Which is the best Canon SLR for Video Use? How do they differ?
[For non-video related comparisons of these cameras, please see my previous articles : 5D Mark II vs. the 7D and the 7D vs the T2i.]
Currently, the Canon EOS 5D Mark II is unrivaled in the world of SLRs for professional quality video production. For those of you who watch the FOX medical drama “HOUSE”, you may be interested to learn that the recent season finale (May 2010) was shot entirely with Canon 5D Mark IIs. The 5D’s closest competitors, though, are also Canon SLRs, and less expensive ones at that. These are the Canon EOS 7D and the Canon T2i / 550D. There are a few fundamental differences between these cameras and the 5D which may make them more attractive to some film makers, while others may be deterred. I’ll quickly discuss these differences below. As always, additional information and further questions are welcome!
Depth of Field
The fundamental difference, of course, is the sensor size. The 5D carries a full-frame sensor, while the 7D and T2i use APS-C (ie, 1.6x crop) sensors. For video, however, this creates a completely different set of problems than it does for still photography. Image quality is NOT a significant difference, as 1080p HD video (1920 x 1080 pixels) is only 2 megapixels. In each of these cameras, only about 10% of the data that can be captured by the sensor will be used, so issues of lens resolution (discussed previously regarding the 7D and 50D), diffraction, etc, that plague the world of fine art photography are simply not field-relevant with video; video resolution is too low to reproduce these problems.
The main issue with video is depth of field. Since HD video resolution is so low, comparatively speaking, most video cameras have very small sensors… many of them less than 1/4 the size of an APS-C sensor. The smaller the sensor, the greater the depth of field… so most consumer grade video cameras produce video in which the backgrounds are relatively sharp in comparison to the subjects, which looks very distinctive and, frankly, cheap. Professional grade video cameras use larger sensors and can use depth of field more creatively, but cost a small fortune. Or a large fortune, in many cases (hundreds of thousands of dollars).
Many professional grade video cameras, costing $100,000 or more, use small 2/3″ sensors. The Sony HDW-F900R CineAlta is a perfect example.
And this is where the Canon SLRs excel. They have large sensors with incredible lenses, and can produce depth of field effects (separation of subjects or subject/background) just as well as film cameras of the past and modern production video cameras. Even APS-C sized sensors (Canon’s are about 22.2 x 14.8mm ) in Cameras such as the 7D are much larger than most video camera sensors (the Red One is an exception, with a sensor about the size of an APS-C, and a camera setup can be had for only about $20,000).
Since the APS-C size sensors of the 7D and T2i are both about the same size as 35mm movie film frames (which are smaller than 35mm still photo frames), they produce a shallow depth of field that is very similar to film-based movie cameras. The 5D Mark II has an even larger sensor, and therefore has a significantly shallower depth of field, at least potentially. Regardless of the camera, the actual depth of field will still depend on the focal length of the lens (ie, 24mm lens vs. 200mm lens) and the aperture at which the lens is used. Since all of the Canon cameras can be used with the full line of EF lenses, many of which utilize a maximum aperture of f1.4-2.8, there should be little difficulty in achieving very smooth, shallow depth of field, as long as it’s not too bright to use the wide apertures. Shutter speeds higher than 1/250th of a second can produce a choppy looking effect because each individual frame loses motion blur and becomes too sharp.
Since movie film travels vertically (for typical formats), its widest dimension is actually about the same as the narrow dimension of a full frame still photograph.
Video Features
The three cameras in question are remarkably similar when it comes to video functionality. The following table highlights the many similarities and a few of the differences between the three models.
| Canon 5D Mark II | Canon 7D | Canon Rebel T2i / 550D | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Body Price | $2399 | $1599 | $799 |
| Sensor Size | Full Frame (36 x 24mm) | Canon APS-C | Canon APS-C |
| Crop Factor for 35mm EF lenses | None | 1.6x | 1.6x |
| Frame Rates at 1080p (with Current Firmware) | 30, 24, & 25fps (30 = 29.97, 24=23.976) | 30, 24, & 25fps (30 = 29.97, 24=23.976) | 30, 24, & 25fps (30 = 29.97, 24=23.976) |
| Frame Rates at 720p | 60 (59.94), 50, 30, 24, or 25fps. | 60 (59.94), 50, 30, 24, or 25fps. | 60 (59.94), 50, 30, 24, or 25fps. |
| Recording Duration | 4 Gigabytes (FAT32 file size limit) or 29 minutes, 59 seconds. | 4 Gigabytes (FAT32 file size limit) | 4 Gigabytes (FAT32 file size limit) |
| Manual Exposure Control Available? | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Magic Lantern Available | Yes | Expected Soon | Possible |
| Media Type | Compact Flash | Compact Flash | SD |
| Video File Format | Compressed Video: Quicktime H.264/MPEG-4 | Compressed Video: Quicktime H.264/MPEG-4 | Compressed Video: Quicktime H.264/MPEG-4 |
| ISO Range | 100-6400 | 100-6400 | 100-6400 |
| Video Output | Mini-HDMI jack | Mini-HDMI jack | Mini-HDMI jack |
| Dedicated Video Control | No | Yes (separate record button for thumb) | Yes ("movie" mode on dial) |
| Canon Lens Compatibility | All Canon EF lenses | All Canon EF and EF-S lenses | All Canon EF and EF-S lenses |
| Native Audio Recording | Linear PCM 48kHz stereo (44.1 with original firmware) | Linear PCM 48kHz stereo | Linear PCM 48kHz stereo |
| External Audio Inputs | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Firmware
One of the great things about using a camera that is controlled by software is that, in this digital age, it opens the door for the possibility of 3rd party improvements. When the Canon 5D Mark II was introduced, film makers were immediately enchanted by its potential in the industry, but the camera was missing several important features for serious video use. Consequently, a team of clever programmers/film makers got together and created a firm-ware upgrade for the 5D called “Magic Lantern”.
Magic Lantern isn’t a firmware replacement. It is, essentially, a sidecar; a piece of software that runs along side the 5D’s native firmware. Full details about Magic Lantern can be found on their website, but it is a FREE download and can be used by anyone willing to try it.
Currently, Magic Lantern offers the following features for the 5D Mark II:
- On-Screen Audio Meters
- Zebra Stripes
- Disables Audio AGC
- On-Screen Crop Marks for different aspect ratios
Magic Lantern for the 7D is under development, and is expected to be available soon. You can check the progress on the Magic Lantern 7D development website. Although it is technically possible, I have not yet seen any mention of devel0pment for the Rebel T2i / 550D. Since there are so many similarities between the 7D and 550D, it is quite possible that once the firmware for the former is released, it will be modified to work with the latter.
Conclusions
For the moment, the 5D Mark II is the clear winner for true production work, due in large part to Magic Lantern. However, the dedicated video controls of the 7D (and the price tag) make the 7D a very close runner up, and the development of new firmware may push it over the top. The T2i has the advantage of being even less expensive and produces identical video to the 7D, but may not have the firmware available for professional use any time in the near future. Some people also prefer the fact that it uses SD cards instead of Compact Flash, as they tend to be less expensive and can be locked.
I’ll update this post as more information becomes available, and as I have time to absorb it. Please feel free to submit additional questions, comments, corrections and updates!
GHTime Code(s): dcb08 7733c nc nc bf6ae nc e23e5 af8e5 nc ba45a af944 82f61 76fbb 8375b 317c4 59a64
Hi,
While comparing with 5D to 7D , which one is best for under water videography.
I’ve never done underwater work, so I’ll have to make a couple of guesses… but I’ll assume that you’ll want the camera that’s best for video, and the camera that has the best low-light performance. When it comes to low light, the 5D mark II has a noticeable advantage at ISO1600 and beyond (and a slight advantage before that) when it comes to still photography, and that performance translates to video as well. The 7D is a little smaller and lighter, for what that’s worth.
When it comes to which camera is better for video, though, each camera has it’s separate strengths. I think that the 7D is probably a little easier to use, but the 5D mkII has some great firmware features available. You might want to check out the link in the “Video Features” section of this post for further details.
If anyone else has ideas on this subject, please feel free to chime in!
- Matthew
i want to shoot a feature film with Canon EOS 5D Mark II Camera therefore it will be very kind of you if you can write me the detail about its price and also the accessories required like stands, lenses, rigs etc.
I’m afraid that I’m probably not the best person to ask about movie making equipment. As I’ve mentioned in other posts, I’m a photographer, and not a film-maker. Consequently, I can give you detailed information about the SLRs and their technical details, but I’m afraid that beyond their specific use, I don’t know the best equipment to supplement them for movie-making. I’ve read a couple of things about pre-amps for mics for the 5D Mark II, and seen some rigs for stabilization and focusing, but I don’t know enough about them to make any sort of recommendations. Good Luck with your search, though!
- Matthew
Great site! I`m debating 7d or 5dii, and also kind of curious about a 5diii…. Thanks a lot for all this great information.
I have a comment: I was a 35mm film projectionist for 5 years and I`m also a serious amateur photographer. Movie film frames are not smaller than photo frames. Each frame of 35mm movie film is equal to a 35mm still photo frame. Some of the aspect ratios may omit some of the available frame space, but standard Hollywood 1.85:1 uses pretty much all of it. A tiny bit is lost on one edge, for the optical soundtrack, (similar to a record groove), but it`s negligible.
david,
Tokyo
Thanks David.
I see that I didn’t really specify which movie format I was talking about, so of course you’re right! I meant to refer to super 35. I understand that when it comes to film width, a 35mm still frame is the same as motion… but with super35, the vertical crop is very significant (as it is with some other formats). Of course, this is only used during production, and by the time the film gets to a projector, it has been re-sized again. Even production formats that use larger portions of the frame, though, are still somewhat smaller than 35mm full frame.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_35
hi David
i seriously wants to shoot a feature film with Canon EOS 5D Mark II Camera therefore it will be very kind of you if you can write me the detail about its price and also the accessories like stands, lenses, rigs etc. required with the above mentioned Camera to shoot a professional feature movies.
Hey Matthew,
It’s pretty obvious you come from a photography background and aren’t familiar with the specifics of film and video technology (which us professionals are constantly struggling with everyday). As such, your article glosses over a few extremely important problems and positives I think should be clarified. I’ve written extensively on the subject in the past and think it may be of benefit to check out two pieces summarizing the cons and pros (respectively) of these fantastic cameras.
8 Reasons Not to Buy A DSLR
8 Reasons to Buy A DSLR for Video
Keep on shooting,
David
Hi David,
As I’ve said in my other posts related to these cameras, I’ve been a still photographer for 20 years, and I have no interest in video. OK, maybe a little bit. But if you took this post to be promoting the use of SLRs for video production, then I apologize for not being clearer in my writing.
The fact of the matter is that since I’ve written about the SLRs in question for photographic use, I’ve had a lot of questions about which ones would be best for video, and decided to get down a little bit of information about how they differ from each other, with a minimal amount of background explanation as to why there is any serious interest in them for video in the first place.
So, I appreciate the links to your site, and although they don’t address the specific issue at hand, I’m sure that my readers will find them helpful.
- Matthew
Dear Matthew,
I am fond of nature photography, photographing mostly flowers, larger flora and landscapes. I use canon 450d with canon 100mm 2.8 macro for macro shots and canon 17-40 L for landscapes. Now I have a possibility to purchase canon 5d for an affordable price. I would love, of course, to jump to canon 5d mark II, but that is still too expensive for me at present. At the same time I am thinking of changing to the recent canon 550d which has so lovely features of higher resolution, HD video and greatly improved LCD-screen at so affordable price. Could you please kindly advise me on what is the best option to go from 450d to 5d or 550d? First of all, I would like to have best image quality. I could not find anywhere a direct comparison of 550d with 5d, so it is difficult for me to jugde the difference in their image quality. Usually, of course, FF provides better image quality that crop. But, at the same time, 550d has greater resoluton and newer Digic IV processor and better gapless design of the matrix. So, could you please clarify something on their comparative image quality? For me, it is also very important that 550d has LiveView which is extremely helpful for shooting wild flowers with a tripod. I am acually scared of how I am going to shoot flowers with 5d without LiveView!
I would appreciate greatly also the video feature of 550d. And its improved LCD is supreb indeed and very helpful for evaluating the true image quality an the spot.
I am also worried that my lenses will work in a different way on 5d. Now my 100mm lens works in fact as a 160mm lens on FF, and that is not bad for macro. Besides, the cropped matrix provides greater DOF which is also very nice for macro (it is easier to get shallower DOF, that greater DOF). My 17-40 lens now works for me as a universal lens, for, in fact, it is somewhat 28-70mm lens on the crop, it suits fine my needs for shooting landscapes and large flora as well as family shots, etc. On the FF it will become an ultrawide zoom, and I am not sure if I really need so wide angle – till now, it is perfectly enough for me as real 28-70. Besides, I have read such a wide zoom looses, to certain extent, its image quality on the wide angles on FF, especially in the corners. All these differences make me hesitant.
But still, if 5d provides truly better qualtiy than 550d, then, I feel, im prepared to sacrifice the convenience of 550d for that.
Or would you recommend to content myself for the timebeing with 550d and just amass gradually the fortune to get 5d mark iI?
Thank you so much, if you will find time to answer me!
-Ritam
Hi Ritam,
That’s a very good question, and unfortunately, I don’t have an old 5D around for testing, which is really the best way to settle the matter.
Probably the most striking difference between the cameras will be the build quality. The 5D feels solid and heavy, and it will stand up to hard, professional use, whereas the 550D will feel like an entry-level camera. Some people don’t care about that sort of thing, but it’s worth keeping in mind.
But as for image quality…
If both cameras had 12.8 megapixel sensors, but one full-frame and one APS-C (1.6x), then to make a print of the same dimensions, the lens flaws recorded by the smaller sensor would have to be
magnified by 1.6x, and you’d therefore expect the image quality to be better from the larger sensor.
However, if you’re comparing an 18 megapixel with a 12.8, you’d have to enlarge your photos from the 12 megapixel sensor by 1.4x to get to the same print size, which means that you’d be enlarging those lens flaws anyway. It would be very slightly less (1.4x rather than 1.6x), but this difference is probably not significant, especially with high quality lenses (like yours).
So, right off, I think that the sensor size issue that IS significant when comparing the 5D Mark II and the 7D or 550D is not an issue between the 5D and the 550D; they should be about the same with regards to lens flaws, and the 550D ultimately gives you more resolution. There is also, as you mentioned, the “sweet spot” effect to consider: the 550D is using the highest resolution part of your lens’s frame of coverage, so you’re likely to be getting better and more even images anyway.
The other issue is technology age. Most importantly, the 5D’s sensor has 12-bit capture, while the
550D‘s has 14-bit. This is a very significant difference, especially in the shadow side of the histogram. With the 550D, you should expect more dynamic range and smoother tonal gradiants. Of course, the 550D‘s Digic Processor is a newer model, and the sensor boasts two extra f-stops of exposure, and it should be more energy efficient and produce less noise, relatively speaking.
Despite how well the new generation of cameras handle noise, I’d guess that you’d still get slightly better noise performance in low light with the 5D in mid-range ISOs.
So, with all of that said, I would expect that you’ll get very similar image quality between the two cameras, but with good technique, it may be better with the 550D. And if you’re interested in the live view and video features of the 550D, I’d say you should go for it
Hope that helps a bit!
- Matthew
I’ve noticed two video issues with my 550D, but they aren’t devastating. It’d be interesting to know whether they occur in the other models (I’ve anecdotal evidence to suggest so).
1) Rolling shutter issue, whereby the information can’t be saved from the CCD quickly enough, resulting in bent vertical lines during fast pans. Apparently the video mode only takes every third scanline (IIRC), but every pixel in that line (3000 or so?). If there were firmware to take every other pixel and ~then~ down-convert then this issue would disappear completely – although there may be some anti-aliasing issues emerging).
2) Auto exposure. When I zoom with my bottom-end lens, the camera compensates for light differences (this occurs on completely manual settings). However, this is a discrete process, meaning any zoom results in a flickering video-clip. Whether this is a lens issue I couldn’t say, but I’ve heard unfavourable reports on this IS 18-55 which came with my camera.
Hi Curt,
You’re absolutely right about the rolling shutter issue, of course. I’d like to mention, though, that this is a problem for all of the Canon SLRs, not just the 550D / Rebel T2i. It is also sometimes called the “Jello-O Effect”, because if you pan back and forth very quickly, solid objects will appear to jiggle like the stuff. I believe that one of the reasons that a rolling shutter is used, though, is that the entire sensor isn’t charged at the same time, thereby helping dissipate heat and keeping digital noise to a minimum. I understand that even with the rolling shutter, heat can be a problem with prolonged use.
The auto exposure issue is an interesting one… it sounds as though it’s a lens specific problem. With lower-end lenses, the maximum aperture is not fixed; it is larger at wider focal lengths and smaller as you zoom out, as I’m sure you know. The lens communicates its current focal length to the camera as it zooms so that the camera can force a smaller aperture setting to match the light-falloff, and I imagine that we’re looking at some sort of effect that’s related to that process. Do you still have the same problem if you manually set the aperture to something smaller than the lens’ smallest maximum aperture (like f8, perhaps)?
In any case, thanks for the additional information, it’s very much appreciated.
As Ever,
Matthew