Magic Lantern enables 14-bit RAW CinemaDNG on 5D

Dxomark measured 11.5 in RAW stills. Other people using the same equipment (but a better lens) measured 12.7 stops. RAW video will be close to RAW stills, but not quite there (there's line skipping, so shadows will be a bit more noisy).
In any case, these are "usable DR" measures, not my usual "absolute DR" measure, where if there's detail, it counts, no matter how noisy it is. So: a lot better than in H.264 video mode!
 
I do think some of the examples are crazy good. Now that the initial honeymoon period is calming down and we have tonnes of examples - is anyone else bothered by the vertical pattern that MacGregor highlighted? Starting to see it a lot now ,especially if shadows are boosted or there is bright clear sky. Will it bother an audience - don't know really as it doesn't appear everywhere. Also a few face examples, the skin takes on a plastic feel. Perhaps it was the specific post pro of the various shooters but I am on the fence about this really. Also seen cadence issues - stuttering and obviously skipped frames. Are these going to be overlooked or will we start to get a real critique of this breakthrough soon. Got a 5D MKII and have considered hacking it even though it is far less capable and will see. Have a BMPCC on pre-order and am thinking it will give similiar results as this vid below with perhaps a less compromised image ( Moire and aliasing excepted ) and perhaps easier workflow than the 5D MK III. An when I say compromised I am nitpicking of course, because of course the images are extraordinary but with some issues.


What do you guys think? 5D + hoops to climb through or BMPCC. Choice is getting annoying now he he he he.
 
Last edited:
henryolonga said:
Got a 5D MKII and have considered hacking it even though it is far less capable and will see. Have a BMPCC on pre-order and am thinking it will give similiar results as this vid below with perhaps a less compromised image ( Moire and aliasing excepted ) and perhaps easier workflow than the 5D MK III. An when I say compromised I am nitpicking of course, because of course the images are extraordinary but with some issues.

What do you guys think? 5D + hoops to climb through or BMPCC. Choice is getting annoying now he he he he.
Click to expand...

I actually reckon that if you already have the 5D MarkII kicking around then you might as well give it a go. At the moment it's still all a bit alpha and the workflow will probably get better over time, but it might still give you a bit of an idea about whether you want to commit to a RAW based workflow or not.

Personally I'm very excited by the BMPCC camera because of the MFT mount and the fact the little thing can record to pro-res. I think that's a great combination and I get a bit over excited by it.

Anyway I did a bit of a round up of Canon Raw video stuff so there could be a lot of videos in one place to check out. It includes both D600 and Canon 5D Mark II videos to give you an idea. Sadly these cameras are more limited than the Canon 5D Mark III but I'm sure you can still get creative with them!

Anyway here is my round up:

http://www.redsharknews.com/technology/item/731-freya’s-magic-lantern-raw-video-round-up

Freya
 
henryolonga said:
What do you guys think? 5D + hoops to climb through or BMPCC. Choice is getting annoying now he he he he.
Click to expand...

I expect to have my feature wrapped before the BMPRO and VAF filter hits the shelves.

I did some timed workflow tests, post processing takes 5x longer than H.264 so be prepared to invest in a raid array, a fast comp, tape backup, and lots of fast CF cards. It's a serious investment.
 
Since that day Magic Lantern enabled the Canon 5DMK3 with raw video capabilities we've seen what an amazing thing it is, esp for current owners of this camera. In my honest opinion, not so much for the raw per se, but for the fact that MK3 video shooters can now get the most from what is a very good sensor. For now, there isn’t an in between for Magic Lantern to enable better quality…as the Canon signal path to the HDMI is where most of the bad things seem to happen. They found a clean raw data path, and all of the great things that go with it, along with the cumbersome data rate and intensive post work flow for MK3 shooters.
The results so far have been stellar, to my eyes looking very much like C100 footage,
which is interesting to me, since the C100 is a limited camera codec wise. I think that the fact that the C100 was designed to do video only, with an incredible S35 sensor, great DR, sensitivity, profiles, etc, help that camera to overcome 4:2:0 limitations. A Ninja can also be used to get 4:2:2 to get even more out of it.
The MK3 on the other hand, has problems in the video mode: It’s soft, the picture profiles are not great, the DR is limited, and the recent 4:2:2 HDMI firmware didn’t help. Which suggests that everything about the Canon video mode in DSLRs is done quick and dirty…unlike the process in the C100, C300. Even AVCHD on the C100 looks beautiful and organic. H.264 as processed on the MK3 takes the beautiful sensor and does bad things to it. So for MK3 shooters, the ML raw hack is incredible, it bypasses all of that terrible processing!
What about for someone like me looking to build a set up from scratch? To my eyes the cameras images are similar. AVCHD C100, and raw MK3 (odd as that sounds) Here is how the costs compare to start from ground up.


A C100 costs $5499 for the body, $37.95 for a SanDisc 16GB extreme pro card for 80 minutes of footage, $140 for an extra Canon battery giving you 8 hours of record time, it includes audio, ND filters, and a VF. Total is $5676.95

A 5DMK3 costs $3499 for the body, $1800 for 6 1000x CF cards for approx. 72 minutes of footage, $180 for 3 extra batteries giving you 8 hours of record time, $269 for a Zoom H4N, $136 for a fader ND, and $150 for a Flashpoint Swivi vf which is a bargain and works on the MK3. Total is $6034


For the purposes of this break down, I chose the best cards available for the C100 and the MK3 raw data. I tried to use a good budget to quality ratio on the outboard items for the MK3, choosing items that have been used and trusted by DSLR shooters, without going to the extremely expensive choices. Rigs and lenses will be different from person to person. As will computer costs for raw and choices like whether or not a Ninja is needed on a C100. This cost comparison is strictly from the pov of legitimately going out and shooting a piece with each body, assuming a lens is added of course!
 
pulpfiction007 said:
Since that day Magic Lantern enabled the Canon 5DMK3 with raw video capabilities we've seen what an amazing thing it is, esp for current owners of this camera. In my honest opinion, not so much for the raw per se, but for the fact that MK3 video shooters can now get the most from what is a very good sensor. For now, there isn’t an in between for Magic Lantern to enable better quality…as the Canon signal path to the HDMI is where most of the bad things seem to happen. They found a clean raw data path, and all of the great things that go with it, along with the cumbersome data rate and intensive post work flow for MK3 shooters.
The results so far have been stellar, to my eyes looking very much like C100 footage,
which is interesting to me, since the C100 is a limited camera codec wise. I think that the fact that the C100 was designed to do video only, with an incredible S35 sensor, great DR, sensitivity, profiles, etc, help that camera to overcome 4:2:0 limitations. A Ninja can also be used to get 4:2:2 to get even more out of it.
The MK3 on the other hand, has problems in the video mode: It’s soft, the picture profiles are not great, the DR is limited, and the recent 4:2:2 HDMI firmware didn’t help. Which suggests that everything about the Canon video mode in DSLRs is done quick and dirty…unlike the process in the C100, C300. Even AVCHD on the C100 looks beautiful and organic. H.264 as processed on the MK3 takes the beautiful sensor and does bad things to it. So for MK3 shooters, the ML raw hack is incredible, it bypasses all of that terrible processing!
What about for someone like me looking to build a set up from scratch? To my eyes the cameras images are similar. AVCHD C100, and raw MK3 (odd as that sounds) Here is how the costs compare to start from ground up.


A C100 costs $5499 for the body, $37.95 for a SanDisc 16GB extreme pro card for 80 minutes of footage, $140 for an extra Canon battery giving you 8 hours of record time, it includes audio, ND filters, and a VF. Total is $5676.95

A 5DMK3 costs $3499 for the body, $1800 for 6 1000x CF cards for approx. 72 minutes of footage, $180 for 3 extra batteries giving you 8 hours of record time, $269 for a Zoom H4N, $136 for a fader ND, and $150 for a Flashpoint Swivi vf which is a bargain and works on the MK3. Total is $6034


For the purposes of this break down, I chose the best cards available for the C100 and the MK3 raw data. I tried to use a good budget to quality ratio on the outboard items for the MK3, choosing items that have been used and trusted by DSLR shooters, without going to the extremely expensive choices. Rigs and lenses will be different from person to person. As will computer costs for raw and choices like whether or not a Ninja is needed on a C100. This cost comparison is strictly from the pov of legitimately going out and shooting a piece with each body, assuming a lens is added of course!
Click to expand...

I think if you are going to compare the C100 to the 5dMk3 you need to include the Ninja2. Also, I think that there will be some interesting tech coming out solving the storage issue within the next few months.
 
You have to factor in the cost of a raid array and the 5x longer transcoding time too. Raw ain't cheap but a digital negative sure is sexy (to some).
 
I know I'm alone in this but I really dislike the C100 footage and do not prefer it one bit over the 5D3... I would love to "love" the image of the C100 like all of you guys but I just don't.. It has a lovely sharp image but to me that's what makes it look very video. The ergonomics, the workflow, the price, there is so many things I love about this machine, but I dislike the image immensely and no matter how many video's I have seen, the 5D mark 3 looks more cinematic and aesthetically pleasing to me. It appears people are obsessed with the WDR and C log that when they get the footage back to the NLE it lacks all contrast and they don't add it back, it looks flat and almost washed out... or maybe it just looks like it to me... I don't want to come across like I'm trolling, its just my honest opinion!!..

The important thing to take from any development the ML team creates, is that it gives us all more choices..
 
I've seen 100 C100 videos today, they all look different...the best ones look just as good as MK3 Raw to my eyes...and the low light is ridiculous on it. I think people just see AVCHD and repeat what they hear others hear...AVCHD = bad. Not on that camera.
 
I've seen a few things shot with the C100/300 that look really cinematic but when it comes to the black crushed 35mm film vibe I think the 5D has the edge. It's taken me a week to teach myself how to shoot like a photographer/cinematographer again instead of a videographer. It's so much more like shooting film.
 
I think the hot ticket may turn out to be the C100/300 for interviews, etc. And the 5d3ML for b-roll, using the strengths of each as needed. I agree also that there is something truly interesting looking about the 5d2/3 raw footage arriving each day, something different.

Scott Freestyle said:
I know I'm alone in this but I really dislike the C100 footage and do not prefer it one bit over the 5D3... I would love to "love" the image of the C100 like all of you guys but I just don't.. It has a lovely sharp image but to me that's what makes it look very video. The ergonomics, the workflow, the price, there is so many things I love about this machine, but I dislike the image immensely and no matter how many video's I have seen, the 5D mark 3 looks more cinematic and aesthetically pleasing to me. It appears people are obsessed with the WDR and C log that when they get the footage back to the NLE it lacks all contrast and they don't add it back, it looks flat and almost washed out... or maybe it just looks like it to me... I don't want to come across like I'm trolling, its just my honest opinion!!..

The important thing to take from any development the ML team creates, is that it gives us all more choices..
Click to expand...
 
Scott Freestyle said:
I know I'm alone in this but I really dislike the C100 footage and do not prefer it one bit over the 5D3... I would love to "love" the image of the C100 like all of you guys but I just don't.. It has a lovely sharp image but to me that's what makes it look very video. The ergonomics, the workflow, the price, there is so many things I love about this machine, but I dislike the image immensely and no matter how many video's I have seen, the 5D mark 3 looks more cinematic and aesthetically pleasing to me. It appears people are obsessed with the WDR and C log that when they get the footage back to the NLE it lacks all contrast and they don't add it back, it looks flat and almost washed out... or maybe it just looks like it to me... I don't want to come across like I'm trolling, its just my honest opinion!!..

The important thing to take from any development the ML team creates, is that it gives us all more choices..
Click to expand...
You really need to shoot with the C100 to appreciate it. Until then its specs on paper and other peoples compressed web vids that you are judging by. Once you have your own footage in the NLE the thoughts of the camera change quickly.
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
I think the hot ticket may turn out to be the C100/300 for interviews, etc. And the 5d3ML for b-roll, using the strengths of each as needed. I agree also that there is something truly interesting looking about the 5d2/3 raw footage arriving each day, something different.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's called Full Frame RAW. And the MK3 is the first and only camera capable of doing that. But lets no crown it king just yet. ML has lots of work to do to make this camera viable in productions with $'s involved as the A-cam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top