essbe

To me it seems the new build works almost flawlessly, atleast for my use. Supposedly there have been some issues in photo mode, and with AF, but I never use those things on the Eos M (I think it is one of the worst cameras for photography ever made, especially when using af). I get continuous recording in 2.8k raw (2.9 crop as the bmpcc original), 11bit 25fps, 2.39:1. In overexposed areas the timer turns orange (indicating that it can not go on forever), but when going back to normal exposure it goes back to green (continuous). If I would use 24fps I guess I could maybe go up to 12 bit. In 10bit it is always clean. Haven't tried it though, and probably won't do any extensive testing, as I have what I need now. The same settings as above are ok for continuous recording at 5.2k raw for me. Haven't tried dual ISO as I see no need for it. The preview is full screen and real time for both modes. Rolling shutter is an obvious issue in 5.2k mode (which is a 1.6 crop from full frame), a bit less so in the 2.8k raw mode. Good rolling shutter in the standard, almost fhd, raw mode, but that mode has a lot of aliasing. I would say the eos m is perfectly useable now, especially as a super-16 camera. I also really like the mlvapp. You could look at it as a cheaper alternative to the BMPCC original, but with better battery life and manual focus aids. Watch the build walkthrough if you are interested in trying it out:

As it has not been up on the forums, I would just like to inform about some recent developments that actually could make the Eos M *THE* digital super-16 camera, as well as a much improved super-35 5.2k raw shooting camera. Just needs some financial support, which I personally think is more than justified. So, if you want an updated user experience for magic lantern on eos m, 650d, 700d and 100d, or just want to support magic lantern, have a look here: https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=26851.0

Maybe too obvious, but what about the EOS M with ml in 2.5k (or 2.8k) crop? The cheapest alternative atleast.

If it is possible for you to order from Sweden, it seems to be in stock in several places here: https://www.cyberphoto.se/foto-video/kameror/systemkameror/nikon-z9-kamerahus https://www.scandinavianphoto.se/nikon/z9-kamerahus-1050990 https://kameradoktorn.se/?id=10010350

If you are based in the EU I have an EF-mount Zhong Yi lens turbo II (speed booster clone without electronics) that I could sell for 60€. In any case if you're just planning to use m42-lenses it would be cheapest to use a RJ/Jinfinance or Zhong Yi lens turbo, as you don't need any electronics in there. They are both good, supposedly more or less on par with metabones, just check reviews on the internet. In my experience the various speed boosters all work well on m4/3 as the corners are much better on those sensors than on aps-c. The only one I've tested that has been significantly worse than the others is the Kipon Baveyes.

I think the measurement for the a99ii 4k refers to the super 35 mode, which makes it quite a bit faster than the a7rii, Samuel H (who added the figures) refers to the a99ii as much better than the a7rii in his post. Would be interesting to know the numbers for its FF 4k mode.

Why not use the nx500 in 2.5k mode? You benefit from the full aps-c sensor, get very low rolling shutter and (probably) no noise reduction. Sure, you have those strange lines across the screen that appear now and then, but I have not found them to be a problem. I'm using Vasile's hack and I see it in maybe 1% of the clips (more often with the NX-KS hack), and then I can get rid of it by selecting interlaced instead of progressive scan when transcoding, using the high setting in handbrake is usually enough as well.

As the speedbooster reduces the focal length, you should probably put the new focal length (for example 0.71x50mm, or whatever combination you have of speedbooster and lens).

Great work! How close can you focus using the elements from the 35NAP 2-3M?

Really love this hack, enabling silent shutter mode was enough to make me happy, and it's wonderful to see it progress. A strange request perhaps but would it be possible to disable the automatic image flip/horizontal alignment of the display so we could have an upside down image when the camera is upside down? Would be useful for me, but probably not for anyone else.

Hi! I am a big fan of this site and of this forum, but I have never felt the need to post myself. There is however one thing about these new speedboosters for the BM cameras that makes me curious. I hope I can write this in a way that makes it understandable, as I hardly understand it myself. It is regarding the question of f-stops, t-stops and pixel vignetting. So, I have a Metabones Speedbooster for Sony Nex and I bought it hoping that it would give me an extra stop of light (besides increase in field of view of course), and usually it does, but not at all f-stops. Pixel vignetting (as explained in this dxomark article http://www.dxomark.com/en/Reviews/F-stop-blues) seems to be causing light loss at digital sensors at wide apertures. This is something I have experienced myself when using the speedbooster (but it is not the speedboosters fault, it is the digital sensor). All of my lenses gain one full stop of light with the speedbooster up to and including f2.8. At f2 the lenses I have tested gain 1/2 to 1 stop (usually as much as that specific lens gains on that specific camera when going from f2-f1.4 without the booster). At f1.4 the speedbooster "only" gives me an increase of 1/3 of a stop compared to when I am using the lens at f1.4 without the booster. I have not tested any faster lenses than f1.4, but dpreview found something similar in their first impressions report (http://***URL removed***/articles/2667195592/first-impressions-metabones-speed-booster), and there should be even less of a gain when using lenses with maximum apertures of f1.2 or more (with or without speedbooster). Anyhow, this might not be true for the BMCC and the BMPCC as I guess they have a lower pixel density than digital photography cameras, and, on top of that, the speedbooster might not make the angle of incoming light more oblique when exiting the pupil (my speculation) than when entering (so at f2 the t-stop could still be about 1.2 on the bmpcc, as intended). I think it would be interesting to know how these new speedboosters behave in regards to brightness increase at wide apertures, if t0.74 really is possible when using a digital camera. Especially since low light performance could be a decisive factor when choosing between, for example, the 5d mark III, the BMCC and the BMPCC. And as a side note I am very satisfied with my speedbooster, despite the minor issues at f1.4.