Blackmagic Forum

Our latest video on comparing the Cinema Camera and the Canon 5D Mark III is finally up on Vimeo (took DAYS to finally get it up). Ultimately it's a little more compressed than we'd like, but it's better than nothing.



Join us this Tuesday night in Boston at the BOSCPUG event where we'll be showing this video (and much more) in ProRes4444 on a 2K Christie projector.

http://boscpugsept25.eventbrite.com/

Cheers!

Awesome stuff Marco as usual

I couldn't stop smiling while watching that. I can't believe I'm going to have that camera in the near future!

Wow. Thank you!

Wow.

I'll have both soon, 5D Mark III for stills and the BMDCC for video. Both awesome at what they're made for. Though this video basically confirms just how limited DSLRs are currently for video.

Great job!
I´m really impressed by the latitude.

Coul you explain a bit about the debayering process?

Thanks again!

awesome and well done

João Gomes wrote:Great job!
I´m really impressed by the latitude.

Coul you explain a bit about the debayering process?

Thanks again!

Single chip cameras don't have the advantage of seperate RGB chips and instead have a chip with half the pixels as green and the remaining ones as red and blue. (so the horizontal resolution stated is a bit misleading...) The pattern of the pixels and their colours is the Beyer layout. So to convert that captured pixel colour arrangement into RGB values for each pixel. A lot of work has to be done looking at the surrounding pixels to calculate the estimated colour values for the colours not captured by that pixel.
The "effort" level of the de-beyering basically increased the resolution of the end RGB result. More effort equals longer processing times but better quality.
The Canon 5D camera does this work in real time to record the media file (in fact the RGB is further converted to Y,R-Y,B-Y) so it's not possible to access the RAW data on a 5D and one of the reasons it stands up so poorly to cameras like the BM Cinema and the Red camera which do give you access to that RAW data.

Watched this on a Flanders at work.
Again thanks Marco and OneRiver Media for caring

Pat Horridge wrote:

João Gomes wrote:Great job!
I´m really impressed by the latitude.

Coul you explain a bit about the debayering process?

Thanks again!

Single chip cameras don't have the advantage of seperate RGB chips and instead have a chip with half the pixels as green and the remaining ones as red and blue. (so the horizontal resolution stated is a bit misleading...) The pattern of the pixels and their colours is the Beyer layout. So to convert that captured pixel colour arrangement into RGB values for each pixel. A lot of work has to be done looking at the surrounding pixels to calculate the estimated colour values for the colours not captured by that pixel.
The "effort" level of the de-beyering basically increased the resolution of the end RGB result. More effort equals longer processing times but better quality.
The Canon 5D camera does this work in real time to record the media file (in fact the RGB is further converted to Y,R-Y,B-Y) so it's not possible to access the RAW data on a 5D and one of the reasons it stands up so poorly to cameras like the BM Cinema and the Red camera which do give you access to that RAW data.

Thanks for taking the time to explain Pat!

Just hoping we finally see the back of the 5D footage.
If it's shot well and exposed right it's ok but if you need to work it in the grade it's poor.

Definitely.

I´ve been working with my 7D since it came out and, don´t get me wrong i am grateful that it allowed me to start my own business, but you compromise so much on the aliasing, banding in the skys, softness when using nd faders or ND´s of any kind...

This is a wonderful test Marco! This really confirms that I ordered the right camera!

Hey Marco!!!

I know I wasn't really favorable to "texting is dangereous" but this test is amazing. Nice comopositing and beautiful images, and the BMCC makes 5D look as if it is out of focus. So when people say 5d is better...they may see this video.

Excelent work and happy you are enjoying your camera.

Jesus

Hi Marco, I got a follow-up question, when you say BMCC, 24mm f/1.4L II @f/16, 180, 5000K 800 ASA, how did you get the f-stop given there's no way to have this info through current firmware.

I guess you setup f-stop on the 5D3 then switch to BMCC, right? Thanks.

Jason

This is even better than your last video, especially for all of us shooters who are interested in the camera. Your willingness to spend the time and go over the fine points is quite a gift to the community. Just know that the love flows back to you! And once again I liked the music, too!

it's a good promo of bmc from very.. artistic.. professionals.

they knew how to screw up 5dmk3 over contrasted picture, no flat profile... good job boys.
when i will get bmc i will do more real test of these two cameras, that will be interesting for people who are using 5d since 2008 and know all the features of this camera.
don't get me wrong. i like the results that you can get with bmc, but.. this "test".. i can't call a test.
sorry for that

PetePolyakov wrote:no flat profile... good job boys.

At 20 seconds into the video it states: "Canon 5D Mark III flat profile: Sharpness 0, Contrast -4, Saturation -2, Color Tone 0"

if you start grading dslr material in resolve you can see how fast this 8 bit image will break down.

even prorez version from bmc will beat that hands down.

there is more aspects in that test than one could see in first run.

i have graded a lot of dslr stuff in resolve and i just do not like 8 bit stuff breaking when it should not.

so you can talk all you want about canon being great but it is bad by the compression.

for me this is the main point with bmc that you can avoid compression.

some of the people here are missing how important feature this is despite dof etc what is manageble
but compression is not if you only have h264 option.

Canon DSLR's aren't made to be cinema cameras. They're excellent at high resolution, high dynamic range raw stills, but their video modes are crippled if you want to take the image out of them seriously. There is an upper limit of what their video capturing pipeline (the codec, the compression level, the bit depth and the sensor readout) can handle.

If you took a 5D Mark III, cropped it to 2.4K and wrote those frames as raw CR2 files to an attached SSD, you'd have a similar device to the Blackmagic, in simple terms.

Everything that is bad about DSLR footage has almost nothing to do with the sensor and everything to do with the way the frames are read from it and how they're stored.

Marco Solorio wrote:Our latest video on comparing the Cinema Camera and the Canon 5D Mark III is finally up on Vimeo ...

Hi Marco: Sorry I didn't respond sooner; I've been out on the road. Now finally have a fast 'net connection so I can download your video.

Thank you for this fantastic comparison of the two cameras! Especially for the excellent examples of what the BMCC is capable of.

I especially appreciate the outdoor "nature" scenes because I was traveling for the past several days along Oregon's stunning SW coast. As much as I enjoyed being there, I couldn't help but wish I had my BMCC already to capture it on video. Hopefully sometime "soon"!

Cheers, and thanks again!

agree with you guys. and this is the reason why i on this forum, because i made pre-order as the most of you.
but in the same tame - this is not the test, it's promo. it's more than clear reverent RM to BMD.

Comparisons aside, I have a gig in October that requires longer than 11 minute takes. I was hoping to have my BMC for it but now I'm very glad my teammate actually owns a 5D MIII. The 29:59 minute HD takes are a life saver. It's hardly fair to compare a camera that is ready to shoot a gig with a camera that no one knows when it will actually be delivered.

u're more than right Marc

PetePolyakov wrote:agree with you guys. and this is the reason why i on this forum, because i made pre-order as the most of you.
but in the same tame - this is not the test, it's promo. it's more than clear reverent RM to BMD.

For me, Marco's video is an extremely valuable test, and dense with information.

There are many kinds of tests that can be performed between and among cameras. Marco's work here is an excellent example.

These cameras are not on a level playing field. One camera, the BM is working with a ton of file information. The Other, the MKIII only offers a tiny bit of file information.

So how does the BM hold up as a Still Camera? Can I soot a single frame Raw file with a BM. I am a MKIII owner and just saw the video on Vimeo. I was wanting to start making more video with my MKIII, I have a ton to learn. It seems to me the mkIII is hobbled from the manufacturer. I am surprised no one has cracked the device open and hound where the raw data is being sent from the sensor and tapped in to it and sent it to an SSD.

There is no question the BMCC is incredible, and the price is amazing. I am very excited about video, but still love stills. Again can the BMCC do stills?

PetePolyakov wrote:agree with you guys. and this is the reason why i on this forum, because i made pre-order as the most of you.
but in the same tame - this is not the test, it's promo. it's more than clear reverent RM to BMD.

Maybe it seems like a promo because BMCC is simply stunning and beats 5D's ass in aaaaaaaaaaaaaalll possible ways??

The BMCC, Arri Alexa, and Red Epic are Cinema cameras purpose built to shoot high resolution video... if a cinema camera has a stills capability, it's purely a secondary function. If you are looking for a single camera that shoots high quality stills as well as HD (albeit compressed) video.. you should be looking at a high-end DSLR or a Hybrid camera. Or you can do like I am (and I'm sure others) and use the BMCC for shooting films. and a DSLR for stills.
To answer your question.. I have not seen any information stating that the BMCC can shoot stills.. I suppose you could just use one of the .dng files as a still image.. but again.. I think a DSLR is better suited for shooting stills.

Jesuan wrote:

PetePolyakov wrote:agree with you guys. and this is the reason why i on this forum, because i made pre-order as the most of you.
but in the same tame - this is not the test, it's promo. it's more than clear reverent RM to BMD.

Maybe it seems like a promo because BMCC is simply stunning and beats 5D's ass in aaaaaaaaaaaaaalll possible ways??

i wasn't going to discuss with fanatics, sorry.
i said, if these professionals (and they are really pro) couldn't "play" dirty it would be such a different test. much more interesting test. sure bmc is better, except several features, but listen, guys, let's play in fair game.

Like I said, the thing that makes this camera so much better than any DLSR for video is that it doesn't HULK SMASH the sensor readout before saving it to storage.

Nick Bedford wrote:this camera so much better than any DLSR

agree. have own prod problems but better.

Thanks for taking the time Marco. Well presented, hit all the important marks, and the footage really spoke for itself. Great video. I was already sold, and I got a lot from watching the video. Maybe another video on your POST workflow would be nice as well, for those new to RAW. Thanks!

PetePolyakov wrote:i wasn't going to discuss with fanatics, sorry.
i said, if these professionals (and they are really pro) couldn't "play" dirty it would be such a different test. much more interesting test. sure bmc is better, except several features, but listen, guys, let's play in fair game.

Sorry I'm not a fanboy, I'm just saying that after this test you can not say this is a promo just because BMCC is better than the 5D. Maybe it looks better because it is, if you want to stay with your 5D it's ok. Everyone works with the tool they want, it's fine, but come'on this test is pretty simple to see that BMCC is way better than 5D in terms of video.... in still mode obviouly 5D FTW.


Jesus

hi Jesus,
when you will get to know how to read that people write, i would love to continue discussion with you.

Marco,

Your contribution has been enormous. Thank you for investing your time and talent for the good of the community and for moving the conversation forward. I think your comparison piece stands on its own, but the fact that you have been an advocate for shooting with DSLRs adds credibility to your opinions and perspective.

I am sure you are aware that since you have published the signature comparison piece to date, requests for even more will follow...

Mark

I think the issue is that the current crop of DSLRs that are designed to shot stills and have the option to shot video in a compromised way are fine for just that. And the BM Cinema Camera isn't that. It's a film replacement camera designed to shot digital film (or HD video)

However we increasingly see people using DSLR cameras only for shooting HD video. No requiremtn for stills just video recording as a direct replacement for an HD video camera.
And if you get everything right they can look very good.
But focus is frequently off (not helped by shallow DOF) Exposure is often way to low (and lifting in the grade exposes the compression and noise). Handling in Post production of the cards and the QT files isn't robust (no UMIDS) etc etc.

Marco Solorio wrote:Our latest video on comparing the Cinema Camera and the Canon 5D Mark III is finally up on Vimeo

Hi Marco, I was wondering why you made that test video with that red color cast ? (wrong white balance I guess..)

Is there a technical reason or is it that way without any particular reason?

Thanks

I have the 5D Mark III and will maybe eventually get my preordered Blackmagic. When I do, and if I remember, I may do a small side by side with my preordered Canon 24-70mm F2.8L II which will mount on both cameras but I will use the same white balances, apertures, ISO and shutter speeds. I will zoom the lens to match the focal lengths. 24mm on the BMDCC is equal to 55mm on the 5D Mark III (approximately).

/throw in frustrated joke about how I'll be waiting months for my preorder...

i see there is nothing to joke about it.

one does compressed the other not.

ok it takes time but if you want to have uncompressed
on that price level then it does not seem to be a problem to me.

Just watched the high res version on my PS3 > Panasonic plasma.
Still impressed with the results

Nick Bedford wrote:I may do a small side by side with my preordered Canon 24-70mm F2.8L II which will mount on both cameras but I will use the same white balances, apertures, ISO and shutter speeds.

Your MIII has auto white balance, the BMC does not. Your MIII displays aperture settings, the BMC does not. Your MIII has a multitude of ISO settings, the BMC does not. Your MIII has a fist full of shutter speeds, the BMC has a few angles (bring your calculator).

Been doing a bit more video with the 5D Mark III here and there and to be honest, I can already see it's far below that which the BMDCC will yield. The stills are stunning, and they should be, but its video pipeline kills the detail and dynamic range that even ProRes on the Blackmagic yields.

>Your MIII has auto white balance, the BMC does not. Your MIII displays aperture settings, the BMC does not. Your MIII has a multitude of ISO settings, the BMC does not. Your MIII has a fist full of shutter speeds, the BMC has a few angles (bring your calculator).

For video this is mostly not necessary:

>MIII has auto white balance,
WB can be fixed with RAW in post.. which is better
Apart NEVER use auto white balance in video if you want to be professional

> Your MIII displays aperture settings, the BMC does not.
True, that is strange but does not matter if you use nikon lenses.

>Your MIII has a multitude of ISO settings, the BMC does not.
WB can be fixed with RAW in post.. which is better to have down the road.

>Your MIII has a fist full of shutter speeds, the BMC has a few angles (bring your calculator).
You should stick to one shutter speed most of the time, and only go for other if you want a different look. Exposure shall be done with ND filter - NOT with the shutter.

Cheers

John Waldorff wrote:...fixed with RAW in post.......fixed with RAW in post.....

I guess you're just a "fix it in post" kind of guy, huh?

White balance is still very important even when shooting raw. It won't save you from ugly mixed temperatures if you're just running around shooting willy nilly.

What raw gives you that doesn't involve "fixing" anything (the basics anyway).

• Use a non-neutral white balance for mood.
• Adjust gamma and exposure to complement the white balance and intention of the scene.
• Bring up shadows and push down highlights to broaden the perceived dynamic range.
• Do all this without banding.

Shooting raw doesn't excuse shoddy lighting and exposure. It just makes it less difficult to fix in post.

Nick Bedford wrote:White balance is still very important even when shooting raw. It won't save you from ugly mixed temperatures if you're just running around shooting willy nilly.

What raw gives you that doesn't involve "fixing" anything (the basics anyway).

• Use a non-neutral white balance for mood.
• Adjust gamma and exposure to complement the white balance and intention of the scene.
• Bring up shadows and push down highlights to broaden the perceived dynamic range.
• Do all this without banding.

Shooting raw doesn't excuse shoddy lighting and exposure. It just makes it less difficult to fix in post.

this! ^

We were talking about advantages of 5d that involved auto settings.
So it was meant like this:

- Auto Whitebalance is certainly not an advantage for filmmaking, since you will more likely set the whitebalance yourself.

- You wouldn't want to use auto focus either, would you? Even if the 5d did it, there is no advantage for most styles of filmmaking.

- But being able to fix whitebalance in post is a serious advantage for anyone.

the more features the better, features are there for those who need them, don't need them ? just don't use them.


AWB can be necessary in some cases, example ? steadicam filming during a wedding, the walk of the couple at the end of the ceremony from artificial light inside to sunlight outside, that's just one case of professional videography where AWB is needed. I want both options, custom k° and auto.


Autofocus, needed in steadicam footage again if you don't have a remote focus puller with relative equipment. I don't so I need autofocus in my wedding videos.


Every extra function of a camera can be of great advantage for those pro or non pro user who needs them.

I sure wish I had said "custom white balance" instead of "auto white balance". I meant to imply an accurate white balance setting as opposed to four or five fixed numbers that might not discern orange from fire engine red.

You are embracing the past.
Whitebalance settings are only for preview - there is no workflow without post anymore when going RAW. There is no evidence in the final footage however you set it.

In the future there are notfix-it-in-post guys!
We will all be in Post or jobless.

RAW = Post!

Look at this: [link]

It is the RED workflow not the consumer type cam workflow!

The camera is dump but all information is recorded instead of the consumer cameras that throw away 99%. You have to do it in post.

But true what Red has one nice feature to save a look and then get it into the camera.
So you see a look when filming for your pleasure and probably the client on the 2nd monitor.
However it is timeconsuming so most people with Red do not do it most of the time.
Reason is you need a computer to generate the look and put it back, it is not in-camera.

Cheers