Thomas, funnily that's the first time I've heard anyone say that. What software/hardware would you use to convert? I would have thought getting an interlaced 30p to 50i was pretty difficult.

It's not just you. I've noticed the same thing in the original camera .MOV files. I hope that it can be remedied with different in-camera processing settings. It has the same sensor as the 1Ds Mark III, and I know the dynamic range on that camera is at least 13 stops when downsampled to 1080p, so ISO 1600 should have at least 9 usable stops. But if the 5D Mark II doesn't sample every pixel, I can see how it would lose latitude fast.

What bothers me much more than the poor dynamic range, though, is the aliasing (jaggies, moire). My only hope there is that Gaussian blur and resampling to 720p will remove the artifacts (that will help with the compression artifacts and noise, too).

30p to PAL 50i
 

I prefer After Effects to convert 30p to 50i. Compressor can do this as well, but you must up the preset conversion settings to best (it defaults to good), which is slow unless you have a fast machine. After Effects is fast, and looks very smooth.

When shooting, I personally prefer 30p over 24p/25p. However, Canon should include all 3.

I can't imagine it not being able to do this, especially if sold in PAL countries.

Thomas, using AE or Compressor is supposed to give variable results for fast motion for 30p to 50i. Are you saying this is not true? have you got any samples online to see?

Also the 5DmkII is only 30p in all countries, this has been verified by Canon

Best

Dan

30p to 50i
 

I recently converted one of my video projects from 30p to 50i using AE... It worked out great for me... Even fast motion looked identical to the 30p source, when viewed on a native PAL DVD player/PAL TV. I don't have any online samples. Be aware that any online samples would be 30p or 25p playback... You wouldn't see the 50i output, unless viewed on a PAL TV or Monitor. When I distribute for web playback, I always keep it 30p. All computers (worldwide) will playback 30p video files, as well as NTSC 30p DVDs (all regions). You only need to convert to 50i if distributing on PAL DVDs or for PAL Broadcast, where it will be viewed on a PAL TV.

The reason 30p converts to PAL 50i, is that you're actually adding frames (fields)...

30p (30 pictures/frames per second) - PAL 50i (50 pictures/fields per second).


*Canon sure made a mistake by not offer 25p PAL option...*

30p to 50i sidenote
 

You really only need to convert to 50i if it's going to be broadcast in PAL countries.

Most PAL DVD players will convert NTSC all region 30p to 50i output nicely for Playback on PAL TVs... It's also safer that way, so that when viewed on computers, you don't run the risk of you 30p to 50i DVD being viewed as de-interlaced 25p.

after converting 30p to 24p or 25p or 50i, just use virtualdub and check the thing frame by frame. For me this is unacceptable. An certainly you video must be exceptional to be accepted for broadcasting.

DVD players can convert on the fly 30p to 50i, but expect some speed change and ghosting on every thing moving every 4 or 5 frames.

As said, for home videos it could be ok, but I don't think it is worth the effort to shoot anything serious, taking care of all the difficult things when shooting professionally, to end with a 30p video stream.

I author straight-to web, so it's a bit of a non-issue for me. I am basing my opinion on the raw files I have downloaded and fiddled with, and they seem to really show up a lack of dynamic range. As much as I hate being an early adopter, I had an opportunity to sell my old kit, and wanted something new, so it's no big deal. But at the same time, I was curious as to other peoples views on the issue.

What frustrates me is that many of the videos have been produced in near darkness, and are of pretty rough quality, production wise, so it's hard to establish!

However, if these issues are indeed real ones, then it IS my own fault for considering being an early adopter! It's just a pity my backup choices have almost doubled in price because of the plummeting dollar. Something I had not considered!

Daniel, thats what I thought too. Most DSLR sensors have very good DR in comparison to what video people are used to, so I'm sure many assume its the same deal for video out of a FF camera sensor.

Dynamic range doesn't really look too bad in this video:

Bora Lane; Moving photography on Vimeo

The interior of the car while moving is pretty noisy, but I'm assuming that was at a pretty high ISO. I don't see any jello though.

Note: You can download the original .wmv file in the bottom right hand corner. Works on my Playstation 3. Really amazing picture quality.

Saw this link in Engadget.com

Pretty amazing stuff:

Canon's 5D Mark II: The World's First Forbidden HD Video, Finally Official!! : Akihabara News .com

Geez, the clean 35mm 1080P footage is just killing me. I've just bought a D90 simply because of the DOF control and excellent colors, plus the 24fps versus 30fps dilemma, and I'm not complaining about my purchase but I know it could look much better. Still, I needed something over my HV20 and the D90 was the best option right now and it's working out great for what I want. Yet on a technical sidenote, I wish it was more on par with the 5D Mark II's resolution and sharpness.

Here is a link to the Tokyo video at vimeo:

Tokyo Reality (Canon 5D MarkII) on Vimeo

You can download the original .mov there.

Hmm.. regarding that "Tokyo Reality" video... quite distracting rolling shutter "effect" noticable there imho... and very "videoey" colors and exposure issues - also it's very noticeable that the contrast is really really high in video mode (crushed blacks/whites).
I guess this video does really good in showcasing many of the (known) weaknesses of the cam...

Especially the rolling shutter was sometimes so bad that I was reminded of videos taken with a mobile phone :-/

I didn't notice any rolling shutter problems but that lens really breathes on the focus shifts at the end.

Apparently this cam wont be the choice for those who intend to take fast moving trains all the time.
I think the only situation when rolling shutter shall make videographers worry is when a photographer uses flash (typical case is a wedding - where the photographer is an "enemy" anyways).
I dont know whether a "normal" (non rolling shutter looks) light explosion of a flashlight is any better on a clip than a rolling shutter artifact.... Both look bad and screw up the clip. So for weddings I try to cut these off as much as possible and replace with other footage, plus I try to make the photographer understand that taking "I do" makes sense only on video but totally unnecessary to capture that very moment on a still picture. 5-6 seconds later will do and no one could tell it was not the very moment of the commitment :)
Just imagine how one's face looks when saying the "o" from "I do".
Seriously, does any customer want to see that? :)