Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • 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 vs. RED ONE - a real footage comparison

So you took a compressed sample from vimeo and are comparing it to Red One footage? Why exactly?

There is no way compressed 7D footage can compete with Redcode, I don't even know why one would bother to compare them either.

And what's the purpose of this? These are two different tools at vastly different pricepoints. And when you compare them I can't help but think there's some insecurity involved. And if you're going to waste the time to put something like this together you should at least get native footage from both just to see what you're really working with. This isn't a real footage comparison nor is it game over Canon.

Different tools, different price points, and I don't see why anyone would rule out owning one or both. They both have their uses and you'd be a fool not to consider that there are jobs where a Red is overkill and unsuited because of size and there are jobs where a 7D would not be appropriate. Anyone else tired of this?
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
If you feel "disturbed" with that just do your own comparison.
Click to expand...

This isn't about me doing my own comparisons - it's strictly a comment about doing comparisons with integrity - not by corrupting another professional's work to prove your point.

But I don't expect you to understand my point - I only brought it up to prevent anyone else reading this from buying into a nonsensical comparison based on corrupted and distorted data.
 
Bottom line is that the video from these HDSLR's, any of them, is mediocre at best. Not even up to the quality of HDV. Yes you have 35mm DOF and greater sensitivity, but the poor scaling and compression artifacts are very evident and the video resolution is low for HD. The video looks better compressed to 720p or 480p for the web than it does native as a good down conversion covers up some of the worst aliasing artifacts.
 
David Rasberry said:
Bottom line is that the video from these HDSLR's, any of them, is mediocre at best.
Click to expand...

That's a little harsh. Are you speaking from hands on experience or just personal opinion? If it doesn't work for you fine, but many are getting great results from these cameras. To call them all mediocre without using them brings very little to the table.

Are you shooting with Red? If it works for you great, but I'm seeing a lot of mediocre Red footage poorly shot and underexposed and I'm pretty certain that a good DP could make either one of these cameras sing.
 
David Rasberry said:
Bottom line is that the video from these HDSLR's, any of them, is mediocre at best.
Click to expand...

Based on what? There is hardly any footage in the field yet, just a handful of clips and short productions. What is out there, looks pretty good at 720p, in a web-based delivery system. That is all we know with any degree of certainty.

The real bottom line is that specious junk testing does not add any value to the existing knowledge base.
 
Meryem Ersoz said:
Based on what? There is hardly any footage in the field yet, just a handful of clips and short productions. What is out there, looks pretty good at 720p, in a web-based delivery system. That is all we know with any degree of certainty.

The real bottom line is that specious junk testing does not add any value to the existing knowledge base.
Click to expand...

BBC quality evaluation tests using zone plate resolution charts. Canon's own XH and XL series 1/3" video cams produce HD with higher resolution and much less aliasing artifacts than the 5DII.

http://thebrownings.name/WHP034/pdf/WHP034-ADD39_Canon_5D_DSLR.pdf
http://thebrownings.name/WHP034/pdf/WHP034_ADD25-Canon-XHG1.pdf

http://thebrownings.name/WHP034/pdf/WHP034-ADD32_RED_ONE.pdf
 
Isaac Brody said:
That's a little harsh. Are you speaking from hands on experience or just personal opinion? If it doesn't work for you fine, but many are getting great results from these cameras. To call them all mediocre without using them brings very little to the table.

Are you shooting with Red? If it works for you great, but I'm seeing a lot of mediocre Red footage poorly shot and underexposed and I'm pretty certain that a good DP could make either one of these cameras sing.
Click to expand...
the more you post the more the gang likes you Isaac.. do not bother yourself.. they are (??) always the same saying always the same.. probably because it is necessary to justify the red investment or for self-esteem who knows?

- filmmaker's gang
 
WTF I hope the OP ment this as a joke!!! If not, holy shit is he insane?
I'm dumbfounded, I have no idea how to exress the idiodicy.

On a completely unrelated note I ran benchmarks between an 8-Core Mac Pro and an Acer One netbook, you'll never guess which ones better... go ahead try!

Also I challenged the neighbor's kid to a race around the block, I have a car, he's only six, he had to run... ME FOR THE WIN BABY!!!!

WOW...

EDIT: I just noticed his signature "There is no point in having sharp images when you've fuzzy ideas." OH THE IRONY!
 
Believe me when I say I don't want to enter the fray, as compared to most folks here I'm a total newb.

I just have a question: why IS the footage from the 7D more "stuttery" than the footage from the Red? And I don't mean, "because its a better camera in a different price class," I mean, in a technical sense. The 7D footage doesn't APPEAR to me to have been shot at some high shutter speed (which would seem counterproductive for both the visual style and the fact that this was already being shot in low light), so I'm lost.

I for one LOVE the 7D so far and was literally one click away from ordering it the first few hours it was announced. Problem being that my niche is action films and the specs on the 7D just seemed too great a compromise when the Scarlet seems to be looming on the horizon.
 
Did you look at Philip Bloom's orginal clip or whatever Sanjin posted? 'cause I haven't seen what Sanjin did but someone else said he jacked with it. Not sure if it's true or not. So go look at Philips orginal work or better yet download it if your computer is fast enough to play back 1080p
http://vimeo.com/6475938
Also this is an awesome piece with some fast rollercoaster clips thrown in.
http://vimeo.com/6487566

I'm not trying to pitch the 7D, I couldn't give a shit what people shoot on, I just hate dumb shit!
 
I actually did download the original clips form Philip Bloom and yeah, the footage was WAY smoother in the original file than in the version posted side by side with the Red One footage. But that clip the OP posted is what made me notice that the original Philip Bloom footage still stuttered a lot more than in the footage from the Red that the OP posted. The stuttering in the 7D isn't horrid or anything (if anything the slight jello-ing I BELIEVE I'm seeing bothers me more) and for most projects outside of action I wouldn't mind it that much at all. But I am interested in learning why its there.
 
So basically the "cadance" of the 24p motion on the 7D isn't as smooth/authentic as the Red1. That's completely within the bounds of reason. :)
If it doesn't work for you it doesn't work!
 
The 7D is a hell of a camera for it's price.... just like Scarlet is a hell of a camera for it's.
But comparing them?
 
Do you think that the general audience will care or notice these flaws in the 7d when watching a video or hopefully one day a feature film shot on this little amazing DSLR camera for this price...think of that...!!! Its the story that captures the audience just like that Philippines' film on Vimeo post a week ago.

Sure, it may have those flaws but its pretty descent little cam eventually with firmwares or like added firmware by Magic Lantern for the 5DMkII. Pretty amazing features.
 
I wouldn't choose this camera for a feature film, but it can sure replace other cameras for lesser projects. But all in all, what makes it great is the stills and for me as a still photographer it's pure gold!
 
I have a Red, a HVX 200 and an HPX 170. I've also owned several film cameras. Last week I shot on my red, then on a HPX 300 for a different job and today on a D300 for another job. Next week I'll shoot greenscreen with a varicam and I just put a deposit on a 7D. Each of these cameras performs a different job in a different budget range, none of them is perfect. They are merely tools.
I, like many others, hope that the epic will be the camera that can adapt itself to many different scenarios but currently the Red is not the camera of choice of working DP's for all jobs, just those jobs to which it is suited. It's a great camera, the images are wonderful, but it is not the be all and end all of cameras no matter what Sanjin may say.
I'm looking forward to the Epic but I'll also use the hell out of the 7D until it gets here.
Regards,
Shane.
 
David Rasberry said:
BBC quality evaluation tests using zone plate resolution charts. Canon's own XH and XL series 1/3" video cams produce HD with higher resolution and much less aliasing artifacts than the 5DII.
Click to expand...

I don't buy that... I've got a XH and it only shoots 1440x1080 interlaced rectangular pixels. The 5d's I've used are true progressive 1920 square. Aliasing, yes. But not resolution.
 
Actually, the 5D2 measures no more than 1440 horizontally....

Graeme
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top