Picture from EOSHD.com, head over to Andrew’s site to check out his full review of the 5d mark III along side his video tests.

I’m currently still waiting for my 5d mark III order to ship and of course I’m hunting around trying to find every last spec of information on the camera while I wait. As mark III’s start arrive on peoples door steps, more and more information is coming in on how the camera preforms.  The biggest complaint I’ve seen so far is that the 5d mark III isn’t enough of an improvement over the 5d mark II. A lot of complaints center around resolution and the fact that it’s not much of an improvement over the mark II.

It’s true that the hacked Panasonic Gh2 is one of the best preforming DSLR’s (for video) in the resolution department, but how many complaints did we really see about the 5d mark II’s resolution? Sure it’s 1080p video is softer then some of it’s competitors but people have happily referred to this softness as “organic” and “film like”. Many have been more then willing to embrace the Canon 5d mark II’s video resolution without hesitation and most complaints were instead about moire and rolling shutter.

So what’s changed? If the Canon 5d mark III is only a slight improvement in resolution over the mark II is that really that big of a deal? I’ve been more then happy with the “organic” look over the last few years and although the upgrades made to the 5d mark III are considered by some to be only incremental, they’re still an improvement.  If the new features added to the mark III aren’t compelling enough for you to spend $1500 more, then stick with the 5d mark II that you’ve been more then happy to use for the last several years. A new product release doesn’t render the old one useless.

I personally like the look of the video from the 5d mark II and it isn’t a disappointment to me that the mark III’s resolution is mostly unchanged. I have yet to sit down with the mark III and do a hands on comparison to the mark II but from what I’ve seen of the 5d mark III’s video so far, I don’t think I’ll be let down.

Before you start worrying about resolution make sure you think about how your final product will be viewed. By the time you upload your video to Youtube or Vimeo the compression will do away with most of the advantage that a higher resolution video would have. If you plan to distribute your film on blu ray, will anyone really notice the difference when sitting 5 or 6 feet away from their flat screen? Films shot on the 5d mark II have been released in theaters and no one was complaining there. So how much do you really need that extra resolution to make your film project more compelling?

Tags: , ,