Canon EOS M + Focal reducer = Fullframe raw for 300$?

[BrorSvensson]

So yesterday i stumbled apoun this product on ebay ( http://www.ebay.com/itm/new-Nikon-F-G-focal-reducer-speed-booster-adapter-to-Canon-EOS-M-EOSM-M2-M3-/361376870358?hash=item5423bd6fd6:g:u84AAOSwHnFV4muu ), its a Eos m to nikon g focal reducer. I knew that the Eos M have some magic lantern raw capabilities and after further research i found out that it can shoot at a resolution of 720 x 1280. 
A eos M can commonly be found for about 150$ (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-M-Body-Gehause-black-schwarz-TOP-wie-neu-OVP-/151853015439?hash=item235b25218f:g:vYQAAOSw~bFWI-fz).

If anyone has tried a common combo i would be interested in knowing more.

[Nikkor]

I might be wrong but I think the eosm was too slow to write the whole apsc frame so the 720p raw is a crop, so if you go with the speedbooster you will end up with something less than Fullframe.

[bamigoreng]

[TheRenaissanceMan]

It can do 720p or so from the whole sensor, but it produces pretty bad moire. You could also go the Tragic Lantern route and just get a jacked up bit rate for h.264. 

If you're a stills guy, pair it with the 22mm and you've got the best, cheapest 35mm compact on the market.

[maxotics]

Yes, like TheRenaissanceMan says, you can do 1280 native focal length, but get moire.  However, if you have shallow depth of field and are not shooting anything with hard edges you'll get that rich color look.  The biggest problem are the focus pixels.  You need to remove them or they create "pink dots".  I wrote software for windows that does it well (but only in crop mode)  https://bitbucket.org/maxotics/focuspixelfixer/downloads  For other resolutions, you want the PinkDotRemover.  The best combo, IMHO, is a 10-20mm type lens, then shoot crop mode, which will make it 40 to 80.  Also, you'll need a 95MBS read/write card (even though it will max out at 40mbs).   Here's a cool video I did using the EOS-M to show you what your sensor really sees in Bayer mode: https://vimeo.com/79857693  And here's one that show the basic quality, it's VERY filmmlike to me.  Here's one with the kit-lens https://vimeo.com/76181035  And this one with a Sigma 10-20.  Finally, here's a good one in H.264 with the EOS-M.  I LOVED that camera.  https://vimeo.com/75122636  I now have a BMPCC.  But I LEARNED so much using the 50D (another great ML camera) and the EOS-M.

[mercer]

I can't tell you how happy I am that Bror posted about ML Raw on the eos-m because I have recently started using it but I figured nobody would be interested in discussing something so out dated. 

The reason I started using it was because I recently learned I could use my vintage c-mount lenses with it in crop mode. Which is great. I was getting ready to sell them off when I realized it.

Anyway, I am getting some mixed results, and I am wondering if it is due to my workflow? I am recording in .mlv and then using mlmystic to ingest and convert the clips to's .dng. I click on the chroma smoothing option, at 2x2 to remove the pink dots then open those files in mlrawviewer where I fix the wb and convert to prores444. Is the chroma smoothing softening the image, or is that how the pink dot remover program works? I also stopped recording sound because it seemed to cause the dreaded threads failed to start issue. Now I read that it is okay to have in camera sharpening up a notch when shooting raw, but if the camera doesn't acknowledge the picture profile, then how do you use in camera sharpening?

Now I have seen other people's footage online, Max  and a kid named Ryan Moorman, and they both were getting amazing, sharp results with raw, and I am just not sure what I am doing wrong?

Are the c-mounts the problem... Can they not resolve properly for the raw footage.

I also am only using the 64gb Transcend card that writes at 60MB, could that be the issue?

 

So yesterday i stumbled apoun this product on ebay ( http://www.ebay.com/itm/new-Nikon-F-G-focal-reducer-speed-booster-adapter-to-Canon-EOS-M-EOSM-M2-M3-/361376870358?hash=item5423bd6fd6:g:u84AAOSwHnFV4muu ), its a Eos m to nikon g focal reducer. I knew that the Eos M have some magic lantern raw capabilities and after further research i found out that it can shoot at a resolution of 720 x 1280. 
A eos M can commonly be found for about 150$ (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-M-Body-Gehause-black-schwarz-TOP-wie-neu-OVP-/151853015439?hash=item235b25218f:g:vYQAAOSw~bFWI-fz).

If anyone has tried a common combo i would be interested in knowing more.

Bror, I saw that focal reducer and was wondering the same thing. With just the 3x crop on, the camera is insanely better than the original canon specs, so I was wondering what the image would look like with the Nikon focal reducer shot in 3x crop... Would it bring it back to apsc sized without the aliasing?

Here's a jpeg grab from a raw clip I took last week using a 12.5 to 75mm Cosmicar c-mount zoom. I really love the look and the colors.

[maxotics]

Now I have seen other people's footage online, Max  and a kid named Ryan Moorman, and they both were getting amazing, sharp results with raw, and I am just not sure what I am doing wrong?

 

The chroma smoothing defeats the purpose of shooting RAW.  Here's why.  When you shoot RAW, you are getting a 14bit value for every 1280x720 pixel.  Each of those pixels is either red, green or blue.  When you "smooth" the red, green or blue pixels you're essentially truncating the 14bit values down to who knows what.  The pink dots are removed at the expense of color depth.   Since you don't know which pixel is a focus pixel, you have to degrade them all.   The strategy behind the pink dot remover and the software I wrote, is to figure out the exact locations of every focus pixel.   this can be down because they have a pattern that radiates out from the center of the sensor.  Anyway, if the pixel is a red one, you go out and get the red value at the closes red pixel and use that value.  It works very well and is very similar to the whole de-bayering process where you fill in missing color information.  Unfortunately, which pixels are focus pixels changes with the crop mode you use.  In crop mode they are closer together.  when is full-sensor mode, so to speak, they are more spread out.  If you have a Mac, find a copy of the Java pink dot remover and use that.  You can use it on PC too.  But if you have a PC, and shoot in crop mode, my software is very fast.  

 

[tupp]

So yesterday i stumbled apoun this product on ebay ( http://www.ebay.com/itm/new-Nikon-F-G-focal-reducer-speed-booster-adapter-to-Canon-EOS-M-EOSM-M2-M3-/361376870358?hash=item5423bd6fd6:g:u84AAOSwHnFV4muu ), its a Eos m to nikon g focal reducer.

[snip]

If anyone has tried a common combo i would be interested in knowing more.

I've got the EOSM and this RJ focal reducer.  Essentially, it makes the EOSM a full-frame camera and gives an extra stop of brightness.  It goes a little soft (with a slight chromatic aberration) on the edges, but most don't notice it unless they are looking for it.

 

When I received the RJ adaptor, the back mount (EF-M) was loose/wobbly and could not be tightened.  Basically, the mount screws were too long and/or the threads were not tapped deep enough into the body of the adaptor.  RJ was diligent in corresponding on the problem, and RJ sent shorter screws which eliminated looseness/wobble.

 

The RJ adaptor mostly stays mounted to the EOSM, as all my lenses except one are old Nikkors and as it prohibits dust from getting to the sensor. Sometimes the RJ gets replaced with an tilt-swing adaptor ( EF-M-to-Nikkor-F), which is a lot of fun.  Almost never used are my EF-M-to-Nikkor-F dummy adaptor and my EF-M-to-EF adaptor.

 

 

  On the RJ adapter, I am considering using tape to fix the "G" aperture adjustment ring to the smallest position, as I don't have any "G" lenses and as you can inadvertently bump it so that it keeps the aperture on "F" lenses from closing without your realizing it.

 

By the way, the EOS M2 can currently be had new for almost the same low price to which the original EOSM sunk, but ML is just now starting to explore the M2.

[tupp]

You could also go the Tragic Lantern route and just get a jacked up bit rate for h.264.

Regular Magic Lantern for a while has allowed one to boost the h264 bit rate.  The main advantage of Tragic Lantern's h264 is the ability to set all I-frames, so that there are no inter-frame artifacts.  The all I-frame capability combined with a boosted bit rate eliminates almost all perceptible artifacts in h264 at the EOSM's full HD resolution.  By the way, TL also provides this same all I-frame capability on the 600d/T3i (not sure if it does so on the 7D).

 

On the other hand, I believe that regular ML has all I-frame capability in the source code, but it is not "switched on" in the provided builds.  I seem to recall reading in the EOSM thread that someone had enabled all I-frames in the ML source, compiled it and used it without any serious problems.

[tupp]

Yes, like TheRenaissanceMan says, you can do 1280 native focal length, but get moire.  However, if you have shallow depth of field and are not shooting anything with hard edges you'll get that rich color look.  The biggest problem are the focus pixels.  You need to remove them or they create "pink dots".  I wrote software for windows that does it well (but only in crop mode)  https://bitbucket.org/maxotics/focuspixelfixer/downloads  For other resolutions, you want the PinkDotRemover.  The best combo, IMHO, is a 10-20mm type lens, then shoot crop mode, which will make it 40 to 80.  Also, you'll need a 95MBS read/write card (even though it will max out at 40mbs).   Here's a cool video I did using the EOS-M to show you what your sensor really sees in Bayer mode: https://vimeo.com/79857693  And here's one that show the basic quality, it's VERY filmmlike to me.  Here's one with the kit-lens https://vimeo.com/76181035  And this one with a Sigma 10-20.  Finally, here's a good one in H.264 with the EOS-M.  I LOVED that camera.  https://vimeo.com/75122636  I now have a BMPCC.  But I LEARNED so much using the 50D (another great ML camera) and the EOS-M.

Your videos are inspiring and informative.  The "Angry Toddlers" video is what induced me to get the EOSM along with the Fujian 35mm -- that's a magical combination!

 

For those unfamiliar with the Fujian 35, it is an inexpensive C-mount lens that has a wonderful "wonkiness" in its plane of focus, and its image circle covers the EOSM's entire APS-C sensor.  Using the  Fujian with such a large sensor maximizes its focus wonkiness so that it "pops" across the frame.

 

I avoided raw with ML and TL, as the "work flow" early on seemed to be a little tedious.  It was okay to sacrifice a little dynamic range and sharpness, for ready-to-use files that are full HD with all I-frame, high bit rate h264.  Setting the picture style sharpness to "1" (not 0) and then boosting the sharpness slightly in post gives clean/flexible camera files and plenty of sharpness in the final image.

[tupp]

With just the 3x crop on, the camera is insanely better than the original canon specs, so I was wondering what the image would look like with the Nikon focal reducer shot in 3x crop... Would it bring it back to apsc sized without the aliasing?

Never tried the 3x crop on the EOSM (nor on the T3i), but I can't imagine that a pixel peeper would be happy using the RJ focal reducer in crop mode.  Lenses only have a finite number of resolving lines within their image circles.  The more one crops into the image circle, the more one reduces the number of resolving lines in the frame.

 

Focal reducers squeeze more of a lens' resolving lines into the frame, but at the same time the focal reducer causes a slight loss of sharpness by introducing another piece of glass into the optical chain.  If the focal reducer is high quality, this tradeoff is optically "equitable" and no loss of sharpness is noticed between the images with and without the focal reducer.  I don't know if the RJ focal reducer will hold up to such a crop, but if you like the look of the Cosmicar 12.5mm-75mm in 3x crop (I love it), it might be okay.

 

Also, the RJ wouldn't bring the 3x crop close to APS-C size.  The RJ focal reducer crop factor is 0.72x, and the crop factor of the EOSM's crop mode is 3x:

0.72 x 3 = 2.16

 

So, the effective size of the frame in 3x crop mode with the RJ focal reducer would be 2.16 times smaller than (or slightly less than 1/2 the size of) an APS-C sensor.

[BrorSvensson]

real bummer that it only really works in crop mode, still i think the eos M is a very underrated camera. Im for sure picking one up to play with. Btw do 16mm lenses work on it when in crop mode?

[mercer]

real bummer that it only really works in crop mode, still i think the eos M is a very underrated camera. Im for sure picking one up to play with. Btw do 16mm lenses work on it when in crop mode?

Raw on the eos-m works in apsc as well. It just excited me to use it with old c-mount lenses. 

The chroma smoothing defeats the purpose of shooting RAW.  Here's why.  When you shoot RAW, you are getting a 14bit value for every 1280x720 pixel.  Each of those pixels is either red, green or blue.  When you "smooth" the red, green or blue pixels you're essentially truncating the 14bit values down to who knows what.  The pink dots are removed at the expense of color depth.   Since you don't know which pixel is a focus pixel, you have to degrade them all.   The strategy behind the pink dot remover and the software I wrote, is to figure out the exact locations of every focus pixel.   this can be down because they have a pattern that radiates out from the center of the sensor.  Anyway, if the pixel is a red one, you go out and get the red value at the closes red pixel and use that value.  It works very well and is very similar to the whole de-bayering process where you fill in missing color information.  Unfortunately, which pixels are focus pixels changes with the crop mode you use.  In crop mode they are closer together.  when is full-sensor mode, so to speak, they are more spread out.  If you have a Mac, find a copy of the Java pink dot remover and use that.  You can use it on PC too.  But if you have a PC, and shoot in crop mode, my software is very fast.  

 

Thanks Max, I have been reading a lot of your posts over at the ml forum. Yeah, I figured the chroma smoothing was the culprit and now that you explain the process of how it works, it makes perfect sense. I do have a Mac, using FCPX. So, with your experience, what is the best workflow from capture to edit? I have been researching it, but I found there are so many different schools of thought and updates, it honestly gets confusing keeping it all straight. Is mlvmystic an okay program to convert the mlv files to dngs and then  pink dot remover and then mlvrawviewer to convert to prores?

[mercer]

Never tried the 3x crop on the EOSM (nor on the T3i), but I can't imagine that a pixel peeper would be happy using the RJ focal reducer in crop mode.  Lenses only have a finite number of resolving lines within their image circles.  The more one crops into the image circle, the more one reduces the number of resolving lines in the frame.

 

Focal reducers squeeze more of a lens' resolving lines into the frame, but at the same time the focal reducer causes a slight loss of sharpness by introducing another piece of glass into the optical chain.  If the focal reducer is high quality, this tradeoff is optically "equitable" and no loss of sharpness is noticed between the images with and without the focal reducer.  I don't know if the RJ focal reducer will hold up to such a crop, but if you like the look of the Cosmicar 12.5mm-75mm in 3x crop (I love it), it might be okay.

 

Also, the RJ wouldn't bring the 3x crop close to APS-C size.  The RJ focal reducer crop factor is 0.72x, and the crop factor of the EOSM's crop mode is 3x:

0.72 x 3 = 2.16

 

So, the effective size of the frame in 3x crop mode with the RJ focal reducer would be 2.16 times smaller than (or slightly less than 1/2 the size of) an APS-C sensor.

Right, that makes sense. I have been selling a lot of my lenses... I have been know to suffer from LBA. I use specific lenses with specific cameras. I have a set of non-ai Nikkors... A 50mm f2, a 35mm f2 and a 24mm 2.8. I loved them with the eos-m but now that I am shooting with the 3x crop, the focal lengths just don't fit with my shooting style. To make a long story short I am looking for a reason to keep them because I paid next to nothing for the set. I'll look into the all i-frame mode and test them with that. 

Thanks for the reply and the great info. 

[maxotics]

PINK DOT REMOVER: If you have a Mac you'd have to find the old Java pink dot remover.  Don't know where the last one is.  This might be it: https://github.com/Foorgol/PinkDotRemover  It seems the EOS-M is a bit of a dead end since ML doesn't work on Digic 6's yet (EOS-M 3) and may never do.  

#1 MISCONCEPTION ON EOSHD: Some people here don't shoot people in story-telling formats, so often gloss over one of the primary benefits of RAW, which the EOS-M has, even in low resolution--high dynamic range and color depth.  My experience is, even in a perfectly lit scene, if you shoot any H.264 of someone in a consumer camera, and then shoot that same scene in RAW, the RAW will have a more natural look (even though, in the end, you end up with 8-bit output like the H.264).  Why this is I don't know.  Perhaps someone can say.  Anyway, the point is, it wasn't the resolution that got me away from the EOS-M.  Even at 720, it looks beautiful to me--better, again, in a certain color feel than any 4K camera from Panasonic (I currently have the LX100).  The problem was dealing with the pink dots, and worse, the "shutter bug".  

If I'm a filmmaker wanting to do documentaries, or I plan to shoot a lot, I'd go with Sony or Panasonic--each have their strengths.  If I wanted to do a evocative piece with depressed people in the woods I could shoot RAW with the EOS-M.  Anyway, shooting RAW on the Canon cameras is a huge pain, but NO ONE who has ever done it has complained about the results   RAW, on any camera, gives a look that can only begin to be immitated in H.264 on professional cameras like Canon's C line.   What about S-LOG, V-LOG.  I'll probably get flamed.  8-bit is 8-bit.  The log curves are useful for some lighting situation where you want to favor exposure (in highlights usually).  It does NOT make 8-bit 14bit!  What you gain in the highlights you would LOSE in the shadows.  That can hurt skin tones and other things.  End of rant

If I only had $300 for one camera it would be the EOS-M.  Remains, to me, the undisputed best utility still/video/RAW camera of all time!  The next would be the Canon 50D (no pink dots and near 1080 RAW).

[mercer]

Thanks Max. I am a narrative filmmaker, so I agree about the look of Raw footage for storytelling. Even with my lack of experience and bad workflow, I could see a major difference in roll off shooting with the raw. I see on my cam, there's the option to use version 1 raw. Is it any better since it's uncompressed? Or does the added workflow make the benefit negligible?

[maxotics]

Thanks Max. I am a narrative filmmaker, so I agree about the look of Raw footage for storytelling. Even with my lack of experience and bad workflow, I could see a major difference in roll off shooting with the raw. I see on my cam, there's the option to use version 1 raw. Is it any better since it's uncompressed? Or does the added workflow make the benefit negligible?

Not sure what you're referring to, but if it's the difference between RAW (version 1) and MLV, then I would shoot RAW because the potential benefits of MLV, metadata, audio sync and compression, aren't going to give you much on the EOS-M.  However, I haven't used ML in a while, so maybe there is something with MLV that gives you a benefit.  Does MLV now compress RAW on the EOS-M?  I would find it hard to believe the camera electronics would have any energy for it.  If it doesn't, then yet, just shoot RAW.

[mercer]

Not sure what you're referring to, but if it's the difference between RAW (version 1) and MLV, then I would shoot RAW because the potential benefits of MLV, metadata, audio sync and compression, aren't going to give you much on the EOS-M.  However, I haven't used ML in a while, so maybe there is something with MLV that gives you a benefit.  Does MLV now compress RAW on the EOS-M?  I would find it hard to believe the camera electronics would have any energy for it.  If it doesn't, then yet, just shoot RAW.

It's my understanding that .mlv files are the newest version of raw that is compressed. But, as I said, I am a beginner so I could be completely wrong here. Either way, I would think regular raw would be better as you suggested. 

Ugh, more tests. 

Thanks again for your help. Oh yeah, I did find the PDR, and yes, I already noticed a higher quality running the clips through that as opposed to chroma smoothing. And the program is so fast... The added step is inconsequential. 

Thanks again. If you have any other tips you can think of... They'd be greatly appreciated.

Oh yeah, I had read one of your posts where you were explaining how you were synching sound with the raw, but I can't seem to find it again... Were you using an LED key light?

[mercer]

Yeah, after closer evaluation, the pink dot remover program is not working. Am not sure if I am doing something wrong, probably, or if the program is confused because there are two options that pertain to my clips... Eos-m and crop mode. 

[maxotics]

It's a pain, and was a weakness of the software.  If you can figure out which settings correspond to the mode you're shooting in, you'll be set.  I'd try to get crop mode working first.  Just shoot very small clips of a white wall and try out difference cameras/settings in PDR until the dots disappear.