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 - tron

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 5D Mark IV
« on: December 02, 2016, 03:53:24 PM »
I may be wrong of course but it does not look like posterization and certainly does not look like just chroma noise.

Also it is ALWAYS in parallel to the longest side no matter what I shoot. Since I do not shoot video I translate filming to shooting.

I would rather not increase ISO since it lowers Dynamic range. Experiments made with high iso and trying to recover shadows while keeping highlights from burning gave poor results. I have to keep exposure lower to save highlights (less DR) so shadows are even worse (and there was banding).

ISO 50 behaved better (although it is a digital iso, the way camera handles it saves us from quite a processing). EDIt: It betters 5D3 in shadow lifting too that's why I tried it with 5D4.

To tell the truth some shadows have to be kept as shadows to keep a photo natural so this can be controllable in some cases. But in really HDR demanding scenes (like an open window for example) the solution remains 5D3 + ML (or the classical bracketting and combining  >:( )

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 5D Mark IV
« on: December 01, 2016, 02:24:36 AM »
Color banding disappears when increasing iso and keeping other parameters the same since there is less underexposure of the shadows. But since this causes a more correct exposure for the shadows (overexposing the rest of the picture) I guess it would happen like that.

Reverse Engineering / Re: EekoAddRawPath
« on: November 30, 2016, 02:26:25 PM »

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 5D Mark IV
« on: November 30, 2016, 01:57:47 PM »
Alex if you were referring to my post I can try. I just know that iso 50 improves slightly the situation.

Actually I have made some experiments with higher iso (400) but I tried to not burn the highlights so DR was less (of course). The banding was evident. But I believe to try to simulate a higher iso in the ML way I just have to increase ISO (say to 1600) and keep shutter and aperture constant. Highlights will be be burnt but we will get some info for the shadows and higher iso.

Please correct me if I am wrong about that.

Reverse Engineering / Re: EekoAddRawPath
« on: November 30, 2016, 01:51:57 PM »
Sorry for being half-off topic but what is with 5D4AE vs 5D4 and 7D2S vs 7D2M ?

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 5D Mark IV
« on: November 30, 2016, 11:56:18 AM »
Wishing for a 5DIV port in a couple of years (not trolling, If possible, if there is time, programmers, etc).

I am thinking of Dual ISO feature since there are still shadows issues believe it or not (I am on my 2nd 5D4 and the replacement body has equal color banding with the 1st when lifting shadows, see canonrumors forum for more info). My 5D3 with ML is better than 5D4 on this!

Many thanks to a1ex and everyone who contributed on this  :)

Main Builds / Re: Nightly Builds - try the very latest stuff here
« on: February 28, 2016, 01:55:19 PM »
@axelcine: I just read about latest UDMA3 limitations comment. Strange indeed. I guess UDMAxx (xx > 10) will fix that  :D

Anyway they also have to increase copy speed and support CFAST 2.0 and XQD ....  :D

Main Builds / Re: Nightly Builds - try the very latest stuff here
« on: February 28, 2016, 01:51:58 PM »
I was commenting on FAT32/exFAT only. I do not shoot video. I thought of exchanging experience regarding how our 5d3s behave with formatting various cards. I have already 2 hyperdrives and I do not intend to buy a 3rd one. Even my "latest" which is the UDMA model (2 gens behind) cannot be upgraded to support exFAT. It would be best if Canon gave us a format choice in menu but I know this is not going to happen...

Main Builds / Re: Nightly Builds - try the very latest stuff here
« on: February 24, 2016, 11:13:16 PM »
Both of my 5D3s with firmware 1.2.3 format 64GB cards as follows: CF 64GB: FAT32. SD:exFAT.

I want both of them to be FAT32 so as to back them up with my hyperdrive (the specific non-latest model does not understand exFAT even with latest firmware).

I can format SD card with a specific utility to make it FAT32 and recreate the directory structure manually (this works with both camera and hyperdrive) but it seems complex to also put ML above that.

General Help Q&A / Re: T5i went dead after clearing card
« on: February 13, 2016, 04:48:12 AM »
Well T5i is 700D. 

BUT, make sure that you include not only the autoexec but the ML directory too.

Also a .fir file must be present for installation and (possibly) uninstallation (take the latter with a grain of salt as I am a 5D3 ML user and the process for 700D maybe a little different.

If camera boots and works OK that's it. Otherwise you may be able to uninstall ML and start from there.
When I had done the same on my 5D3 I had corrected the situation by putting the autoexec and .fir files and the ML directory back (I had the exact same version saved in my laptop)

Good luck!

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 5D Mark III / 5D3 / Firmware 1.2.3
« on: December 21, 2015, 03:36:22 PM »
Alex thank you very much and Merry  Christmas too. It was a nice surprise  :)

There is some possibility though that it will be available 2 or 3 years from now...

Thanks dfort. Is it still  the unified 20 bit version ?   :)

Camera-specific Development / Re: Canon 5D Mark III / 5D3 / Firmware 1.2.3
« on: November 04, 2015, 11:59:24 PM »

seems OK now...

June 9th firmware for 5D3 1.2 3 seems to have been removed!

If the deleted shots are important try to recover them. There are various tools for this job.

Hardware and Accessories / Re: Corrupt: Sandisk Extreme Pro 64gb
« on: June 07, 2015, 02:08:10 PM »
The installation is very simple.

1. I format the sd card in the camera.
2. I put the card in a no name card reader connected to my laptop.
3. I expand the latest nightly ML zip file into the root directory of the card.
4. I put the card back in camera and update firmware.

Hardware and Accessories / Re: XTPower 10000ma with lanparte for 5d3
« on: June 06, 2015, 03:22:33 AM »
You might have a look at

before proceeding...

Something else: I have read somewhere that the genuine Canon DC coupler lowers the input voltage a little (from 8.2-8.4 to 7.4).
BUT I read in B&H

Rated Input    8.0 VDC
Rated Power Output    7.6 VDC

Maybe it lowers voltage a little.


Alternatively you have a voltmeter. So the choice is yours... (You will have to buy the Canon DC coupler though...)

Hardware and Accessories / Re: Corrupt: Sandisk Extreme Pro 64gb
« on: June 04, 2015, 06:32:13 PM »
I can only add my (untroubled) experience with 5D3 and ML.

Up to now I have used the following SDxx cards:

2 X 64GB Sandisk Extreme Pro 95Mb/sec
2 X 32GB Sandisk Extreme Class 10
1 X 8GB Sandisk Extreme Class 10

The cameras are 2x5MkIII (1.2.3) either with or without ML and I never had any issue.

Releases I remember were: ML 28Apr 2015. This worked (and keeps working) OK even when I had to power off a camera in the middle an erroneously chosen exposure of 30 sec to save time! No corruption in both cards.

26 Sep 2014(the Fixed one- there were 2 releases with that date): No problem (it was a test release containing silent full res module)

Jul 2014 (Sorry I do not recall specific dates for that): No problem

Some other facts: In Canon 5D3 the SD card is formatted exFAT for 64GB (and upwards I assume)
32GB SD cards are formatted FAT32. By the way the CF 64GB card is formatted FAT32 by the same camera!
I do not know about other cameras.

I mostly format cards in camera. Only one time I have formatted one in PC but I made sure that the default format parameters were the same with the card's. Then I reformatted the card in the camera (No Low level).

The above are not suggestions, merely a description of what I do. So no issues at all.

Add to that in the past I was using a 5D2 with nightly ML (up to Jan 14). Again no issues.

A (maybe) silly question - regarding the cards experiencing issues: Are they bought from reputable sellers?

As it is mentioned that this never happens with the stable release so (which makes the previous question silly - I know):

Can this be reproduced: OK I do not mean after a timelapse but how about what I did (wrongfully maybe but with with no consequences):

Take a long exposure and turn the camera off. Do not open the door and do not remove the battery for some time. Then check the card in 2 ways:

1. Turn the camera on and see if everything is OK
2. Put the card in a card reader and run the good old chkdsk from command line.

It is not a complete test of course but if in one case you have no issues and in the other you have (keeping all other test parameters roughly the same) maybe you have found something. Maybe you can think of other experiments but you must have all the test parameters the same and be patient (the problem seems unpredictable so you may repeat the experiments many times).


By the way when I had a one time chance to shoot a total solar eclipse with a film camera I bracketed a lot (keeping the 500 rule) during the 2.5 min totality phase using Fuji ISO 200, an EOS1n with 300 4L + 2XII fully open at f/8. Guess what: I succeeded :-)

By the way during the partial phase I was able to make just one exposure selection (using a solar filter) since I was able to shoot a roll one month before and decide what I want in advance.

But I guess if you were there with a film camera you genius would expose totality correctly with just one shot  ;D ;D

P.S The situation I described 2 entries before is also a 2 minute event and every time the dynamic range is different due to the difference in moonrise and sunset times. 

1. There are cases at the limit. Wouldn't someone want to take advantage of full resolution?
OK this is ETTR stuff more or less  but:

2. There are some cases that are DR or as I said at the limit but at the same time are once in a lifetime (or at least in what I have in mind) once in a year. I would like to have the best of both worlds in case something goes wrong.
(I am talking about full moon rising behind temples for example which by the way I will try to shoot in a few days   :D  )
There are many combinations depending on the specific moonrise, sunrise times that make it normal or DR. I am talking about the full moon day, the previous day is a typical non-DR scene where in fact sometimes the moon can be barely seen due to sun and the next day being at the limit because although dark there are artificial lights turned on.

3. Finally, I cannot understand the empathy against shooting alternate pictures. Does it harm the experts to have this feature disabled if they are not interested in it?

I did not know that people are psychic and can know in advance the results of dual iso crhdr processing...

Dual ISO should be used as needed, not more often.
You cannot know 100% unless you see the final DNG and compare it to a normal processed RAW photo.
1. Resolution 2. Possible Artifacts (OK very rare and are dealt with crhdr.exe updates) 3. Any other issue that may happen.

In summary, it's best to have the best of both worlds. I cannot see why the capability should be removed. If someone feel they do not need it they are free not to...

@Audionut: Alternate option is very useful. It encourages people to use Dual ISO more often.

Why should we choose one or the other? We cannot be sure on the spot of DUAL ISO results.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7