GH13 Why aren't Olympus cameras being hacked?

roxics

roxics

Veteran
Just curious, they are capable of shooting video as well and take some great still images. Especially the E-M5 and the newer smaller cameras that were just announced that use the same sensor. Plus Olympus has some nice color. So why not have more choices for m43 shooters and have hacked Oly cameras as well?

Something I don't know?
 
It seems there is only 1 person hacking the Panasonic cameras. Vitaly Kiselev. So there is only so much time for him to do it, and he has multiple projects going on. It probably just never came up.
 
The internal 5 axis image stabilization would be huge if this thing had a decent video mode. From what I have seen the OMD uses line skiping so the video will always have aliasing issues no matter how high the bit rate is. I think the E-M5 is the best m43 stills camera on the market right now we will have to wait until the GH3 comes out to see if Panasonic beats it.
 
Others can correct me if I'm wrong, I don't have a GH2 yet (but considering it). But if I've read correctly, the reason the panasonics can be hacked is because they down convert from higher res to improve sharpness. This means the hack can intervene and divert the raw image (via firewire?) before it is down converted as well as allow alternative processing of this for other effects. What I've read online doesn't outright say it but seems to suggest this down converting is unique to the panasonics.
 
...Not an expert, but I think the main reason for the Panasonics being hackable is that they use a software AVCHD encoder ( instead of a dedicated encoder chip ), so the software encoder can be greatly modified by changing values in the firmware image.
 
I don't think there is a firmware file for Olympus cameras, like for the Panasonic cameras. Olympus cameras are upgraded to new firmware via some connection to the internet which downloads the upgrade to the camera. My guess is that this makes any hack on the firmware difficult to install in the cameras... Al
 
Egg Born Son said:
Others can correct me if I'm wrong, I don't have a GH2 yet (but considering it). But if I've read correctly, the reason the panasonics can be hacked is because they down convert from higher res to improve sharpness. This means the hack can intervene and divert the raw image (via firewire?) before it is down converted as well as allow alternative processing of this for other effects. What I've read online doesn't outright say it but seems to suggest this down converting is unique to the panasonics.
Click to expand...

That is wrong. Pretty much all cameras that have a higher resolution image sensor than they encode do some form of downconverting, be it pixel binning (turning multiple pixels into 1) or line skipping, there is no other way to go from a large image sensor resolution down to 1920x1080 while still using the entire sensor. The hack doesn't divert a raw image either, it simply allows a person to enter different parameters for encoding.

TheDingo said:
...Not an expert, but I think the main reason for the Panasonics being hackable is that they use a software AVCHD encoder ( instead of a dedicated encoder chip ), so the software encoder can be greatly modified by changing values in the firmware image.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it is because it uses a software encoder, or that it uses a hardware encoder, but the parameters for encoding are stored in an accessible location to the hack. i.e. The encoding is done on an FPGA/ASIC but the parameters for the encoding are taken from a microprocessor/EEPROM.
 
atarijedi said:
That is wrong. Pretty much all cameras that have a higher resolution image sensor than they encode do some form of downconverting, be it pixel binning (turning multiple pixels into 1) or line skipping, there is no other way to go from a large image sensor resolution down to 1920x1080 while still using the entire sensor. The hack doesn't divert a raw image either, it simply allows a person to enter different parameters for encoding.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to tell me I can't trust what I read on the internet? :badputer:

Haha, thanks for the correction.
 
I remember when the announcement was made and photos/videos were linked, Vitaly said he didn't really care to hack it and that it wasn't going to happen. I haven't followed up on personal view since then, but I can bet that he's sticking to his guns.
 
@Egg Born Son

What @atarijedi said is correct, just don't underestimate the importance of the combination of the sensor, optical lowpass filter and the downscaling method used. The GH2 implements one of the best seen in the video mode of a DSLR or mirrorless hybrid to date, with a combination of good resolution and low moire (though many people say that a handful of cameras like the 5DMkIII may have even less moire, though the 5DMkII was much, much worse).

And just to emphasize what was said earlier - using PTool with lets users improve the encoding by changing the encoding parameters (bitrate, matrix, etc.) Most of the things it does, does not change what image makes it to the codec in the first place (with the exception of unlocking the ISO limit, etc.)
 
TheDingo said:
...I think the main reason for the Panasonics being hackable is that they use a software AVCHD encoder ( instead of a dedicated encoder chip ), so the software encoder can be greatly modified by changing values in the firmware image.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's correct, and while it was likely built that way for cost-saving reasons, Panasonic's software-based GH2 encoder has become the high-performance champ of the DSLR video world.
 
lpowell said:
Yes, that's correct, and while it was likely built that way for cost-saving reasons, Panasonic's software-based GH2 encoder has become the high-performance champ of the DSLR video world.
Click to expand...

So are you implying then that other cameras with hardware encoders are not hackable?
 
@Jim Simon That is only one part of the equation. Remember that GH2 is already exceeding many other DSLRs before it hits the codec level based on the way video side is being handled by the sensor and LSI. The hacked settings primarily help to improve the codec handling of that data, but you can see how well it handles various other factors (moire, resolution, etc.) even without that by just shooting un-hacked and comparing to competing cameras. In that situation it sometimes has more compression artifacts, but it still outperforms most others in terms of resolution (and all but a handful in terms of moire).
 
Good points, Per.

Having read about some of the moire and aliasing artifacts produced by the 5D, I was pleasantly surprised to see them completely absent from some recent shoots that easily could have caused such artifacts.
 
Last edited:
roxics said:
Just curious, they are capable of shooting video as well and take some great still images. Especially the E-M5 and the newer smaller cameras that were just announced that use the same sensor. Plus Olympus has some nice color. So why not have more choices for m43 shooters and have hacked Oly cameras as well?

Something I don't know?
Click to expand...

I'll tell you, Olympus actually sent me a sample E-PL3 a while ago for review. Its one of their very low entry-level m4/3 bodies, no where near the quality of the OM-D. But its a great pocket-sized walk around camera (especially with a pancake prime). The pictures are very respectable, but the rolling shutter on video is just plain *AWFUL*. Like, worse than Nikon D90 AWFUL. Everything looked like jello, even at a conservative 17mm (I can only imagine the horrors of this at 50mm).

Maybe the higher end ones are better, but my impression is that Olympus just isn't known for video quality, and not because of the codec.
 
Didn't the producers of Secretariat use a little Olympus for their on-horse work? Surely they did something to improve the image of the camera....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top