Magic Lantern for 5D Mark III

Everyone is always on the internet like "We need clean hdmi so we can record it separately!". Which they never actually do. The D800 has it and it's such a chore to use a separate recorder with these connectors. Especially as it doesn't then record internally at all.
 
Regnis said:
Also Alex, I tried HDR video mode but just got flickering while recording and flickering again in playback. Should this be happening?
Click to expand...

You will need to split up the footage into odd frames only and even frames only layers, then combine them one on top of the other to get a HDR footage. I use AE to do it, but I am sure there is a way to do the same in FCP. You can google magic lantern hdr tutorial to see how people do in different systems.
 
Regnis said:
Also Alex, I tried HDR video mode but just got flickering while recording and flickering again in playback. Should this be happening? Will it change once convert to prores and edit in FCP?
Click to expand...
If you look in UserGuide.pdf which is included in the Magic Lantern zip file on page 25 there are links to several workflows for HDR video.
 
maarek said:
Everyone is always on the internet like "We need clean hdmi so we can record it separately!". Which they never actually do. The D800 has it and it's such a chore to use a separate recorder with these connectors. Especially as it doesn't then record internally at all.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. I really don't want to have to bolt another device with its own recording media & batteries onto my camera just to record video at slightly higher quality. There is a place for these devices e.g. record direct to ProRes for easy editing & no recording time limit.
 
thanks guy. will go over the user guide in the next couple of days. pretty exited to have ML on my 5Dmk3!!
 
nigelbb said:
I totally agree. I really don't want to have to bolt another device with its own recording media & batteries onto my camera just to record video at slightly higher quality. There is a place for these devices e.g. record direct to ProRes for easy editing & no recording time limit.
Click to expand...

It is not slightly higher quality. It is signifigantly higher quality in many cases. The C100 with a recorder will yield far better output Prores 422 HQ than the AVCHD internal codec for instance. Further it will put that $7000 camera on par with the best output from the $15000 C300.
 
yoclay said:
It is not slightly higher quality. It is signifigantly higher quality in many cases. The C100 with a recorder will yield far better output Prores 422 HQ than the AVCHD internal codec for instance. Further it will put that $7000 camera on par with the best output from the $15000 C300.
Click to expand...

The problems are: 1. Connectors. HDMI is really quite bad and will slip out constantly when shooting high paced stuff. On the D800 this will be bad because you have no backup internally. When that cable slips out, you lose the shot. On the C100 you do have a backup. An HD-SDI would be way better. 2. No monitoring on a separate monitor when you use them. That smallhd? No go. Unless you try splitters. But then the cable mess...it'll just be a mess. 3. I never see anyone actually use them, except for indoor shooting. Atleast not in the low-budget arena.

Granted the C100 is a good exception because there the quality jump will probably be quite noticeable.
 
maarek said:
The problems are: 1. Connectors. HDMI is really quite bad and will slip out constantly when shooting high paced stuff. On the D800 this will be bad because you have no backup internally. When that cable slips out, you lose the shot. On the C100 you do have a backup. An HD-SDI would be way better. 2. No monitoring on a separate monitor when you use them. That smallhd? No go. Unless you try splitters. But then the cable mess...it'll just be a mess. 3. I never see anyone actually use them, except for indoor shooting. Atleast not in the low-budget arena.

Granted the C100 is a good exception because there the quality jump will probably be quite noticeable.
Click to expand...
I agree that HDMI is a problematic connection, but the C100 has a locking HDMI connection.
 
maarek said:
The problems are: 1. Connectors. HDMI is really quite bad and will slip out constantly when shooting high paced stuff. On the D800 this will be bad because you have no backup internally. When that cable slips out, you lose the shot. On the C100 you do have a backup. An HD-SDI would be way better. 2. No monitoring on a separate monitor when you use them. That smallhd? No go. Unless you try splitters. But then the cable mess...it'll just be a mess. 3. I never see anyone actually use them, except for indoor shooting. Atleast not in the low-budget arena.

Granted the C100 is a good exception because there the quality jump will probably be quite noticeable.
Click to expand...

1) locking HDMI
2) Monitoring is loop-through on most recorders. So not only will you be able to use the screen on several recorders but also an EVF or a real Monitor. So a completely false premise. No need for splitters at all either.
3) I see people using them all the time on regular video cameras. You have never seen them on DSLR's because up to now that option barely existed.
 
maarek said:
Everyone is always on the internet like "We need clean hdmi so we can record it separately!". Which they never actually do. The D800 has it and it's such a chore to use a separate recorder with these connectors. Especially as it doesn't then record internally at all.
Click to expand...

I remember using a separate recorder for the HVX all the time, it was a hassle then too. Our shoots would end up wasting time due to the work around, not to mention the cable coming lose sometimes, so we eventually just shot without it. Sure we had more compressed video, but most of the stuff was going on dvd or the web, so I didnt see a huge benefit. Maybe if we were shooting a feature that would end up on 35mm film, but if that were the case we wouldnt be using a HVX or a DSLR for that matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top