I edit HD video professionally for broadcast via Final Cut Pro. Having another tool to shoot with is always welcome. I'm REALLY happy to see it records .mov files. I'm also looking forward to having a low light HD cam (something most current HD cameras are not very good at) via using fast primes and higher ISO's.
cyclejoc wrote:
How do you feel? Are you excited about sitting down for hours doing video editing? Let us know....
No. I'm not a fan of the hybridization of electronic equipment where the end result is that all devices are sort of iphones on steroids that can take pictures, do video, text messaging, and play video games.
This feature creep begs the question...what will be the "enhancements" to the 5D MKIII? MP3 player? Mobile web? Wireless keyboard and mouse for the business traveler?
I have all of this crap in my cell phone, and I bought it just for the sole purpose of talking on the phone. Just because you *can* put something in a device...doesn't mean you *should*. Once you open that door it can be a slippery slope.
What about the R&D for this? Could they have introduced a new 5D without video, microphone that was a $100 or $200 dollars cheaper? I would sure prefer that camera.
from what I gather on all EOS the AF is done by the MAIN CPU not DIGIC, escept for the MkIIIs that have a separate 48MHz 32-bit RISC for AF (with a 40MHz 32-bit RISC for main CPU). So unless they gave it a new main CPU.... and seeing how they re-used most things (shutter/mirror).... but who knows?
The consumer DSLRs have a single RISC that handles all functions of the phase-detection autofocus system. Since MK II, the 1-Series has had two RISC chips handling the functions of the phase-detection AF system.
The DIGIC IV cpu handles contrast-detection autofocus from sensor data.
jfulton wrote:
I edit HD video professionally for broadcast via Final Cut Pro.
jfulton,
I have an off-topic question.
I'm planning to get Final Cut Express (or Pro) to import and edit for now the Full-HD AVCHD videos and later down the road the dSLR H264 videos. Do you know if both software process the Full-HD video in 1920X1080 format or in Apple Intermediate Codec 1888X1062 or even 1440X1080 stretch pixel format? The reason why I am curious is iMovie 08 imports the AVCHD videos in Apple Intermediate Codec 1888X1062 size, and iMovie 06 HD renders the edited portions in 1440X1080 size. The finished videos play back in Full-HD seamlessly and I cannot see any IQ difference between the two sizes. I hope FCE or FCPro can import and render in 1920X1080 or at least in AIC 1888X1062 size.
RDKirk wrote:
The consumer DSLRs have a single RISC that handles all functions of the phase-detection autofocus system. Since MK II, the 1-Series has had two RISC chips handling the functions of the phase-detection AF system.
The DIGIC IV cpu handles contrast-detection autofocus from sensor data.
And do we know if the AF RISC processor of the 5D II is faster than that of the 5D? Digic IV won't affect much at all as far as AF goes.
skibum5 wrote:
they are way sharper at low ISO!
jpgs have crappy sharpening
You must be doing something wrong. If jpegs were not as sharp as raw i doubt the worlds top wedding photographers would be shooting jpeg, which they are.
I must admit that my initial thoughts about this were similar to User222. I presumed taht this would be another cell phone camera gimmick. Useful for "Soccer Mum" stuff but otherwise not much good. Reading Vincent LaForet has made me wonder. Apart from videos of the kids if the quality really is possibel it could be very useful in short AV presentations I put together from time to time (up til now I hae always used stills figuring that the cost in time and money to acheive anything like the quality with video would be too high). Now I'm waiting to see the video itself to see what is possible (though I wouldn't need to meet Vincents standards).
So a couple of questions from a newbie to video.
How valuable would IS be in viseo situations? I have the 24-70L but would consider getting the kit if the 24-105 IS would be a real boon for video.
The video is 30 frames per second, right? So any single frame capture would be at the equivalent "shutter speed" of 1/30th (correct me if I am wrong, I'm not sure). So would subject movement be a problem? (most of the stills vincent posted seem to be at points where the action was fairly well frozen).
bobbytan wrote:
He He He .... if this is true, and if Canon announces a 3D in February, I will be able to sell my 5D II to upgrade to the 3D .... and not have to suffer a big loss!
Sadly I think the 3D is at least 3 years away. Hope I am wrong, it is a bit inductive to think that Canon will keep to 3 year schedules with the competition hotting up. More likely is a 1DIV at a sub US$4000 price which could be effectively a 3D (apart from the weight).
If it did come out at PMA then there could be a lot of 5D mkII order cancelations
Andy Wilson wrote:
Sadly I think the 3D is at least 3 years away. Hope I am wrong, it is a bit inductive to think that Canon will keep to 3 year schedules with the competition hotting up. More likely is a 1DIV at a sub US$4000 price which could be effectively a 3D (apart from the weight).
If it did come out at PMA then there could be a lot of 5D mkII order cancelations
Even more sadly in 3 year time it will still be three years away, but on the bright side in 3 years time even the xxD will have good AF. 2008 is the year of the high ISO, 2009 is the year of the AF.
The main thing that separates a 3D from a 1D IV say is size and weight. A sub $4K 1D IV would be most welcome, but having a small forma factor version with say 95% of the performance for say $1K less would be even more welcome.
And do we know if the AF RISC processor of the 5D II is faster than that of the 5D?
No, we don't know that. I would think, though, that the 5D2 uses an improved RISC. Certainly for purely economic reasons Canon would have improved it in three years--made it smaller, more energy efficient, and cheaper to manufacturer. Of course, "faster" might not have been an R&D goal, but we don't know.
I doubt it will happen but it would be funny if Nikon pissed in Canon's cheerios this November right before the 5D Mark II's actual release. Perhaps with a D800.
davewolfs wrote:
I doubt it will happen but it would be funny if Nikon pissed in Canon's cheerios this November right before the 5D Mark II's actual release. Perhaps with a D800.
Probably not Photokina, but come PMA, a 24MP D800, with HD video and all the other D700 features and improved live view etc, say for $3500 would be a killer.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Probably not Photokina, but come PMA, a 24MP D800, with HD video and all the other D700 features and improved live view etc, say for $3500 would be a killer.
Not to start a rumor but I friend of mine (neither he nor I have any inside connection to Nikon or Canon) mentioned a D800 last week, the way he mentioned it I assumed it was something already announced... perhaps it is wishful thinking (like the 5D Mark II talk for the past 6 months on this forum... or the 3D ones for the past several years :-) ).
Vann
5D Mark II on order... waiting like a kid for Christmas...
Marcus Watts wrote:
You must be doing something wrong. If jpegs were not as sharp as raw i doubt the worlds top wedding photographers would be shooting jpeg, which they are.
what can you do wrong with jpgs? there are only a few sharpness and contrast settings?
everyone else i've ver talked to says you can get more sharpness out of RAW.
even just CA removal alone helps.
maybe you are not post-processing RAW well?
RDKirk wrote:
No, we don't know that. I would think, though, that the 5D2 uses an improved RISC. Certainly for purely economic reasons Canon would have improved it in three years--made it smaller, more energy efficient, and cheaper to manufacturer. Of course, "faster" might not have been an R&D goal, but we don't know.
maybe but they didnt improve the shutter or mirror...
but it's certainly possible
