Anyone knows if the MKII's mic-input delivers 3v phantom power? I got a snazzy shotgun mic for video cameras that needs the 3 volts.

-- peer

No Sir it doesn't....

Anyone knows if the MKII's mic-input delivers 3v phantom power? I got a snazzy shotgun mic for video cameras that needs the 3 volts.

-- peer

I just have to ask,
What do you mean 3volt phantom power?
is there a new standard?

i always assumed that phantom power was today +48 volt (DIN 45596)
???

I just have to ask, What do you mean 3volt phantom power? is there a new standard? i always assumed that phantom power was today +48 volt (DIN 45596)???

Here's the mic I got: Tinymike On-Camera Microphone Solutions: Ambient Recording GmbH (http://www.ambientaudio.com/products/tiny.html)

-- peer

Duh.. silly me, it is an ELECTRET microphone.

you need one of these:

Ambient Products Microphone Power Supplies EMP Electret Microphone Power (http://www.ambient.de/produkte/mikrofonspeis/emp/emp_e.html)

and a phantom power source.

but i thought most cameras supplied power to charge an electret microphone
hmmm..

come to think of it,
i didnt think electret microphones actually required a polarizing voltage.

fascinating...

i hope you can find a solution....
cheers!

That will be a lot of boxes and wires to use that mic. I am going with the Zoom H4N. Better quality sound than you can ever hope to get out of the Canon 5D MKII. Plus you can use real XLR phantom powered mics and have phantom power and decent pre-amps built into the recorder.

IMHO, sound with the Canon 5D MKII is a lost cause other than for bad ambient. Even if you put the new Beachtek on it, the camera becomes physically huge and ungainly and I have yet to see any definitive lab testing that shows that their little pilot tone idea actually allows for decent sound quality. Plus, the list price on the Beachtek is more than the Zoom.

I don't know why everyone except experienced sound people seem so intimidated by double system sound? It's not that difficult and the end result is MUCH better sound quality than the 5D MKII could ever hope to achieve.

Dan

Dan,

I agree with most of that, my Edirol R-09 developed a fault so I went out and treated myself to the Sony PCM-D50 recorder today, I looked at the ZoomH4n as well but it seemed a little plastic to me. I have a Sounddevices MixPre so the lack of XLR's are not really an issue. Any other reason I should have gone with the H4n instead of the Sony?

Dan

I use the Zoom H4 but even the 5D2 sound from the built in mic is useful to have for syncing video the with the field recorder, then go back and delete the cam audio track, or mix it in for 5.1 surround as required.

I shot the the 5D this weekend, using an old Beachtek DX-A4 adapter attached to camera. I ran it from an Eng44 field mixer. I also recorded the same sound to an independent HiMD recorder, at PCM level. I have started edit, and have been a bit surprised that the camera recording is pretty nice. I will eventually during editing process compare with the HiMD recordings and let you know how much difference there is.

I think the new Adapter coming out from Beachtek at $ 379 may be the way to go to get gain under control, and avoid the double system sound issues. And, as I understand it, it will provide Phantom power.

Chris,

I've tested the 5dmkII audio using a 1khz XLR tone generator on left channel of a Beacktek DXA-6 and a Sanken CS-1 shotgun mic on the right. Despite a slight bleed of the tone the sound recorded to the 5dmkII's right channel was pretty darn good, and the agc was almost totally defeated. It blew away any previous audio I had got from the 5dmkII. For this reason and the few tests I've seen on Vimeo I have high hopes that the Beachtek DXA-5D will work as advertised using a much higher frequency.

Despite this I am going to continue doing double sound for serious work whenever I can because I think the extra insurance is worth it. For run and gun I think the Beachtek will be a major boon though.

Dan

Dan,

FYI, there's a good review of the H4n and some comparisons with the Sony PCM-D50 here Brad Linder's blog: Zoom H4n review (http://www.bradlinder.net/2009/03/zoom-h4n-review.html)

I think after listening to that I will stick to the Sony for now.

Dan

Hi Dan:

I suspect that the Sony will sound better but to equip it with XLRs costs a LOT more. I think that the Zoom sounds pretty great for the money and the ability to record four tracks in a small hand held recorder for less than U.S. $349.00 is pretty impressive. The mic preamps on the original H4 weren't very good and they did improve them immensely on the H4N.

While I like the idea of the Beachtek, I feel it is over priced and over sized. Have you seen the pictures of the 5D MKII with the Beachtek on it? It makes the camera huge. I do like the advantage with the Zoom or the Sony of being able to locate the recorder wherever, mainly in sit down interviews.

Different strokes for sure but as an audio writer, I don't see the 5D MKII audio circuitry ever producing audio quality that is more than mediocre. Canon has never been known for the pristine audio on their video cameras, why would the 5D MKII be any different?

Dan

...Despite a slight bleed of the tone the sound recorded to the 5dmkII's right channel...Any bleed would be really easy to remove. A simple notch EQ would take care of it, and the cheapest NR software will easily eliminate it.

The bigger concern would be any hiss at high gain levels. We have the Microtrack II, and the hiss is a real problem. We've no choice but to use NR when used with our AT815b. If the Beachtek is silent(ish), I'll consider it. Not having to sync sound can save a lot of time...

Based off of my limited experience with the 5D MKII Jon, also...

1. Low S/N ratio
2. Low channel separation
3. Low dynamic range
4. Low quality audio chain

I have yet to hear a camcorder of any kind that has truly good sound, most of them barely make it into the acceptable category. The RED One has horrible audio quality. The Panasonics, beginning with the DVX100, have pretty decent audio quality although I am hearing bad things about the HMC150 audio, but have not tested one myself. My HVX200 was acceptable, not great and same with my HPX170. EX1 is so, so as far as the points above.

I still feel that trying to make the 5D MKII into something it is not is a waste of time and money. People will try to make it into a full blown cinema camera, hanging weird rod and cage assemblies, monitors, matte boxes, follow focuses, etc. it is obviously not. People will try to make it's decidedly low quality audio chain into something it is not, high quality. That's fine. But most of the low end SD card recorders like the Zoom, Sony, even the little Olympus, Yamaha, etc. all sound ten times better than most $100k cameras.

Audio has never been and probably will never be a design goal for camcorder manufacturers because it doesn't sell cameras. I have yet to see a camera advertised as an audiophile camera, even through the technology exists to build in audiophile level sound for just a couple of hundred dollars for the camera manufacturers. So I say why fight it, just circumvent it and buy these cool, cheap little recorders that do sound amazingly good for the money. Heck, my little Sony MZR37P Mini Disc recorders that I bought for $99.00 on close out from B&H six years ago dust the audio on a $50k camera.

Sigh...as far as the camera manufacturer marketing departments are concerned, audio doesn't exist. Thanks goodness for musicians or we wouldn't even have these really impressive little digital audio recorders.

Dan

Dan,

Good points again.

I was only intending to use the Sony recorder with my Sound Devices mixer but maybe I'll take it back and look at the h4n again. You are right, having a small XLR equipped device would be useful. Maybe I should buy both :)

I have seen the size of the Beachtek and it is a little larger than I'd hoped but it stuck on a 5dmkII it is not really any larger than my old Nikon D3 with a flash battery pack stuck on the bottom of it. Not ideal for being discreet but luckily there are many photographers who stroll around like that here in China so blending in is less of a problem!

I was pleasantly surprised with the 5dmkII audio when the agc was defeated with tone, I guess my expectations were a little lower. It did not sound much different to my EX-1 in the unscientific testing I was doing. All I want to get is a usable track for run and gun for when I'm in a rush, then use a seperate recorder whenever possible.

Not sure you will approve but I'm moving pretty rapidly from the barebones 5dmkII camp to the bells and whistles one. I'm finding that a mattebox and shoulder rig are actually very useful and I am playing with monitors too, for me it depends on the assignment as to how useful the extras are. It's funny I have two projects being edited right now, one is with all the gear and separate sound, the other just a 5dmkII and a radio mic.

Dan (the second?)

Jon,

Yes I know I can remove tone bleed. Hiss didn't seem to be a problem when I fed 1khz into my Beachtek DXA-6 then into my 5dmkII, I hoping therefore that the DXA-5D is better. Time will tell.

Also it was kind of interesting to see on the videos that Canon were showing the DXA-5D on their stand at NAB, a bit rich seeing as they could have added this functionality themselves without all the work arounds!

Dan

Hi Dan:

I suspect that the Sony will sound better but to equip it with XLRs costs a LOT more. I think that the Zoom sounds pretty great for the money and the ability to record four tracks in a small hand held recorder for less than U.S. $349.00 is pretty impressive. The mic preamps on the original H4 weren't very good and they did improve them immensely on the H4N.

Dan

Dan,

I, too, recently got the Zoom H4N. I know bupkus about the finer points of audio, but the sound IS pretty great, for the money and for the size. I'm particularly impressed by the built-in XY stereo mics. They sound better to me than my Oktava 102 connected to it via XLR. Which is ironic since I wanted the H4N because of the XLR inputs.

Agree with you too about double system recording. I made a feature using 16mm film and DAT tapes a few years ago when that was state of the art. That setup required a small crew just to move it. Today I can fit the MKII and accessories in a little camera bag, the Zoom H4N in my pocket, add a couple of mics and for a fraction of the size, cost, and hassle, I can make a better looking and sounding movie.

Not to mention no more lab bills!

A lot of it depends on what kind of material you are shooting and on what sorts of sound systems your material will be reproduced. I know that Dan shoots on the streets of the world and you are shooting interviews in real places, not quiet rooms all of the time. I also understand that much of your material ends up on the web.

Most people listen to web material on no-fi computer speakers (built-in or the $79.00 specials at Best Buy, take your pick) or at most on a lower end bookshelf sort of low-fi setup. In these venues, low hiss and low dynamic range may not be a problem or even noticeable. If the material is halfway legible, that may be good enough for the web. Only gamers usually have a little better quality sound reproduction, it is usually still low fi, but it is loud and can reproduce dynamic range, granted with a high level of distortion most of the time. People who wear headphones while web browsing through the rule all off though, you can hear a LOT of the content, even through the cheapest headphones.

But if your material is ever shown on broadcast, many more people now have at least halfway decent 5.1/7.1 fairly higher powered systems and a few even have true high fidelity playback.

Of course, we all know that theatrical sound reproduction is the ultimate because there are Dolby and THX standards (thank goodness) so in many theaters, the sound is reproduced at a high volume level and tremendous dynamic range is apparent.

The quality of the audio needed for each exhibition venue varies widely. I used to own an audio post facility and believe me, when you mix a feature film on near fields and mid field monitors, you think you are hearing what is there. But you don't. The first time you hear it on a mixing stage is the real ear opener. You hear all kinds of things that you never even new existed, both good and bad.

I would say that the level you need to be concerned about audio is somewhat commensurate with who will be listening to your show on what kind of playback system. The better your audience can hear your material, the better you had better make the recording.

Dan

Yes I know I can remove tone bleed.I figured that you knew that. My comment was more for others who might read that and assume that it was unacceptable.

Anyone knows if the MKII's mic-input delivers 3v phantom power? I got a snazzy shotgun mic for video cameras that needs the 3 volts.

No Sir it doesn't....

Here's what I got back from Ambient (the microphone manufacturer) today:

"I talked to Canon a few weeks ago and they said that this Camera does provide 3 Volts power on the Mic jack. I had a different Canon here (with a customer) yesterday though and this one - I think it read MX or similar - did not have it.
I got a adapter cable with a small battery compartment for a 3V photo battery, that could eventually work.
Regarding the connectors: we do have those in stock."

-- peer

Let us know how it works when you get the hardware....

The Zoom H4n sounds like the way to go for me. But I wondered if it's possible to e.g. feed two XLR mics into the Zoom and carry the audio from the Zoom on to the 3.5mm input of the Canon 5D Mark II? I like the security of a 'belt and braces' approach. Is there a way to do this while retaining headphone monitoring on the Zoom?

I conducted a similar approach in a recent shoot, using the 5D. I was recording to a HiMD as well as direct to the camera through an ENG44 mixer. Problem is, you don't know what you are getting in camera. In this case, I had a constant whine on the camera track because I was able to monitor and correct.