27th We’re told (thanks) that someone from Canon recently visited several studios in NYC with a ‘test’ 1D X body for some well supervised tests. Images had to be processed on a particular laptop that came along with the camera/minder and no images were allowed to be retained. The camera produced files of similar dimensions to a 5D3, but exhibited -much- better colour rendition. Digital IS on Canon 1dx mkII??? Is it possible to add that into the 1dx mkii body with a firmware update? I figured as long as that feature is not dependent on a piece of hardware, that it could be added, but I may be completely wrong. I know that Fuji, Sony, and Canon (in the past) has had some pretty crazy firmware updates that changed a.
Well the question has been burning so I figured I would run some quick test to highlight the differences between these two heavy weights when it comes to video. The two frames below are taken from 4k video captured under that same conditions, using the same lens, ISO, White Balance, Frame rate. Everything is the same on both cameras. Lighting set to 3700k in both cases with some practical lighting filling in. Nothing has been color graded/corrected. Images are direct frame grabs.About the videos: the Canon is capable of very cinematic footage at 24 fps. The Sony tends to feel more like video, but has very good quality for a camera of such a small size.
Color science is very different between the two. The Canon's batteries last a long time. I will not speak of focus as the Sony will be a a disadvantage in this particular test as it is running as Canon lens. While native glass will fare better, the Canon has a decisive edge in the focus pulling department.In short, great results can be had from either camera, however the Canon will make getting those result feel less like work.
Not sure exactly why the Sony's image broke down after applying the vignette. It was certainly unexpected. But one thing is certain, when applying grades or effects you are dealing with a much less robust file from the Sony camera. Mind you I did mess around with some footage from the Kinefinity, and that held up well to everything I threw at it. Even presets that I would never usually dream of using. But of the two in this comparison, I'm quite pleased with the Canon.
Now if they could resolve the poor HD quality it would add serious value.I think the Sony is best used by getting the image as close to the finished product as possible in camera, and keeping external grading to a minimum. It is capable of some sharp images, but manual focus pulling with more forgiving depth of field is your best option for moving subjects. Normally I use manual cine lenses on the A7Rii. However, with the Canon I have been favoring AF lenses, as it seems good enough at holding focus so that this has become a viable option.
Still a slight difference.with some more effort I could get them probably closer. Sony keeps up just fine but I admit the footage is very thin.I'll agree with some effort and careful grading you can get them reasonably close. I guess my point is that many were stating that the A7Rii/Sii were superior in various aspects. In practice I am simply not seeing this to be true.
Of the two cameras the 1DX Mkii is in a different league than the Sonys. It is more reasonable image wise to compare this camera to the FS7, but of course the two are completely different animals.
One being a dedicated Video camera, the other a hybrid. There are benefits of having built in NDs, XLRs, etc.
For my purpose I wanted something more discreet. I can take the 1DX Mkii anywhere and no one bats an eye. However you will need permits and planning with the FS7. But they are both great cameras.The next camera on my radar is the Terra 6k and 5k, but I will need to see more footage. And honestly, I would prefer to buy it locally from one of the well established retailers.
![Luts Luts](/uploads/1/2/5/6/125628401/318111249.jpg)
With are reasonable return policy, just in case it doesn't live up to expectations. The 1DX Mkii is rugged, and that combined with great image quality earn it a long-term place in my kit.
Not sure what I will do with the Sony now? It's not an ideal B-cam to the Canon.
How it become a no game changer. Without peaking logtilting LCD4K output ect.?And it still using old codec even with dual processors in itPersonally, I don't miss focus peaking when a camera can lock on to focus as well as the 1DX Mkii. I would have taken log, but I will use technicolor cinestyle and Marvel and be pretty close. That's not to say Canon should have left it out, because at this price point it should definitely be included. As for codec, it would be nice if it were more efficient, however, it is a high quality codec and the end results look great.Perhaps I'm missing something? Is there another weather-sealed super tough camera with great battery life, 60p 4k that can also shoot 14-16fps stills, with best in class AF that I am unaware of? I am testing technicolour cinestyle on the 1DC and it's not 'great'.
It doesn't give more dynamic range, just redistributes the tones to a very flat LOG like curve. Compared to C-log C-log increases highlight retention. My conclusion for the 1DXII is that if i have a log workflow and apply dekogging curves for my work and use luts designed for log, then cinestyle works really really well there. But for manual grading, the best profile in terms of giving the classic Canon colour science is Faithful with everything turned down (yes even saturation to minimum, I tried, on the 1dc anyway), this image gives a very pleasing image that you don't need to grade much unless you want some tweaks of contrast or saturation. It's better than Neutral which has a slight yellow/green tint compared to faithful. That's for everything, except for female shots that are oriented towards glamour/beauty, it truly does an internal grade that's extremely hard to replicate in post.
It specifies the skin area on the waveform and lifts exposure ever so slighty on that region to give a glowing face, as well as adjust the reds individually to hide red pimples/papules on the face features, both of these are working like a charm on my 1dc and the 1dxii didn't have a change in picture stylexso will work the same way.A final note on the subject that might disappoint you, is that in the Canon log profile, the camera gives a markedly more filmic image due to the absolute lack of digital sharpening and DR. It destroys ever small bit of digital look present in the other profiles.
This profile might sway me to keep the 1dc simply because of the slightly more filmic/organic image, but i sill haven't tried it ir graded native files from the 1dxii. Giving up the new features like 60p, DPAF with touchscreen, 14fps with mirror, higher end stills sensor with high DR, better ISO performance, etc.Tough call.
Mightt go fir the image and put features as a secondary priority. Hard decision.
I am testing technicolour cinestyle on the 1DC and it's not 'great'. It doesn't give more dynamic range, just redistributes the tones to a very flat LOG like curve. Compared to C-log C-log increases highlight retention. My conclusion for the 1DXII is that if i have a log workflow and apply dekogging curves for my work and use luts designed for log, then cinestyle works really really well there.
But for manual grading, the best profile in terms of giving the classic Canon colour science is Faithful with everything turned down (yes even saturation to minimum, I tried, on the 1dc anyway), this image gives a very pleasing image that you don't need to grade much unless you want some tweaks of contrast or saturation. It's better than Neutral which has a slight yellow/green tint compared to faithful. That's for everything, except for female shots that are oriented towards glamour/beauty, it truly does an internal grade that's extremely hard to replicate in post. It specifies the skin area on the waveform and lifts exposure ever so slighty on that region to give a glowing face, as well as adjust the reds individually to hide red pimples/papules on the face features, both of these are working like a charm on my 1dc and the 1dxii didn't have a change in picture stylexso will work the same way.A final note on the subject that might disappoint you, is that in the Canon log profile, the camera gives a markedly more filmic image due to the absolute lack of digital sharpening and DR. It destroys ever small bit of digital look present in the other profiles. This profile might sway me to keep the 1dc simply because of the slightly more filmic/organic image, but i sill haven't tried it ir graded native files from the 1dxii.
Giving up the new features like 60p, DPAF with touchscreen, 14fps with mirror, higher end stills sensor with high DR, better ISO performance, etc.Tough call. Mightt go fir the image and put features as a secondary priority. Hard decision.I have to agree with everyone who has stated that Canon should have included C-Log on this camera (Canon, you need to hear your customers on this one). But nonetheless, I also have to confess that in spite of this, the 1DX Mkii is the best hybrid to date. And a much more compelling video camera than any other hybrid to date.
While a case could certainly be made for a dedicated video camera like the FS7. as the price is pretty close, the fact remains there are places you can take a hybrid that you simply would not be allowed to take a dedicated video camera. Also it is weather-sealed, and in the real world that is important. I can easily carry the 1DX Mkii on a plane, and still have 60p, in a tank like body. that is reliable, works in less than ideal lighting, and I don't need a focus puller.
Even with a low f-stop. Nothing else on the market can make these claims. Not Blackmagic, not Red, Not Kinefinity, not Sony. Frankly not anyone. So if you want an on the go, rock solid reliable, weather-sealed, pro-level unit with 4k 60p this is the only option.
Mark II Fever. The Mark II is more about refinement than knock-your-socks-off features. Seeing as its target market is professional photographers, Canon has prioritized reliability over fancy features that may or may not work.
![Canon 1dx mark 3 Canon 1dx mark 3](/uploads/1/2/5/6/125628401/354302884.jpg)
With that said, the Mark II surpasses its predecessor in many ways: it boasts a higher-resolution full-frame sensor with improved, dual-pixel autofocus; a faster continuous frame rate; built-in GPS; and in-camera 4K capture.20.2MP Full-Frame CMOS Sensor. The modest increase in MP isn’t going to be noticeable to most, but the increase in performance that comes along with the higher-resolution sensor definitely will. Dual DIGIC 6+ processors help the new sensor to offer improved high performance throughout its normal ISO 100-51,200 range (expandable to 50-409,600), 14 fps (continuous focus)/16 fps (locked focus/exposure, live view), and generous unlimited- JPG/170- RAW buffer.Improved AF. It’s not an entirely new autofocus system, but rather an overhauled version of its predecessors. What you get is a 61-point system (all user-selectable—no trickery) with 41 cross-type points. The difference comes in all 61 points supporting f/8 autofocus, the 360,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor for better exposure and tracking performance, and wider-spaced points for slightly larger frame coverage.Dual-Pixel AF.
The Mark II is the first full-frame sensor with Canon’s dual-pixel AF system. Limited to video shooting, this system uses phase-detection for continuous autofocus and tracking with user-adjustable sensitivity and speed settings. The camera also offers rack focusing via the touchscreen rear LCD when shooting video.4K Video. While it’s not quite as feature-rich as the, the Mark II captures DCI 4K up to 60p (4:2:2/8-bit) and Full HD up to 120p (4:2:0/8-bit). 4K capture is limited to a central 1.3x crop of the sensor, while Full HD utilizes the full sensor frame. Clean HDMI output tops out at 1080p for external recording. Audio is handled by the in-camera stereo mic or externally using the 3.5mm input, with real-time monitoring possible thanks to the 3.5mm headphone jack.
Please note that there’s no focus peaking or zebra warnings, so we recommend an external electronic viewfinder/video monitor with those features.Professional Build. Just as you’d expect from a 1D-series camera, the Mark II is built like a tank. The magnesium-alloy body features built-in vertical grip, dust- and weather-sealing, multiple customizable buttons, bright 0.76x optical pentaprism with 100% viewfinder coverage, and a 3.2-inch, 1.62m-dot rear LCD with limited touch-sensitivity (video AF point selection only).
The new higher-capacity offers up to 1210 shots per charge, but the Mark II offers backwards compatibility with the previous LP-E4N battery, albeit with a reduced top continuous shooting rate of 14 fps.Dual CFast 2.0/CF Memory. To keep up with the increase in data flow, the Mark II takes advantage of the CFast 2.0 format. While Canon made the second slot CompactFlash, if you’re looking to get the most out of the Mark II, you’ll need to use CFast cards.
4K video recording for up to 30 minutes and 170-shot RAW buffer are based on using CFast. Try to use even the fastest of CF cards and that drops to a couple minutes of 4K video and a 73-shot RAW buffer. Long story short, use CFast as your primary card and CF as backup.Are there any known compatibility issues with the 1DX II?.Not all CFast cards are compatible with the 1DX II. Canon recommends only the Lexar 3500x series of cards, while the 3400x series is spotty at best.
And just to clarify, the 3600x series for Arri is not compatible at all.Is this camera backwards-compatible with previous LP-E4N batteries?.Yes. While Canon offers a higher-capacity with the 1DX Mark II, you can still use previous, albeit with a reduced top continuous shooting rate of 14 fps.