Julian

  I see. I also noticed that when I open the CineForm files in Resolve, it looks pretty close to the raw DNG's with standard conversion in ACR. when I open them in quicktime everything looks dull.   But with this workflow, you don't have control over things like debayering. I noticed you can drag DNG sequences straight into CineForm Studio and then you have full control over the conversion, sharpness, noise reduction, etc. Will have to experiment with this...   When using CineForm 444 the compression is 'only' about 3.25:1 btw. At least I got 21.7 GB of .raw files and that converted to 6.66GB of CineForm 444 mov.   I might experiment with CineForm 422, that should work with the free version. Maybe could use that for quick projects/proxies and go the full CinemaDNG route in resolve if I want full control. $300 also buys me at least 6TB of HDD space.

@JohnBarlow: I agree with you in a way that the 'mass consumer market' has no clue about (or interest in) such things. It has no clue about things like video quality either. Until a few years back I also thought every Canon shot beautiful 1080p footage. Just because it was in the specs and I saw nice stuff with shalow dof on Vimeo and YouTube. I just didn't have much knowledge about it. I thought small sensors like 4/3 were crap compared to fullframe (like they relatively are in photography). And that was me, working in photography business for years. 99% of consumers is totally ignorant about things like moire, they probably don't even know what it is and don't care. 95% of the market doesn't realise Canon has been shipping the same sensor for 5 years. I spoke to a editor in chief of big a photography magazine recently who 'really likes the quality of his 650D'. Surprised me. I wouldn't say it's bad, but if you know how to use the 14 stops of DR in a Nikon D5200 for example, you don't want that Canon sensor anymore...   But. On the other hand. The Magic Lantern Forum has 22525 members. And those are the people who actually took the step to register at the forums. It's not just a few hundred people playing around.   Ok, those ten thousands of people haven't all tried raw, butit is still in an experimental/alpha phase. Those numbers will change when it gets to the frontpage of ML with a stable release.   Yeah, still this share of ML users will be much smaller than the usual consumer crowd (we don't have to forget that we are talking about dslrs, I'm pretty sure 90% of the users never even touch the movie options. Most photographers are very, very conservative.). But in the end, ML is not a niche of a few hundreds of users.   Especially now it brings such huge improvements in image quality, I think ML will gather more attention and users. Before the Canon raw hack, I really didn't feel the need to buy a Canon. Even though ML was pretty cool, it didn't help the image quality at all.   Once a stable ML raw release will be available on their frontpage, this will leave the experimental phase and the numbers will grow.    In the end, I think ML is giving us a piece of the future here :) Consumers aren't ready for raw video, probably they never will be in the 'raw' form. Pro-sumers will switch to it, like they do in photography where it is really the standard. It might take 5 more years before raw video is a normal thing in a hdslr. Wouldn't surprise me. The big brands have to make money out of their pricey raw video camera's. They have to come up with something new and awesome in the high end markt, to make sure the raw shooting dslr's aren't a threat to their own products.

  Makes sense.

Yeah..they have a lot of reasons to hold back on future dslrs - because of their own line-up :(

Remember you can still use h264 for easier workflow on the 5D ;) I'm not a huge fan of small DOF either for video but you can always stop down or use 5x crop. Actually the BMPCC is more expensive regarding lenses. You really need some special glass (and preferably a speed booster)to get a bit of a shallow DOF and wide angle. I do want to have something next to my 50D, preferably something small... Contemplating if I should keep my GH2 (or go for the G6) or maybe trade it in for a RX100... Have to try anamorphic with the RX100 sometime. If my tiny petit cinevision 1.5x lens works well with it, that would be a great carry around combo...

Andrew, what's your workflow with CineformRAW? I managed to output 444 mov files, and I see that if I import them in CineformRAW there is quite some room to play around with them.   But right now I have no control over the conversion from .raw to .mov, I have the feeling there should be a step between RAWanizer and making the Cineform files.   The Cineform premium trial is a bit short at only 15 days. Would like to make the most out of it to see if this is what I want. In theory it sounds pretty sweet. But If I end up not using it, it's $299 down the bin... no way to sell it on I suppose.

I had a BMPCC preordered at CVP UK, had to pay like 15% with paypal upfront, but could cancel it whenever I wanted. Guess what I did yesterday... Got my money back the same day.   Pre-ordering doesn't hurt. It shouldn't cost you anything. Will it help you getting the camera faster...? No idea. Depends on the amount of camera's the supplier of your choice gets, I suppose.

  It's true, but it seems also a sensible thing to do to me. I'm not even an indy filmmaker, just an amateur, but I just want the best my money can buy. BM announces the Pocket... amazing! $1K raw video. Instant preorder (thats also about the max. I feel comfortable paying, for a hobby camera). I did cancel it a few days ago because now I have a 50D that shoots raw, for €300. I'll jump whichever boat that gives me the most for the least amount of money.   I actually do feel kinda uncomfortable being 'happy' with my Canon, as I really haven't been happy with their lack of innovation the past 5 years.   These kind of campaigns are completely understandable, it's just marketing, every company does it and I have nothing against it. I just thought this whole text and the title is pretty funny, seeing the recent developments.   It is definitely not a 'reaction' to the developments, this was obviously planned long time ago and Canon just has chosen to keep hanging on to old products. The fact that they are running this huge campaign for all the current products probably proofs that we won't be seeing anything new soon.   This might be a good sign... Hopefully Canon is just trying to squeeze every last drop out of their current technology cycle, but working behind the scenes at that real next step in imaging.

Boring press release: http://www.canon.co.uk/About_Us/Press_Centre/Press_Releases/Consumer_News/News/Power_to_your_next_step_campaign.aspx   It would be more appropriate if it was the other way around :)   Consumers launch biggest ever campaign empowering Canon to take their 'next step' in imaging   Or replace 'Consumers' with 'Magic Lantern'.   And yes, this is a pointless topic...                    

I just changed the command line in RAWanizer to ".mov 444" and now it spits out .mov files fairly quickly. Looks nice as proxy at first sight, but I understand this is a 'raw' file as well? How can it be in a mov container? The white balance must be baked in at least? And what about sharpening/noise reduction settings for example?

Went out for some shots earlier, didn't have the time to process everything and to make an edit, but I wanted to show some shots anyway. Going to try some new workflows with more of the footage later.   http://vimeo.com/67605772   Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8, after sunset. High iso. Ungraded, straight conversions from raw (bit of noise reduction and less sharpening) Upsized in Premiere to 1080p. Added sharpen 20 in Premiere.     Here's a underexposed frame (well, I actually prefer it this way) boosted +2 stops. I think the camera was on H1 while shooting, but if I had taken a picture with that settings it would have come out brighter.   [url=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/538-boosted/][/URL]

Andrew, as far as I understand dslr's dont have a 'native' iso, like a Blackmagic does for example. Dslr's are always best at low iso's. From there on (analog?) gain is applied if you higher the iso value.   Boosting a underexposed image will look bad for sure. For example, if you take a picture at iso 800 underexposed 3 stops, and brighten it up 3 stops, it will look worse than the same picture at iso 800 with correct exposure (unless you have a D800 or something, because it has crazy detail/DR in the shadows. The Canons sure don't, including the 5D3).   Someone has to figure out the 50D live view. Hope the developers can help with this. The iso behaviour is definitely not the same as in the pictures. The brightness seems kinda random sometimes. A few days ago I didn't see any difference on the screen between H1 and H2, now I do...

C500 is overpriced! C500 is overpriced! It just is.

Sure does. Donations for the CF card just passed half of the goal. Thanks!

I'm eager to try some new workflows. I've shot some footage lately but I can't find the time to process it. The ACR/Bridge workflow is killing me, loading the thumbnails is just slow... probably because the raw2dng dng's dont have an embedded thumbnail   Anyone got tips for speeding up Bridge? I like the workflow, just not the speed of it. It would be helpful to only load 1 out of 24 thumbnails in bridge for example, just one for every second, but I'm pretty sure thats not possible. I already disabled full size previews.   I'm on a Win7 Core i5 2400, 16GB RAM, GTX660. Not the fastest thing on earth but not slow either. Sure will buy a second SSD to edit projects on as my primary SSD (OS and programs) is pretty full already.   I downloaded CineForm Premium, is there a tutorial on how to set it up in RAWanizer? Not to make proxies, but to export CineformRAW to edit in Resolve.

That's the spirit :) Thanks man! Sent you a PM.

Ah ok, ISO 800 explains. I thought it was 200 or something!

http://vimeo.com/67592774   Just another test video. Trying to wrap my head around the low light performance of this beast. Shot with Sigma 30mm f/1.4 at 1/50 H1 (ISO 6400 equivalent) at 1592x864. Upsized in Premiere to 1080p (just scaled 121%). Pushed the exposure in ACR two stops up, so equivalent = ISO 25.600. Added a bit of luma and color noise correction to taste, kept sharpening low.   edited/unedited frame grab:   [URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/537-canon-50d-iso-6400-pushed-to-25600/][/URL]

  I'm a bit surprised by the banding in those 5D3 cinemaDNG's if I lift the exposure a few stops. What iso were they shot on?

  Thanks to the generous donations of ML forum users (I know a few of you are posting here as well!) after one day the funding for the camera is almost complete! (€ 52,60 left). The camera is already shipped and on it's way to the developer!   I think it will be a good idea to supply him with a fast CF card as well, since he only has slow ones. I'm suggesting the 64GB Komputerbay 1000X, [url=http://www.ebay.com/itm/KOMPUTERBAY-64GB-COMPACT-FLASH-CARD-CF-1000X-150MB-s-Extreme-Speed-UDMA-7-64-GB-/140978267936?pt=Digital_Camera_Memory_Cards&hash=item20d2f5a720]cheapest I can find on ebay is about $120.[/url] I'd like to finish the funding of the camera first and then keep the donations open for a little longer to fund the CF card. If you want to help, send me a PM and I'll send you the instructions and donations overview! Everything counts, even a few dollars/euros are welcome.

Check out the findings on the ML forums. I found out you get actually better speeds with Globa Draw turned on. http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5586.msg45003#msg45003   We can really get the maximum out of the 50D now! 1592x896 (16:9) recording at 24 fps is completely stable without drops. 3:2 recording at 1592x1062 is possible without drops with 1000X cards - (My 90MB/S Sandisk is the bottle neck here)   Anamorphic resolutions like 1320x1062 and 1440x1062 are perfectly doable without frame drops! Love it :wub: 

The small size you get for the DNG's is the preview embedded in the DNG. CinemaDNG is something different. There is a converter, in experimental stage, Andrew just wrote about it on the frontpage!

ISO 3200, underexposed. Not very pretty. [url=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/536-3200underexposed/][/URL]   ISO 3200, better exposure (still a stop underexposed actually), looks much better. [url=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/534-3200goodexposure/] [/URL]   Same as above, processed with a bit of luma noise reduction and less sharpening. [URL=http://www.eoshd.com/comments/gallery/image/535-3200processed/][/URL]

I think ALO shoots underexposed (to save highlights) and pushes it back up in the camera. Not sure how that works in live view / raw video. Would be cool to see some tests :)

  Send some dng's to yourself with www.wetransfer.com and paste the link here. I'll have a look. Make sure you expose correctly, iso 1600 underexposed a lot is going to look bad.       I don't think both settings will have any effect. We are shooting raw.. remember :) Definitely noise reduction is a JPG only thing. ALO I'm not sure how it works, give it a try - with and without!