Activity › Forums › DSLR Video › Why does DSLR’s full HD look so less “vibrant, sharp. detailed” than XDCAM ?
-
Why does DSLR’s full HD look so less “vibrant, sharp. detailed” than XDCAM ?
Posted by Mark Shepherd on December 18, 2012 at 11:01 pmI have been watching the Discover Channel and National Geographic channel and I am always amazed with the clarity and richness of the HD imagery, that was probably shot with the 3 CCD XDCAMs or maybe with the old Sony F900’s or the Panasonic 3 chip CCD cameras. Why does the “full HD” video out of the DSLR Canon 5D Mark111 look so bad compared with the XDCAMS? All 1920×1080 24p video is not created equal.
Bill Bruner replied 13 years, 4 months ago 6 Members · 13 Replies -
13 Replies
-
Sareesh Sudhakaran
December 19, 2012 at 11:26 amCanon DSLRs don’t resolve 1080 lines, usually it’s about 700 lines or so. By the way, what you probably see on TV is heavily compressed and sharpened, which is very close to consumer grade 1080p camcorder footage.
And yes, 1/2″ CCD sensors are magic.
https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.
-
Al Bergstein
December 19, 2012 at 1:00 pmSS: is there a list anywhere you’ve seen of cameras that resolve 1080 lines? I’m thinking about xf305, c100, and c300 for example.
Al
-
Bill Bruner
December 19, 2012 at 1:51 pmAl – you may find this helpful. Canon claims 1000 lines for the $15K C300 (the $26K C500 and $6.5K C100 should have similar resolution at 1080p):
https://nofilmschool.com/2011/11/canon-cinema-eos-c300-4k-sensor-outputs-1080p/
For me, that’s a lot of money for 1080p. Unless I needed 4K for theatrical projection, I would spend a lot less money and get the $1299 Panasonic GH3, which outresolves even the top-of-the-line Canon DSLRs.
Best of the holidays,
-
Al Bergstein
December 19, 2012 at 2:34 pmYes, That makes sense. I tried looking up the specs on the xf305, and they don’t list anywhere the lines of resolution but mention that it resolves true 1920×1080, which is likely the same spec stated differently (?). And like the OP stated, the quality off the sensors, when enough light is available, is superb. Often it is better than anything I get, even with my new 5DMkiii. But the benefit of shooting DSLR with DOF and low light abilities, plus portability, puts the 5D in my hands far more than the 305. They are very different tools.
But the new 5D Mkiii images, for anything short of theatrical sized (Which I’ve not tried yet), is really wonderful. While I like the look of the GH2, I prefer the 5D with L series lenses. It has a very unique look that I don’t get with the xf305 or have seen on a GH2 without some kind of color manipulation.
Al
-
Bill Bruner
December 19, 2012 at 2:41 pmI agree with you on the GH2, Al. But the GH3 is a different kettle of fish. Did you get a chance to look at the GH3/5D Mark III test I linked to above? Interesting: https://vimeo.com/55060120
Cheers,
Bill
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Vimeo framework” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
Sareesh Sudhakaran
December 19, 2012 at 3:04 pmThe EBU tests cameras regularly for broadcast worthiness. It’s a great resource. All the cameras you mentioned should resolve 1000 lines. The Canon and Nikon DSLRs line-skip, hence the resolution loss. The GH2/3 resolves 1000 lines.
Funnily, there was a case a few years ago where the 4K RAW from the Red One passed testing, but the uncompressed SMPTE 292M 10 bit 1080p stream failed.
Resolution is important, but not as much as most people seem to think.
https://www.wolfcrow.com – Workflow information and support for filmmakers, photographers, audiographers and videographers.
-
Jason Jenkins
December 19, 2012 at 4:03 pmHi, Bill:
How do the GH2 and GH3 compare image-wise. I’m mostly interested in moire and low light performance. And, where did you pick up your GH3? Thanks!
Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production… with style!Check out my Mormon.org profile.
-
Bill Bruner
December 19, 2012 at 5:54 pmHi Jason – I have not had time to do a lot of comparative shooting yet, but the best side-by-side of the GH2 and GH3 that I have seen is from Noam Kroll: https://www.noamkroll.com/gh3-vs-gh2-and-initial-thoughts/
I preordered my camera from Adorama on September 18th and got my camera on December 4th. They are pretty much out of stock in the States, but you may be able to find one in Canada. I am at work right now, but will post links when I get home.
Cheers,
Bill
-
Brent Dunn
December 19, 2012 at 6:22 pmI have both the EX1 and Canon DSLR’s. There is a very distinct difference the the codec that records the image as well as the sensor.
I shot a concert last year with both cameras. The DSLR’s didn’t come close to the EX1 as far as detail. The XDCAM codec records much more color information allowing me to magnify or zoom my footage in post with no loss of image quality.
The biggest problem is that most new cameras are using the AVCHD format. IT keeps the file size small, but at the expense of detailed color information.
Brent Dunn
Owner / Director / Editor
DunnRight Films
DunnRight Video.com
Video Marketing Toolbox.netSony EX-1,
Canon 5D Mark II
Canon 7D
Mac Pro
with Final Cut Studio Adobe CS6 Production -
Jason Jenkins
December 19, 2012 at 6:44 pmThanks, Bill: Great link!
I actually ordered my GH2 from Canada two years ago for that very reason.
Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production… with style!Check out my Mormon.org profile.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up