Canon 7D looks quite Nice

[Daniel Browning]

Ok... Is there a cheat sheet somewhere for me to carry letting me know which are the best ISOs, which are acceptable, and which are "brain damaged"?

Not that I know of. Here's a start. Assuming a floating exposure:

• 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600: normal amount of highlight headroom.
• There is little difference from ISO 100 to 200, because most viewers can't tell the difference in photon shot noise, and the read noise drops by almost a full stop in ISO 200.
• 125, 250, 500, 1000: considered harmful. 1/3 stop less highlight headroom and 1/3 stop more shadow noise.
• 160, 320, 640, 1250: fine, as long as you are aware of the decreased highlight headroom. (Clips 1/3 highlights to get 1/3 more shadows.)
• HTP should *always* be enabled when the ISO is higher than 1600.
• There is a careful balance between increasing shadow detail through ISO (which clips highlights) or through HTP, the picture profile (e.g. contrast, tone curve), or Auto Lighting Optimizer. Generally, the higher you go in ISO, the more beneficial it is to use non-ISO methods to increase shadow detail. For example, ISO 3200+HTP (actually ISO 1600) is better than the real ISO 3200. ISO 800+HTP may be better than the real ISO 800, but it depends on how much highlight headroom you need.

Hope that helps.

 

[Charles Nader]

Contax Yashica C/Y lens to Canon EOS

http://cgi.ebay.com/Adapter-Fits-Co...635432969&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14#ht_1784wt_1167

If you just search on Contax to EOS you should come up with a lot of them - I have seen them as cheap as $7.

Contax was the original Zeiss made 35mm SLR and they sold the rights to their camera operation to Yashica. C/Y is the common abbreviation for the the Contax/Yashica non-AF mount. The Zeiss Contax/Yashica mount lenses are extremely good and feel a lot like the cinema lenses and are the basis for the ZF, ZE series of lenses and now the compact Primes.

thanks...Actually I found a couple for Nikon...that's what I really need. Have you heard positive feedback on the Nikon. Its seems the price range for Canon - $7-30. Some claim Metal is better than copper or aluminum.

Which one do you have? Did you have to pay duty on that?

Thanks for all your advice.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

That helps a lot Daniel. I will make myself a little cheat sheet with all of that in it, and test them out to get a good feel for them. Thanks! Always filling my head with more than I expect to get for free.

 

[Matthias Martin]

Interesting. I did notice that on this video the skew was nearly perfect, at least to my eyes: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=185109

Skew is invisible due to the excessively short focal length (10mm) of the lens used. I remember that when the D90 was announced Nikon had a very similar sample footage on their product page, also shot on an very wide lens and even with the horribly slow sensor readout on the D90 that video was virtually jello-free.

That said, i don't consider the 7D's skew a significant issue. I like shooting talking heads anyway.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

True, I guess 10mm means the background is so small that it moves shorter distances within the frame.

 

[Joel Kaye]

True, I guess 10mm means the background is so small that it moves shorter distances within the frame.

The 10mm theory doesn't make any sense to me since the contents of the frame could be anything. If you stick a 10mm lens 5 feet from a telephone pole it's not tiny in the frame. I'd think the deeper DOF of wide lenses would make skew more noticeable because the objects are more easily identified.

Having said that, I'm not really seeing skew as a problem on the 7D so far. The aliasing/moire is much more concerning.

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

The 10mm theory doesn't make any sense to me since the contents of the frame could be anything. If you stick a 10mm lens 5 feet from a telephone pole it's not tiny in the frame. I'd think the deeper DOF of wide lenses would make skew more noticeable because the objects are more easily identified.

I agree with what you are saying but do you usually use a 10mm for a CU or two shot, or a tight action HH shaky camera deal? Probably a 24mm or longer for a two shot, a 35mm or longer for the CU, and maybe an 18mm for the tight HH which is a world of difference to a 10mm. I am no DP though, I would need a viewfinder or better yet, line it up with the actual camera. I am just saying. This is like when people get mad cause someone says a bigger sensor doesn't give you thinner DoF... it doesn't, but I am talking practically, average use. Because this is a fisheye, AND a fisheye eye kind of use, THEN skew is less apparent. But you are right.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

http://vimeo.com/6860546

Yeah, that's pretty kick-ass stuff. Notably, the action bits were shot with a high shutter speed (~1/1000) rather than a more 'filmic' one, so there's plenty of grit in there for the codec to work on.

I think this is a particularly interesting video (too bad the original isn't vailable for download). There are flaws all over it - that is, if you play it full screen and pause it just about anywhere you can see aliasing or macroblocking or banding or what-all else. Some of this is surely due to Vimeo compression but it still seems commensurate with examples of raw footage.

But...when it's playing it looks fantastic. The content is strong and that overcomes the IQ weaknesses. And personally, I think that when it fails it (mostly) does so in an interesting way, which reminds me of cancas. As long as you're not shooting moire, at least :smile:

Does it look anything like as good as RED? No way, but as someone observed upthread, you can buy ten of these things for the same price. How about Scarlet? Again, that's definitely going to be a superior camera, but you can go out and buy a 7d tomorrow - well, it's still backordered in some places but basically it's available now, and it's a pretty decent price - in fact about the same price as a lightly used DVX100b...which people still use to make low-budget features.

The 7d is the poor filmmakers digital cinema camera, no question. Coming from a background of doing sound for 35mm and s16mm shoots, the idea of using a histogram + light meter (instead of zebras) and doing the sound double-system isn't really intimidating. I could be shooting 16mm now on a Beaulieu I bought cheap and rebuilt, which had a lot less functionality than the 7d does, and while 16mm film still has the quality edge the sad fact is that when you figure the cost of purchasing, developing and scanning film stock, it starts to cost more than the 7d after about 80-90 minutes...

Thing is, this just isn't direct competition to the Scarlet (unless you want to talk about the low-light capability vs the 2/3" Scarlet). Now, there will be competition down the line - I'm willing to bet 2010 sees 24 fps RAW in the DSLR form factor, and remember the existing manufacturers are used to cranking out 12-20 megapixel RAW images, so they have a lot of room for maneuver. I'm equally sure that the propellerREDs on both the business and technical side are fully prepared for that!

Meantime, the 7d is a very fine camera for the price and practicalities. Not the greatest, not the easiest to use, it's certainly not for everyone, but most people who have already bought it like it very much and the footage is nice looking and pretty easy to work with. I'd say get get used to the fact that what it does is 'good enough' for a lot of audiences, because if the past is any guide this will not only get used for features, some of them are going to win awards and you will hear a lot of gushing about this camera because everyone loves an underdog - not Canon, but the guy who shot a feature with a camera any production can afford.

 

[Joel Kaye]

I agree with what you are saying but do you usually use a 10mm for a CU or two shot

You don't? I can't be the only Jean-Pierre Jeunet fan around. How 'bout Terry Gilliam?

(There are 10mm rectilinear lenses out there. They don't have to be fisheye. That's something else altogether)

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Yes, like the Canon 10-22mm, which is stunningly sharp too! If only it were a little faster (f/3.5 on the wide end). I am getting a Tokina 11-16mm as soon as they are back in stock, which has a tad more distortion than the 10mm but is way faster at f/2.8, and fixed. I hear that crazy expensive Arri 9mm is great too, but I don't know much about it.

But even though there may be amazingly rectilinear ultra wides out there, you will still get weird looking faces if you get close because of the effect that wides have on size. If you are filming a comedy or something else that can use that off-bear or weird look then perfect. But I doubt my leading lady will appreciate me making her nose disproportionally bigger than the rest of her face.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

I can't be the only Jean-Pierre Jeunet fan around. How 'bout Terry Gilliam?

You're not ;-)

 

[Paul Leeming]

Just bought a 7D tonight. Am charging the battery now and will do some comparison tests (photo) between it and my 40D for image quality.

Then I'll play with movie mode....

Have to say though, it's one solid feeling camera! And the LCD is gorgeous! HUGE step up from my 40D....

Cheers,

Paul

 

[Tom Lowe]

Paul, shoot a zone plate if you have one. With motion, too.

BTW, I should know in the next couple of days if I'm coming to Japan. It would be Nagoya.

 

[daansteijnen]

do I have a 5dmkII? Yes

do I enjoy shooting video with it? Yes, even though it is primarily used for photos.

do I want a 7d? No

do I still want a scarlet? Yes

do I want that scarlet to shoot stills? No

will I spend 7k on a scarlet that has a sensor the same size as the 7d? No

will I spend 5k on a FF scarlet? Yes

could I learn a lot shooting with a canon while waiting on the scarlet? Certainly

You spoke my mind. I shot an event report on the 5D to test it, and see what is was like. I really liked the sensor! the codec was not so great, I would love to send the sensor data straight to my laptop for cineform, that would make a killer cine machine.

I think bashing the 5/7D image isn't quite right, its an amazing result for that price and the FF sensor is unique. For us as a company it was a great option to get more cine style looks for a low price.

Maybe a little tip: Just make sure you expose right. If you don't the codec completely eats up your image and all will be lost (not like retreiving raw in post). So for that reason I'd like to test scarlet.

Here's a link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1y3498g3wo
all the quotes were shot on a Sony HVR-V1.

Food for thought?

 

[Paul Leeming]

Paul, shoot a zone plate if you have one. With motion, too.

BTW, I should know in the next couple of days if I'm coming to Japan. It would be Nagoya.

Hi Tom,

I don't have a zone plate sorry, but I did shoot it on set yesterday alongside two Red cameras, to give a wide master cutaway to an interview.

I don't have permission to release the footage sorry, but having looked at it closely, I will say this about it:

The good - Super35 size sensor, matches with Red for image look and feel in that department. Small body size, records to CF (I used my Red 8GB cards for around 24 minutes per card at 1920x1080p29.97). Shallow DoF when used that way. Has far easier video shooting settings than the 5D MkII. Dedicated video/stills mode and Start/Stop button is great. Can use M mode to dial in everything manually. I just copied our Reds' settings and used ISO200 instead of Red's ISO320. Image exposure was roughly equivalent (given the 8bit limitation of the codec). I can shoot video with just a DSLR and get into locations that would otherwise have the cops harassing me for not having permission to shoot video, or looking too much like a professional with my Red. Price.

The bad - You are getting an 8bit image, with a lot of moire on moving fine lines, and colour macroblocking in the dark areas. The image is not a nice, clean 1920x1080 image. I'd say in real terms (as mentioned by others) its effective real resolution is about 1280x720 from the 1920x1080 picture. This is based on a locked off shot with only the people moving in the frame (at f4.0, 1/60th shutter, 29.97fps). Best for half or quarter resized web video.

The ugly - Can anyone say "Jellooooooooo"? Wobble/rolling shutter may be slightly better than the 5D MkII, but it's still baaaaaaaad! NOT to be used under any circumstances to film one's next handheld action blockbuster! :tongue_smilie: Also seems to have a weird inter-frame judder I can't quite explain. Doesn't look smooth like film or Red in its motion characteristics.

On the photo side, it's pretty bloody good for an 18MP APS-C size sensor! Noise is well controlled and what there is can be easily cleaned up in Photoshop. Very little fixed pattern noise, though it can be provoked if you try. Photoshop's ACR 5.5 profile is listed as beta and it shows. Not a very clean RAW conversion at this point. Canon's DPP does a better job for now. Low light performance (compared to my 40D) is much improved! A stop or more and ISO3200 is quite useable IMHO. When resized to 25% it still gives a good sized image and shows lots of fine detail which my 40D wouldn't.

Here's a quick noise test I did, shot handheld at ISO3200, 200mm f2.8 using Av mode for a shutter of 1/13th second. That was a DARK room. Click on the image for a full size version directly from camera (6.8MB). Noise is very good for such an image I think, given there's 18 million pixels crammed in that small sensor area. Canon did a good job.



Note that it's only the fifth shot I've taken on the camera. I didn't dial any settings in yet or adjust micro-focus etc. Just turned it on, threw on my EF 70-200L f2.8 IS USM, and took some snaps to play.

Will post a lot more in the Official SLR Photo thread once I get a chance to get creative (and public) with it.

Hope the mini-review was of use to you Hope to see you here if you make it over.

Cheers,

Paul

 

[Joel Kaye]

Hope the mini-review was of use to you Hope to see you here if you make it over.

It was useful to me and I own one! Thanks for posting.

I'll try more serious tests in a week or two... but generally I'm seeing what you're seeing. I wasn't sure about 1080P resolution - sure seems like it's more than my HD-100 (720P) but less than RED. I've seen the moire and macroblocking. You may want to test auto lighting optimizer OFF when you get a chance.

Jello hasn't bothered me much so far. It's there, but I did some handheld outside at faster shutter speeds that looked fine to me.

Some guy managed to shoot this without much jello:
http://www.vimeo.com/6938509

Check out the power fences posts throughout and the power line tower at 1:42. Not bad in the middle of a motocross jump. So I'm thinking the jello isn't going to be trouble for normal dollies, pans and tracking typical actor movement.

But that moire. OMG. They need to fix that.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

Check out the power fences posts throughout and the power line tower at 1:42. Not bad in the middle of a motocross jump. So I'm thinking the jello isn't going to be trouble for normal dollies, pans and tracking typical actor movement.

But that moire. OMG. They need to fix that.

Very true, although it seems to be a 720p issue, the 1080p images don't suffer nearly as much. Of course if you're shooting action that's still a big deal since you'd want to get some slo-mo shots, but it's survivable.

 

[morgan_moore]

http://vimeo.com/6960394

this is my test

early opinion

THE BAD

high iso is not amazing

this means you still have to treat it like a proper camera and use some light

a monitoring solution is required to pull focus

THE GOOD

jello is of little consequense when following a subject and handling the camera in a reasonable manner

does it look good/cool for a 3000UKP rig including lenses - yes

THE FUTURE

Do I want RAW decent ISO performance and no allaising and higher resolution ? Of course




S

 

[Roberto Lequeux]

Just got mine today. I gotta be honest, what this camera did the most for me in the first few hours was to give me goosebumps about what Scarlet and Epic with their ISO 500-800 rating will be like!

I don't say that in a hater sort of way, please don't assume I am speaking with any sort of negative tone. This camera rocks, hard! :cheers2:

But, the form factor and CMOS for video were Red's idea. Even if a little company somewhere tried CMOS before Red, it sure wasn't Canon, and Red is taking it all tha way home with bases loaded. So I really don't think that my reaction is out of place.

f/1.8 ISO 1250 is i-n-c-r-e-d-i-b-l-e!

With a pristine ISO 500, plus Quad-HD down converted to 1080p or 4k plus for 2k... then ISO ~1250 at 1080p/2k really IS a possibility, right?

Am I pushing it into dream territory here? Brook seems to think it will be so. After he said that on Jim's new thread I just locked the ISO on the 7D to 1250, and started giggling at how acceptable the noise was. Maybe 1250 is a bit much for the 7D, maybe it will prove to be a bit much for Red if what you are after is the absolute best IQ. And all of that is just pure speculation at this point... but I can't help it!

Is there a native rating for Canon sensors somewhere? I would love to know what they give the 7D. I hope that Red's CMOS technology is close in terms of noise, and it should be. Wonder how close though...

Aside from being the ultimate Scarlet/Epic teaser (for me), the 7D itself is a pleasure to use. Sure, it is driving me INSANE for many reasons, but it does so much for so little! The shutter increments are ridiculous, no flip screen is ridiculous, no XLRs is complete bull$&it, quite a bit of skew still present, aliasing won't go away completely regardless of settings... just not a video camera, at all. But! A complete joy to use, especially at night.

A S35 (~) sensor with interchangeable lenses for $1,700?! In 2009?!?!! (Thank you RED!!!!).

 

[Paul Leeming]

I took the camera out tonight to Shibuya Scramble Crossing to test the high ISO functionality. First sample shot at ISO3200, wide angle shot at ISO1600, using both my EF 70-200L f2.8 IS USM and EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USM lenses, wide open.

You can click on the images for full size JPGs directly out of camera. For high ISO shots, these are quite acceptable to my eyes. The grain is still fairly random in nature and not at all unpleasant. Run them through a noise reduction program for even better results!

Click on the images below for full size versions:





I recorded a short movie as well for comparison. It's 471MB in size so only download it if you really need it. Again, shot 10mm f3.5 at ISO1600 handheld, it's basically identical to the crossing shot above, except a movie instead of a still. No settings were altered between the two, so you can directly compare. Note that the chromatic aberration is likely due to the lens (see the photo) so don't draw too many conclusions about the video side from that particular distortion.

Shibuya Scramble 7D MOV (471MB)

I figure that's as good a test as any to see how the codec holds up, given the amount of movement in the scene between my handheld abilities and the people crossing along with the flashing lights. Oh and about the flashing lights, the amount of different flicker frequencies from the various big screens is causing the strobing, not the camera itself. Shutter was 1/50th to match Tokyo power frequency.

HTH!

Paul

EDIT: I made a mistake with the wide angle EXIF, it's actually ISO1600 sorry. Still amazing quality! Post amended to fix error.