So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I've been a little spoilt in terms of capturing image detail as the owner of an XF300 and Gh2, which in fairness both resolve appreciably more detail than the 5D3 (and its predecessor).

I purchased a 5D3 for other reasons - low noise, DOF control, that pretty full frame image - knowing it may be a little lacklustre in terms of sheer resolving power.

Even so, I was perturbed by early samples on the web that showed the 5D3 to be Soft with a capital S. And some of the early reviews (like Phil Blooms, just out) tend to support this impression.

Over the past couple of days I've shot a lot of clips with the 5D3, basically trying to determine whether to hold onto it (and my Canon kit) or invest more heavily in the Gh2 with external recorder, rig etc.

On day one things were looking pretty bleak for the 5D3; with its elder sibling's inclination towards aliasing and false detail heavily suppressed, footage really does look soft when sharpness is turned down full.

However, the more I've played around with the 5D3, the more I'm learning to love it, and it looks like it will be the Gh2 that gets the boot.

Two reasons really: pixel peeping aside, there's no denying the full frame image (combined with low noise and lovely colour) really is pretty. And secondly, once you get to know the camera, there's a lot of room to play with sharpness, both via the internal settings and in post.

I had a quick play with this shot of my lad, ISO800, f2 earlier today. Sharpness was set at 3 in camera (in future I'll dial this down further after learning more about what the codec can withstand in post).

The shot is repeated four times in sequence:
* the first is the unmodified clip
* the second is a quick FCPX grade plus a touch of sharpening
* the third solely applies Crumplepop Finisher with a touch of detail enhancement
* the forth solely applies Crumplepop Tonegrade, also with a touch of detail enhancement

While it's hard to see at 720p (1080 grabs attached below), adding a fine degree of sharpening in post really makes the image pop, and because the 5D3's codec appears to be relatively robust, and the noise performance so good, the image withstands post enhancement very well.

Overall, I'm increasingly finding this camera resolves all the detail I need to work with.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Interesting post Josh. I've read on other forums some posts by early adopters of the 5DMkIII that anything more than 1 on the in-camera sharpening setting introduces a halo effect.

The general consensus that appears to be emerging from my reading all over the place (and it's still shifting ground...) is that the actual resolution of this camera is somewhere between 700 and 800 lines, the lower figure seeming more tangible. I guess the evidence will emerge to prove what it is very soon, if it's not out there already.

Like you, a number of owners are suggesting that little to no sharpening in-camera is the route to take, with sharpening added in post (i.e. to avoid this Canon halo effect) in order to make the image "pop" 5DMkII style.

Keep sending us useful info Josh!

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I think that colour, sharpness, tones, details within shadows/highlights etc are subjective and depend on the chosen subject matter, personal preferences and aimed audiences. Colour grading is one subject within video that often depends on the mood you are trying to convey.
I do like sharp images, but do not like the perchance lately for false tinting, cool blues, overly dark scenes, or washed-out colours that are often present in many recent films.

For example, I actually prefer the non-graded slightly softer unmodified clip. The warmer colour (although slightly on the yellow side of the spectrum) provides a warmer emotion to the scene, and the subjects skin tones are better.
The second FCPX clip is far too magenta.
The third clip slightly too blue (although probably the best in terms of balanced colours).
The fourth clip is too green.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I've never been bothered by the low level of detail in the mkII as long as the overall image looks good. I've never been able to use the in-camera sharpening at all though - even at it's lowest level I see haloing around highlights - so the fact that these were shot with sharpening on in camera is encouraging to me as I don't notice that in the uncorrected shot at all. I've also found a 10% sharpening after the grade in Color tends to make things pop better, but any more than that and the aliasing starts showing up (not just on horizontal lines, but tiny facial details as well, etc). It certainly seems that there's several improvements in the mkIII that give more room to sharpen the image if desired.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Yep... and I wasn't trying to suggest the graded images look any better necessarily - it was just an attempt to test how sharpening (using a few different tools) affects the image.

What I'm encouraged by is that an ISO800 image in the camera's native format can be manipulated quite easily without falling apart. And this is Evan's point really... I too have a preference for soft, graceful images, but it's nice to know the 5DIII offers more room to move than it's predecessor.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I think the first, unmodified image is by far the best Josh.
The tone and latitude are superior and with a little work with curves it could look sharper with no "sharpening".

I'd stay away from any and all in camera sharpening.

I think if anything the first image shows that the 5D continues to offer a great 35mm image.

We shoot everything flat and create the final look in post and as long as you start with a solid exposure the 5D (either) stands up well to quality finishing and grading.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I think in a way, yes, the 5DMKII & the MKIII are soft. It is the difference between detail and sharpening. You can not replace detail.

This reminds me of when I had an HPX-500. I dialed down the in-camera detail to take away the edge fringing and sharpened in post. It helped a lot but it is not the same as having a true, high resolution image.

The image is still very nice but I will say that I am disappointed Canon did not give the MKIII more detail. I think the full frame sensor helps things look more detailed due to the selective focus as well.

Thanks for posting and good luck with your decision. I am staying with the GH2.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Film is often fairly soft, also. I think it's about choosing the right "tool" for the job. The 5D's will never be a good choice for wide, landscape shots (er, in video mode, anyways). But for interview shots... faces... there's nothing quite like it. Vista Vision DOF, subtle skin tone variations. We just don't need (or often want) lots of sharpness for these shots. APS and M4/3 sensors just aren't large enough (IMHO) to render faces the "cinematic" way I like to see them.

Is it possible to make a FF cam that's also sharp? I guess we'll soon enough see some head-to-head shots of Canon's new FF solutions vs. Nikon's .

Me? I'll settle for soft, FF, and little or no moire' in my shots. And pick up a different cam when I need sharp and wide. I guess my old XH-A1 might still do that. Or a GH2.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Not wanting to flog a dead horse here, but (despite all the insightful responses above ), I note Philip Bloom has found that if you set the 5DIII to zero sharpening it does appear uber soft, but it responds very well to sharpening in post.

To quote Philip (http://philipbloom.net/2012/03/22/5dmk3/):

"Bit of grading and post sharpening the footage is coming to life beautifully. Detail that is not there before is coming out….thankfully!"

Moire/aliasing is practically gone and post work really livens things up, so there's no question it's capable of a superior image to the Mark II (not to mention ISO performance, which really is a dream).

I'm really loving the images I'm getting out of this camera, and I agree fully with Brian above, for many shots an elegant softness is highly desirable. However, I think for most users/applications there will be times that shots will benefit from some form of sharpening for 1080 playback.

With this in mind, my question is (having no experience/need to sharpen before), is subtle use of the simple "sharpen" filter in FCP7 and FCPX (for those who have it) all that's required here, or is there an alternative that's both easy and superior?

(Remember, the first ungraded image above already had sharpening of 3 applied in camera.)

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

For landscape photography, the Canon 5D Mark II, matched with the highest quality lenses, is one of the best cameras that you can buy. I also love the detail it delivers in landscape photography when small apertures are used...far better than most camcorders that have tiny sensors.

The Canon 5D Mark III does I'm sure match and exceed the stills performance of the Mark2 version, so would be a great choice for both stills & video landscape photography, especially wide vistas using wide angle lenses. The video and stills quality from a prime wide angle or high performance wide zoom lens matched to either of these camera bodies is pure magic...especially at this price point.

Another good choice for landscapes and wide vistas would be the latest Nikon D4 or D800 matched with the best Nikkor lenses.

We all hunt constantly for tiny jumps in improvements from previous camera models, but in reality we are at a golden age of digital imaging.

It is astonishing just how fast digital video & digital photography has improved during the past decade. Photographers and videographers have never had it so good! :)

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

This is interesting footage in view of the fact of not how well it was shot but the various subjects (flash car, brick walls, lots of man-made structures and objects, fine repetitive textures and lots and lots of wide shots etc.). I'm sure some of you may have already seem it but watching it in YouTube's 1080p gives us some good insights about the 5DMkIII and its performance capabilities with things that can be challenging for most DSLRs.

This would have looked pretty horrid on my 7D - it would have been aliasing hell - well apart from the Bugatti Veyron, that'd look good on any camera!!!

Sure, some jello as he shot it hand held - and it got a bit shakey at times!

Canon 5D Mark III - Image Quality Shots in Beverly Hills - YouTube

The footage does not scream "soft" to me. Sure, my EX3 would have been sharper, but not by that much.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Just to reiterate Andy, the very video you point to keeps this theme going among 5DIII owners. Quoting from the description:
"The 5D Mark III produces excellent quality when sharpened in post with in-camera sharpening turned off."

I'm starting to really dig this camera. Shot some indoor footage tonight in a dim bedroom, all f2 handheld at ISO 1250-1600. In camera sharpening at 0 with a tiny touch of sharpening and curves added in FCPX. Tonight really sealed it for me - this camera can produce gorgeous images... no need for me to keep conjuring up means to attain a C300.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Youtube is filled with yuppies carrying expensive DSLR gear and filming scenes as if they are experiencing an earthquake... :)

I can still never understand why people buy such good equipment and then waste time filming handheld extremely shaky footage. If you are going to use a DSLR, then try to at least make sure you're able to keep it steady...if not, then buy a camcorder with IS or clamp it to a tripod.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

or at least shoot with IS lens,
men i hate those shaky videos,

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Yep agreed. The thing is, think how much worse it would have looked if you had all the dancing colours of moire and the moving/stepping aliasing!!! Yet, despite the questionable hand holding skills/no rig these were mostly absent - and the technique of zero sharpening in camera (and then selective sharpening in post) gave otherwise good images where previous Canon DSLRs would have really struggled with.

As an aside, someone else has now posted a comparative video between a hacked GH2 and 5DMkIII shot in the UK and specifically focussing on resolution. He is still pretty scathing about the Canon for those that want to ready it - so look out for that (I won't directly link it here).

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Tony, I just can't imagine that this is true. For stills? Most definitely so. But, I've seen too much video footage from the 5D2 that just falls apart attempting to render a bunch of leaves, pine needles, grass, water ripples (and moire' comes into play there, too), and large expanses of forest, fields, sea, or sky.

I've noticed the same thing comparing my 7D footage to my XH-A1 on wide, deep DOF shots. A close-up of a bull elk with a 200mm/2.8L? Fantastic! A wide shot with a 17mm of the same bull elk in a meadow near a lake? Ugh. That's what I meant by "right tool for the job."

Something about the skipping/binning just removes the clarity from the imagery. I think a dedicated HD video sensor will just beat the pants off of any DSLR in terms of resolving detail in these scenes because of all of the skipping/binning that must take place to pull 2k video off of a 20k+ sensor.

Once my Mk III arrives, I'll put it up against my 7D and XH-A1 against some nature footage, since I've got over 400 square miles of it right outside my front door.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Hi Andy,

I enjoy the that blog, but I wouldn't get too caught up by the author's comments on the 5DIII. His focus has historically been on resolving power. Fair enough, but at the same time I feel he somewhat downplays the 5DIII's strengths (while overstating its perceived weaknesses - the "fizz" he refers to is not something I've come across - the 5DIII is amazing in the noise department).

I also have a Gh2 - in fact, I've recorded to via HDMI out direct to ProRes so I've captured it in all its glory.

Certainly it captures astounding detail. But its aesthetic is miles away from the 5DIII; this is all personal preference of course, but for me as much as I love the Gh2 for detail, it's just too clinical, too dry... the 5DIII creates a much prettier, more resonant image. I think subject matter comes into this a lot: I like capturing people and intimate surrounds, where the 5DIII excels. Andrew Reid typically captures a lot of wide vistas and nature shots, and for this purpose the Gh2 really is a good (and wonderfully cheap) option.

I think you'll love the 5DIII Andy... I wouldn't worry too much about image postmortems. For me (and it sounds like, for you too), moire and aliasing were the big issues with earlier Canon DSLRs. This has been dealt with, basically eliminated - I think Canon should get some credit for this.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Seems like the debate goes on forever. Count lines, count pixels, What is better, sharp resolving capabllities, or those other intangibles. Diaganol pixel arrangement, etc., etc. etc. I suppose it is proper in a forum about video cameras, but my gosh, don't be claiming one camera is better than the other just because it gets better resolution.

As I posted in another thread, the 5DII has been a great boon to the budget film maker because of the look it provided. "Act of Valor" proves you can shoot a commercial feature film with the 5DII and presumably the 5dIII and get it released. We saw a nicely filmed episode of House shot with it.

If you are a pixel peeper, or camera techie, for the first ten minutes of these films, you looked for all the tell tale signs. Then you actually started watching the story. If you know what you are doing, you can shoot a feature film with the GH2 also, the Z1, also the PD150, the Canon Xl1, and a lot of other cameras out there. Its all about story, characters, shooting in the right light. Down at the end of the list is the actual equip used to shoot the camera. I don't see many credits, except on films we do on this site, that actually tell you what the film was shot with.

Time to make movies !

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

An outlandish idea man, what have you been smoking?

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Yep, thanks Josh. I think a lot of the negativity all over the web relates to people expecting C300 performance at 4 year old 5DMkII prices from the 5DMkIII. It just ain't going to happen for marketing reasons we all understand well.

[As an aside, I spent 20 years in the big corporate world working all over the world on the R&D technical side, always in close association with marketing people and all their "positioning" of my teams new products relative to other offerings and those of competitors.]

Sure, it would have been great if it was 1000 lines of resolution and/or had clean 1080p HDMI out. Technically, it could have been designed to have those features - but it does not. Canon's desired market positioning for this product is why it does not. If anyone can't live with that, simply go buy another camera. The FS100 is the nearest rival. I've looked hard at it - but it's not for me. Nor is the Nikon D800 (I have too much Canon glass and certainly don't want another DSLR that shows aliasing).

I have to say some of the latest 5DMkIII films now appearing on a 5DMkIII Vimeo channel and on YouTube seem to suggest that, in the right hands, this camera is capable of some superb images and a worthy successor. The "magic" is definitely still there, and without many of the issues we all had to deal with before. I just love "the look" that is possible.

Speaking personally, I also get some commercial stills work on the back of my video work - so the much improved stills capability of the 5DMkIII will be an excellent boost to my 7D which is currently handling that aspect.

And then we have the excellent low light capability both in stills and video. Yep, I want that too.

As I mentioned earlier in one of these threads, I'm 90% likely to push the button on a 5DMkIII soon, just waiting for NAB to see what else might appear in the £3-7K ish area in the next 6 months or so before I finally decide. Until then the credit card is staying locked up in the Safe and I'll keep going with the EX3/7D/TM900 combo that's serving me terrifically well.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

You'd be hard-pressed to be able to shoot 17mm-wide video footage with the XH-A1...yet the 5D matched with the Canon L 17-35mm or 16-35mm L produces wonderful detailed footage.

That's why I prefer using the right tool for the job. :)

The tiny sensors and medium-wide lenses available on camcorders such as the XH-A1 or XL-H1 have never been wide enough for me in many situations, and as for DOF and crisp detail in landscapes...they are rarely good enough and always look fairly 'mushy'. The Canon XL 6X AF lens has been the best of the bunch by far.

These camcorders also do not provide a fantastic high-rez stills image of the same video scene.

Granted, video from the 5D Mk2 & Mk3 is far behind the stills images from the same camera (and so is EVERY video camera available)...but that huge sensor combined with the incredible wide-angle lens options available for the 5D still makes it the best option for me.

In short, it is the best tool for the job.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I did a greenscreen shoot yesterday (quick audition) and left the mkIII with its stock settings. Had my 24-70 f2.8 on and shot at f8 iso400 Got it into AE with Primatte Keyer Pro and it did a very nice job with enough detail to capture some flyaway hair. SOOO much better than the mkII or 7D! No comparison to my XF300 though but that was expected. I think with some in-camera tweaking the mkIII will be just fine for general duty.
Stop pixel peeping and go shoot with the thing!! :)

And if you flip it over to still mode, be prepared for a different beast! It is unbelievably sharp with gorgeous color and the fastest AF I have ever seen!

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Great news, Robert. I'd LOVE to quit pixel-peeping... if B&H would just send me my MkIII already!

Good to hear about your greenscreen success. A few weeks back I was able to key some chroma footage from my 7D without too many problems. Ultra in Premiere 5.5 handled most of the shots, except one that I did a rack-focus with, which I used Keylight in A.E. Granted, it was kind of a cheesy film, so no one was peeping too much on it: Berthoud Bash 2012: Cowboy Up! - YouTube
I'm looking forward to seeing more film work with the (slowly) arriving MkIII's.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft - James Miller removing OLPF
 

Removing the OLPF on a brand new 5DMkIII removes some of the softness ....along with the warranty!

Some increase in aliasing but no increase in moire is mentioned.

I don't think this is an early April Fools article (I have my doubts about the specs in the Sony NEX-FS700 stories....) but I guess we'll all know soon enough.

For sure, this looks like a real 5DMkIII being taken apart in these pictures. There are with and without 1080p frame grabs too.

James Miller removed optical low-pass filter from 5D Mark III for resolution increase.

Elsewhere on the web I've read that someone reckoned it is currently 890 lines (ex factory, without this modding!). Seems higher than I'd expect from footage I've downloaded from others. Anyone seen any proper resolution chart test results yet?

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Removing the OLPF would be nuts! It cuts frequencies that are slightly in-band for 22MP stills, not 2MP video. It also cuts out of band signals can cause aliasing no matter the end resolution.

The claim that it adds aliasing but not moire is equally bizarre. Moire and aliasing are due to the same problem - out of band frequencies appearing as lower, in-band frequencies. The difference is the content. A telephone line shows aliasing while a shirt shows moire. Show a slew of telephone lines, or one thread from a shirt and aliasing and moire swap positions. Based on content, they look different. From the technology side, they're the same thing.

Any softness in the 5D3 has to do with the way the pixels are read and combined. The softness is not due to the OLPF. The OLPF is your friend. :)

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft? - Removed OLPF (1st Video)
 

And now the video....looks pretty sharp!

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft? - Removed OLPF (1st Video)
 

Miller says there are two OLPF filters, and he removed the "secondary" one which doubles as the self cleaning plate. Not sure this make sense, but the video sure looks clean.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Here is a resolution test video that is being debated on some forums. It has just now gone up on YouTube in 1080p (and its also been on Vimeo a little longer). Possibility of getting 890 lines resolution has been suggested - I'll let the resolution chart experts determine if that's accurate or not!

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

It looks like a lot of people will be 'hacking' their 5D Mark III bodies to turn them into 'single OLPF' bodies! :)

I suppose the cleaning plate is also out of action if one of the OLPF's is removed.

The question is, how vast a difference is there between a non-sharpened video shot with a 5D Mk3 minus one OLPF, and post-sharpened video shot with a Mk3 with both OLPFs in place? And is it really worth all the extra hassle...inclusive of loss of warranty on a new camera?

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft - James Miller removing OLPF
 

Wow... "some of the softness" is an understatement Andy. Much more akin to a C300 image than the 5DIII with sharpness off and no post work.

The 1080p file on Vimeo shows a truly impressive difference. No moire to speak of either.

Is this an April Fools prank? If not, who do I give my 5DIII to - I want that OLPF ripped out now!!

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

I'm not convinced by this radical hack. The only before/after frame grabs are not comparable at all as the lighting conditions are so radically different. The shots taken with the OLPF removed are in sunshine with shadows & good contrast while the 'before' shots are under a flat grey sky with markedly reduced contrast. Who is to say that the same scene shot with an unhacked camera wouldn't look exactly the same?

The sight of people on other forums uncritically falling over themselves to "oooh" & "aaaah" over the awesome quality of this video with the OLPF removed reminds me of the GH2 fan boys who make wild claims for the various hacks without comparing them to the unhacked camera.

There are so many variables involved in shooting digital video that without proper comparison we cannot say that one is better than the other. These are all representations of reality fooling the brain that it is reality. Until we see some charts shot with & without the OLPF we can't say whether resolution is better. Until we see a proper double blind comparison of real life video shot with & without the OLPF we cannot say whether it produces a more pleasing image.

Canon engineers know a lot more about digital sensors than we videographers so I am sure that they didn't put that OLPF there just for the hell of it or to degrade the video quality. OK I know that some conspiracy theorists do think that is exactly what they did so as not to cannibalise C300 sales but seriously it's there for a reason & removing it is going to screw up something.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Nigel, it is probably wise to wait until after today to see if the image clears... The 1st has never been a good day for being serious. :)

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

To remove the OLPF or...not? Here is a nice article on the older body with OLPF plus sharpening versus a 'hack' job:

Frontal Lobbings: To Anti-Alias or not Anti-Alias

Rather than rip one out of a Mk3 it would be easier to just buy an 800E... :)

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

A prime requirement for a valid April Fools joke is that it's not published until the 1st April. This first appeared yesterday evening 31st March so unless they really aren't playing by the rules I think we must assume that it is not a joke

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

The same James Miller has shot a lot of C300 footage... coincidence?

"Warning: this is breaking news – please wait for the final results." - sounds like a tip off to me that a leg or two may be in the process of being pulled.

I guess, technically they could claim at least in some parts on the online world (ie: where I am) it was already April 1 at the time the story went live.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Interesting lens resolution tests on different camera bodies - Canon 5D Mk2 & Mk3, Nikon D700 and D800:

LensRentals.com - “D” resolution tests

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

Philip has now given his views about James Miller's "hack-job" to his new Canon Mark III:

A drastic solution to increasing sharpness with the 5DmkIII… | Philip Bloom

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

+1 for Josh's assessment. I too think this is an April Fool's joke, and the footage in question is from the C300.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

He's added yet another video... seems like it must be authentic. Harder to discern a detail improvement in this one given the subject matter, but it is a very nice image.

Re: So, is the 5D3 soft?
 

But PB is offline for 8 days, according to his tweet 31/3, so this blogpost most have been written a few days ago, and put online on the 1/4... Judge for yourself what that mean.