Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Canon 7D looks quite Nice

Yeah, I think the CA is due to the ultra-wide angle and extreme light/dark differences. Corrected my post to show that the wide angle shot was actually ISO1600, not ISO3200. But nevertheless the ISO3200 setting on camera is entirely usable IMHO.

Cheers,

Paul
 
zone plate D/L if you want one

zone plate D/L if you want one

I don't have a zone plate sorry ...

Technical pattern tests aren't for everyone, but you can download and print out zone plate patterns if anyone wants to try that kind of test. Not as good as a commercial sample but just make the plate take up about 1/4 the full frame or less, and the printer resolution should not be an issue.

Here are some test patterns I put on my page so you can print them:

http://www.bealecorner.org/red/test-patterns/
http://www.bealecorner.org/red/test-patterns/Zone720-hardedge-A.png
http://www.bealecorner.org/red/test-patterns/Zone720-hardedge-B.png
 
Readers might find this thread discussing the 7d's response to a 4k resolution chart (compared to a Panasonic HMC40) interesting. In a nutshell, horrifying degrees of moire, but it's questioned whether this is entirely hardwired or has to do with the camera's sharpness settings.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=186334
 
Charts? Blah...

I had fun shooting this little video in 30 minutes. Don't judge quality on the little dream sequences as I added grain and shake for effect. Some of the other shots rock...right out of the box. The 7D is NOT competition for the RED for theatrical outputs. But web videos...hmm...RED better hurry out with that Scarlet. Here's my test...enjoy and you'd better not say the acting stinks. :-)

http://vimeo.com/6957325
 
Imatest

Imatest

Thanks for posting these. Are you using the Imatest software? If so which version?

Imatest versions and pricing has changed a lot since I got my version 3.1 Master. I could not reasonably buy that now, although they do have a "personal" version for $100.
 
Charts? Blah...
I had fun shooting this little video in 30 minutes.
http://vimeo.com/6957325

A fun project! The camera is fine as far as I can tell; I'm not too impressed with the Vimeo compression though. I see the image getting blocky where you do fade to black (which stresses the codec, since every part of the image changes at once in a fade). What format did you upload it in?
 
John-Post was as follows:
-Shoot in the h.264 in camera
-I used compressor to transcode to RS422 for editing
-Exported directly to the AppleTV mp4 codec
-Sent to my AppleTV and it looked GREAT on a 50" plasma...no compression artifacts at all
-Uploaded the same AppleTV version to Vimeo

Thanks!
 
Charts? Blah...

Hehe! I'm not too hung up on it, it's just a scientific demonstration of why/how moire is an issue on some textures, especially at 720p...you probably won't want to use a 7D to remake Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid :willy_nilly:

I had fun shooting this little video in 30 minutes.

And it looks great - that's why I'll probably pull the trigger on this very soon. I wouldn't be so sure abut ruling it out for theatrical - of course it lacks the image quality for big-budget stuff, but there have been enough movies shot with DVX and other prosumer cams that I wouldn't rule out one of these new guys - avoid the pitfalls and embrace its limitations and it has the potential to bring a special flavor of its own.
 
I took the camera out tonight to Shibuya Scramble Crossing to test the high ISO functionality. (...) I recorded a short movie as well for comparison.

I've been having a lot of fun playing with this - it's actually a fine example of examples of the camera's capabilities. May I suggest you upload it to vimeo? You can certainly see aliasing and the various limitations, but I find it a surprisingly pleasing image all the same - much better than i expected after viewing the still photo. Pushing it around in AE for the last couple of hours has been educational, thanks!
 
I'm amazed that people still have the impression that little cameras like this aren't good enough for theatrical release. I still remember seeing "The Celebration" on the big screen shot on DV - blow up to 35mm...sure, it wasn't great looking but heck it was a good little movie and it GOT theatrical release...something most filmmakers never get. That's the big difference.

Just shoot and have fun, you never know what will be on the Big screen...maybe this little cam will...Just add some talent. Presto!!!
 
Oh indeed many cameras are "good enough" for a big movie screen. That doesn't mean that while watching them I would be wouldn't be wishing for better picture quality or better production values. Sure, the story and acting could be just perfect, but that can still leave you wanting more.

If "good enough" were the only requirement for a camera, can you imagine the picture quality of what we'd be watching? I don't want to live in that world. Indeed, I demand that if I'm going to sit through a movie that the picture quality be excellent.

When District 9 came out, I was unlucky enough to see it projected out of focus. That was "good enough" for the rest of the audience who didn't complain to the manager. I went back to see D9 in focus and it is a much better movie in focus.

To me "good enough" is not an artistic choice. No artist to my knowledge sits down and thinks that they'll just do "good enough" - they strive for "best" even knowing "best" is un-obtainable, but still they strive.

Graeme "striving for best" Nattress
 
If "good enough" were the only requirement for a camera, can you imagine the picture quality of what we'd be watching? I don't want to live in that world. Indeed, I demand that if I'm going to sit through a movie that the picture quality be excellent.

who would disagree that better picture quality is better? however, many people have been profoundly moved by films they've seen on cruddy old VHS tapes and degraded film stock. clearly, great picture quality is not a necessity. but i'm glad someone is striving to create the best tools.
 
Barry posted this over on dvxuser....

He put the hmc40 and the 7d side by side and shot some res charts. He used the hmc40 b/c he said it was the only other 1920x1080 cam he had at the moment...

Anyways, pretty interesting read at the least:

Barry Green @ DVXuser said:
Today I introduced the Canon 7D to the greatest res chart in the world, the DSC Labs MegaTrumpet 12-SW. This is a chart that was designed because conventional video camera res charts weren't good enough to deal with new cams like the Red One. And, in testing my HMC40 against my old res chart, yeah, that little cam bested what the chart could do -- so, I got myself the greatest res chart in existence.

When I saw how the Canon performed on this chart, in 720p mode, I couldn't believe my eyes, so I went and got the HMC40 (the only other 1920x1080 camera I have right now; the GH1 is out on loan) and put it in 720 mode and shot it too, and then split-screened the results here.

Check it out:
7D-HMC40-720-Mid-Trumpets.jpg



And, for good measure, I of course also shot 1080/24 on both.
7D-HMC40-1080-Mid-Trumpets.jpg


Wow. As "The Contintental" would say, wowie wow wow wow.

The little HMC40 blows the doors off the 7D when it comes to sharpness. In 720p it's embarrassing; the Canon puts up a much better fight in 1080, but it's still subject to some bizarre color aliasing and vertical aliasing as far out as 500 lines! I mean, keep in mind that this chart is perfectly black and white, there's no gray, no color, no anything, but look at the bizarre detail extinction on the horizontal trumpets at about 800 lines, and the color moire happening on the 45-degree angles.

By my readings of these charts, vertically, the Canon doesn't even register on the chart in 720p mode. The chart starts at 500 lines, and it's already screwed up with bizarre color patterns right where the chart starts. The HMC40, on the other hand, delivers pretty clean up to 700 lines. Horzontally, the Canon looks to be delivering about 550 lines before detail extinction, and the HMC40 starts aliasing about 550 lines before complete detail extinction at about 720. And what's with the weird aliased color-moire pattern in the central zone?

In 1080 mode, the HMC40 is clean as a whisper in vertical resolution, easily hitting 900 lines and complete detail extinction at 1000. Horizontally there's some alias pattern but still pretty clean res down to about 900 lines. And look at the 45-degree-angle trumpets -- crystal clean and perfect down to about 1100 lines, where the detail becomes completely extinguised. The Canon, on the other hand, what the... ??? Look at the straight horizontal trumpet, measuring vertical res. There's nothing good about it. You can see the aliasing wants to take over starting early, and the aliases actually cross over the lines at about 700. On the vertical trumpet (measuring horizontal resolution) it's a much cleaner story, but still low-res. It aliases (crossing lines) as early as 700 lines, with complete detail extinguishing at about 780. The HMC40 doesn't hit the detail-extinguish point until about 1200 lines!

It's weird all the way through. The HMC40's 45-degree is clean to 1100 lines, the 7D is heavily aliased at 600 lines and has completely failed by 800. Look at the 7D's 292-degree trumpet (the one above the horizontal trumpet) -- it's actually rendering those just-off-horizontal lines as vertical lines! I have never seen anything like that, ever. Biiiiiizzzaaarrrreee.

In another thread, Glenn Przyborski said "I don't want to get 7D members on my butt, but others at our edit facility who are used to screening high-end HD, thought the 7D 1080p footage had the sharpness and image quality of 720P, blown up to 1080." I think I'd have to agree.

Now, res charts don't mean everything, they're only one way to evaluate an image, but -- yeah.

I'll put the GH1 through the same tests when it arrives. I frankly don't expect it to perform any better than the 7D, I mean -- DSLR to DSLR, same basic technology in each, I expect similar results.

Original thread:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=186334
 
^ Wow... Good thing I don't make movies about test plates. :wink:
 
Yup, test plates show the worst a camera will be, but that doesn't mean you can't see those problems in real world footage. However, if a test plate shows up good, you can practically guarantee you won't get these kinds of images in the real world. That's why such test plates are good.

Also, what you can't see directly is that all these artifacts eat at the available data rate to record the image, and the more bits spent on aliases and artifacts, the less you have for your image data. And that problem travels with you all through to broadcast where again you're using a lossy motion adaptive codec.

Graeme
 
To me "good enough" is not an artistic choice. No artist to my knowledge sits down and thinks that they'll just do "good enough" - they strive for "best" even knowing "best" is un-obtainable, but still they strive.

Well some people also can strive for certain "degraded" looks that some people might confuse for "good enough".

I mean the Pixelvision is still popular in certain circles because of the bizarre quality of the image it can produce, even though that camera obviously would fail the majority of test charts you would throw it again. "Pi" looked fantastic with high-contrast grainy 16mm. I have found compelling films that were shot on DV or HDV.

Sometimes "good enough", or even a purposefully crummy image can be utilized for an artistic effect. Micheal Mann loves the sharp video look for instance, and it fits his "vision" of the world.

So I guess it can depend a lot on the person and what they are striving for.
 
Certainly people have different goals.. I've seen one Pxlvision documentary and to tell the truth, I don't understand the appeal. For a long time I've wanted an affordable motion picture camera that has no visible un-natural artifacts, and can export a still frame that's as good as a normal DSLR still. Red holds out the promise of such a device (although for my needs will probably still be too big & too expensive). The 7D is small enough and cheap enough but it's pretty clear the video quality doesn't match my personal aspiration. My $0.02
 
To me "good enough" is not an artistic choice. No artist to my knowledge sits down and thinks that they'll just do "good enough" - they strive for "best" even knowing "best" is unobtainable, but still they strive.

We are talking about a stills camera here that has a video mode, the still format will leave the Red one for dead in low light and for general resolution.
So I, being a photographer/artist, believe the 7D is better than the Red one if "striving" for the "best" image.
Not having a go at Red at all but that's just the way I see it at present and Scarlet/Epic might change my opinion.
 
Back
Top