I would probably use a 16mm prime 2.8 or 35mm 1.8 as the 14-35 f4 for indoors even if it’s L lens isn’t gonna work favorably other than bumping up the ISO like u did. Great shots video tho. 👍🏼
@@112206maximus thank you! And yes I now learned there is a huge difference with f4 vs f2.8 as soon as I turned on the camera but didn’t wanna waste the footage!
Bring a faster lens or a prime lens and your problem will be gone and don't shoot log in low light unless you have many light source to control the light around you.
Canon R8 owner here. My advice: don’t shoot in Log profiles when you have to bump iso beyond 12,800. The point of log is to get max dynamic range, but every time you increase iso, you lose that dynamic range. So essentially you’re just shooting in a noisier format for little to no benefit in color/highlight/shadow information.
This makes sense, thank you! This is the highest ISO I've ever used, and I knew I was running a risk of adding noise but it felt necessary because of how dark it was. I will turn log off next time I attempt to shoot in low light.
1. dont use log in low light. 2. 24 fps 1/50 is optimal. you could even go lower in shutter 1/30 and it would be ok. 3. stick to full iso values, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12800. not inbetween values as they provide more noise.
First, my credentials, I started in video in the 1960s, shooting with studio cameras doing training videos for the state of Illinois. Lots of experience. Indoors it's almost always preferable to shoot 4k in 24p. Movie studios always use 24fps indoors, always! This allows a standard shutter angle of roughly 1/50th. By comparison, your use of 60p allows a shutter angle of 1/120th. So using 24p yields 2.4 times more light onto the imager, plus it looks more 'cinematic'. I would have tried using a standard video profile in addition to a log profile in that situation. You are correct in that some of the shooting situations you ran into required log, but others looked like standard profile could have worked. Also, using a more filmic gamma, like the "Cinema" gamma yields a more filmic look, so less black crushing and smoother highlight roll-off. Finally, yes, a lens with at least an f2.8 opening was indicated for indoors, further improving your video signal to noise ratio possibilities.
Sorry I meant "Cinema Gamut" not gamma, and it's located under the R8 "Log" tab, then under the "Color Space" tab. In the Canon EOS R8 - Advanced User Guide, the "Log" pertinent information starts on page 377. There you'll find more exacting details of the 3 gamuts available and how to change them.
Thank you so much for all this information!! Great point about using 60fps vs 24fps for the interior shots. I was debating shooting in 24fps for the entire video, but I was concerned about the shakiness of the footage knowing that I would have to digitally stabilize it in post, so I relied on 60fps, which is what I normally do in daytime shots. However, I didn’t think about how 1/120 would also make my shots even darker so that’s a great point! I should have stayed with 24fps and be very very steady. I have my R8 set to Cinema Gamut, I do prefer the look of this as well. It’s a shame it’s hard to tell in this low light test but I do prefer this color profile as well. Thank you again!
@@PaulaMadshave you tried R8 in body electronic stabilization? I use my R8 for casual use, but electronic stabilization works great for me using non stabilized lenses.
@@JP1050x hello! Yes, I have my Digital IS turned on for the R8. I have used it on my 16mm f2.8 which is not stabilized and it works nicely as well, I just have to remember not to whip the camera around too much because it will definitely show 😅
I like using the A7SIII when I’m at home in a studio setup because I can control the environment and the R8 when I’m out and about for its small form factor.
Yeah I would agree with others, shooting in 60fps is pretty confusing and definitely would make it harder with low light. I didn't think it performed bad really at all considering that lens and at higher ISOs needed. f/4 lenses are just not meant for a lot of indoor work and definitely not so much for indoor video work in low light. Still it performed pretty well. It really comes down to just needing a faster lens for indoor work.
Thank you! And yes this was a good experiment for me and it taught me a lot about shooting in different fps and how valuable my f2.8 is haha considering my f4 was my go-to for its more compact form factor but now I have a renewed appreciation for my slightly bigger f2.8
Try to work with prime lens. Maybe the 24mm 1.8 and de 35mm 1.8 You lose the versatility of a standard zoom lens but you are going to have better low light performance and portability. Battery life sucks! Y always bring 2 or 3 batteries with me or the battery grip.
Thank you, good point! I have a prime lens it’s a 16mm f2.8 and but has no stabilizer. And yes the battery life is a bit limited, may invest in a second pack in the future.
He meant a faster prime lens. A 2.8 lens gathers DOUBLE the amount of light as an F4. Meaning for example you can cut your ISO in half for less noise. If you had a 50mm 1.2 and shot at 1.2 (tricky due to the amount that would be in focus) that would be like 3.5 times more light@@PaulaMads
Why would you even consider bringing an f4 lens into that dark of of a setting? LOL. At minimum you should have used a f2.0 or under. Even with the R5 you wouldnt get much better low light performance on an f4 lens. You cant blame the camera and call it only a broll camera when you brought the wrong gear. The R8 has the same sensor as the R6 mark 2 and its low light performance will impress the majority of people if given the right gear for the job. Trust me. Try this with the f1.4 35mm or even better the 1.4 85mm is lens and you will see what this camera can really do.
First of all, use 2.8 or lower like 1.8 I never shoot 60 or 50 fps in such a places. 24 is to go. So imagine f1.8 lense and 24 fps. It would be 8x brighter in total comparing to sour f4 and 60fps. So yeah, wide aperture is the main key. a people a lot of complain for blackmagic pocket4k what i use in night scenes also. I never go above 3200 iso and always have 1.4 or lower lense an 24fps and it’s super crispy and clear even r8 is 5x more better in low light.
I agree and I thought it was only me. I posted a video from my camera. I did have to apply a lot of NR using Da Vinci Resolve to get it to acceptable level.
Your videos are awesome. I can’t really tell the NR was increased that much, but yes this was something I learned about shooting in low light with this camera.
9:30, the smaller the aperture, the bigger the depth of field. I guess in low light, the focus struggles a bit more due to the lack of depth of field of an f/2 aperture
Comment any suggestions on shooting in low light with the R8!
Haha bring a diff lens!
@@BrianMadsLive I know 😞
I would probably use a 16mm prime 2.8 or 35mm 1.8 as the 14-35 f4 for indoors even if it’s L lens isn’t gonna work favorably other than bumping up the ISO like u did. Great shots video tho. 👍🏼
@@112206maximus thank you! And yes I now learned there is a huge difference with f4 vs f2.8 as soon as I turned on the camera but didn’t wanna waste the footage!
Bring a faster lens or a prime lens and your problem will be gone and don't shoot log in low light unless you have many light source to control the light around you.
Canon R8 owner here. My advice: don’t shoot in Log profiles when you have to bump iso beyond 12,800. The point of log is to get max dynamic range, but every time you increase iso, you lose that dynamic range. So essentially you’re just shooting in a noisier format for little to no benefit in color/highlight/shadow information.
This makes sense, thank you! This is the highest ISO I've ever used, and I knew I was running a risk of adding noise but it felt necessary because of how dark it was. I will turn log off next time I attempt to shoot in low light.
1. dont use log in low light.
2. 24 fps 1/50 is optimal. you could even go lower in shutter 1/30 and it would be ok.
3. stick to full iso values, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12800. not inbetween values as they provide more noise.
Thank you for these! I will keep in mind lowering shutter speed next time for low light, and yes I agree with the other tips for sure.
First, my credentials, I started in video in the 1960s, shooting with studio cameras doing training videos for the state of Illinois. Lots of experience.
Indoors it's almost always preferable to shoot 4k in 24p. Movie studios always use 24fps indoors, always! This allows a standard shutter angle of roughly 1/50th. By comparison, your use of 60p allows a shutter angle of 1/120th. So using 24p yields 2.4 times more light onto the imager, plus it looks more 'cinematic'.
I would have tried using a standard video profile in addition to a log profile in that situation. You are correct in that some of the shooting situations you ran into required log, but others looked like standard profile could have worked.
Also, using a more filmic gamma, like the "Cinema" gamma yields a more filmic look, so less black crushing and smoother highlight roll-off.
Finally, yes, a lens with at least an f2.8 opening was indicated for indoors, further improving your video signal to noise ratio possibilities.
Sorry I meant "Cinema Gamut" not gamma, and it's located under the R8 "Log" tab, then under the "Color Space" tab.
In the Canon EOS R8 - Advanced User Guide, the "Log" pertinent information starts on page 377. There you'll find more exacting details of the 3 gamuts available and how to change them.
Thank you so much for all this information!! Great point about using 60fps vs 24fps for the interior shots. I was debating shooting in 24fps for the entire video, but I was concerned about the shakiness of the footage knowing that I would have to digitally stabilize it in post, so I relied on 60fps, which is what I normally do in daytime shots. However, I didn’t think about how 1/120 would also make my shots even darker so that’s a great point! I should have stayed with 24fps and be very very steady.
I have my R8 set to Cinema Gamut,
I do prefer the look of this as well. It’s a shame it’s hard to tell in this low light test but I do prefer this color profile as well. Thank you again!
@@PaulaMadshave you tried R8 in body electronic stabilization? I use my R8 for casual use, but electronic stabilization works great for me using non stabilized lenses.
@@JP1050x hello! Yes, I have my Digital IS turned on for the R8. I have used it on my 16mm f2.8 which is not stabilized and it works nicely as well, I just have to remember not to whip the camera around too much because it will definitely show 😅
Nice video! I agree that a faster lens and a light would have produced better results.
Thank you! And yes, lesson learned for sure.
You're welcome!@@PaulaMads
Love my R8!!! Agree with all your points
One of my favorite cameras! ❤️
Problem is not with R8 ... It's more with selecting correct lens in low lights
I agree, faster lens would have been better
Yes... True... My recent visit to Rhino Sanctuary in Assam, India, it was overcast weather & difficulty in getting more depth of Field
what camera do you enjoy the most: the canon r8 or the sony a7s3.
I like using the A7SIII when I’m at home in a studio setup because I can control the environment and the R8 when I’m out and about for its small form factor.
I don't think I understand, why not shoot in a standard profile in 4k for less noise. what is the point in shooting in LOG for something like this?
LOG is usually more dynamic, but I’ll have to try standard next time I shoot in low light.
Brilliant honest review with lots of useful infomation
Thank you! Learned from my mistakes in this one
Yeah I would agree with others, shooting in 60fps is pretty confusing and definitely would make it harder with low light. I didn't think it performed bad really at all considering that lens and at higher ISOs needed. f/4 lenses are just not meant for a lot of indoor work and definitely not so much for indoor video work in low light. Still it performed pretty well. It really comes down to just needing a faster lens for indoor work.
Thank you! And yes this was a good experiment for me and it taught me a lot about shooting in different fps and how valuable my f2.8 is haha considering my f4 was my go-to for its more compact form factor but now I have a renewed appreciation for my slightly bigger f2.8
Try to work with prime lens.
Maybe the 24mm 1.8 and de 35mm 1.8
You lose the versatility of a standard zoom lens but you are going to have better low light performance and portability. Battery life sucks! Y always bring 2 or 3 batteries with me or the battery grip.
Thank you, good point! I have a prime lens it’s a 16mm f2.8 and but has no stabilizer. And yes the battery life is a bit limited, may invest in a second pack in the future.
He meant a faster prime lens. A 2.8 lens gathers DOUBLE the amount of light as an F4. Meaning for example you can cut your ISO in half for less noise. If you had a 50mm 1.2 and shot at 1.2 (tricky due to the amount that would be in focus) that would be like 3.5 times more light@@PaulaMads
@@EvilSardine084ooh gotcha, this is really helpful thank you for clarifying!
Great video!
Isn’t the issue really that an F4 lens is really a bad choice for anything low light?
Yup, that’s what I learned
Why would you even consider bringing an f4 lens into that dark of of a setting? LOL. At minimum you should have used a f2.0 or under. Even with the R5 you wouldnt get much better low light performance on an f4 lens. You cant blame the camera and call it only a broll camera when you brought the wrong gear. The R8 has the same sensor as the R6 mark 2 and its low light performance will impress the majority of people if given the right gear for the job. Trust me. Try this with the f1.4 35mm or even better the 1.4 85mm is lens and you will see what this camera can really do.
First of all, use 2.8 or lower like 1.8 I never shoot 60 or 50 fps in such a places. 24 is to go. So imagine f1.8 lense and 24 fps. It would be 8x brighter in total comparing to sour f4 and 60fps. So yeah, wide aperture is the main key. a people a lot of complain for blackmagic pocket4k what i use in night scenes also. I never go above 3200 iso and always have 1.4 or lower lense an 24fps and it’s super crispy and clear even r8 is 5x more better in low light.
I agree and I thought it was only me. I posted a video from my camera. I did have to apply a lot of NR using Da Vinci Resolve to get it to acceptable level.
Your videos are awesome. I can’t really tell the NR was increased that much, but yes this was something I learned about shooting in low light with this camera.
@@PaulaMads thank you so much. My other camera is Sony A7C2 that I feel is a great camera too and with which most of my videos are shot.
Remember f.stop controls depth of field so f4 the depth of field is much further so auto focus will hunt less because more is in focus
That’s right, thank you that makes sense!
9:30, the smaller the aperture, the bigger the depth of field. I guess in low light, the focus struggles a bit more due to the lack of depth of field of an f/2 aperture
Thank you, this makes more sense!
F4 lenses not a good idea for low light. 1.8 should be the standard for low light in my opinion.
So many armature mistakes made.
😅what about a7cii ? Have you tried that? Anyways nice video ❤❤.
I haven’t tried that yet, if i get my hands on one, I will!
5:31 Bill Nye?!
Hahahaha close!
4.0 is….. okay you figured that out. It’s not the camera.
Haha yeah, good lesson for me
Sony ❤❤
Love it too