Leaderboard

  though i´m a 5d mark3 owner, i absolutely agree with you. for the most paid things the 5d mark raw is not a solution. even if the hack gets stable. the data rates alone make it impossible to use for documentary shooting for example. i´m really happy that this hack exists and i can play around with it but let´s see if it becomes a good way to work. i doubt it.  i also think you all should not blame canon so much. it´s a normal strategy for companies to offer different product for different prices and costumers. for example i know somebody how works for bmw in the development. the 316, the 318 and the 320i have the same engine, they just crippled the lower end engines and sell them cheaper. it´s more efficient to produce a higher number of engines and make them less strong for lower end cars, the to produce 3 different engines. all bmw would be much more expensive if they would produce 3 different engines. even if canon  would would use the same sensor in the 600d and the mk3, i would still buy the mark3, because i want a magnesium body and not a plastic camera. for example the canon ef 50mm 1,4 and the ef 50mm 1,2 are both very good lenses. but the 50mm 1,2 has a much better build quality and a bit better image and it costs 5 times the price. but if you work every day with this lens and earn money with it, then you maybe wanna buy it. i don´t start thinking is this really 5 times better then the 50 1,4? or is canon a greedy bitch because of this? i just think about if the things, this pro lens offers, is worth the more money for me personally. it´s easy like that. i mean who would think the 5d mark raw is the right tool for one when he works every day with it? and i don´t mean making test shots and playing around. this is important to do and i´m really thankful that it´s been done, but if i can get a nearly the same image quality then the mark raw with a proress codec, and a good handling of the camera and the post workflow. this doesn´t sound too bad for me. it´s really funny that everybody buys canon and complains about them at the same time... lol

Filled my 32GB card with anamorphic raw shots. 1280x960.. love it! Here some previews, while I work on the files.   [url=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/517-magic-lantern-50d-cinema-camera-2x-anamorphic-preview/][/URL]   [url=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/518-magic-lantern-50d-cinema-camera-2x-anamorphic-preview/][/URL]   [URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/519-magic-lantern-50d-cinema-camera-2x-anamorphic-preview/][/URL]

  Good advice.   Don't make a dramatic selling decision until you know the ins and outs of it.

  sure not. the camera is not THAT old, hehe )

Promoted to front page. http://www.eoshd.com/content/10507/it-lives-5-year-old-350-canon-50d-becomes-raw-cinema-monster

Personally, I don't really care about the top-end-gear-to-price arguments. I'm VERY low-end but my 4 year old DSLR camera shoots raw 14bit video! That's all I need to say :)

www.vimeo.com/66955436   Some footage with SLR Magic lenses, and a little with the Panasonic 14-42. As before, looks pretty damn great for $1000.   Brawley said he shot the low light stuff at 800 and wishes he'd shot at 1600, so it's a little noisier than it should be. http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2013/05/26/shooting-from-the-hip-pocket/

  Graded as closely to match as possible - Download the frames as JPEGs - http://we.tl/0DYPaHNkUG   Colour certainly a huge leap from the others on the 5D Mark III at this ISO.   White balance and tint vary wildly between the three.

Yes they are graded and exposed to precision. The colour is just flat out better on the 5D 3 at this ISO. It's an extraordinary sensor. Kineraw goes up to ISO 12,800 and is much cleaner than BMCC in terms of noise.

Seriously, why would you use a hacked old camera that shoots below 1080p res when working with a client? This is great news and very interesting as a curiosity, but that would be a quick way to lose a paying client.

Moire can be pretty bad on the 50D:   [URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/520-canon-50d-raw-worst-case-scenario/][/URL]   Yuck :)   It's quite a worst case scenario though. This is the worst shot of all, many shots with lines/details aren't affected or just barely.

@MKjaer: I know... I never liked the 50D because of the poor iso performance/banding. I am really surprised it is this good. There is banding at H2, definitely not perfect. But it's so much better than I would expect.   Here is my test, you can download the original file in Vimeo:   http://vimeo.com/66995002

You can put FD glass on an EF camera but it will increase the focal length x1.25 and you lose around 1 stop of light. It also has to pass through more glass in the adapter itself and most that I tested were not very good, making the image very soft. It's not worth it. M42/Nikon = no problem :) Q. Sell your GH2/3 and get a 50d? A. Don't be silly now! ;) The GH's haven't suddenly gone bad. I wouldn't sell mine if I had one. They still rock and I still want a hacked GH2 for some things!

Trade your FD's for Nikkors :)

  This raw hack has whipped me up into a frenzy. I started shooting stills years before video and became very used to working with raw files. For my entire time filmmaking I have been irritated that I'm forced to shoot in a compressed codec and suddenly I am presented with a camera that shoots raw that I could swap to for no money? Seems like a no brainer.   The ML team have unlocked compressed video on the 50d too and it has a nice enough image from what I have seen.   I shoot narrative mainly, so a super 35 raw camera for £350 is a dream come true. Even several of my lenses will become more easily useable. At the moment I have to quickly put the lens on a Canon body to set the aperture, then put it back on the GH2. I only swapped to the GH2 a few months ago because I wasn't happy with the mush the 550D was giving me. Prior to that I have had a 10D and a 30D so you could say I'm a bit of a closet Canon man really. I just hate the way they tier their products based on arbitrary firmware implementations and minor hardware difference.   It's now even more obvious than it already was that the camera manufacturers all have a meeting once every few months to decide which feature they shall all implement next. The progression of the technology is far to linear across the manufacturers. BMD have clearly broken the mould and I praise them greatly for doing so. 

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with you on the value of the C-series. Yes, I would say without a doubt in my mind there are pricing issues. it's not for everyone, but RAW isn't either. I guess it's going to be an uphill battle as many of the claims on raw here are just borderline cult-like and I haven't seen much respectable inquiry into the subject.  

Thanks for the front page article, very cool! :D   This is the fasted card I have Andrew. But I think the camera is the limiting factor. 1592 is the maximum width of the live view in 1x mode. You can go to 1900-something in 5x zoom. I think my card is faster than 50MB/s as well but probably like the 5D2 the 50D has a limitation in the CF controller. Would make sense since it's an old beast. Probably I can test faster cards soon!   Rendering a video with the extreme iso's, will let you know when it's up, would be nice if you could add it to the article!   /edit: need sleep.. footage tomorrow :)

Doesn't matter much wich camera is better, storytelling, composition, lightining and sound are more important than the resolution or dynamic range the camera has, sure you need a bare minimum but for sure that bare minimum is not a c100 or a 500, you can even do with a couple of gh2's as Upstream Color movie showed us.

What is that company that recycles the same sensor tehnology for quite a few years ( DX ), is it Canon ? and what is that company that charges almost double ( at least in my country ) for the "new" 24-70. Check out XF100/105 price, or :D wait wait :lol:  Canon XA10 price against a Panasonic camcorder like ag-ac90, it's a joke, if it were for Canon the air we breathe would cost money.   The hell are you talking peederj ? are you from this planet ? We can agree on one thing, Sony and Canon are the most greedy of them all but at least Sony has some new sensor tehnology.  

Sample footage! shot some boring bricks to test for moire. Looks pretty good to me. I have the feeling it's better than the 5DII... Would have to check in a direct comparison though. [url=https://www.wetransfer.com/downloads/9601255fb2b189b37b4b0d44cb0194c320130525170445/0fc5fb145e9213a3c61911886b4a751d20130525170445/70564c]Download here (WeTransfer)[/url] Some exported sequences and some DNG files to play with. All the info in the readme.txt. 1592x840 @ 24 fps - Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 @ f/8 1280x960 @ 24 fps - Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 + Kowa B&H 2x anamorphic - Stretched to 2560x960 in Premiere And a sharpened 1920x720 version of that last one.   I love this :D     Just need to order some badges... :P

The response by TC says it all I think. Superb myth busting there. You're a credit to the forum.   For me there is no defending the C500's external recording requirements, and the pros I know who have shot with it say the same. External recorders are a PITA. It's a complete scandal that the C500 doesn't do raw internally like a $3000 DSLR or a $1000 Pocket Cinema Camera. Dumping uncompressed DNG raw to a SSD is trivial stuff. Canon chose to go for maximum margin, minimal design changes to the camera, maximum profit for their partners making the external recorders. One of them (I forget who) was even charging something like $4000 for the firmware required to make it accept the C500's raw output!! How do any of them think this kind of thing is going to wash in today's ultra competitive camera market?   Again it is a shame Canon took the beancounter route for the C500 as it could have been superb. For me there's no reason why they couldn't have added compressed DNG and a SSD slot, sold it for the same price as the C300 and then they would have had a worthy competitor to Sony. As it is the C500 is not competing.   I hope for your sake peederj you realise that your C100 + Ninja has a shelf life of about 1 year and huge potential for deprecation in price. It is already comfortably outgunned on image quality by raw on the 5D Mark III. I know you will confront this argument by saying the ergonomics are great, but I'm not talking about ergonomics I'm talking about the image. An external recorder is poor for ergonomics anyway - that's one of the things (spidery arm, HDMI cable) that pros were running away from DSLRs to avoid!   So your honest advice to people on this forum is to upgrade their 550D to the C100 and everything in-between is nonsense... Seriously are you a Canon plant? Just look at your own logic. Is the following nonsense? -   Blackmagic Production Camera - 4K and global shutter, free copy of RESOLVE 10 5D Mark III raw recording from full frame sensor internally to CF card - show me a competitor to that! FS100 and Speed Booster - incredible low light performance and flexibility with the lens mount plus 1080/60p Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera - ProRes internally for $999! Form factor a GF1. What's not to like? GH3 - 1080/60p at 50Mbit, 24p at 72Mbit ALL-I - does your C100 do that for $6000? No Not to mention STILLS on 5D3 and GH3 Blackmagic MFT 2.5K camera - beautifully cinematic and Speed Booster compatible KineRaw mini (2K raw for $3k)   You have to be practically blind, deaf and dumb to dismiss all that as 'nonsense'.

Raw is the 'raw data' from the sensor. The sensor captures light, translates it into analogue data then to digital. In order to create an image that digital data must be debayered and processed. Usually this would be done on the camera, but DSLRs don't have as powerful processors as a desktop computer, and need to process the data in real-time at 24fps or even 60fps.   Also when raw image data is compressed into a video file, or a JPEG still, it gets baked. It is like cooking a stake. It isn't raw any more :)   With raw video you do your cooking later, with all the flexibility to cook the original image in post. You can change and grade the image far more than you can when the camera has already cooked it for you in-camera, and served up a much less tasty dish.   The camera is a bad chef.

  The Canon C series are definitely *not* price leaders.  The C500 is insanely overpriced - it costs $26,000 but can only record 8 bit MPEG 1080p in camera.  It is surely one of the worst value cameras on the market today.  But it is physically almost identical to the C100 which Canon sells for $6000.  That gives you an idea of the margins Canon is making, because a heat sink and an SDI socket are not $20,000 parts.    The 5D2 was a great camera.  But let us not forget it was released without manual control of the aperture (classic Canon deliberate crippling) and shooting only at the non-standard 30.00fps.  They back-tracked on that pretty quickly when all their customers started buying Nikon lenses with manual aperture control.  And the 5D2 still has a crippled HDMI out to this day.       You are joking with us, right?  It has taken nearly 5 years for Canon to remove the crippling from the HDMI output of their DSLRs.  They have only done it for one model - the 5D3.  And hidden in the firmware with this update was new code to prevent the camera working with third party batteries.       The EOS mount was introduced in 1987.  The patents have expired, that is all.  It is not an act of generosity on Canon's part.

  That's the thing, though... it's NOT free. Not everyone owns the 5D. Most I would say actually don't. And if it's a choice between buying a $3,000 camera that shoots a few seconds of unstable raw and buying a $2,995 or $3,995 camera that shoots stable raw at a higher resolution, I'd say that Blackmagic still wins when presented to undecided customers.   If anything, I'm still tempted to buy the Blackmagic Pocket over this. 1080p raw for $999. Take the two grand you've saved over the 5D and go out and buy some nice m43 glass to go with it.   I agree this is a nice treat for folks who already have a 5D, but I still don't believe the raw abilities of this camera as it currently stands warrants a $3,000 purchase.   But again, if Magic Lantern can actually make this stable and eliminate those image-tearing motion and vertical line issues (that I notice Andrew keeps conveniently ignoring) AND gives us TRUE continuous recording that last for several minutes before dropping frames (which by the way should absolutely make it a total dealbreaker) then I'd be happy to drop the money and buy it.      It's getting there, but it's not quite revolutionary yet. 

  I'll agree totally, the original EF BMCC is here and gone. That's exactly what I mean by turmoil. All of this is changing so fast, and yes that is a good thing in many ways . . . but a tricky thing to navigate as someone hoping to upgrade. I haven't bought any Blackmagic products yet, and I very well may not. But I maintain that sensor size IS an important factor, and furthermore that fullframe is not always the best option (of course, a fullframe sensor with various crop modes like the ML5DIII essentially covers all bases). I'm still hoping (probably in vain) for something with better controls than both the Blackmagic and the DSLR cameras, but that's just me. After having gone mirrorless mount, I'd rather not give that up. The adaptability is incredibly useful.    For those with Canon cameras, this is an incredibly good thing as they can start shooting some really nice RAW footage if they want. But for someone with zero Canon gear wanting to get into RAW video? I guess I don't think I'd advise them to go out and get a MKIII for that. I know that there will "always be a better cam tomorrow", but in this case especially, I don't think we'll have to wait long. Blackmagic cracked the door, ML just opened up the floodgates. Any new cameras henceforth will have to seriously consider including RAW as an option. Otherwise, why would anyone upgrade to . . . say . . . a 7DII/5D4/whatever? They already kill in stills mode. All of this is good, but I'm going to wait until there are a few more out of box RAW-capable cameras out there before I pick my poison (so to speak), because once I get one, I'm going to be using it for a long time. I can't afford to switch bodies on a whim every time something new hits the fan.

  Nice post Caleb,   I think its been really really hard to justify upgrading because of manufacturers playing customers for fools. My last proper camera was an EX1 and now just use a GH2 and wait until manufacturers treat customers properly or BMC gets theirs in the shops.

I'm in a similar boat. Completely linear workflows in which you have full control over the exposure of the footage as well as the CG objects is so much easy to work with and usually yield Much better results. I just hope we get some kind of Raw option for the cropped sensored cameras. Honestly the results so far are I'm incredibly pleased and hopeful with! I'd be lying thought if I say I don't regret saving a little more and getting a Mark ii haha

On the technical side, yes if you work with 4K and/or raw then your macbook pro simply won't cut it anymore. I have an Alienware M17x which is a gaming laptop, with a powerful i7 CPU and soon to be 680m nvidia graphics card. It's great with Adobe Premiere because of the CUDA support. Soon enough people will start realising that if you want to efficiently edit this stuff you need either a PC desktop, hackintosh (like Andrew discussed before), or gaming/ workstation notebook running premiere or whatever program can utilise CUDA. Clevo/ Sager laptops are particularly nice if you want a professional looking and well-built laptop with beastly power. If you absolutely can't go PC and don't want to set up a hackintosh, then the best option would be the new iMac with specifically the 680MX graphics card option. That's a good card and will have enough CUDA cores to handle the big files. And soon we will have the new generation of graphics cards from both Nvidia and ATI. The biggest mistake you could ever make is wasting money on a Mac Pro. Hugely overpriced and very dated now. There are much better 3rd party graphics options for the Mac Pro now... but if you go with the stock spec you will get an old piece of shit that is much weaker than the current iMac offerings.

Andrew. You are taking a different approach and I hope a better one. Your reporting of the 5D hack and how to implement it has been brilliant.

  This is the main issue I have as well, I find to be told that story and content are important is downright patronising. To be constantly reminded of the obvious, and that raw files are larger than compressed files is no help to me at all. I love the challenge of gearing up for the future and learning raw is a big part of that. It's why I built a Hackintosh and it's working beautifully. So much fun. So much gain in image quality.   Am I in competition with Philip's blog? If I am then I think there's room for more than two websites in the world. Have you seen how many there are out there?!   Philip's blog is separate to me as Philip the person. If I don't find his advice or blog useful any more then it shouldn't reflect badly on him, I just think we're taking different paths with our approach to filmmaking.

Posted this on Bloom's blogpost. Part of me thinks he realised he dropped the ball on this one and wants the whole thing to go away. Like Andrew said with great power comes great responsibility. AMROTH 19 HOURS AGO Your comment is awaiting moderation. Totally agree with Sam Tansey here. PB as much as I respect your work and like many of your articles, I think this one comes off as more of a convoluted ramble or rant, with too many obvious things like “focus on story and shooting more†. That’s fine though I know your website isn’t just for helping others but also for ranting too. Your response to Sam was a much nicer balanced view of everything, but your article and initial tweets were clearly negative and skeptical towards the ML hack, no matter how much you elaborate afterwards. I honestly think you responded awkwardly to the ML update because you feel left out. This amazing development is simply not relevant to you anymore. Several years ago you probably would have jumped up and down with joy. My only camera is a Nex-5n and I wouldn’t even consider shelling out my savings for a 5DMiii until I saw the videos of this new hack. In your blog post you talk about how much you love using your 1DC which is a $12k camera. Most of us can’t afford a $12 camera with all the toys around it. I appreciate that you try hard to relate to the newbies and the hobbyists as well as the pros and semi-pros, but maybe you should stop trying. You’re in the working pro league for a while now, with lots of experience and gear under your shoulders (due to hard work of course) and travelling the world giving seminars. Instead of constantly elaborating and glossing over everything, I think you just should man up and confess that you reacted to the ML raw hack that way because the whole DLSR community were crazy overjoyed and you simply didn’t feel like part of the party anymore. Not trying to provoke you with this post, just my honest opinion. Amro

Sounds like it was screened from the Blu-Ray at your cinema. Depending on the quality of the projector used, that could account for the softness of the image. I worked in a cinema where the Blu-Ray screenings were done with a lower quality projector, and I could always tell.