5D3 h.264 vs RAW comparison

[ultimatemale]

Hehe...I agree and that's the conclusion I arrived at after doing my non-scientific test:

https://vimeo.com/72566458

The Alexa still has a slight edge due to the incredible way it rolls off highlights in a very natural way, but the two can intercut quite nicely together and I doubt anyone would be able to tell.

I remember seeing your video and i was amazed by the quality. If you had only used the indoor shots, i doubt most people would know which was which. Of course the Alexa has better image quality over the 5D3, but its just so tiny now that it makes me love my £2000 5D3 even more now.
As soon as i learn Davinci Resolve, then game over, i'll rule the world with my 5D3 Bwahahahahaha

[Midphase]

There is this tutorial series on Resolve:

http://ae.tutsplus.com/sessions/introduction-to-davinci-resolve-fundamentals/?search_index=1

The guy is a bit hard to understand, and it doesn't have the slick feel of some of the better tutorials, but it's a good way to get going with Resolve. It will teach you the basics in no time.

[ultimatemale]

There is this tutorial series on Resolve:

http://ae.tutsplus.com/sessions/introduction-to-davinci-resolve-fundamentals/?search_index=1

The guy is a bit hard to understand, and it doesn't have the slick feel of some of the better tutorials, but it's a good way to get going with Resolve. It will teach you the basics in no time.

Thanks, been watching the videos since i found them few days ago.

[Shield]

If you read carefully my comment, you will see that it's not a personal comment about you, but a general comment about people that request this comparison.

It's almost impossible to "match" RAW and h264, and even if you can, it would involve a lot of work that I find unnecessary.

I think that the most important thing about the video of ultimatemale, is that you can see a big improvement in detail resolution in RAW, much more dynamic range, and less noise. I don't think that matching colors would make a difference in those parameters.

Also, I don't think that the way of postprocessing RAW should involve aggressive tweaks in Lightroom (shadow/highlight i.e). I think that the DaVINCI RESOLVE path is a much better approach for getting a more natural look.

Anyway, I agree that H264 is still VERY GOOD for some works, but if you have the time and knowledge for post-processing it, RAW is much better.

best regards,

The biggest problem I have with Resolve is I shoot video with lenses that vignette heavily wide open, like the Canon 35/2 IS and the Tamron 24-70 2.8.  I cannot correct this with Resolve, but with the Adobe ACR I can very quickly.  I completely agree if I were shooting a film, commercial or something like that I'd shoot raw.  Something I shoot again if a take is screwed up.
Wouldn't do it for a wedding, and it's too much of a pain for me for moving kids.  My buddy's band I'd shoot some in raw though.

[timetraveller]

Another very interesting comparison I've found in VIMEO.

Take a look specially to the Closeups of the girl, the level of detail resolved is amazing.

[ultimatemale]

This is a good example of 5D3+ML+Resolve

Some ppl may think its a little too sharp but i like it just the way it is.

The video convinced me to start practicing resolve

[Ryan]

A lot of these clips have artifacts/banding and flickering in shadow and highlight areas. Is that due to noise reduction or some kind of workflow issue?       



Full size image here: http://i.imgur.com/FXl95dQ.jpg

[Lars Steenhoff]

I think all these issues are from two times compression, first the uploaded file was already compressed after raw conversion and then vimeo compresses again.