Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Zacuto - DSLR and film tests - small screen to cinema  (Read 6190 times)
N Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302


WWW
« on: March 27, 2010, 04:13:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Detailed comparison film stock v DSLR. Skip to 10 mins to see the start of the tests.

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout

Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2010, 06:35:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nick Walker
Detailed comparison film stock v DSLR. Skip to 10 mins to see the start of the tests.

http://www.zacuto.com/shootout
Hi,
Great work!
I've been impressed by the results and we are really in the middle of exiting changes with digital.
Even the D3 impressed me at 720 if you know its downsides. The GH1 looked over sharpened and saturated to my taste.


What I do not get clear, (as english is not my native language maybe I missed something) is the Skywalker Ranch. Was it filmed by a mix of these cameras or by the 5D?

What about RED in this game? Do you see RED coming in this game and compeat with the brands involved in that test?

Fred.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4923



« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2010, 08:13:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Something to keep in mind is that the DSLRs shoot regular video, which is the equivalent of shooting JPG. The RED and forthcoming Scarlet shoot the equivalent of raw. Operationally, the RED is also a real video camera, not a DSLR with video capability.

RED and Scarlet are simply in a different league.

Michael
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2010, 10:44:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: michael
Something to keep in mind is that the DSLRs shoot regular video, which is the equivalent of shooting JPG. The RED and forthcoming Scarlet shoot the equivalent of raw. Operationally, the RED is also a real video camera, not a DSLR with video capability.

RED and Scarlet are simply in a different league.

Michael
Yes, but what I would like to know is that if RED is planning to step towards stills and being part of the cake. If I understand well the situation, we have CaNikon and others converging towards video, but RED converging towards still images?? Or am I understanding wrong the panorama.
I saw a sample here of still from RED scarlet but it did not look it could compeat yet with the big boys in that terrain.

Also, and I know Michael explained several times the issues about the short DOF with MF, but if MF goes video when CMOS sensor will be available, will not it create a different style or language precisely with the very short DOF? I'm thinking about certain kind of "shooters" that just look for these characteristics.
Files will be huge, but who knows in the next future if available computer power and new compression etc...A crazy wish
But I can see some interesting applications for the photographer.

Well, I read all I could read in this website about Red cameras, and generaly what's got to do with where we are going with HD video. I still swim in a sea of confusion. For example, broadcast systems 720 or 1080. We saw a clear difference in the test. Why some TV would have choosen 720 then?
If 720 is enough, then we should be able to shoot a campaign with an EP1, a GH1 or a K7 etc... But what's been produced so far is Canon (again...this nonopoly is nearly insulting  : )
Red is not going very fast, but Canon is. Do you still think that Red is or will be a game changer? I was convinced some time ago, now seeing Canon, I'm not sure. Yes, these dslr have big issues with usability for video and there are some unexplained choices, like the stupid fixed LCD. But these are easy to correct.
If Canon or Nikon, and I hope Sony go to raw video, what about Red then?
Many questions, many confusion, many things...

Je ne comprends rien
Ich verstehe das nicht
Ngoh m-ming
Jeg forstår ikke
Non capisco
Wakaranai


An extended article (or a serie of) on Lu-La will be really welcome.

Fred.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2010, 02:09:36 PM by fredjeang » Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4923



« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2010, 03:23:10 PM »
ReplyReply

If you haven't seen it this article might help a bit.

Some broadcasters have chosen 720P over 1080i because progressive is preferable to interlaced, and much better when there's rapid motion of the subject or camera, such as when covering sports.

1080i is higher resolution, but is interlaced. Old tech. Some people think that 720P is therefore superior. I find it a toss up, and it depends very much on the content.

1080P is the holy grail (for now) but is not supported by broadcasters (only BluRay) because it requires so much bandwidth.

All video cameras (and video DSLRs) have 1080i as their highest resolution, but Panasonic has just introduced the Panasonic TM700 and HS700 camcorders that can shoot 1080P 60. This is a first. I'm going to be receiving one for testing next week.

Michael



Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2010, 03:47:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the link Michael.
That was usefull and brought more light. I saw this article when published but could not find it anymore.

All that evolution is very exiting.
I always thought in the past that a mixed of HCB and filmaker would be the perfect activity.
Now it is possible.

Imagine, instead of printing your landscapes in the Toronto's gallery, you'll display a mix of stills and video in a special digital frame, and in 3D...
No more color profile headaches, no more papers (trees), no more plotter, no more tints...freedom!
he he...I always bark against the abuse of technology, but I love it.

Fred.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2010, 05:35:56 PM by fredjeang » Logged
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2010, 02:33:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
RED and Scarlet are simply in a different league.

Without question.   The most economical 1 lens Scarlet 2/3" package is said to be over $10K USD
That is, if and when they ship and if they don't change  price and if they don't change features......

Personally,I feel they've been dicking away far too long with all the hype and bravado and have lost a lot
of the momentum they had 12-18 months ago. [apart from their forum supporters which is one of the few on the planet
that make Digital  Leica M owners seem sane by comparison  :>)) ]


Mark
www.marktomalty.com
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2010, 03:11:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: mtomalty
Without question.   The most economical 1 lens Scarlet 2/3" package is said to be over $10K USD

That's an unfair and inaccurate comparison. The cameras RED (motion) cameras are positioned against cost an order of a magnitude more.

That's without lenses.

They are real modular motion cameras which can be rigged just like the expensive ones, or turned into steadicam setups. And you can do proper focus pulling, which is a nightmare with dSLRs. While dSLRs continue get improved video capabilities, I can't see them overtaking proper motion cameras in the foreseeable future.

There are real movies shot with RED cameras, and bringing that kind of image quality within the reach of most dedicated amateur videographers is nothing short of revolutionary. I'd go as far as saying it's as groundbreaking as the financing and release of Bonnie & Clyde, with which Warren Beatty broke down the Hollywood studio system.
Logged

mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2010, 03:40:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The cameras RED (motion) cameras are positioned against cost an order of a magnitude more.

Completely true and they seem fantastic but the camera review/preview Michael linked to was the Scarlet
which, to me, is aimed squarely at the prosumer and, by extension, the current generation of HDSLR's
thus my price reference.


Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 30, 2010, 05:27:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: mtomalty
Completely true and they seem fantastic but the camera review/preview Michael linked to was the Scarlet
which, to me, is aimed squarely at the prosumer and, by extension, the current generation of HDSLR's
thus my price reference.

I'll have to disagree even on that  While I agree on the Scarlet's target demographic being in the prosumer and the dedicated amateur videographer segment, it's still a big step up from a dSLR for motion photography. 5DII rocks as a hybrid camera, I'm sure, but I really can't imagine anyone buying it for mostly motion photography.

All this talk really makes me want to see what the RED can do compared to the dSLRs in terms of IQ.
Logged

Chris L
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 87


« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2010, 07:18:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: feppe
I'll have to disagree even on that  While I agree on the Scarlet's target demographic being in the prosumer and the dedicated amateur videographer segment, it's still a big step up from a dSLR for motion photography. 5DII rocks as a hybrid camera, I'm sure, but I really can't imagine anyone buying it for mostly motion photography.

All this talk really makes me want to see what the RED can do compared to the dSLRs in terms of IQ.


I got lost with all the Red announcements, anyone know WHEN and WHERE I could actually buy one ( scarlet S35mm )? Please dont point me to the Red User forum, that thing is nauseating.

Logged
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2010, 10:34:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm sure, but I really can't imagine anyone buying it for mostly motion photography.

Then I guess you'll just have to work on your imagination  :>))


http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/

Scroll down to the 2nd piece on his blog (Keeping it Small) and a number of pieces below that one

Personally, I have no dog in this fight,yet, but still follow to see what is in the pipeline and how some established
veterans are integrating HDSLR's into their workflow.

Regardless of the platform, the future can only be bright for the enduser with each segment pushing, and challenging, the other.

Mark
www.marktomalty.com



Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8015


WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 30, 2010, 11:00:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I have no issue with Michael says. I just want to expand the issue.

What impressed me in the shootout was the clear demo of tonal separation in the highlights in film compared with digital. Much of this is coming from the shoulder characteristic of film. Cine film is negative film, correct?

I would expect RAW digital to have a greater dynamic range then motion JPEG directly from camera. But do you think that digital really can handle the "low light scene", which essentially went from candlelight to light bulb? On film they could see the fingerprints on the clear electric light bulb, while on digital the light bulb just looked as an uniform surface.

Correctly exposing to the right and RAW processing may help but digital is very different from negative film in handling highlights.

Best regards
Erik




Quote from: michael
Something to keep in mind is that the DSLRs shoot regular video, which is the equivalent of shooting JPG. The RED and forthcoming Scarlet shoot the equivalent of raw. Operationally, the RED is also a real video camera, not a DSLR with video capability.

RED and Scarlet are simply in a different league.

Michael
Logged

bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2882



« Reply #13 on: April 15, 2010, 07:28:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: michael
Something to keep in mind is that the DSLRs shoot regular video, which is the equivalent of shooting JPG. The RED and forthcoming Scarlet shoot the equivalent of raw. Operationally, the RED is also a real video camera, not a DSLR with video capability.

RED and Scarlet are simply in a different league.

Michael
While the comparisons were interesting, I thought that it was rather silly to compare a professional film camera with a DSLR shooting in the equivalent of JPG in video mode. The Red and Scarlet are interesting developments, but I understand that there are real professional digital movie cameras such as were used in Public Enemy, where digital capture was useful in capturing the night scenes in the shoot out at Little Bohemia in the Wisconsin Northwoods. Why not compare apples to apples?

Bill
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 15, 2010, 07:36:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bjanes
While the comparisons were interesting, I thought that it was rather silly to compare a professional film camera with a DSLR shooting in the equivalent of JPG in video mode. The Red and Scarlet are interesting developments, but I understand that there are real professional digital movie cameras such as were used in Public Enemy, where digital capture was useful in capturing the night scenes in the shoot out at Little Bohemia in the Wisconsin Northwoods. Why not compare apples to apples?

Because they wanted to see if dSLRs are a "threat" to cine film. Comparing RED to cine film would have been a totally different test.
Logged

Nill Toulme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 741



WWW
« Reply #15 on: April 23, 2010, 04:04:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a question about the Zacuto "shootout."  As I recall, they said that the "native" ISOs of all the DSLR's were 360 and multiples therof, and they only tested them at those ISOs, not any "intermediates."  

Is there any truth in this?  How is it determined?  And if 360/720 etc. are indeed the "native" or "true" ISOs of, for example, my 1D Mark IV, how come when I set it for full stop ISOs it only offers up 400/800, etc.?

Nill
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8015


WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 23, 2010, 11:06:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'd suggest that they are talking about real ISO, not the setting on the camera. The ISO settings on the cameras are not exact, nor do they really matter as there are a lot of other variables measuring light.

DxO measured the 400 ISO setting on the D1IV to 332 ISO.

ISO is essentially a characteristic of the sensor. There is a set of preamplifiers that can increase the signal from the sensor before raw conversion, these can actually increase ISO until all photons registered in the sensor are actually counted. Going much longer doesn't really increase ISO. High ISO-s are normally achieved by tagging the image with an high ISO and underexposure.

[attachment=21667:Screen_s...58.03_AM.png]

If you look at this measurement from DxO you can see that dynamic range drops little when going from say 50 to 800 ISO, this indicates that this ISO range is actually achieved using preamps. At higher ISO dynamic range drops one step for each doubling of the ISO. This essentially means that the same image quality would be achieved by shooting a lower ISO and just underexposing, if we were shooting RAW. Noise reduction in JPEGs would increase with higher ISOs. Some cameras also have noise reduction in the RAW-data that may also be affected.

Best regards
Erik





Quote from: Nill Toulme
I have a question about the Zacuto "shootout."  As I recall, they said that the "native" ISOs of all the DSLR's were 360 and multiples therof, and they only tested them at those ISOs, not any "intermediates."  

Is there any truth in this?  How is it determined?  And if 360/720 etc. are indeed the "native" or "true" ISOs of, for example, my 1D Mark IV, how come when I set it for full stop ISOs it only offers up 400/800, etc.?

Nill
Logged

Nill Toulme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 741



WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 24, 2010, 09:06:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Erik, that's helpful.

Nill
Logged
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1078


« Reply #18 on: April 28, 2010, 11:29:38 PM »
ReplyReply

i believe the "native/true" ISOs are 160, 320, 640, 1250, 2500,...

i'm still curious why Canon and Nikon have the same "native" ISOs

similarly curious why you must use the full range of settings to select the "native" ISOs and when you select full stop ISOs you get 100, 200, 400, 800, ...

how much difference is there really?  is the noise at ISO 160 really the same as ISO 100? 640 the same as 400?
Logged
BardAzima
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


WWW
« Reply #19 on: April 29, 2010, 05:57:08 PM »
ReplyReply

This is a fascinating discussion - and the test was very revealing.  As a wedding photographer I'm thinking of upgrading from my D700 to the D3s to give me the chance to shoot very short bits of video to integrate into a slideshow afterwards with pictures.  This fusion is starting to be very popular right now.  I'm still concerned though about the limited functionality of the DSLR as a video camera - though the image quality is obviously amazing.  I'm guessing in a couple of years the video within these high level DSLRs is going to rapidly improve so that a DSLR will rival higher end video cameras.  There was talk above about the RED.  Without me going and checking it out myself I'm guessing you can't shoot a scene with RED with only candlight (25,600 looked great with the D3s.  Is this true - what equivalent ISO would the RED go to?
Logged

Wedding Photography Toronto

Gear:  Nikon D700, Nikon 50mm 1.4, Tamron 28-75mm 2.8, Nikon D200 backup, Nikon 18-200mm VR
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad