7D vs 5D vs GH1 vs Vixia vs HVX200 Quick Shootout
 

The 7D arrived, and hence created the necessity to pit these guys against each other, or amongst each other actually. I haven't retired any of them yet. I wanted to test focal lengths compared to field of view, range of zoom, depth of field, moire and aliasing, and resolution. I did not do any motion, codec, or low light testing. I did intentionally try to include a range of lighting from proper exposure to blown out to underexposed to black. I didn't get too picky about some things, for instance, white balance - I just let the cameras do their thing, except for the HVX. Most of the footage is not color corrected or treated, except for the moire test, and my tests on blow out recovery in post.

From 1/3", 1/2", 4/3", APS-C, to FullFrame, I wanted to include 2/3" sensor size, but didn't have access to one. After all the hoopla over large sensors, it was interesting to be reminded of the 1/3" on the HVX definitely capable of some shallow depth. After seeing how crazy FullFrame DOF gets, I have a new appreciation for smaller sensors. I can see 2/3", 4/3"&APS-C, being a sweet combo for most things I do. Then if I really need the extreme shallowness, the 5D is there. I admit, all of this testing and seeing deficiencies makes me want Red Scarlet sooner than later, but I'm still blown away by all of these cameras in some way or another.

My biggest gripe? There's not one camera yet that does it all. If I could throw the 4/3" sensor from the GH1 into the HVX with aliasing controlled, include the LCD from either the 7D/5D, and record to DVCPROHD on Compact Flash cards, I'd be pretty stoked!

Here are the tests:



-steev

Thank you very much for sharing your tests and for taking the time to upload full 1080p versions. It's great to have side-by-side tests.

Wow! Thanks for taking the time to do this. It's great to be able to see these cameras alongside each other.

I was playing with a vixia HF-S10 at the weekend and I was surprised to see a fair amount of aliasing (which is less than the 7d displays)... I was looking forward to an all-in-one stills and video camera with the 7d... I'm just hoping I don't end up spending all my time cursing the fact that the image is full of artefacts.

Thanks Alex. With the Vixia, I also immediately discovered aliasing on some fine lines, but hey, it's 1/6 the price of an EX1. Most of the time at 1920 it looks great. With the aliasing artifacts, by the time it gets down to 1280x720, or 640x360, I don't notice it much and the image looks pretty awesome.

Regarding the 7D having less aliasing than the Vixia? I can't entirely agree with that. The 7D has tons of aliasing in certain situations, just as bad or worse than the Vixia. However, I'd say the aliasing is far less noticeable in shots that have shallow DOF that is possible on the 7D, but not possible on the Vixia. All this reminds me that all cameras can shoot ugly images, but it's up to us to make superior images through knowing what to avoid and playing up to the greatest strengths.

The greatest strengths of the 7D to me are:
- The large sensor that affords a lot DOF control, but not as crazy shallow like the 5D
- A solid bitrate on the codec, far superior to the GH1 in 1080
- 24p
- Compact form
- HDMI out
- Love the hard switchable live view, front shutter button focus while live view, no switching to 480p during record, and dedicated record button (these are improvements over the 5D)

Ultimately, I think of all of the cameras as artistic tools, and not necessarily technicians tools. Believe it or not, the only camera I'm still trusting with technically demanding projects is the HVX200. It has next to no aliasing issues, global shutter, no jello, and a codec that blows away the rest. However, it has all the issues we well know with noise, low res, and obviously no where near the DOF possible on these larger sensor cams.

-steev

I just watched the Latitude video, and your verdict is confusing me a bit.

"The 7D/5D are slightly better than the GH1, but still pretty awful compared to what I'm used to with the HVX"

When watching the video it seemed to me that both the 7D and 5D had more latitude than any of the other cameras. And I think they're supposed to thanks to the big sensor. Am I missing something?

What I mean by this is latitude in post processing. I think the 7D/5D have better latitude when properly exposed. However, if you over expose even a little with these cameras, you don't get your detail back.

Whereas with the HVX200, there is a famously significant amount of detail you can recover from highlight blowouts in post processing. Actually I'm impressed with the Vixia in that regard as well - although not as impressive as the HVX200.

The very last part of the Latitude video shows these attempts at recovering from highlight blowout, and the results from the GH1, 7D, and 5D are very weak.

So the take away is... be very careful with your exposure on these cameras. I am leaning towards slight underexposure at all times.

-steev

It's possible to tune the 5D2 settings for far greater latitude: HTP, neutral profile, -4 contrast, and even ALO (though I often dislike its variability). In magenta light I can squeeze as much as 10 usable stops out of the 5D2.

Oh I see, that makes sense.
So where is the headroom coming from? Do those other cameras shoot 10 bit files?

Oh man! HTP (Highlight Tone Priority) Rocks! Thanks! That makes a HUGE difference in highlight handling.

I always wonder what may come out of posting here, and you've made it worth it with that one response.

Is there any downside to using HTP?

-steev

You're very welcome.

The only possible downside is an increase in shadow noise. But the possible increase depends on the ISO setting. At ISO 3200+HTP, there is no downside at all. At ISO 1600+HTP, the increase in shadow noise is very minimal. It's only at ISO 800+HTP where you have to even consider the possibility.

The highest possible increase is at ISO 200+HTP, but even then, in typical situations, with default settings, the difference cannot be seen. In order to see the difference you have to combine it with something else that will help make the existing shadow noise visible or increase the shadow noise.

Decreasing contrast to -4 may make the increase in shadow noise visible, since the black tones are no longer black. Shooting in low CRI light (tungsten, halogen) and white balancing the light back to neutral. Also, using the broken ISO settings (125, 250, 500, 1000) increase noise by 1/3 stop.

I do seem to get vertical banding under certain circumstances. Took my camera to the dealer and tried 2 other bodies and they all seemed about the same (although I couldn't test every ISO and WB setting, lighting conditions, etc.).

But in doing some tests today I seem to get reduced to no banding with HTP off. The other day I shot outside in bright sunshine with HTP on and noticed no banding too, so maybe there is something to do with the tungsten WB and HTP. Still testing this, but that may be the downside to HTP which is a shame, and hopefully (like I believe there was for a similar problem with the early 5DMk2s) a fix in the works so we can use HTP without concerns of vertical banding.

Steev,

I just returned from a 2 day filming trip to see this thread and found it of great interest/immense value.... since I'm about to push the button on a 7D or GH1 in the next few days! (see on a couple of other threads on here)....still agonising over that choice but just to say a BIG THANKYOU for posting those comparative videos.

I'm sure I'll watch them all again multiple times in the next 2-3 days. Let me buy you a cyber beer!

Cheers! Andy

*Chug-a-lug* Cheers!!

I went for some codec/low light tests last night, and wow... these cameras really do spar against each other.

GH1 - crisper resolution across the board, but has vertical streaks in low light, a tad bit less light sensitive, fragile codec at 1080, but codec is pretty rockin at 720. I love my footage shot at 720p and slowed down.

7D - better latitude, especially with Daniel's suggestion of using HTP, very durable codec at 1080, but more aliasing than GH1 across the board, and at 720 the aliasing is even worse - I would argue that its worse than any of the other cameras. My thoughts for 720p on the 7D is to use it only with very shallow DOF so you can't see much sharpness in anything.

More low light tests tonight. Biggest problem with the GH1 in low light is the slow kit zoom lens. I wish it was f2.8 constant. Things change a LOT on the GH1 with the 20mm f1.7 in low light.

Interesting... I noticed from your shots that the codec looked pretty ropey for the GH1 (looking at the latitude tests it doesn't seem to handle underexposed detail and gradients at all well)... But are you saying it's better at 720p?

I'd love a GH1 if it didn't have such a rubbish bitrate!

Steev, I've found the 7D to have pretty crazy shallow DOF, really too shallow to use in almost any real situation:


I've loaned my XHA1 out, but I've been dying to do some comparison tests to the 7D. The 7D has incredible DOF control, but there are some other areas I really miss with the XHA1, like gradual aperture changes and the 20X L-Glass! I believe the 7D fits my style better for artistic pieces, but I'd be slow to say it is a better video camera than the XHA1.

I need to know how to ...
 

Hi!
I've watched the videos of the 5D and 7D and I did not know that the zoom function in video mode ...
I have an EOS 7D, but I do not know how to zoom in video without losing focus, how to zoom while maintaining the focus please ?
It"s important for me !
Thanks
Daniel

You are right - you can see strange artifacts on footage from the GH1 at 1080p - the worst in my opinion is the mud during fast motion, camera handling, zooming, or complex images.

However, I'm finding that the image is nearly superior to the 7D in 720p mode in resolution clarity, and lack of aliasing.

Latitude wise, again you're right - the GH1 doesn't handle highlights as well as the 7D. This is the case regardless of 1080 or 720 mode.

I totally agree. You can get crazy DOF on the 7D. But as you can see in the tests, the 5D is significantly shallower. I think you can put it to use if you have enough control over your shoot, or you have the luxury to wing it and edit around the terrible focusing. Certainly it would be foolish to shoot mission critical once in a lifetime events with tremendously shallow DOF. I've been trying to hit on this point more than once. Which leads to your next points....

[QUOTE=Roger Shealy;1439917I've loaned my XHA1 out, but I've been dying to do some comparison tests to the 7D. The 7D has incredible DOF control, but there are some other areas I really miss with the XHA1, like gradual aperture changes and the 20X L-Glass! I believe the 7D fits my style better for artistic pieces, but I'd be slow to say it is a better video camera than the XHA1.[/QUOTE]

Yes indeed on that zoom range! You just can't beat that with one of these DSLRs. The GH1 is the closest to try, but it's not constant aperture and only 10x. We shouldn't forget the pro audio on most camcorders that beats the snot out of the 5D/7D.

The GH1 actually pulls off some competitive audio with its on-board stereo mic which matches some of the best audio you'll get out of pro camcorders though. However, there's no XLR inputs, monitoring, nor metering. These DSLRs don't have ND filters built-in either. And while I'm at it... the 5D/7D are a joke for in-camera playback of the video - first/last frame and play? No fast-forward or rewind. Ugh... The GH1 gets it right in this regard - it has proper playback controls.

Soooo many things to compare and consider. Fun fun fun!!

The key thing I've discovered regarding this is obtaining lenses that are "parfocal". There's actually a good thread on this somewhere on DVinfo. It's hard to find this specification listed on any photography lenses.

On the key lenses I purchased for the 5D/7D, I made sure they are essentially parfocal. The Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 is parfocal, except for a little inaccuracy near it's minimum focusing range (focusing up close). The Canon 17-55mm f2.8 (too my gleeful surprise) is also parfocal, with the same exception of some inaccuracy focusing up close.

The GH1 kit lens is slightly parfocal - as you can see it keeps focus until the far end of telephoto and then it loses it and goes way out of focus (it couldn't focus that close while zoomed in that for. Otherwise, I think it's completely parfocal, provided you are far enough away to focus all the way zoomed in. So, in other words... this lens doesn't have a constant minimum focus distance. The 2 previous mentioned lenses for the Canon do.

The Vixia as with most camcorders worth a damn, is also parfocal, but it also has varying minimum focus for sure. For example, at wide, you can focus macro, but as you zoom in, it can't.

The HVX200 by far is the most superior performing zoom lens for video out of these 5 cameras.

Great points Steev. I agree with the advantages of the pro video recorders having features that are very useful.

I also find that when doing many types of work, having a great DSLR for stills is a huge blessing, so in that arena the 5D/7D beats the snot out of the video cams. It's really a matter of what type of work you are doing and how many cameras you can afford to keep handy. If I need sound, long play times, or there aren't "redo's" on the action, I prefer the video cams. If its a controlled situation and sound isn't much of a factor or I can carry separate audio gear.... it depends. If I'm taking a trip and want to create some creative pieces to capture the moment, say a car show, museum, hike...., or short stylistic snippets; 7D.

So Steev, if you get asked to make a 30 second commercial paying $5K showing a couple walking on a trail, eating a great candlelight dinner, playing in leaves with kids, all voiced over and piped in audio. Which cam from your arsenal would you use, if only one?

I'd use the 5DMkII for certain - if there was voice spoken by actors, I'd have the actors voice dub to conformed 24p. If I needed to have on-set dialogue to be recorded and sync'd (can't do dialogue replacement), I'd use the 7D. Why not the GH1? I must say - the weak codec.

Later today, hopefully we can ascertain how much and how soon we can say we'd use the Red Scarlet. ;)

I have a shoot tomorrow at a live event in San Francisco, and I've deliberated on what cam(s) to bring and use. I decided on the 5D, GH1, and Vixia. Yep, I'm leaving the 7D behind on this one due to excessive noise in low light as shown by my tests this evening. The 5D smokes it. So I'd rather have the ultra shallow option (and super clean image), followed by the GH1 for zoom/not as shallow DOF, and the Vixia for more camcorder style ease. I'd prefer an EX1 over the Vixia though - but I wouldn't be able to fit all 3 in a LowePro ProMag Bag!

Also stashed in the bag is the Lumix 20mm 1.7 and a LitePanels mini LED light. All fitting in a bag smaller than the Portabrace I carried my HVX rig in. Wacky!

Steve,

I was doing some tests with the 7D in low light last night preparing for a project where I want a young couple watching TV (simulated TV). The original had more noise than I'd like, but it cleaned up nicely with noise suppression:


Thank God for patient wives that tolerate their husband's hobbies and even "model" for their crazy tests!

You should have use ISO 640, it has less noise than ISO500, search on this forum and it will shows you, the one that you want to use is 160, 320, 640, 1250, and so if you need atleast ISO 500, it is better to go to ISO640 because it is cleaner.

Hmmm, wouldn't have though 640 better. Have to read up on that.

The "-1/3" ISO settings (160, 320, 640, 1250) are just digital manipulations of the next-highest ISO. 160 is actually ISO 200, darkened by 1/3 stop digitally. This reduces the highlight headroom (blows 1/3 stop more highlights compared to ISO 200 with -1/3 EC), but results in less noise. With default settings, that 1/3 stop of highlights aren't used anyway, you have to lower contrast to get at it. Those ISO settings are like the opposite of HTP: it reduces highlights to get less noise. FYI.