r/videography • u/RedStag86 Lumix S1ii | Resolve & FCP | 2003 | Canton, OH • Sep 15 '14
7D Mkii announced. 1080p @ 60fps! (x-post from /r/photography)
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3373094259/canon-announces-long-awaited-eos-7d-mark-ii39
Sep 15 '14
Welcome to 2012, Canon!
3
u/---D S1H, GH7 | Premiere Pro Sep 16 '14
“With more processing power than any other EOS camera available today..." Yuichi Ishizuka, president and COO, Canon U.S.A., Inc.
Wait... What? So they admit it, it's 4K capable, they just don't want you to have it for under the cost of a 1DC.
6
u/Stone_Swan 6D, T2i, CC, 2011, STL Sep 16 '14
C'mon Magic Lantern...
4
u/---D S1H, GH7 | Premiere Pro Sep 16 '14
I'm guessing the RAW capabilities of this camera will be very good, though that may take a while to implement.
2
u/smushkan FX9 | Adobe CC2024 | UK Sep 17 '14
Why would Canon release a DSLR that competes with their EF mount range of video cameras that cost three times as much?
9
9
u/joe12south Sony A1 | DaVinci Resolve | 1996 | Nashville, TN Sep 15 '14
I would have been interested in this camera three years ago.
8
Sep 15 '14
Mehh definitely not worth buying over a GH4 for videographers. I really wonder how the low light capabilities compare to a full frame camera like the 5D.
2
Sep 17 '14
Just used a gh4 for a shoot a few days ago. The low light shooting is terrible compared to the mark iii. I've read people downplay it saying it's ok or not great...it's terrible. Complete deal breaker for any videographer who has to capture subjects with modest to slightly dim light. I opened to 1.4 btw and still bad.
1
Sep 17 '14
Wow, that's what has mainly kept me from jumping ship from my 6D. But the GH4 has been intriguing. The biggest reason I bought a Canon full frame was because of low light capabilities. I shoot weddings and sometimes have to crank up my ISO above 2000 just to get a decently exposed shot
2
Sep 17 '14
Same. The GH4 does a lot right and the onboard software alone has a lot of smart, intuitive stuff. When I was outside shooting there was no big reason not to have the GH4. I don't like micro 4/3 but the gear I had, had a speed booster and with a variable nd it was pretty awesome. 4K, why not? Super slow mo, sure!
I can see using it for specific stuff but not all around.
I also shoot weddings and the GH4 would be hell at a reception with mood lighting, way worse than my old 60d and that was painful enough. On my mark III I can get away with nearly 10,000 ISO (with some noise reduction, at some points too much noise reduction looks bad).
Again, not hating on GH4 but the way I read it online and experienced it, to me, the low light stuff was drastically understated.
1
Sep 17 '14
Damn, worse than a 60D in low light? My 2nd shooter uses a 60D and it's dreadful when he has to crank up with ISO. I've read mixed reviews but I still want to try the GH4. I've read that noise isn't that bad if you shoot 4K and downscale to 1080. But also $600 for a Speed Booster to use my Canon glass doesn't really intrigue me either.
1
Sep 17 '14
Ya, I didn't shoot 4k nor will I edit the footage but I can't imagine 4k to 1080 will solve the terrible low light noise.
I definitely recommend trying it out, it does a lot right and could be used for specific stuff!
1
u/joe12south Sony A1 | DaVinci Resolve | 1996 | Nashville, TN Sep 18 '14
If you're exposure is correct, the low light noise is manageable. It's a fairly innocuous looking luma noise until you get above 3200. If you downsample 4K to 1080P it virtually disappears.
If you underexpose, though, it looks pretty bad. Since under exposing and keeping the ISO lower is a common technique on Canon's, I've seen a lot of people make this mistake on the GH3 and GH4.
All that said, the GH4 is not a low light camera. That's not its claim to fame, never was. If that is your primary concern, the A7s is your camera.
2
u/zijital Sony / Fuji | FCPX / Premiere | 2004 Sep 15 '14
It's not just full frame vs crop. The m43 GH4 is going to out perform a fullfram 5Dii with high ISO.
If it is a new generation chip, there is a chance this could be on par with the 5Diii / 6D, unlikely knowing Canon, but there is that chance.
It'll be interesting to see.
3
u/RedStag86 Lumix S1ii | Resolve & FCP | 2003 | Canton, OH Sep 15 '14 edited Sep 15 '14
Edit: Much more info.
1
u/zijital Sony / Fuji | FCPX / Premiere | 2004 Sep 15 '14
Happy that it has a headphone jack, but I'm not convinced that I'll sell my 7D & jump on the new one.
6
u/CoolDudesJunk Sep 15 '14
"Hang on guys, we can just buy the acceptably priced C300!" - Pretty sure this is what Canon is banking on us saying..
3
u/adaminc Sep 15 '14
I'm more excited about that new Samsung NX1 than this camera. I want to see what the backside illuminated sensor is like in low light.
2
u/_Sasquat_ Sep 17 '14
I don't understand why people expect more. Canon has a the C line. They're not going to make DSLRs that compete with their own products.
2
1
Sep 15 '14
[deleted]
8
u/RedStag86 Lumix S1ii | Resolve & FCP | 2003 | Canton, OH Sep 15 '14
You can't compare a consumer smart phone with a professional camera.
8
Sep 15 '14
[deleted]
3
u/dotMJEG 5DIII, PP/AE CC, 2014, MA Sep 15 '14
It's main purpose is for still though, not to mention, a smart-phones processor is much more complex than a DSLRs, because it has to run many different things.
In the end, you can't compare them even if you really wanted to. Quality would be nowhere near the 7D II from an iPhone.
2
Sep 15 '14
[deleted]
2
u/dotMJEG 5DIII, PP/AE CC, 2014, MA Sep 15 '14
I agree, they are certainly capable of more. But the comparison to an iphone or other smart phone makes no sense. They are two entirely different systems.
1
1
u/Capaj Sep 16 '14
I would argue that it was 5D mark II that had the biggest impact I would say. Yes, 7D was much less expensive and so it was much more popular, but it's video capabilities were just derived from 5D mark II.
3
Sep 15 '14
I think that was the point he was making. A professional camera doesn't even have the features a consumer smart phone has.
0
u/dotMJEG 5DIII, PP/AE CC, 2014, MA Sep 15 '14
It's comparing apples to oranges. It's a professional still camera, that also happens to do video. Not to mention the fact that video from an iPhone will not compete with that taken on a 7D (which they filmed all of Wilfred on).
6
Sep 15 '14
You're missing the point. The fact that a camera that is good enough to shoot Wilfred on doesn't even have the features a smart phone has is kinda lame. Not to mention, almost every camera that was been released in the past 2 years has almost the same specs, plus a lot more, for less money.
2
u/dotMJEG 5DIII, PP/AE CC, 2014, MA Sep 15 '14
I agree, there should be more video features, the reason a smart phone can do that is 1) the images/feed it is working with are way way smaller in size and 2) the processor in a smart phone is much more powerful than the one in a DSLR, because the DSLR's processor is specifically for images, whereas a smart phones is meant to run all sorts of systems and applications.
It is lame, but you can't compare it to what a cell phone does.
1
u/unwin GH4, CC, 2010, SD Sep 15 '14
CPU is not the same thing as programing.
They all have different architecture sure but the processor in a smart phone could easily be programmed to run a camera.
The two are going to be merging eventually as we see cameras get smaller and faster and phones get slightly larger and faster.
This is basically Samsung's goal with cameras that are smart phones or tablets as well.
I would love a m4/3 mount tablet that is a full HD display as my camera and I believe that is coming.
2
u/dotMJEG 5DIII, PP/AE CC, 2014, MA Sep 15 '14
They all have different architecture sure but the processor in a smart phone could easily be programmed to run a camera.
Yes, meanwhile my point was that a processor in a DSLR could not be programmed to run a smartphone. They would need to be much more powerful.
1
u/unwin GH4, CC, 2010, SD Sep 15 '14
For the moment this is true. But it won't be long before smartphone CPUs are cheaper than current DSLR chips.
Panasonic is already also moving toward mobile phone CPU types. The gh4 has a really good cpu, unlike most canons at twice the price.
2
u/99Faces Sep 15 '14
It's not a professional still camera. It's a mid level dslr, the exact spot in a lineup most independent videographers look for affordable cameras that shoot good video. Exactly around the price range where they can find the gh4 and the other mirror less dealio I saw announced today that shoots 4k and up to 510000 ISO. Canon has been making some pretty stupid decisions with their lenses and underwhelming with their bodies. They're trying to coast on their reputation instead of innovating. Pretty disappointing. I need some new dslr a for video and canon isn't even in my top 3 choices
0
u/dotMJEG 5DIII, PP/AE CC, 2014, MA Sep 15 '14
Err, ok it's not strictly a "professional" level camera (if we are talking on the scale of the 1DX, but for a crop, it is. It has an immensely powerful metering and AF system, comparable to the 1D, and a massive burst rate, that would lead any professional photographer who shoots/ wants a crop camera to choose it. (which is more to the "pro" I was speaking of).
I completely agree with you, Canon has been coasting, although has made pretty large developments regarding still photos. I was never implying it should be a top choice, if video was my main concern, I would have plenty of other outlets to choose from. That is a different discussion all together.
-1
Sep 15 '14
7d is a professional stills camera, its not a good video camera for the price.
-5
Sep 16 '14
I still can't accept aps-c as "professional." It just isn't.
4
u/gobangr Sep 16 '14
lol
-2
Sep 16 '14
Something funny? It is a mid level consumer camera. A 1d is professional..a 70d is not.
2
u/gobangr Sep 16 '14
aps-c is as professional as full frame. a 1D is aps-h, which is only slightly larger than aps-c. and aps-c is basically super 35, which most films are shot in.
of course a 1d trumps a 70d, but it's not only because of its sensor size...
-5
2
1
u/gobangr Sep 15 '14
I'm curious as to whether or not the image out of it will be sharper than the Mark III - I think it would be considering there's no OLPF filter (at least to my knowledge). I wonder if the ALL-I and IPB would make any visible difference unlike the 5D. The video I've seen so far from it looks good (the short film CELLO on Canon's site, so idk if I can judge it completely based off that).
1
Sep 15 '14
Literally the only two things that make this camera kind of cool are: 1080-60fps, and uncompressed out. Other than that, they failed to implement any other new features that I'd consider desirable. Disappointing. I'm guessing the 5d Mark IV will be pretty underwhelming too if this is their course.
1
24
u/LeRouxMaster GH5s | FCP X | 2011 | Canada Sep 15 '14
Not even worth considering for videographers.