Canon 5D Mark II 24P Update 24P Vs. 30P Test

March 16th, 2010

I shot the break at 30fps. The rest was shot with a Canon 5D Mark II 24P Native with a Canon 24-105mm Zoom Lens T4 at 1250 ISO. My AC Chris Collins saved the day and nabbed a 5D to update right after the release. Monday night is pretty lame in Hollywood so we opted for the pool hall. The 24P is silky smooth.

***Update*** Ned over at Hollywood DI hooked up this comparison test with the frame rates burned in. I upgraded the firmware at the pool hall while shooting this.

32
Leave a Reply

guest
1
1
- 2
Filter:
all
Sort by:
latest
adams
adams
Guest
June 11th, 2011

FOR SALE:Canon EOS 5D Mark II 21MP DSLR Camera

Canon EOS 5D Mark II has a stunning 21.1-megapixel full-frame CMOS sensor with DIGIC 4 Image Processor, a vast ISO Range of 100-6400, plus EOS technologies like Auto Lighting Optimizer and Peripheral Illumination Correction. It supports Live View shooting, Live View HD videos, and more.

PACKAGE CONTENT:

1 Canon EOS 5D Mark II Body
1 Eyecup Eb
1 (EW-EOS5DMKII) Wide Neck Strap
1 (STV-250N) Stereo Video Cable
1 (IFC-200U) USB Interface Cable IFC-200U
1 (LC-E6) Battery Charger
1 (LP-E6) Battery Pack
1 EOS Digital Solution Disk
1 Software Instruction Manual

EMAIL CONTACT: [email protected]

Otto
Otto
Guest
July 23rd, 2010

The 24P looks silky smooth, with subtle aromas of oak and splashes of pepper… The 30p is robust and full bodied, with an elegant flow and soft lines.

Too bad the test didn’t include 25P. It is impossible to fully capture those authentic European feelings at any other frame rate…

frankie c
frankie c
Guest
May 29th, 2010

whats the best setting for my 5d mrk ii when shooting in low light? so i don’t get graininess.. thanks

iKeithb
Guest
April 29th, 2010

Sorry if this burst any “indie” bubbles here but I could clearly see that the Emperor had no clothes so I did a web comparison test with identical set ups recording the same thing to see if there was a difference. Once a vid hits the web on YouTube, Vimeo etc. you’ll see that the 24p recording won’t make a difference.

Open these 2 vids in separate browsers and start them at the same time.
As far as YouTube goes they look the same.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTkTNH523tU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQgqdNvw7_4

(2) Canon 5D’s both with 24-105L lenses, f4, iso 640
Camera 1 is recording at 24p – Camera 2 is recording at 30 fps

It’s a crude test with a blown out background. But as you can see the vids look the same. The vids may look different on TV but we are all doing a lot of web stuff here right?
Chances are that if you are working on a TV show or commercials then you are not even reading this!

While you are on my YouTube channel check out my music vid “the shelf” Mostly shot with a Minolta 50mm 1.2 on the 5d. It was my first try at video, singing, writing, riding a unicycle.
OR see my cute baby videos.

Filmmassa
Filmmassa
Guest
March 22nd, 2010

Wow good point, lol! Knowing what you are looking at and how many layers of frame rate conversion is really kinda important.

eddy
eddy
Guest
March 20th, 2010

Great colour.

leewilson
leewilson
Guest
March 19th, 2010

This test is simply ridiculous !

Two frame rates . . . converted to one frame rate, then re-compressed by YouTube into their own frame rate – you can tell exactly nothing from this.

A movie cannot have two frame rates in separate sections of the movie, so one will always be compromised.

A ridiculous idea for a test !

hampusforev
hampusforev
Guest
March 17th, 2010

I really like the video, but I can’t tell the difference to be honest…

Jared
Jared
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  hampusforev

Check out the number 5 ball after the break in 30fps.
Thanks,
Jared

nickin
nickin
Guest
March 17th, 2010

what frame rate is the file you uploaded to youtube?
and what frame rate has youtube rendered it at?
i don’t see how one file can display both fairly

Jared
Jared
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  nickin

I will check with Ned at Hollywood DI for the answer to that.
Thanks,
Jared

Jared
Jared
Guest
March 18th, 2010
Reply to  Jared

It was rendered at 23.98 frames. I don’t know about you tube.
Thanks for the comment.
Jared

Filmmassa
Filmmassa
Guest
March 17th, 2010

May I ask what you dialed in for your shutter, was it the same between the two frame rates? I agree that there are (still, despite increases in technology) differences in viewing footage on a computer monitor vs. a TV (be it plasma, LCD, ect.). But I think what effects the look of fps most is the shutter, being that the look seems to me a question of movement and frequency. NTSC and PAL fps were chosen because of the two electrical (frequency) standards in their perspective countries. Which, makes you wonder, at what fps or frequency does the human eye see?

Its weird huh because in many ways we seem to more smoothly then 24fps, but 30 seems to be “Too smooth” and “video like”. Many people seem to prefer 30fps @ a 50th shutter, as it is close to 24’s 48th but still has the added benefit of having more “temporal resolution”. Now this is total speculation on my part but, maybe because we have two eyes, they don’t exactly agree on the fps or frequency, and thats why we see the stutter of 24 as particularly “beautiful”, but still see 30 as smoother and more “natural”.

At any rate its difficult to compare frame rates without giving us different shutter speeds/angles to eyeball. Or at least it would be nice to know which ones you used. Thanks!!

Jared
Jared
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  Filmmassa

The shutter was 1/60th for both I think. I know I shot 30fps at 1/60th and may have dialed it down to 1/50 for 24P. Check out the Five ball after the break at 30fps it stutters some. Thanks for the comment.
Jared

CG
CG
Guest
March 17th, 2010

No discernible difference. We make too much of frame rates. If you need to match with other 24 FPS formats or print to film for projection than, yeah, it’s important. If you’re medium is web or tv, it’s not going to improve your footage. If your subject is fast moving, 30fps will be better (the break for instance). Frame & light the subject well while illuminating your theme, that’s what makes good footage.

photoTristan
Guest
March 17th, 2010

I think I can see a difference. This video looks a lot less ‘video-ey’ and more film like to me.

Henry
Henry
Guest
March 20th, 2010
Reply to  photoTristan

Sorry to disappoint you. Only in your mind are you noticing any difference. Both clips are playing back at the same frame rate because Youtube does not support Variable frame rate.

Kfir Ziv
Guest
March 17th, 2010

I like it. the sound is great too

Giulio Sciorio
Guest
March 17th, 2010

I don’t think anyone is really going to notice the difference online if something is shot in 24p or 30p but you can see the difference if its played back on a HDTV. My videos look super smooth but when I put them on a 50″ tv they looked really “video” too smooth.

jared
jared
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  Giulio Sciorio

The balls stagger a bit in 30fps, they seem smoother in 24fps. Thanks for the comment.
Jared

mortoncinema
mortoncinema
Guest
March 16th, 2010

Regarding the 24p, it looks nice to me on my computer screen.

If anyone can answer it would be appreciated:

In addition to aesthetic possible reasons for 24p, are there practical reasons? For example, is it easier to play on youtube because maybe the file is not as “dense” or maybe easier to edit for the same reason?

FletcherFIlm
FletcherFIlm
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  mortoncinema

To reply to mortoncinema,
the reason 24p is “cinematic-like” is because in the early days of actual film, 24 frames per second was the cheapest filmmakers could get without having breaks in their sound. Higher frame rates means more film required, more reels to buy, etc. 24 frames per second was the minimum amount of frames they could use for constant audio flow. Which is why, when we try to “match” the look of film, we’re really just mimicking their money saving strategy, which happened to be used all the time for the reasons described. :) I think it’s funny because if all the greatest films were shot in say 60fps, would we be trying to mimic that as well? Think about it…

FletcherFilm
FletcherFilm
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  FletcherFIlm

Oh and to the youtube question – yes, 24p is a smaller size than 30p because there is less data to process (fewer frames)–which you will note if you’ve ever converted 30fps to 24fps in Compressor. But realistically it doesn’t change all that much there. A 30p file that’s 300mb let’s say would size down to 250mb in a 24p file. It doesn’t exactly line up but you get the idea.

jared
jared
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  FletcherFilm

Thanks for hooking up the answer to that question.
Jared

zhibo
zhibo
Guest
March 18th, 2010
Reply to  mortoncinema

practical reasons? smaller file sizes, and requires little bit less light than 30p

shalom
shalom
Guest
March 16th, 2010

Really nice! Very cinematic!

Did you do any grading?

What picturestyle settings did you use??

Happy Firmware day!!

jared
jared
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  shalom

Neutral Picture style. Thanks for the comment.
Jared

Chris
Chris
Guest
March 16th, 2010

Very nice for overhead fluorescent lighting.

jared
jared
Guest
March 17th, 2010
Reply to  Chris

Thans for the comment. Yeah the lights don’t look that bad.
Jared

mayhem
mayhem
Guest
March 16th, 2010

Very nice, looks great!

Jared
Jared
Guest
March 16th, 2010
Reply to  mayhem

Thanks for the comment.
Jared

1
1
- 2
Filter:
all
Sort by:
latest

Take part in the CineD community experience