another Canon user discovering limitations of the terrible menu system. Save your time and use what Canon decided is best for the users. I complained for years, as a CPS member, about various verified problems. They never fixed them and stopped responding to my inquiries.
!)