Vincent Laforet posts first 5D mkII HD Video

[wheezy]

If you haven't been following Vincent Laforet's post about his 72 hours with the 5D mkII, he managed to make a short film using the 1080p HD feature before giving it back to Canon. After finally finding a place to host it (Canon came forward nonetheless) he's posted it here.

My internet here sucks and it's still downloading, but at 1/4 size what has downloaded so far looks amazing. He shot it at night, between 5pm and 4am, so everything was done very low light using top notch fast primes. Read his initial review to get more of the story behind it.

 

[Phrasikleia]

The quality is stunning. It almost makes me want a 5D mkII, but I know half the game is having a cache of L-glass at your disposal, as Vincent LaForet did. Oh well, I can dream.

 

[apearlman]

It's quite a leap for DSLRs

That video is very impressive.

The debate about whether video belongs in a "pro" DSLR is happening elsewhere. But for me, what's amazing is the idea that one camera can be a no-compromises DSLR shooting great stills, AND an impressive video cam with fine trade-offs (interchangeable lenses and low-light ability, but 30-minute length limit.)

For a casual family/travel shooter like me, there's always a choice of whether to shoot stills or video. The idea of one machine that can do a great job with both is exciting. Pros and purists may still want separate still and video devices, and I don't blame them. But there are many of us who would rather carry just one camera.

For now, the 5DII is way out of my price range and I'm not in the market to upgrade. But it's great to know it exists, and maybe 3 years from now the tech will trickle down or used ones will be cheaper.

 

[troyhark]

The time limit on video shooting for film work is not really that relevant unless doing something like 'Timecode' or 'The Ark'. For live work, you'd use video cameras.
Film is normally limited to 11mins and if you want to see a film that uses that length brilliantly, go see 'Irreversible', as it's made in a series of [apparently] continuous 11min chunks. Really not for the faint hearted BTW and many people simply didn't get it, so it had very mixed reviews. A very clever film.
'Cloverfield' had a few nods to Irreversible.

 

[CrackedButter]

The time limit on video shooting for film work is not really that relevant unless doing something like 'Timecode' or 'The Ark'. For live work, you'd use video cameras.
Film is normally limited to 11mins and if you want to see a film that uses that length brilliantly, go see 'Irreversible', as it's made in a series of [apparently] continuous 11min chunks. Really not for the faint hearted BTW and many people simply didn't get it, so it had very mixed reviews. A very clever film.
'Cloverfield' had a few nods to Irreversible.

What is there to get other than having the repulsive act of rape forced into your face for 10 minutes.

Its an interesting film but its light on substance.

 

[troyhark]

I'd say the opposite, it is not light on substance, it's a very clever film and regarding the rape scene, it's the crux around which the entire film rotates and is meant to be unpleasant. Also I find it a bit odd when people single that part out and I question whether they actually watched the film. To put it in perpective, it's light relief compared the first part of film.
But this is going way OT now, other than you could easily have filmed it with a 5DII despite it's 'short' recording time.

 

[FF_productions]

Stunning, absolutely Stunning.

 

[CrackedButter]

I'd say the opposite, it is not light on substance, it's a very clever film and regarding the rape scene, it's the crux around which the entire film rotates and is meant to be unpleasant. Also I find it a bit odd when people single that part out and I question whether they actually watched the film. To put it in perpective, it's light relief compared the first part of film.
But this is going way OT now, other than you could easily have filmed it with a 5DII despite it's 'short' recording time.

I watched the entire film (twice) and I got the point but it gave me nothing to think about afterwards for very long. Rather than simply contradict me, explain why you think the film is not light on substance please, I'm open to other people's interpretations.

 

[Mike Teezie]

Technolust attack. I can't wait to get this thing in my hands and shoot some video at 85mm f/1.2.

 

[rogersmj]

Looks pretty damn nice. Kind of lame that the last 40% of that video was the credits though. Beautiful, sharp image however.

Let the competition heat up! Every DSLR maker is going to be falling over themselves to get video into every level by next year.

 

[hayduke]

I've a 30" ACD and a *high* BW connection. I want to see the full-res version!

 

[ChrisA]

How does the video quality compare to the Nikon D90? The D90 sells for just under $1,000 and also does HD video. The D90 does 720P But still for under $1K.

As for the lenght of the recording time. Why care? major Hollywood films are still mostly shot on film and film comes in (about) 10 minute reels. They seem to be able to do good work now and then even with camera limited to 10 min. recording times

 

[wheezy]

How does the video quality compare to the Nikon D90? The D90 sells for just under $1,000 and also does HD video. The D90 does 720P But still for under $1K.

Having no experience with either whatsoever, what I have heard is the D90 doesn't even come close. Vincent goes so far as to say that in low light the 5D mkII completely out-performs Canon's current top 1080P camcorder. He also showed the raw footage to a RED editor who was very very impressed.

 

[taylorwilsdon]

This video blew my mind. I downloaded the HD version and ran it on my 23" Cinema display and the quality is astonishing. I may end up buying a 5dmk2 based on what I saw here. Such a good advertisement for them, and a real testament to the cameras abilities.

 

[CrackedButter]

How does the video quality compare to the Nikon D90? The D90 sells for just under $1,000 and also does HD video. The D90 does 720P But still for under $1K.

As for the lenght of the recording time. Why care? major Hollywood films are still mostly shot on film and film comes in (about) 10 minute reels. They seem to be able to do good work now and then even with camera limited to 10 min. recording times

The D90 might also do HD but have you seen the 'jelly' like movement it records? Its terrible, Nikon are behind on this, way behind.

 

[840quadra]

Not bad at all. I am highly considering this camera as a companion to my EOS 40D. I need to have to cameras so I can have one with a wide lens, and the other with with a Tele for my MX Photography work.

The only downer with the 5D is the low burst speed, however I am amazed how little I use it on my 40D. Being able to do psudo production quality videos with this camera, and my Final Cut Express would be an awesome perk to add to my sites.

 

[Kebabselector]

Have you seen the 'jelly' like movement it records?

I thought that was a hoax?

 

[Col127]

wow. that's actually really impressive i'm amazed at the quality of it.

 

[krye]

Wow!

 

[CrackedButter]

I thought that was a hoax?

I haven't heard as such, if it is then I stand corrected.

 

[macdaddy121]

The D90 might also do HD but have you seen the 'jelly' like movement it records? Its terrible, Nikon are behind on this, way behind.

I agree that the Canon's video is better than Nikons....However you are comparing a $999 camera to a $2699 camera.

 

[Kebabselector]

I haven't heard as such, if it is then I stand corrected.

I did see one video that someone debunked, however some videos posted here look a little wobbly. Not too sure if that's down to lack of tripod (not want to offend the original poster).

 

[wheezy]

I did see one video that someone debunked, however some videos posted here look a little wobbly. Not too sure if that's down to lack of tripod (not want to offend the original poster).

The low-light on that was pretty nice, that's the main thing that Laforet was blown away by, with the ability to use 1.2-2.0 lenses at night with a (now mid-range) ISO, it doesn't take a full truck and light crew just to do dark scenes.

The pans do seem a little bit jiggly, and that's what I've heard is the biggest downer on the D90, but the video still looks pretty solid.

 

[taylorwilsdon]

The low-light on that was pretty nice, that's the main thing that Laforet was blown away by, with the ability to use 1.2-2.0 lenses at night with a (now mid-range) ISO, it doesn't take a full truck and light crew just to do dark scenes.

The pans do seem a little bit jiggly, and that's what I've heard is the biggest downer on the D90, but the video still looks pretty solid.

I want to love the D90's video, but all the samples I've seen look herky jerky and wobbly. Even Nikon's samples show this... it just isn't quite there. IQ is amazing, but when played straight its not that impressive to me.

5dii video blows my mind though, and I'm a Nikon shooter.