Magic Lantern enables 14-bit RAW CinemaDNG on 5D

FOR MKII DO NOT USE a128gig 1000x or 1050x UDMA7 CF card for Magic Lantern.

FOR MKII DO NOT USE a128gig 1000x or 1050x UDMA7 CF card for Magic Lantern.

Just want to update 5D mkII users that for now DO NOT USE a128gig 1000x or 1050x UDMA7 CF card for Magic Lantern.

Tests I have been doing with techsupport from Komputerbay shows us that the 5DmkII

can accept the fast cards ONLY WHEN USING CANON FIRMWARE and for shooting stills and H264 .MOV files.

BUT the card CANNOT BE USE TO UPDATE FIRMWARE, even the firmware from Canon can't be "seen" by the 5D mkII

also MAGIC LANTERN FIRMWARE CANNOT BE "SEEN" BY THE 5dMKII, even if you use EOScard to make it bootable.

So far we are doing the tests using Komputerbay 128 gig 1000x and 1050x cf cards,

If you are using a 128 gig on the mkII + Magic Lantern please share if its 1000x or less, also if its UDMA7 or less.
 
, I've been away for 4 weeks. Could someone point me out to the latest stable build and if there have been any new improvements? Thnks!
 
For the mkIII, there is the dual iso development, still early stages but "it aims to increase dynamic range" by combining 2 ISOs in every frame.
This is developed by A1ex and you can get the latest from the "official" repo in the downloads/nightly builds section.
Discussion here. http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=7139.msg59687#msg59687


For the mkII, there is a development for Photos/stills called auto exposure, the algorythm for auto ISO and auto AE is developed by pravdomil and its discussed here http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=7208.msg60545#msg60545

incorporated in the builds by a.d. for the 5D2.
 
Dual-iso is impressive in paper and works rather well on stills. Unfortunately, still not usable (and perhaps never will?) for motion since it renders half-res in transition ISO areas (highlights/shadows)... Could work with no too aggressive intervals (ISO 100-400 as max?)
 
Let me be the first to ask this... why trying to make one of the sharpest HD cameras even sharper? Not so long ago, when HD was still new I remember a few people ( some of them producers and colleagues, some of them clients ) complaining that HD made people look older and uglier because it exposed the skin imperfections and wrinkles so clearly. Has this perception gone away? Are people now demanding more detail or sharpness in their already sharp HD videos? Don't get me wrong, being a tech head and cameraman, I am all for 4:4:4 color space and high DR... but frankly, I don't recall 35mm film been this sharp...
 
The goal is maximum detail possible, not sharpness per se. Over-sharpening looks digital. Once maximum detail is captured by the camera (ideally without aliasing or other artifacts), it can be softened if desired in post. The 5D3 H.264, for example, throws away a great deal of information which can't be recovered in post.
 
jcs said:
Over-sharpening looks digital.
Click to expand...

Still a lot of these "raw-enthusiasts" let ACR keep the sharpening at 25 (which is quite heavily sharpened). The RAW-files at 0 sharpening are quite softish. There is detail there to be extracted though but it isn't on the level of a C300.
 
Real high resolution never looks as bad on complexion as oversharp low res (hd and sd) material.
 
maarek said:
Still a lot of these "raw-enthusiasts" let ACR keep the sharpening at 25 (which is quite heavily sharpened). The RAW-files at 0 sharpening are quite softish. There is detail there to be extracted though but it isn't on the level of a C300.
Click to expand...

Actually it is on the level of the C300
http://www.eoshd.com/content/10475/canon-1d-c-vs-5d-mark-iii-raw-and-c300-gh2-resolution-comparison
And if you shoot 1:1 it surpasses that camera.

The huge advantages of raw are flexibility in post, stelllar highlight roll off, no banding, higher DR (especially high if you use dual ISO), super sensitive low light capabilities that surpass 8but compresed flavors, and beautiful non-plastic skin tones.

Do those benefits outweigh the costs to me? You bet.
 
The C300 is true 1000+ lines h, v, and diagonal. It doesn't use/need traditional deBayering due to the sensor design (just simple averaging for G to get very high quality results (R&B not processed)). It provides higher resolution vs. 5D3 RAW (normal mode. The 1:1 crop mode looks better on 5D3 on his page, but note comment: doesn't sound like a proper test).

5D3 RAW is excellent, totally usable now, perhaps 1800 h pixels or more resolvable (vs. H.264 which could resolve max 1620 h pixels). My FS700 is slightly higher resolution than 5D3 RAW (internal or external recorder), and the C300 is slightly higher resolution than the FS700. Did a bunch of research and tests a while ago: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/1953-comparing-actual-camera-resolutions/
 
maarek said:
Still a lot of these "raw-enthusiasts" let ACR keep the sharpening at 25 (which is quite heavily sharpened). The RAW-files at 0 sharpening are quite softish. There is detail there to be extracted though but it isn't on the level of a C300.
Click to expand...

Right- sharpen enough to bring up microcontrast/detail but not so much that it looks digital when in motion (aliasing going on).
 
Another test I did in the early stage of raw video was, if you add too much sharpening in ACR, results in a flickering during playback.
a lot were stumped, some pointed at the early versions of raw2dng, and to some degree, the newer raw2dng fixed it but in my case, the reduction and sometimes putting sharpening to 0 fixed it.
You can also opt to add it in the timeline by other tools/filters like unsharp etc.
Its the sharpening while still in ACR that brings flickering during playback, my doubt is probably due that perhaps this is designed for stills rather than a sequence of moving images in dngs.
 
Ted Ramasola said:
Its the sharpening while still in ACR that brings flickering during playback, my doubt is probably due that perhaps this is designed for stills rather than a sequence of moving images in dngs.
Click to expand...

The flickering from oversharpening in ACR is aliasing. It's best to get the max sharpness without aliasing in ACR since it's doing a lot of work on the raw Bayer data. Once deBayered, it's not possible to get as much sharpening (alias free or not). Almost all sharpen filters are non-temporal, meaning they work on single frames only (convolution ("Sharpen"), unsharp mask). Neat Video with Temporal set to > 0 might perform temporal sharpening to minimize noise/aliasing. There is a technology, call Super-resolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superresolution) which specifically uses aliasing information in a good way: to increase detail/resolution while reducing noise/aliasing (haven't seen a commercial product really demonstrate this working well). Dark Energy is another product that is using temporal information to remove aliasing/noise: http://darkenergyforaftereffects.com/see-dark-energy/ (haven't used it).
 
jcs said:
The flickering from oversharpening in ACR is aliasing. It's best to get the max sharpness without aliasing in ACR since it's doing a lot of work on the raw Bayer data. Once deBayered, it's not possible to get as much sharpening (alias free or not). Almost all sharpen filters are non-temporal, meaning they work on single frames only (convolution ("Sharpen"), unsharp mask). Neat Video with Temporal set to > 0 might perform temporal sharpening to minimize noise/aliasing. There is a technology, call Super-resolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superresolution) which specifically uses aliasing information in a good way: to increase detail/resolution while reducing noise/aliasing (haven't seen a commercial product really demonstrate this working well). Dark Energy is another product that is using temporal information to remove aliasing/noise: http://darkenergyforaftereffects.com/see-dark-energy/ (haven't used it).
Click to expand...

could be aliasing, but my 5d2 is using a VAF filter already, so it has already "minimized" the usual aliasing bought about by the line skipping readout. I think the default sharpening setting was the culprit in the test I did involving a highly detailed shot of a tree trunk bark and roots with grass and leaves in a contrasty lighting.

Anyhow, reducing to almost zero solved it. Though in some scenes sharpening in acr doesnt cause flickering, its a case by case scenario i guess.
 
Steve Kahn said:
Actually it is on the level of the C300
Click to expand...

No, just no. Even that little little underscaled C300 shot clearly has more actual detail then the 5d raw shot. I just did a fight scene- test with the 5d raw and it looks nice, great even. But the detail is nowhere near a C300. Forget EOSHD and shoot the cameras yourself.
 
For ACR, my preferred sharpening setting would be 10, unless there are very strong edges that can look oversharpened. Here you can see how 0, 10 and 25 look (on a BMC, which, if you ask me, is very similar to the 5D3+RAW in terms of sharpness if you're looking 1:1):
http://www.similaar.com/foto/blackmagic-workflow/index.html
There's some minor oversharpening, but I only see it in the white circle surrounded by black, everything else looks fine to me.
 
Here is our first fight scene with the Canon 5d RAW. Luckily we had a great sunset to test it with, also a couple of shots with 60p RAW. Please, watch in HD and in Youtube.

[video]http://t.co/j0ty8A780V[/video]

Also vimeo link for the youtube haters:

https://vimeo.com/71280534
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top