DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Canon EOS Full Frame for HD (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-full-frame-hd/)
-   -   A Good Conversation With Canon (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eos-full-frame-hd/142823-good-conversation-canon.html)

Jim Giberti January 31st, 2009 05:27 PM

A Good Conversation With Canon
 
I had a long and congenial talk with Canon Tech on friday.

Here's what came from it:

They (Canon US) are very aware of the situation and frustration of those of us who got the camera for HD work, and are getting constant calls about it.

He was literally amazed to learn that Nikon lenses give aperture control with a simple $15 adapter.

He was also surprised and concerned that people were rotating their "L" lenses off of the mount to trick their cameras into some form of control.

He didn't realize (and now does) the importance of a fixed shutter when shooting any project, and also now understands the importance of the 180 degree shutter angle. But most importantly the effect of arbitrary and varying shutter speeds on the essential look of any clip. He (understandably as a still camera tech) really didn't realize that, unlike still work, shutter speed can make or ruin an image

He didn't seem to think that my suggestion of a fixed 30/60/120 speed selection, or a "shutter priority" auto mode was an unreasonable request or my suggestion for the ability to hold the settings you get even if you have to trick the camera to get them.

Again, at his request we talked for at least a half hour with him asking lots of questions. He took notes and personal info about me and my company and my history with Canon.

He said he was going to deliver my concerns and ideas up the chain.

I at least felt like I got my points across and he understood that most of us are not asking for Canon to redo or add features to the camera.

As I said, most of the professional users are grown ups and got into this with our eyes open - but I think most of us were shocked to find that even essential controls like shutter speed were disabled.

I reinforced that no one was reasonably expecting 24p, peaking, XLR inputs or audio monitoring, but he was very understanding when I told him that a two day shoot in perfect snowy conditions at one of Americas top winter resorts was ruined when we got back to the studio with the footage and virtually every clip differed from the next because the shutter speed ruined the effect of the falling snow.

At 60 to 80 it was exactly what we were going for (with a two camera shoot) but much of the footage was shot at absurd shutter speeds in the hundreds, and the perfect falling snow was ruined as was the new TV commercial and next years DVD marketing piece.

That's hardly a feather In Canon's cap and is frankly intolerable from a professional standpoint.

So, my suggestions:

Allow for basic control of a simple range of shutter speeds. Allow the shooter to "know" what settings he's actually shooting at, and allow those settings to hold until the shooter wants to change them. Other than that it's still a full auto Movie mode and audio mode. It's then up to us whether we want to use Nikons and the Beachtek pre-amp to make it more professional and controllable. But why punish your users with arbitrary automation that can literally ruin their best efforts?

He was great to talk to and genuinely concerned over the issues that he hadn't previously understood and suggested that at least Canon saw this as a problem but he didn't know how they might address it.

I'd suggest more people call and have cordial and reasonable conversations with them in order to reinforce our concerns.

Julian Frost January 31st, 2009 05:52 PM

I think a letter-writing campaign to Canon might prove beneficial, if we keep the requests down to "Please upgrade the firmware in the 5D mk II to allow the user to manually set both the aperture and shutter speed." The letters could also briefly explain why this is necessary, and that many people are buying Nikon lenses and an adapter, instead of Canon lenses, to get manual aperture control.

What we need is the mailing address of a few contacts at Canon who have some power to make such decisions. Any suggestions?

Julian

Josh Dahlberg January 31st, 2009 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti (Post 1004650)
I had a long and congenial talk with Canon Tech on friday

Thanks for sharing Jim.

As a Pal user I am reasonably expecting 25p (though not holding my breath).

Mark Moreve February 1st, 2009 02:57 AM

A Good conversation with Canon
 
I recently had the same sort of conversation with Nick Millen from Canon UK & asked if there was a possibility of manual control when using video mode. The reply was that they were aware that a lot of people want this but he could not tell me if something was going to be done about it. I think we have to keep asking and writing letters. I could post his email address but I'm not sure if this is a bit unethical.

Mugurel Dragusin February 1st, 2009 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Moreve (Post 1004747)
I could post his email address but I'm not sure if this is a bit unethical.

TIP: Search for his address using a search engine. If you find the said address publicly available on a Canon website then you could post the link to the page :) If the address is private, better ask for permission or set-up a dedicated e-mail account to which you provide him with the username and password (and us the address so we can write to) :)

Paul Cascio February 1st, 2009 09:23 AM

You might also contact the photography, tech and video magazines and ask them to put write about this matter.

Mark Moreve February 1st, 2009 09:23 AM

A Good conversation with Canon
 
Ok here is a link to the Canon professional network website on here are loads of email address's to different Canon reps all over the world so I suggest we all ask & keep asking.
Canon Professional Network - Index

Elizabeth Lowrey February 1st, 2009 02:29 PM

Great work, Jim. I hope these efforts actually produce some results.

I've mainly chimed in on public message boards about these issues in hope or expectation that Canon reps (like those of other major brands) actually monitor feedback on their products. But if actual letter-writing to specific Canon folks is going to get the job done, I'll certainly make it a point to compose one and get it off this week.

Jim Giberti February 1st, 2009 05:10 PM

They do monitor them to some extent Elizabeth and one of the reasons I think they pay attention to places like this is because of the way it's run with real life contributors without aliases, and with a professional environment. Hey, I've been edited if I've been too opinionated here.

Anyway, I think that reasonable people respond most readily to other reasonable people and reasonable requests - especially when it's in both party's interests, short term and long term. As I've said, I don't know nor is it my business what Canon's business strategy may be between the video and still divisions or future DSLR evolution. And I don't think they made the decisions with the 5DII to be punitive. But I do think they may not have realized how many people would adopt this system specifically for HD not as an add on feature and how restrictive it would be for them.

That's why I've been clear about not asking for things that change the basic concept or add features. To begin with, given it's extremely limited audio capabilities at every level, form factor, clip length, and general features, it will never threaten a dedicated HD production camera.

The things I've discussed would maintain the concept of the camera while making it a real creative tool for all of the professionals who are buying it, and allow them to get the quality of image it's capable of in a creative manner; rather than fighting and tricking it and guessing about it's basic settings, using other manufacturer's lenses or uncoupling Canon's.

Ed Kukla February 1st, 2009 07:18 PM

full manual control
 
If they change this camera to a full manual control, I will probably buy one; selling my Nikon equipment along the way. Without this feature, I'll stick to traditional video cameras.

Wacharapong Chiowanich February 1st, 2009 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Kukla (Post 1005035)
If they change this camera to a full manual control, I will probably buy one;

I suspect that is precisely why the camera is crippled with the full auto video mode that requires burdensome and otherwise unnecessary workarounds in order to perform up to the standards of most capable videographers. I'm quite convinced the lack of manual shutter speed and iris (aperture) controls is intentional by Canon to protect its camcorder markets. Can't think of another reason, to be honest. Same with the provision of a mic jack but lack of mic level control which is available in several far cheaper camcorders and is such a very basic requirement for having good audio.

All of the above will be corrected once Nikon, who has no camcorder market to protect, comes up with a better version of the D90.

Wacharapong

Tim Polster February 1st, 2009 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti (Post 1004650)
I reinforced that no one was reasonably expecting 24p, peaking, XLR inputs or audio monitoring, but he was very understanding when I told him that a two day shoot in perfect snowy conditions at one of Americas top winter resorts was ruined when we got back to the studio with the footage and virtually every clip differed from the next because the shutter speed ruined the effect of the falling snow.

At 60 to 80 it was exactly what we were going for (with a two camera shoot) but much of the footage was shot at absurd shutter speeds in the hundreds, and the perfect falling snow was ruined as was the new TV commercial and next years DVD marketing piece.

That's hardly a feather In Canon's cap and is frankly intolerable from a professional standpoint.


In Canon's defense, the 5DII IS a professional instrument, a still camera.

If the two day shoot was a professional video shoot, I would have to make the point of why was an un-proven still camera used?

Canon added this as a feature, not as the main purpose of the camera.

I am very excited about the direction we are heading, and improvements need to be made, but I don't think it is fair to hold Canon's feet to the fire.

Jon Fairhurst February 2nd, 2009 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Polster (Post 1005099)
Canon added this as a feature, not as the main purpose of the camera.

The 5D can definitely work on the shoot described, but I would do it with ND filters and Nikon lenses. With practice, the camera does its job.

The lack of manual features didn't stop me from buying it. I'd buy it all over again. Unfortunately the lack of manual features irritate users on every single take. This isn't a matter of "not being professional." It's more like an amazingly beautiful pair of shoes that gives you blisters. Amateurs don't like irritants any more than pros do.

That the feature hobbles Canon lenses makes the decision unfathomable. None of the other limitations (audio, aliasing, form factor, frame rate, etc, etc) turn EF lenses into second class citizens. Only the lack of manual mode does.

I really hope Canon sees the light on this one. It would be good for all involved.

Mark Moreve February 2nd, 2009 08:37 AM

A Good conversation with Canon
 
I wrote an email to the Canon UK rep yesterday asking for more control and if that was not possible just the fact that we could lock the exposure settings until we want them unlocked here is the reply I got.

"Thank you for your feedback and taking the time to forward me your observations and suggestions. I have forwarded your email to the relevant parties and I appreciate that your thoughts echo a number of photographers who share similar ideas, I know Canon is working on improving the camera through firmware updates and I am hopeful that some of your suggestions will materialise in future updates."

I think that it sounds quite promising but I really also think we all need to send them as many emails as we can. I don't think it matters if this camera in it's video mode is used professionally or not it just matters that as a "feature" on the camera its works properly otherwise what's the point of having the feature ! I also sent him and one of his colleagues links to this site so they can see what people are saying. So keep writing !

Paul Cascio February 2nd, 2009 08:44 AM

I believe that much of the 5D's success has been because of its video capabilities. As a still camera, it's evolutionary, it's the video that makes it revolutionary.

Michael Murie February 2nd, 2009 10:10 AM

This conversation really confirms what I already believed; that Canon didn't cripple the camera intentionally. If you look at the video capabilities of the PowerShot models, you can clearly see the video capability getting better and better; but always coming from the direction of still camera builders, not video camera makers. It's like they've had to learn everything again.

I still doubt that Canon will update the 5D - though I guess there's always hope - but I'm hopeful that if enough people get the word to Canon, it will mean that the 60D has a much better implementation!

Jim Giberti February 2nd, 2009 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst (Post 1005169)
The 5D can definitely work on the shoot described, but I would do it with ND filters and Nikon lenses. With practice, the camera does its job.

The lack of manual features didn't stop me from buying it. I'd buy it all over again. Unfortunately the lack of manual features irritate users on every single take. This isn't a matter of "not being professional." It's more like an amazingly beautiful pair of shoes that gives you blisters. Amateurs don't like irritants any more than pros do.

That the feature hobbles Canon lenses makes the decision unfathomable. None of the other limitations (audio, aliasing, form factor, frame rate, etc, etc) turn EF lenses into second class citizens. Only the lack of manual mode does.

I really hope Canon sees the light on this one. It would be good for all involved.

Jon and the previous poster, with all respect - no it can't.

If you produce sports of any kind (I've done 2 Olympic documentaries in the past 4 years for instance and lot's of winter sports), fussing around simply isn't an option. Even with variable NDs, the time it would take to get the correct shutter and, because you lose all settings automatically, regain your settings means you simply don't get the shots. If, as Canon claims, this is more a photojournalists tool, then all the more reason that quick adjustments of parameters that can make or break a shot is a pretty obvious necessity.

I'll make one simple point.

Not unlike a previous post, Canon's regular response so far has been, paraphrasing -"The 5D MKII wasn't developed as a professional video camera."

Well, how did we get from that to - This camera has absolutely no controls over basic parameters at all?

That's a very wide chasm.

As I've said, the camera, even with full manual control, is still not close to a professional video camera in many, many big ways.

However, given that it was completely hobbled in implementation, it simply doesn't live up to their claims of the 5DII as a photojournalists tool, and it absolutely doesn't live up to the promises of it's own White Paper regarding the control of DOF available only in high end video cameras.

This is in fact a problem.

Jordan Oplinger February 2nd, 2009 02:00 PM

bravo! Excellent post! While I love this camera for monkeying around and shooting events (where the "auto" mode is somewhat usable), it would NEVER stand up to a production environment where you, I dunno, actually have to put up lights? I have a lot of the same criticisms of the RED. For as much press/hype as that camera has received, there are still issues that hinder production in some cases.

Michael Murie February 2nd, 2009 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti (Post 1005324)
Not unlike a previous post, Canon's regular response so far has been, paraphrasing -"The 5D MKII wasn't developed as a professional video camera."

Well, how did we get from that to - This camera has absolutely no controls over basic parameters at all?

That's a very wide chasm.

If you look at the video options in Canon's other digital cameras, I don't think any of them - like the PowerShot S5 - have controls over basic parameters when in video mode.

Jim Giberti February 2nd, 2009 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Murie (Post 1005439)
If you look at the video options in Canon's other digital cameras, I don't think any of them - like the PowerShot S5 - have controls over basic parameters when in video mode.

For obvious reasons they never presented any of them with promotional promises like this (from Canon's 5DII White Paper):

"The 1080p HDvideo recording mode represents a paradigm shift for still photographers and videographers alike, and promises to open new creative doors and commercial opportunities for advanced, professional, and fine art photographers. With it activated, photographers and video-graphers can capture high definition video with depth-of-field control found only in professional video models—using much more affordable Canon EF lenses including fisheye, ultra-wide,and image stabilized lenses."

Clearly Canon is marketing directly to me and professionals in general here. They specifically say this camera is for professionals and videographers and offers DOF control only available on high end video cameras. In fact, the video features as currently implemented on the 5DII are, by definition, Point and Shoot only.

Michael Murie February 2nd, 2009 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti (Post 1005540)
...Clearly Canon is marketing directly to me and professionals in general here. They specifically say this camera is for professionals and videographers ...

I think Canon would say - and even that paragraph can be read this way - that the camera is for "professional photographers" and for "videographers." Not for professional videographers. The words professional and videographer are in two separate sentences.

Don't get me wrong, I wish they'd make a few changes too. It's so close to being great, it's maddening.

Jon Fairhurst February 2nd, 2009 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Murie (Post 1005552)
I think Canon would say - and even that paragraph can be read this way - that the camera is for "professional photographers" and for "videographers." Not for professional videographers. The words professional and videographer are in two separate sentences.

Here's the deal. Nobody shoots a thirty minute clip of their kids on a VHS tape and just plays it anymore. America's Funniest Home Videos hasn't been on prime time for a long, long time.

Today, any bozo with $50 worth of software can edit two clips of video together.

Yes. Amateurs edit.

Even amateurs would like their two measly clips to match when cut together.

Amateur vs. pro is just a talking point. It's really about competence vs. incompetence.

To get competent video, we need consistency between shots. (Duh.) And to get that, we need to trick the camera. And this makes us look incompetent. I don't like looking incompetent.

"Wait, wait. I almost have it... Dang... Okay. This time I'll get it... Dang... Third time's the charm..."

That's a number of steps below amateur.

Michael Murie February 2nd, 2009 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst (Post 1005575)
Today, any bozo with $50 worth of software can edit two clips of video together.

Well, I went to today's America's Funniest Home Videos (YouTube) and yes the bozos are editing, but they don't even notice the exposure differences!

YouTube - Nikon D90 ????5 cat Cyami?HD

This is a Featured video! It's had 206,453 views and at least in the first page of comments, there's nothing about the problems in exposure from one cut to another. (And seriously, are people overlooking those problems because of the compelling content?!)

Daniel Lipats February 2nd, 2009 11:56 PM

I read in the news that many people that think they are watching HD are in fact watching SD. I think we sometimes forget that the average Joe (client or audience) under most circumstances would not take much notice at 24p or 30p, 180 degree or 360 degree shutter.

I'm not suggesting it's not important. We know the difference, and the effect it can have on the audience but our eyes are trained to look for it. Be it corporate videos, weddings, commercials or films we are creating art rather than just a 'video'.

Mark Hahn February 3rd, 2009 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti (Post 1005540)
For obvious reasons they never presented any of them with promotional promises like this (from Canon's 5DII White Paper):

"The 1080p HDvideo recording mode represents a paradigm shift for still photographers and videographers alike, and promises to open new creative doors and commercial opportunities for advanced, professional, and fine art photographers. With it activated, photographers and video-graphers can capture high definition video with depth-of-field control found only in professional video models—using much more affordable Canon EF lenses including fisheye, ultra-wide,and image stabilized lenses."

Clearly Canon is marketing directly to me and professionals in general here. They specifically say this camera is for professionals and videographers and offers DOF control only available on high end video cameras. In fact, the video features as currently implemented on the 5DII are, by definition, Point and Shoot only.

I feel the video is good for P&S, and high-end pros, but not in the middle. A top-notch videographer knows where this camera can help, such as in low-light and shallow depth-of-field. He also knows when not to use it and what it cannot do. He can match scenes in post.

Ironically, the semi-pro, who this should have been aimed at, struggles to get better than P&S quality productions and use it for the entire shoot. I think still photographers who want to try video fall into this semi-pro category.

Jon Fairhurst February 3rd, 2009 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Hahn (Post 1005697)
I think still photographers who want to try video fall into this semi-pro category.

And, ironically, if anybody understands what aperture, shutter speed and ISO mean, it's still photographers. It's not like this is a microwave oven that happens to have a video feature.

Jim Giberti February 3rd, 2009 02:22 PM

No offense guys but these are non-issues in this discussion. I don't know of a single professional who makes a living or a penny via youtube. That is by definition the home of amateur video.

On the other hand, professionals deliver their products for broadcast on national and regional networks and distributed at the highest quality media/compression possible for playback on VGA, SD and often on huge wide screens for corporate and other film making...even serious wedding shooters need a look as good as the wedding photography to make top dollar.

The fact that Joe the Plumber still laughs at "Ow My Balls" shot on a pocketknife and edited on PlaySkool just ain't what the 5D MKII is about. And if you think that cutting different shutter speeds together in the same timeline doesn't compromise and even ruin the project, then you really haven't worked at this level.

Different shutter speeds have a great place in creative acquisition - when you are going for a specific look and when you can control them.

Jay Bloomfield February 3rd, 2009 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti (Post 1005983)
...Different shutter speeds have a great place in creative acquisition - when you are going for a specific look and when you can control them.

Could you elaborate on that? Shutter speeds in still photography will give you a certain look. But varying the shutter speed in videography is far more inflexible, because of the interaction with frame rate. The further the shutter speed is away from double the inverse of the frame rate, the worse the results are going to look. That's the whole point of trying to achieve a 180 degree shutter. I don't think any of us yet, exactly understand the algorithm that Canon uses to govern the interaction of shutter speed, aperture and ISO in the 5D2, but one would guess that the shutter speed tries to stay as close to 1/60, as it can, before some other factor intercedes.

Sure, you can shoot video at 1/10 sec or 1/1000 sec on many camcorders, but the result is a "special effect" and probably not what was intended. Fast shutter speeds won't stop high speed action properly, unless they are done on a special, high frame rate camcorder.

John Vincent February 3rd, 2009 03:04 PM

Jim, absolutely great thread. You more or less nail exactly why many people who haven't bought the camera - although very interested - are still on the fence (I'm one of them).

You also nail why people who have bought the cam are frustrated. Your point that even if everything was fully adjustable, it still wouldn't be a video camera is spot on.

john

Jon Fairhurst February 3rd, 2009 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay Bloomfield (Post 1005993)
...Shutter speeds in still photography will give you a certain look. But varying the shutter speed in videography is far more inflexible, because of the interaction with frame rate.

The Normandy scenes in Saving Private Ryan and the action scenes in the Bourne movies are great examples of how fast shutter speeds can be put to use. We want that look where it makes sense, and we absolutely need to avoid it where it doesn't.

Quote:

I don't think any of us yet, exactly understand the algorithm that Canon uses to govern the interaction of shutter speed, aperture and ISO in the 5D2, but one would guess that the shutter speed tries to stay as close to 1/60, as it can, before some other factor intercedes.
Regarding the 5D Mark II shutter speeds, 1/60 is not achievable. I can shoot at virtually any ISO at ~1/45 (actual, not reported), and I can shoot at 1/45, 1/80 and a number of faster speeds to at least 1/500 at 100 ISO.

See my test here: Canon 5D Mark II Shutter Exposed on Vimeo

Quote:

Sure, you can shoot video at 1/10 sec or 1/1000 sec on many camcorders, but the result is a "special effect" and probably not what was intended. Fast shutter speeds won't stop high speed action properly, unless they are done on a special, high frame rate camcorder.
1/30 is the slowest possible frame rate that a 30 fps camera. You can't hold the shutter open for 1/10 sec within the limits of a 1/30 second frame.

Jim Giberti February 3rd, 2009 03:07 PM

Nothing to elaborate Jay, you just explained it as I've been doing. I mentioned the idea of using other than a 180 angle as something you might use and only if you could control it , bviously. The extreme example being a very slow shutter speed.

Again, as I've said, all of our 24p cameras are locked at 1/48. When we shot with earlier Canons that shot at 30f they were defaulted to 1/60.

There is no practical reason for the 5DII to be set anywhere other than 1/60 and stay there forever. Canon could and should do that immediately. It would remove one of biggest drawbacks to the creative use of the camera - the arbitrarily varying shutter speed does nothing but cause problems when shooting in Movie Mode.
We certainly don't need that as a third unknowable auto function.

It seems to be a classic case of Still photography design getting confused with the necessities of filmmaking/videography.

You may have missed my initial post that started this thread, but my call to Canon regarded a two day, two 5DII shoot for a major client that was ruined because of the varying shutter.

I'm going to post a short piece this week - not the footage in question that was for national TV - but with the same issue. It's a really pretty promotional piece shot in similarly perfect falling snow...very cinematic - until the beautiful falling snow turns into frenetic random bits of white because the camera decided it had to be shooting at a ridiculously high shutter speed.

The piece is still nice, but I couldn't present it to a client or air it on TV.

Canon really needs to start by simply leaving the shutter alone. using the shutter as some form of exposure control is simply absurd when shooting film or video and Canon should know that.

They certainly were appreciative of learning of it in my conversation, and Tech literally wasn't aware of the negative impact it had.

Jim Giberti February 3rd, 2009 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Vincent (Post 1006010)
Jim, absolutely great thread. You more or less nail exactly why many people who haven't bought the camera - although very interested - are still on the fence (I'm one of them).

You also nail why people who have bought the cam are frustrated. Your point that even if everything was fully adjustable, it still wouldn't be a video camera is spot on.

john

Thanks John. My reason for it and my fairly lengthy responses is to keep it out there for Canon and to get as many people to communicate it to them directly. My personal experience with them was great as it has been for a long time.

Quick aside but very relevant from a long time customer relationship standpoint.

My very first quality SLR was a Canon film camera. Our first video cameras once we moved from Sony Beta stuff were Canon Xl1s, Xl1Ss, XL2s. The first break from Canon for me was the first JVC HD and to Nikon.

I went Nikon because I'd built a huge top end Nikon lens collection shooting with the Mini35 and Letus.

When this camera arrived I was so psyched and ready to reinvest in all Canon cameras and glass and stay with this new approach to acquisition going forward. I still love the camera's quality and promise, but they're requiring me to use my Nikons instead of investing in all the "L: glass I planned on and they're making it much more difficult than quality film making has ever been for me in the past 10 years.

This camera should make beautiful filmmaking easy and fast for people experienced in both media - and it would if they just made a couple of simple modifications to the firmware.

From a customer/corporate standpoint it makes a lot more sense for them to reconsider their decision regarding their paradoxical design of a professional point and shoot camera, than for me and my company to reconsider my decision to reinvest in their technology for years to come.

Jay Bloomfield February 3rd, 2009 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst (Post 1006011)
The Normandy scenes in Saving Private Ryan and the action scenes in the Bourne movies are great examples of how fast shutter speeds can be put to use. We want that look where it makes sense, and we absolutely need to avoid it where it doesn't.

I think I pointed that out the "Saving Private Ryan" effect in a previous thread (as have many others). That (strobing) qualifies as a special effect. In photography, using a fast shutter speed stops action, period.

Quote:

Regarding the 5D Mark II shutter speeds, 1/60 is not achievable. I can shoot at virtually any ISO at ~1/45 (actual, not reported), and I can shoot at 1/45, 1/80 and a number of faster speeds to at least 1/500 at 100 ISO.
Well, I'll take your word for it, but we are all relying on what the camera is displaying. Unfortunately, none of us have any idea as to whether that shutter speed value is completely accurate or not, since the frame by frame metadata that exists on the MOV file is not readable by any software that's commercially available. I asked David Newman of Cineform if they could add that "debugging" option to HDLink & their encoder. He was interested in the idea, but it obviously isn't their top priority. Further, whether one could translate the metadata (frame not file header, which is already available) from the MOV file correctly or not is questionable. For HDV camcorders, there is a wonderful piece of freeware called HDV Data Monitor that displays shutter, gain and aperture, frame by frame, both in RT and for m2t files. Maybe someone who is presently fooling around trying to hack the 5D2, would be better off spending their time on a MOV file frame metadata displayer.

Also, even if that shutter speed display is accurate, it may be due to the "tinkering" that everyone is doing to achieve some semblance of manual control. This tinkering could disrupt the algorithm altogether. My point is that it would be illogical for Canon not to target 1/60 in their algorithm. But then again, Mr. Spock didn't design the 5D2.

Quote:

1/30 is the slowest possible frame rate that a 30 fps camera. You can't hold the shutter open for 1/10 sec within the limits of a 1/30 second frame.
Actually, a lot of camcorders have slower than 1/30 shutter speeds at 30 fps. What you're saying is that there is no benefit derived and that's my original point.

Jon Fairhurst February 3rd, 2009 05:49 PM

It really is a paradox.

"It's for amateurs, therefore it's difficult to use properly." Huh?

"And by the way, please buy Nikon manual lenses." Double huh?

At a minimum, they should release firmware that holds the AE Lock until you deactivate it or exit Live View. AE Lock should not deactivate when you stop recording.

We'd still have to use a flashlight once per use, but we could set a long timeout, lock the settings (at 1/45) and fine tune (the ISO) as needed for each shot with Exposure Compensation. That would help reduce the constant irritation of tricking the camera on every dang take. Doing it once during prep isn't nearly as unreasonable.

It still wouldn't fix the lens problem. In other words, it would reduce the problem for owners, but still wouldn't fix Canon's business problem of selling the other guy's lenses - and possibly motivating us to buy the other guy's body next time around.

Still, if AE Lock didn't deactivate each time we stop recording, it would make the camera MUCH more efficient in real-world use.

Lars T. Therkildsen February 4th, 2009 11:08 AM

I recently wrote to Canon with the same requests as you guys have been doing. My first reply was a standard one about DoF, which had nothing to do with what I asked for (24/25p and manual controls). As I wrote, fiddling with the camera makes you look unprofessional, but also gives them a bad name (customers will notice that it's a Canon you are shooting on) and that we are looking at Nikon lenses now.

Aaaanyway I got a second reply, which didn't confirm anything about a firmware update. What it did say was among other things:

"...
We are well aware of the interest that some photographers and
videographers have in gaining more control over the footage they shoot.
I'm not sure what we may or may not do to address the points you
mentioned, but we are always looking to improve the functionality of our
cameras.

In addition to what ******* mentioned, you can also use the AE Lock
button and the Exposure Compensation controls to tweak what settings the
camera uses.

If you have not done so already, you might also find some interesting
ideas about controlling the camera at sites like dvinfo.net. We don't
endorse everything found on those forum-based sites, but they tend to
have a wide range of knowledgeable professionals who are ready to share
their own thoughts and experiences. Perhaps some of their techniques
will be helpful to you."

At least they are looking at this site. Don't know what to think from the reply.

Michael Murie February 4th, 2009 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti (Post 1005983)
No offense guys but these are non-issues in this discussion. I don't know of a single professional who makes a living or a penny via youtube. That is by definition the home of amateur video.

Maybe, but people are making money on YouTube, and do you really want to argue that the internet isn't where everything is going to end up?

There was a report recently that The Wall Street Journal is giving reporters Sony HDR-HC9's to capture video to put on their website. The Wall Street Journal Standardizes on the Sony HDR-HC9 - Other

Check out a bunch of clips on YouTube like this one from Davos (Jet Li joins the Davos Debates): YouTube - Jet Li joins the Davos Debates

When Canon talks about professional photographers having the ability to capture video, I think it's primarily this kind of use that they had in mind.

Even when they talk about wedding photographers using it to capture video, I don't think they meant wedding videographers.


Don't get me wrong, this is one bozo that would also like more manual controls. I just don't get the indignation and the implied "Canon is trying to screw us." If you don't understand where Canon is coming from, how are you going to communicate with them?

Jim Giberti February 4th, 2009 02:06 PM

You certainly didn't read that here. From the title of the thread to specific comments about Canon not doing this to be punitive and the need to convey information they may not have considered congenially, has been the tone of this discussion. I think you're hyping this a bit or misreading it, but I think we're pretty comfortable with the balanced tone and message here.

At the same time, if you've lost valuable time and resources because as you work with something more of the flaws are revealed, then of course you're going to convey that - and early in the products history is the time to do it.

But as a professional consultant in just these things, to answer your last rhetorical question - I would never say "Canon is trying to screw us" - I've said just the opposite. And I make a living communicating with top CEOs and teaching companies how too communicate everyday so I'm good there too.

Jay Bloomfield February 4th, 2009 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Murie (Post 1006525)
... When Canon talks about professional photographers having the ability to capture video, I think it's primarily this kind of use that they had in mind. ...

And that's really the point here. The only real blunder that Canon made was not including 25p for our friends on the continent (and elsewhere). I would be shocked if there isn't a firmware upgrade that adds that capability. Of course, that would also get everybody a frame rate that could be reasonably converted to 24p.

But all this consumer backlash is good, in that it is most likely speeding up the process of Canon (and Sony and maybe even Nikon) to produce a full frame/large sensor camcorder that looks very much like the SONY EX-3. So, all and all, the pressure, complaints, etc. won't be wasted.

Jon Fairhurst February 4th, 2009 02:31 PM

I think Canon is trying to balance their still and pro video camera business models. They're not trying to harm anybody.

And I think most of their product decisions have been spot on. They didn't compromise their still camera at all to accommodate video. There are no new video knobs or appendages. The 5D MkI user can use the MkII without skipping a beat.

I can even understand not having 24p (though I would very much like it). Many video cameras didn't support 24p until recently.

The difficulty of getting our shots to match when edited back-to-back, however, is a real problem. As I wrote earlier, in the analog age, amateurs didn't edit. In the digital age, everybody does - even amateurs and young children.

I'm not feeling screwed. I'm feeling that a very minor change in the firmware would make the camera enjoyable to use, and that I would be shopping for a whole different set of lenses.

Most of all, I would be transformed from an annoyed customer to a reasonably loyal one.

Tomaso Perrone February 4th, 2009 03:15 PM

I'm in Canada and would love to get to a *real* person!
I have gone through the Customer Support channel - only to be bombarded by form letters
I think the only way to get a real response is to talk to a person.

Tom


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:24 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network