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 :)

Low light: Scarlet 2/3" vs Canon 7d

Ed Ollei said:
I was hoping someone may have an idea of how well the Scarlet would perform in low light compared to the 7d. I know since it has not even been released, I am happy with reading anyone's conjectures.
Click to expand...

The 7D has 4.4 times more area (when cropped to the same hAOV as 2/3" Scarlet), so when used at the same f-number, the DOF will be 2.2 stops thinner and the total amount of light will be 4.4 times higher. If Scarlet is released soon, it is unlikely in the extreme that Scarlet 2/3" will match the 7D in low light performance.

On the other hand, if the DOF of the 7D is too thin in low light for your needs, you will have to stop it down 2.2 stops to get the same DOF as Scarlet 2/3". Under those circumstances, it is far more likely that Scarlet can match or exceed it.
 
Michael Olsen said:
Shooting sports? Not so great...720p has loads of aliasing and rolling shutter would make fast pans tricky.
Click to expand...

Don't be so sure. I'm hearing of a loads of HV20,30,40, AH1 and even a HVX 200 user who've all abandoned in favour of the 7D.

Joel Kaye said:
There's a guy who posted the 7D shooting motocross and that stuff looked fantastic.
Click to expand...

I think this is the clip you've seen Joel:

Moto Cross 7D: http://vimeo.com/6860546

It does indeed look excellent apart from the odd lens hunt.

Also, on the subject of ISO, the 7D goes up to ISO 106,000 and the low light results I've seen are fantastic. I've never seen such crisp, sharp low light video with no grain in sight:

Dublin at Night (Philip Bloom Video): http://vimeo.com/6475938

The biggest restriction it seems with the 7D is the 12 minute record time but then again if you're anything like me, you never shoot for such long periods continuously anyway.

One more amazing video shot with 7D:

Rainy Street in Dublin (Daytime): http://vimeo.com/6551436

I think the Scarlet has a very high bar to reach now Canon are going all out with their DSLR's.
 
Russ Blaise said:
The 7D is obsolete already. Look at this:

http://gizmodo.com/5385443/canon-1d-mark-iv-1080p-night-vision-videos-are-simply-incredible
Click to expand...

james anselm said:
Kind of a dumb thing to say. That Canon will be around 5K, not close to the 7D's price and a decent alternative if you want to wait another year.

At least anyone with a 7D can actually get out and shoot instead of being obsessed over a product that doesn't exist and knocking one that does.
Click to expand...

I have to agree James and to be honest, the night shot from the 1D doesn't even look that good although with its spec and superior price you'd expect the 1D to ultimately be better.

Compare it to this video from Dan Chung shot on the 7D in equally low light conditions (ambient only) and shot at up to ISO 6400:

http://vimeo.com/6759220

Another low light video here:

http://vimeo.com/groups/eos7d/videos/6779305

Here's a 7D nightime timelapse video although its a series of stills so some might regard this as cheating - amazing quality though:

http://vimeo.com/6687192
 
"Obsolete" was just a figure of speech. Of course the 7D is not obsolete. It's just that these cameras are coming out in a rapid pace. You'll hate to buy something because a new model might be out in a month or two after.
 
Russ Blaise said:
"Obsolete" was just a figure of speech. Of course the 7D is not obsolete. It's just that these cameras are coming out in a rapid pace. You'll hate to buy something because a new model might be out in a month or two after.
Click to expand...

Is 5DMII obsolete?
The new 2010 firmware will solve the frame rates issue.
So over 7D, 5D will have, full frame sensor, better video image, better stills quality, the same cmos problems ,-))) not so good weather sealing but the biggest sensor with 1080p. Is it obsolete now? Will be obsolete in 2010?

I don´t have any camera yet. Just trying to make a choice.
And again; very important to me; will a Scarlett camera behave like a true fotographic camera too?
 
Daniel Browning said:
the DOF will be 2.2 stops thinner and the total amount of light will be 4.4 times higher.
Click to expand...

Assuming 7D skips roughly 3 out of 4 pixels, the total amount that actually gets captured in video mode probably is nowhere near that high - the real active sensor area is maybe 1/4 of the full sensor. It could actually be very close to what 2/3" scarlet has.
 
Eki Halkka said:
Assuming 7D skips roughly 3 out of 4 pixels, the total amount that actually gets captured in video mode probably is nowhere near that high - the real active sensor area is maybe 1/4 of the full sensor. It could actually be very close to what 2/3" scarlet has.
Click to expand...

Excellent point! I agree.
 
Eki Halkka said:
Assuming 7D skips roughly 3 out of 4 pixels, the total amount that actually gets captured in video mode probably is nowhere near that high - the real active sensor area is maybe 1/4 of the full sensor. It could actually be very close to what 2/3" scarlet has.
Click to expand...

Questions:
How does the 7D skip 3/4 pixels?
What is the real active sensor area? And why is it a quarter of its sensor?

gracias
 
Ed Ollei said:
Questions:
How does the 7D skip 3/4 pixels?
What is the real active sensor area? And why is it a quarter of its sensor?

gracias
Click to expand...

7D crops vertically to 16:9 HD format, then has to crunch the remaining 12mp or so down to 2mp 1080p. They do this either by not reading some rows of pixels or by binning, reading large blocks of pixels as one pixel. Either way the result is bad chroma and luma aliasing in the 1080P output. Maximum resolution of fine detail without visible artifacts is more like 480p. They do this because the processing power and speed necessary to do a high quality downscale can't be built into the camera for the price at the current level of available technology.
 
David Rasberry said:
They do this because the processing power and speed necessary to do a high quality downscale can't be built into the camera for the price at the current level of available technology.
Click to expand...

Not to mention heat - trying to read the whole sensor at 24p or 30p would be problematic in the 7D's form factor... I mean, look at the size of the vents on the renders and photos of the new DSMC cameras...
 
Well I have to say skipping Pixels or not, the comparison using the Absolute Footage in the Canon 5D vs Red One thread, the Canon wins hands down. Not only does it handle the low light better, but its also visibly sharper under low light conditions. The trailer is poor to my eyes - I'd have binned most of that footage if I'd shot it! - the behind the scenes footage (5d) very good, well lit, very clear and in the majority very sharp.

However, lets no forget its horses for courses. The Canon is limited to 12 minutes max recording time (one go). Ultimately you would expect the Red under perfect lighting conditions to present a better video than the Canon. The point is though, of the videos I've seen, the Canon is running dedicated video competitors very close for quality. I dare say if you analyse every last frame with an eyeglass for Moire etc, you're going top find the Red wins hands down. However, can the Red take stills as well as the Canon or even come close?

They each have their place. The main point I was adding to this discussion is that for many people on a budget or for whom stills is as important as video, the Canon at the moment is looking a very attractive choice. There are already some professional wedding videographers who have abandoned dedicated video cameras in favour of the 5/7D. I as a hobbyist sports photographer have to say that at the moment the 7D looks more attractive to me than the Red. As perfect stills and professional quality (if not Hollywood quality) video leave me wondering just what extra the Red really offer me for a whole lot of extra money?
 
Alsone said:
Well I have to say skipping Pixels or not, the comparison using the Absolute Footage in the Canon 5D vs Red One thread, the Canon wins hands down. Not only does it handle the low light better, but its also visibly sharper under low light conditions. The trailer is poor to my eyes - I'd have binned most of that footage if I'd shot it! - the behind the scenes footage (5d) very good, well lit, very clear and in the majority very sharp.

come on people you can't be serious comparing these two cameras via webbased footage!!! footage taken and compressed in camera recompressed in editing and again compressed for web delivery ...... who will tell me what looks good and what doesn't???

Compare the pictures on a class1 monitor and then tell me again!!!

:emote_head_explode:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Gerald Menclik said:
Alsone said:
Well I have to say skipping Pixels or not, the comparison using the Absolute Footage in the Canon 5D vs Red One thread, the Canon wins hands down. Not only does it handle the low light better, but its also visibly sharper under low light conditions. The trailer is poor to my eyes - I'd have binned most of that footage if I'd shot it! - the behind the scenes footage (5d) very good, well lit, very clear and in the majority very sharp.

come on people you can't be serious comparing these two cameras via webbased footage!!! footage taken and compressed in camera recompressed in editing and again compressed for web delivery ...... who will tell me what looks good and what doesn't???

Compare the pictures on a class1 monitor and then tell me again!!!

:emote_head_explode:
Click to expand...

I agree. Though, looking to the future, how many people are going to be watching moving images on HD screens (let alone grade 1 monitors). 99 % of my friends who have kids say that their kids don't watch tv on tv screens, they watch it on the internet. The future could be all about "good enough" technology......
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjuWUAIpMVc

We all know the Canon has excellent low light sensitivity, but it also shows burned out highlights and crushed blacks with little deep shadow detail. All soft focus static shots so no codec issues. Be interesting to see a comparison with a current build 21 version RED though.

The above Adidas ad shows a RED at its best. The Canon would be terrible by comparison in this kind of shoot. The subtle range of highlight detail and deep shadow detail in this ad a Canon could not achieve in its video mode and the video codec would fall apart shooting fast action.
 
The future could be all about "good enough" technology......
Click to expand...

You are right, "good enough" is a key question, but the question is "good enough for who"? Who is it that's paying for the work?

For example, if an ad is going to appear in print, in the cinema, on TV and on the web, the client won't measure "good enough" by web delivery criteria....
 
Stuart English said:
You are right, "good enough" is a key question, but the question is "good enough for who"? Who is it that's paying for the work?

For example, if an ad is going to appear in print, in the cinema, on TV and on the web, the client won't measure "good enough" by web delivery criteria....
Click to expand...

Thank you, Stuart! I get my head buzzing more and more with people comparing 3k, 4k, 5k or even more - with heavily compressed pictures of DSLRs. It really makes me crazy .... instead of trying to achieve the best possible resolution for their pictures they screw down their requirements .... hope thats spoken correctly .............. :emote_headwall:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top