Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - intrinsic

Pages: [1]
Raw Video / Re: 550D raw video recording port official thread
« on: June 20, 2013, 01:53:14 AM »
Is this buffering aspect has anything to do with increasing card write speed at lower FPS using FPS override? Or is it CPU problem?
I've first noticed that on 5dMkII, and 550D shows the same, it goes up to 22Mb/s at the beginning of the recording (than drops around 21), @FPS 8-12

Raw Video / Re: Current raw video capabilities - All ML cameras
« on: June 13, 2013, 09:46:05 PM »
Even if you can't push 1728x972, I'd imagine that you could still push 1600x900 which is still at least a bit better than 1280x720
Yes, 1600x900 is stable in my case, and it's MUCH better than 1280x720 especially in terms of details in shadows, noise and dynamic range.
I also use Tokina 11-16 EF-S, it helps to avoid issue with cropping on lower resolutions, so even at 1600x900 I still have a full wide angle.

Raw Video / Re: Current raw video capabilities - All ML cameras
« on: June 13, 2013, 05:48:30 PM »
You can shoot 1728x972 reliably with a 1000x card on the 5D Mark II.
It is probably reliable resolution with some particular 1000x cards, for instance my 16Gb Transcend 1000x at 1728x972 gives me only around 500 frames.

Raw Video / Re: 550D raw video recording port official thread
« on: May 31, 2013, 02:38:05 AM »
Hi, guys!
Managed to test the latest release from mk11174.

Was able to get pretty stable 1728x576@12fps.
For me 12fps twixtored to 24fps is a good deal for the most cases I need.


- Movie mode, 1280x720@60fps or 640x480@60p
- Global draw off
- SanDisk ExtremePro 8Gb 45MB/s
- Photo Quality set to JPEG S (don't know if it affects anything)

Using previous build I've got 55Mb of free buffer cache, with the last one it was 62.
I've noticed also that at some magic point I became able to write normally at about 20MB/s, as earlier it was no more than 9-10MB/s.

About difference between RAW and standard H.264 Canon video.
For me it's mostly about noise and dynamic range which is goddamn good at low-light shooting and high contrast scenes.
So far I haven't been able to see a huge difference in detail and sharpness between 1080p H.264 and upscaled RAW I've got from 550D.
Hope with the higher stable resolutions it will become obvious )
So for now, the main feature here which makes it worth the all the efforts, is ability to get clean picture with more film-like noise especially in shadows and underexposed areas. Because trying to get the same picture in terms of shadow/highlight as I've got with RAW footage, using H.264, will result a huge digital-looking noise at shadows, especially terrific at ISO rates higher than 400.

Once again, god bless ML team and mk11174!
From Russia, with love!

Pages: [1]