Messages

I am not good at being diplomatic but really all I wanted to do is give the information that I had found. Thank you for listening and for your contributions to the Magic Lantern and DSLR video communities.

Thank you. I tried to make my analysis in an objective manner. I am basing my conclusions on actual MTF measurements made by DXO and my own analysis of images taken with both cameras in fully controlled tests.

Food for thought:
1. Both the A7R and D800 achieve maximum DXO P-Mpix scores of 29 megapixels even though they are 36 megapixel cameras. With each camera that score is only with one exceptional lens. The vast majority score much lower. Could it be that somewhere around 30 megapixels is the maximum usable resolution of a 24x36mm sensor and only with a nearly perfect lens? Why is it that lower megapixel cameras such as the D600 and 5D3 can achieve scores much closer to their full resolution?

2. Canon has made decent gains in resolution over the last few years even with zero or very small increases in megapixels. Witness the 1D-X, 5D3 and 6D's gains over the previous generation 1DMIV, 1DsMIII and 5D2 as well as the increases of the 70D/700D/100D over the 7D. What is Canon doing differently now with their sensors versus a few years ago?

What I said from the very beginning was that the 5D3 does not have a stronger OLPF than the 5D2 and  I want people to stop saying that it does, because that simply is not true. And it certainly is not the reason that it does not suffer from moire and aliasing as much as many other DSLR's.

I used DXO's testing as one example of solid, scientific evidence about the 5D3's OLPF. What DXO is testing is the combined MTF performance of a lens and camera together as an optical system. They present it as Perceptual Megapixel (P-Mpix) and call it sharpness to be easier for most people to understand. They really should call that score resolution because that is what they are measuring. When they say that the 5D3 achieves 18 P-Mpix with the 40mm f/2.8 and the 5D2 achieves 15 P-Mpix with that same lens, they are just saying that the 5D3 reaches a higher MTF score.

"The Perceptual MegaPixel (P-MPix) is a proprietary ranking of lens-camera combinations, created by DxO Labs. It is intended to express the resolution a camera produces when paired to a particular lens."

DXO has tested 108 lenses on the 5D3 and 5D2. In every case, the 5D3 reaches a higher score. And this increased resolution can be also seen when comparing images in print or on screen. Full stop, that should be the end of the discussion about the relative OLPF strength of these two cameras. What more evidence is needed?

But wait, there is more:

We know that the 5D3 does not have any change in its optical system or sensor between still photo and video modes. There is no magical OLPF that moves in and out from the in front of the sensor.

We know from the folks at VAF who make addon OLPF's specifically to reduce alaising and moire of the 5D2 and other cameras in video mode, that these filters utterly destroy the full resolution image and must be removed for photography.

We know that early on a few people removed the OLPF filter from the 5D3 in hope that it would increase video resolution and this did not work. If they had thought to compare full resolution still images with the 5D2 beforehand they would have known this would not work.

We know that the 5D3 in raw video mode has increased resolution, again with no change in the optical system.

We know that the 5D3's full resolution is 5760x3840 or 5760x3240 in 16:9 ratio for a good reason. That reason can simply be expressed as 5760/3=1920, 3240/3=1080

We can speculate about the video processing inside the 5D3 that creates h.264 and why it is not as sharp as we would like, but I would guess that the reason is a lack of processing power and concerns with heat dissipation.

@eoshq

Is your only evidence, a misunderstanding based on DxO results?

@audionut,

This is a pretty classic attack method you have chosen against me. You have said that I don't understand DXO's lens testing without saying why. You want to discredit me somehow, but you are to lazy to explain yourself or you actually don't know what you are talking about. Either way, I challenge you. Explain yourself or be quiet about it.

I will even give you a hint. DXO's sharpness test are just another way of presenting the same data that has always been used to express the resolution of an optical system. Go ahead and make my day.

@reddeercity,

We can't divide the 5D3's optical system into one for video and a different one for full resolution photos. Any idea that suggest such a theory is nonsensical. It is the same camera in both modes and anything that has been done in the optical system to minimize moire in video would also affect the optical system in photo mode.

As we can see with the VAF add-on OLPF's for the 5D2, 6D, 7D, D800, etc. An OLPF strong enough to stop moire and aliasing in these cameras can only be used in video mode and must be removed for photos, because it destroys the resolution of the camera. Obviously no such thing is going on with 5D3 as it has higher resolution in photo mode than the 5D2.

What Ted said is right for Video, it a known fact to anyone that shot video on the full frame Canon's

@chmee

The gapless microlens structure is not acting like a VAF OLPF in the 5D3 for video. If it were, it would at the same time destroy the resolution of the optical system for 22 megapixel stills.

The key to the 5D3's lack of moire in video has everything to do with (5760 x 3840) and the Digic 5 processing. The fact that the 5D3 is 22.1 megapixels and not more or less, is no coincidence. That resolution was chosen to make it a better video camera. Think about these two numbers (5760 x 3840) again carefully and I think it will become quite obvious.

@eoshq what about this: not the OLPF is the problem, but the microlenses-structure, its gapless in the 5DIII.

ted, You still don't get it and you never will. Your logic is failed. You have been going around saying the "the mkIII has a more "agressive" OLPF than the previous mkII". When it is pointed out that this cannot be true, your EGO has you talking nonsense in circles, instead of just admitting you are wrong. There is no hope of understanding with you.

@ted ramasola, You need to put your thinking cap on and stop posting BS about the 5D3. The 5D3 in stills mode is the highest resolving Canon DSLR to date. This obviously would not be possible if it had a super aggressive OLPF.

With every lens tested on both by DXO, it out resolves the 5D2, often by a larger percentage than the increase in megapixels would suggest. This actually lends evidence to the 5D3 having a weaker OLPF than the 5D2.

This is a good example:
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Zeiss-Carl-Zeiss-Apo-Sonnar-T-Star-F2-135-ZE-Canon-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-versus-Zeiss-Carl-Zeiss-Apo-Sonnar-T-Star-F2-135-ZE-Canon-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II___1017_795_1017_483

@chmee,

the mkIII has a more "agressive" OLPF than the previous mkII thats why in h264, this makes it appear better in handling the issues caused by line skipping(aliasing) but its there, it even appears softer than the mkII in h264 with all settings being equal. However in raw the OLPF seems to work to the mkIII's advantage as the mkII suffers more pronounced aliasing and moire in raw than in h264 mode due to less powerful OLPF, thats why it needs "another" in the form of the mosaic VAF. The mkIII does not need the VAF anymore.

Well, you need to be more specific about which type of ProRes you want to compare to DNxHD, but I'll take a guess at what you meant and try to answer.

There isn't always DNxHD variant directly comparable to ProRes 422, because ProRes 422 is always 10-bit and DNxHD is 8-bit in low to mid bitrates and 8-bit or 10-bit at high bitrates.

There are some variants of both that match up almost perfectly. ProRes 422HQ and DNxHD 175X, 185X, 220X are directly comparable as they are all 10-bit 422 codecs with a very similar bitrate.

5 minutes on wikipedia would really help you understand. Don't be so damn lazy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNxHD_codec
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProRes

According to the Lightroom Journal blog, the Adobe Camera Raw 8.4 Release Candidate adds a new feature for raw video:

"Grain effect now varies from image to image to facilitate editing time-lapse and video frame sequences".

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2014/02/camera-raw-8-4-rc-and-dng-converter-8-4-rc-now-available.html

What is the considered safe working temperature for 5dmrk3? And how do people manage temperature issues, what is quickest with regards to cooling etc.
Thanks!

How hot does your 5D3 get recording raw video? How about normal video?

Here is my report: I wanted to test what happens when the 5D3 spans over 4GB in h.264 recording. It got up to 54 degree C recording 1080p24 ALL-I h.264 for ten minutes without Magic Lantern loaded. And this was in an indoor air-conditioned room at night. So I am assuming that Canon planed for it to get that hot probably a bit hotter. I did not get any heat warnings in the LCD.

Now the 5D3 definitely gets hotter and gets hot faster recording raw video. I've seen it get to 57 degree C. Still no warnings. Will it damage the camera? I hope not, but common sense tells us that heat kills electronics over time and so it will do it no favors.

To cool it down, remove the memory cards and battery for 30 minutes, I wouldn't place mine on ice packs or anything, that just seems to be asking for trouble, moisture vapor and humidity and all will do it no favors either.

Guys we have been sold on a false idea when it comes to editing Cinema DNGs in the new Premiere Pro 7.1

Even when it works correctly, as with Black Magic Cinema Camera (BMCC) files, it is pretty much worthless as you lose the main reason for shooting raw in the first place, raw adjustments.

Over on the Creative Cow forums, one user has put it like this:

" It appears that Premiere Pro uses only part of the latitude of the RAW format, there's apparently no way to change it, and it's apparently suddenly impossible to access the full tonal range of RAW.

As an example, I have some footage with burnt out clouds. If I open a DNG image in Photoshop or After Effects, I can edit the exposure upon import, and bring back all the latitude on the clouds. That's the whole point of using RAW.

In Premiere Pro, CinemaDNG seems cropped to video levels, and I can't bring back any information in the highlights. I simply turn down blotchy over-exposed highlights."

You can read the whole thread here http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/3/947862

Sadly, as it stands now I see no point in editing cdng natively in Premiere Pro.

Guys we have been sold on a false idea when it comes to editing Cinema DNGs in the new Premiere Pro 7.1

Even when it works correctly, as with Black Magic Cinema Camera (BMCC) files, it is pretty much worthless as you lose the main reason for shooting raw in the first place, raw adjustments.

Over on the Creative Cow forums, one user has put it like this:

" It appears that Premiere Pro uses only part of the latitude of the RAW format, there's apparently no way to change it, and it's apparently suddenly impossible to access the full tonal range of RAW.

As an example, I have some footage with burnt out clouds. If I open a DNG image in Photoshop or After Effects, I can edit the exposure upon import, and bring back all the latitude on the clouds. That's the whole point of using RAW.

In Premiere Pro, CinemaDNG seems cropped to video levels, and I can't bring back any information in the highlights. I simply turn down blotchy over-exposed highlights."

You can read the whole thread here http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/3/947862

Sadly, as it stands now I see no point in editing cdng natively in Premiere Pro.

Pelican, A little bit late but I may have a solution for you. Unregister all batteries from your 1DX, clear all settings and custom functions, detach the lens. Take the main battery out. Now, reboot the camera with no lens attached, a freshly charged Canon battery and run the firmware update.

There was a firmware update for the 40mm STM lens in the summer of 2012 that would get stuck at a certain point on the 5D Mark III. Believe it or not, this was caused by having batteries registered in the camera. What this had to do with a lens firmware I do not know, but this bug was confirmed and fixed by Canon in the 1.2.1 firmware for the 5D3. I would say that the 5D3 and 1DX share much of their firmware code, so that is why I suggest you try it without registered batteries. This is why I will never attempt another camera or lens firmware update with batteries registered, and why I believe it is safer to update camera firmware with no lens attached.

I found a work around , with AE link below
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=8177.msg86395#msg86395

This really gains us nothing because you could have been doing this all along, and all the way back to at least CS5, maybe further. There has been a Dynamic Link between After Effects and  Premiere pro for a long time. So, yes this does get your cdng (or dng, BTW) footage into Premiere Pro without the pink cast, but I would not call it a workaround. It is really apples and oranges, two totally different processes. Let me explain further. This way negates any advantages of the new cdng functionality of PP 7.1. By using Dynamic Link back to After Effects it is massively slower and using tons of extra CPU because it is literally using After Effects to render the footage in the background. Check the Process viewer while doing this and you will see that an instance of After Effects is running along side Premiere Pro.

Oh and there is no reason to save a copy of your After Effects project as a CS6 copy when you do this Dynamic Link method as described in your video, not sure where that idea came from but it does nothing to benefit this process.

Have you tried right clicking on the dng and clicking "Edit Original"?  It opens ACR for me.

And what does this accomplish? Absolutely nothing! Sure it will open the first cdng file of the sequence in Photoshop hosted camera raw, but it doesn't do anything to help this pink cast situation. What is the point of your posting this? Do you not try things before you post about them on a forum?

I just wanted to add an indoor shot under household tungsten (regular light bulbs), in the case that makes any difference.

Pink cast CDNG in Premiere Pro CC 7.1
Windows 7 64
5D Mark III
raw2cdng v1.3.0

File is here, download good for 7 days.
http://we.tl/ruiYRunolT

nevermind, decided to jump on the cc-train. so will check that. please be patient

Great news, Thank you 1000 times for trying to help us.

I read today on the Adobe forum that they never even tried other cameras besides BMCC, but they did not tell anyone that until today. Adobe are the worst at deceptive marketing, they knew since the September 8th announcement that CinemaDNG support was only going to work with BMCC files. Despicable.

because i'm no subscriber of Adobe, i've got no "new" adobe-apps. simply i can't check.
(but im thinkin' about it after reading some workflow-experiences)

chmee, As of right now, we have no way to use 5D3 DNG or CinemaDNG in the new Premiere Pro CC 7.1

DNG (with newest raw2dng) will not import because it says there is no metadata, stops dead on error without importing.

CDNG (with newest raw2cdng) imports but has a terrible pink cast which cannot be removed.

If there was some way around this via a new raw2cdng or raw2dng we would be very grateful for the chance to try this new workflow.

reddeercity, auto color is not working for me, nor is closing the project and reopening. I am working with indoor footage shot under tungsten light and it has terrible red cast even after auto color. Your outdoor footage after auto color does look better than my indoor, but still not correct colors.

And can you please clarify what you mean by two additional updates to Premiere Pro and Speedgrade? Are you saying there are some more updates after premiere pro 7.1 and Speedgrade 7.1? Because I am not seeing any additional updates and I can find no mention of them by Adobe. Also, it makes no sense that they would release 2 updates for each of these programs on the same day. Please check versions and reply with what the heck you are talking about. My Premiere Pro is 7.1.0  (141) on Windows 7 and Speedgrade is 7.1x158

I'm kinda sad about this.     The camera that it all started with (550D/T2i) is being forgotten. 

FYI Lightroom and xmp:

Lightroom does not by default store settings in .xmp files, but it can do it just like ACR.

Develop module: Photo menu: Save Metadata to file or Ctrl+S

Library module: Metadata menu: Save Metadata to file or Ctrl+S

To make Lightroom always save .xmp

Edit menu: Catalog Settings: metadata tab: Automatically write changes to xmp (be warned, this will slow Lightroom down)

I made a post about this back on may 19th, I don't think anyone noticed so I will say it again. http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5404.msg37031#msg37031

As I mentioned before, beginning with ACR 7 and Lightroom 4, Adobe introduced what they call "Process 2012" which has automatic highlight recovery that it applies without user action. Merely loading a DNG, CR2, NEF, or other type of raw file will invoke this automatic highlight recovery that you have no control over, and which I believe has the potential to cause changes in rendering from one from frame to another because it was not designed for video. There is some discussion about process 2012 by still photographers way back in early 2012 when Lightroom 4 was in beta here. http://forums.adobe.com/thread/958989?start=0&tstart=0

I think you can avoid this by using "Process 2010" if anyone would like to test it out. I can't do it myself because I cannot run ML on my 5D3 until it supports firmware 1.21.

P.S. Please don't take this the wrong way but something I have noticed since the beginning of Magic Lantern is that there seems to be a huge disconnect between still shooters and video shooters/ML devs. Things that are common knowledge to raw still shooters, such as process versions in ACR, seem to be unknown in the video and Magic Lantern universe. I am sure there are other examples but I just find this divide interesting.

Does this one open in DaVinci Resolve?

(I couldn't install it)

Awesome... I can use a camera profile with this DNG, because it is recognized by Adobe as being from a 5D3. Thank you. 

Are Windows users being left behind here?