Video on the 5D mkII

[Dirt_Bike_Ryda]

Hello

Has anyone had any success with the Video on their Canon EOS 5D mkII ??

I tried mine out for the first time with a Rode Videomic, and the results weren't too shabby, but nor were they as great as i was expecting. The sound quality was nice though. Just that the 25fps compared the standard 30fps on a D.V. camera seemed to be the biggest problem, i was filming motorcross and as the bikes come past me i panned and pretty much kept the bikes in the one position on the screen, but its still far short from being sharp. The lens i was using was the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS at f/22 (to get max DoF to help with focus of moving things) and ISO of 2000 (it was pretty bright outside to start with). It just doesn't seem to be sharp enough.

Also, for those who use the video function (or a DV camera) which video editing software do you use, as Windows Movie Maker refuses to have anything to do with the Quick Time files that the 5D records in (as far as i know i can't change that on the camera (can i ??))

Thanks

EDIT: here is one of the videos i was hoping that it would come up with the option to watch it at full HD as that was how i filmed it... but what ever.

[TheDarkReaver]

These guys did

House Finale Filmed with the Canon 5D Mark II Airs Tonight

[Chaotic Beds]

I'm in the film/media arts program at Wayne State University, and the lab recently invested in some 5D mkII cameras to replace their DV cameras. I've only seen basic demos from the lab, but the image quality through a Zeiss lens blew me away. My professor, who is active in professional film production and was initially wary of the decision to go with a dSLR for video, was very impressed and happy with the decision as well.

But, they also invested in thousands of dollars of Red Rock camera mount equipment, and will also be using thousands of dollars in lighting and other equipment. By my estimate, just these student film shoots will be using between 10 and 20 thousand dollars worth of equipment.

So basically... If you expect to achieve professional quality results (which Vincent Laforet and now House have done), you should expect to make professional-level investments...

[OsmosisStudios]

Dirt_Byke_Rida: You have to have the proper set up for video. Sticking a camera on a tripod isn't it.

There's something to be said for properly designed and used lenses, mounts, and other equipment. Video is a LOT harder than stills, involves more people and involves more equipment.

[Izzy]

Quick time files - I use Sony Vegas Pro and rename the file extension "mov" to "mp4" I do this because Vegas will not work with mov files natively. There are cheaper versions of Vegas that will run you about $80 rather than $500 and the learning curve is very small on this software. Way easy to use.

[Chaotic Beds]

Originally Posted by Izzy

Quick time files - I use Sony Vegas Pro and rename the file extension "mov" to "mp4" I do this because Vegas will not work with mov files natively. There are cheaper versions of Vegas that will run you about $80 rather than $500 and the learning curve is very small on this software. Way easy to use.

Ah yes, I passed over the software part. I totally agree with this suggestion, my first experience with video editing was on Vegas. I was totally self-taught at that point, and it was indeed quite easy to use.

[Dirt_Bike_Ryda]

argh yeah. i might look into getting some form of vegas if i feel like getting more serious about it.

yes, i know you need to have alot of stuff to get pro results etc, but for a simple videos of mates ridding at the local bike track, it just aint worth it. you say using properly disigned lenses ? what do you mean by this, what's the difference ? (serious question)

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by Dirt_Bike_Ryda

yes, i know you need to have alot of stuff to get pro results etc, but for a simple videos of mates ridding at the local bike track, it just aint worth it. you say using properly disigned lenses ? what do you mean by this, what's the difference ? (serious question)

If youve ever seen a feature-film camera setup, it's very different (even when using dSLRs). The trick to cinema is getting focus right, and getting it right easily and without AF. That's why all Cinema lenses are manual focus, and use follow-focus wheels for each scene.

Samyang recently released a follow-focus geared lens at Photokina, and it'd be useable normally, but it's got gear teeth on the focus ring for exactly that purpose: attaching a focus puller.

having a proper tripod, proper head, proper hood and gobos, proper focusing systems and so on really is key to GOOD video. For shooting your mates, though, youre right: a small SD-card based video camera is likely better

[Izzy]

Originally Posted by TheDarkReaver

These guys did

House Finale Filmed with the Canon 5D Mark II Airs Tonight

That episode stood out to me as the best looking episode as far as lighting and a more "movie" feel to it. Now that I know it was shot on DSLR it leaves me rethinking somethings.

[jdepould]

The 5D2 records h.264 natively, which may or may not make your non-linear editor happy. For Final Cut Pro, Canon has a free plugin that lets you Log & Transfer, but if you're on WIn, it won't help.

Try MPEG Streamclip, transcode to something your editor likes.

If you're a masochist, look up long GOP compression, and you'll understand why h.264 is less good for editing.