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 - CFP

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8
Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 29, 2013, 10:01:13 PM »
Thank you very much for the screenshot :)

Only 91 Megabyte Shoot_Malloc ... My EOS 600D has 103 Megabyte Shoot_Malloc (With "Pic Quality" set to "SRAW". Otherwise it's only 75 Megabyte). The EOS 60D's Shoot_Malloc is 280 Megabyte big. I hoped the 650D/700D would lay somewhere in between those two.

where is pic quality setting in ML?  ???
The "Pic Quality" setting should be in the "Shoot" tab. Can you set it to "SRAW" and "MRAW"? Or is the 600D the only XXXD with this feature? I know that the 550D doesn't have it, because it was too buggy.

Make sure to reboot the camera or switche the mode dial after you changed the "Pic Quality" setting (If it exists on your cameras). Otherwise it won't change the buffer size.

EDIT: Here is a screenshot of the 600D's "Shoot" tab. I hope yours look similar Shoot | Google Drive

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 29, 2013, 08:51:12 PM »
I think one of you should take a few minutes to fill this table: Canon EOS RAW Comparison
It surely would help some people. The 650D/700D line is almost empty ...

At least check the buffer size ("Debug" Tab -> "Free Memory" -> press "Q" -> "shoot_malloc total" is what you're looking for) and post it since it's the most important variable together with the write speed.

And please go through all picture quality settings ("RAW", "RAW + JPEG", "JPEG large & fine", "SRAW", "MRAW" (Does the 650D have those settings in the Magic Lantern menu?) ...) then reboot the camera and check shoot_malloc again. On the 600D and 60D that increased the buffer size extremly (600D's best setting is "SRAW", 60D's best setting is "JPEG small & fine") and allowed us to get much more frames, even in high resolutions.

I guess that should help to get at least 1280 X 720 continous if you find the right "Pic Quality" setting.

Tragic Lantern / Re: Raw video on 50d and 40d
« on: June 29, 2013, 07:19:32 PM »
Could you tell me, how much cropped will be images, for example, in 1320x840 mode?
Do the math yourself ;)

The formula is: Max. width / your width X sensor crop

In 1X mode the LiveView resolution is 1584 wide. And the sensor is a APS-C sensor so it has a 1.6 crop factor. For a width of 1320 that means 1584 / 1320 X 1.6 = 1.92. But why do you want to crop? You can record the full width if your card is fast enough ... :D

Your 14mm lens would become a 27mm with a resolution of 1320 X 840. Not that bad, right?
Oh and by the way, 1320 X 840 isn't 16:9 but almost 3:2 (3.14:2)

Tragic Lantern / Re: Raw video on 50d and 40d
« on: June 28, 2013, 04:42:24 PM »
Also taking out the skipping will probably increase the crop.
But if it would be possible to set the skipping from 3 to 2 the image's size would be 2376 X 1584 right? If you choose an aspect ratio like 2.5:1 you would get a resolution of  2376 X 950 (Or 2368 X 960 with multiples of 64) which would require 90 Megabyte/s. It wouldn't increase the crop and should work for a few seconds. Setting the aspect ratio to 3:1 or decreasing the resolution slightly would make it continously.

But that's just one of these pointless "if & would" ideas. I'm not expecting to see that possiblity soon. If it exists.

@CFP: I see, so 1584x1056 isn't a limit in regards of write speed but rather the line skipping?
As far as I know: yes.

Tragic Lantern / Re: Raw video on 50d and 40d
« on: June 28, 2013, 03:13:27 PM »
But I'm curious; why doesn't it work?
Because the camera isn't reading the full sensor resolution (4752 X 3168) and scaling it down to what ever we want. It skips every third line and column to reduce the resolution to 1584 X 1056. In crop mode, there's no skipping so it is possible to get higher resolutions.
If the developers would find a way to set the skipping from 3 to 2 it would be possible to record higher resolutions on the 50D, even without the strong crop. And it might reduce the aliasing. But that would be too nice ... ;D

Tragic Lantern / Re: Raw video on 50d and 40d
« on: June 26, 2013, 04:52:13 AM »
I read that using FF Lens on a crop body like the 50d leads to softness in the video.
That is bullshit.

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 26, 2013, 12:48:24 AM »
If the write speed slows down for a few frames, you don't keep up with the buffer and drop a frame.
With a good SD-Card you'll get constant write speeds. So I'm not sure what it is that you want to tell me. And what does this have to do with any statistics or math? 1536 X 656 14-bit RAW videos at 24 frames/s requires 41 Megabyte/s (1536 X 656 X 14 / 8 X 24 = 42,319,872 bytes). That's a fact. At least until the developers find a way to compress the videos.

The developers also said that making a "RAW-only" build won't inrease the performence at all.

The biggest improvement would be a (lossless) compression of the videos. But I doubt that we'll see that soon in any DSLR.

You can get this resolutions only in crop mode. So it will increase your crop factor from 1 to 2.25 ;)

And of course it's only possible with a very fast card and an highly optimized build so that you can achieve the required 110 Megabyte/s write speed. (At 24 frames per second. Lower f/s will redurce the required write speed.)

Raw Video / Re: RAW on 650D / 700D?
« on: June 25, 2013, 03:28:09 PM »
Since it requires only 41 Megabyte/s write speed 1536x656 at 24 frames/seconds should be possible on the 650D. At least for more than a few seconds.

I think this thread isn't as big as the others because the 650D wasn't in the 2.3 stable release. So many people are still thinking that Magic Lantern doesn't work on the camera.

Well, uncompressed 14-bit 1920 X 1080 videos are 3.46 Megabyte per frame.
Uncompressed 12-bit 1920 X 1080 videos are only 2.97 Megabyte per frame.

So uncompressed 12-bit videos are almost 15% smaller than uncompressed 14-bit videos. So instead of 83 Megabyte/s 12-bit videos need only 71 Megabyte/s write speed. And since Blackmagic adds some kind of compression, the size should be reduced by 20-50%. But since the BMPCC isn't released yet and the specs site doesn't say anything about the type of compression, I can't tell you for sure.

There were some tests with compression but they failed and as far as I know nobody tries to continue them at the moment.
So it's probably impossible to get the Magic Lantern RAW videos compressed.

I think the images on the Blackmagic website are a bit overstated. Of course, the H.264 videos have only 8-bit but they aren't that bad. Still, with 14-bit color depth we have 64 times more information than with 8-bit. There's no doubt that the higher values are better ;D

The Blackmagic cameras record (lossless) compressed 12-bit RAW videos. The Canon DSLR record uncompressed 14-bit RAW videos.

That means that the Magic Lantern videos are way bigger. So it's impossible to record RAW videos with slow write speeds. But Canon's SD-Controllers are really slow so that they can't handle the required write speeds. The 550D has a 21 Megabyte/s write speed limit. But uncompressed 1920 X 1080 14-bit RAW videos require 83 Megabyte/s write speed.

Raw Video / Re: 550D raw video recording port official thread
« on: June 21, 2013, 03:59:47 PM »
My 8MB Sandisk extreme pro 95 MB/s gives me 30 to 50% more frames than 8MB Sandisk extreme pro 45 MB/s.
8 Megabyte? How do you shoot RAW on these thing? ;D

Raw Video / Re: 60D RAW video - it's working !!!
« on: June 21, 2013, 01:03:16 PM »
Why can 60D record max resolution of 1734x976?
Because the camera doesn't read the whole 5184 X 3456 sensor but skips every third line and column to get a resolution which is small enough to get processed in real time so it can be used as LiveView preview (That's also causing the strong aliasing on the Canon DSLRs). Magic Lantern just saves the images before they get processed :D

Raw Video / Re: 550D raw video recording port official thread
« on: June 20, 2013, 11:30:52 PM »
We wouldn't even have Magic Lantern...
A1ex != Trammell Hudson ... Or have I missed anything? ;D

Raw Video / Re: 550D raw video recording port official thread
« on: June 20, 2013, 11:11:37 PM »
Thanks for nothing.
Do you realize that he's one of the developers which made this amazing feature possible? They are sacrificing their time to push our little cameras to the limit. "Thanks for nothing" ... No offence but that was a realy stupid comment. Without a1ex we wouldn't even have the RAW feature on any DSLR ;)

Tragic Lantern / Re: Uncompressed 600D Raw Video
« on: June 20, 2013, 11:02:13 PM »
With RAW in mind, which camera (Canon DSLR) is the best for using this feature.
If a EOS 5D Mark III is to expensive, get a used EOS 50D. You can get them for ~ 400 €.

Since the 50D has the same write speeds like a 5D Mark II (~ 80 Megabyte/s at the moment, but there's still space for improvements) it's capable of recording 14-bit RAW at high resolutions. Only issue: No audio recording. You have to use an external recorder ... if you don't do that anyway :D

Here's the 50D's RAW thread:

If you need a flipscreen and internal audio, wait for the 70D and keep your fingers crossed for it to have a CF-card slot.
The Rebel cameras are to slow for high resolutions.

Raw Video / Re: 550D raw video recording port official thread
« on: June 20, 2013, 07:51:28 PM »
Hi, so why my final RAW VIDEO in canon t2i appear very cropped?
Because that's the way it works.

The raw videos are the LiveView images. And if you use a resolution that is smaller than 1734 X 1155 that's just a crop of the whole image ;D

General Development / Re: RAW video timelapse with frame skipping
« on: June 20, 2013, 05:19:48 PM »
Yes that is how it works.

The RAW videos and silent pics are the images that are read from the sensor for the LiveView preview.

The max resolutions depend on the sensor resolution. My EOS 600D's sensor has a resolution of 5202 X 3465. The higest resolution that's possible for RAW is 1734 X 1155. That's because Canon doesn't read the full sensor and scales it to what ever we want but skips lines and columns to create their desired resolution. In the 600D's case, it skips every third line and column (5202 / 3 = 1734 & 3465 / 3 = 1155) to get a resolution that is close to full HD (1920 X 1080) in terms of width. So it can be used to create full HD H.264 videos.

Only if the developers would find a way to set the lines & columns skipping, higher resolutions might be possible on the 5D Mark III in 1X mode.
But it doesn't look like that is possible.

Duplicate Questions / Re: [WONTFIX, DUPLICATE] Digital zoom on 650D ?
« on: June 20, 2013, 04:57:09 PM »
Since the new 14-bit RAW recording also works in 5X crop mode (The focus assistence crop), the 650D has a zoom mode too.

But the 650D can record 1280 X 720 in RAW while the 600D can't get over 960 X 540. I wouldn't buy a 600D if you'll install ML anyway.

Tragic Lantern / Re: Uncompressed 600D Raw Video
« on: June 17, 2013, 10:12:21 PM »
I'm using the same card. And I get the same results. It's a very good card.

Tragic Lantern / Re: Uncompressed 600D Raw Video
« on: June 16, 2013, 03:00:44 PM »
Are there any shortcomings to using twixtor?
Yes. Twixtor and the free alternative MVTools2 (AviSynth Plugin) may create artefacts if the scene has complex patterns, too much detail oder too fast motion. They aren't perfect.

@ BenRott: You have to convert them to any format you want by using a programm like raw2dng or one of its countless modifications.

Tragic Lantern / Re: Raw video on 50d and 40d
« on: June 15, 2013, 09:27:58 PM »
I am talking about 4k on 50D.  It will definitely work
That's interesting. 14-bit RAW videos with a resolution of 4096 X 2304 at 24 frames per second require 378 Megabyte/s write speed.
Might become a little tight with the 50D's write speed ... ;D

But for silent pictures 4K would be a nice feature on all Canon DSLR.

Tragic Lantern / Re: Uncompressed 600D Raw Video
« on: June 15, 2013, 02:16:06 PM »
I think it's quite pointless to post benchmarks of your SD cards in this thread.
Everybody understood that the SD-Controller is limited to 21 Megabyte/s write speed.

@ jordillonch: Your card reader probably doesn't support UHS-1 so it has the same limitation like our cameras.
The SanDisk 45 Megabyte/s cards actually are that fast. Here's a benchmark I found on Amazon:


@ Andy600: That's interesting. I wasn't aware of the possibility that the Cinema DNG recording might be added with a later firmware update.
Thank you for sharing this thought. But I just used it as an example to show that it is possible to create a good video camera even for such a low price. In my opinion Canon creates good cameras for stills but they waste a lot of potential on the video side, just to protect their expensive camcorders. I mean, look at the 5D Mark III. Canon could have done what Magic Lantern does without any problems.

Anyway. I'll stay with my 600D and its H.264 videos, waiting to see how well the 70D and BMPCC will perform ...

Tragic Lantern / Re: Uncompressed 600D Raw Video
« on: June 14, 2013, 02:44:39 PM »
I haven't seen any official BM announcements about final release specs
Did you see this: Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera | Technical Specifications? Is this not official? :o

But I totally agree with you. The 600D is a great camera and we should be happy with what we have. Of corse, the H.264 video looks way worse than it could if Canon wouldn't want us to have that poor image quality. But it still looks better than most of the camcorders in this price range.

But I'm also thinking that Canon shouldn't waste so much potential of their DSLRs. It makes me sad ...

Look at the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera: It isn't impossible to create an amazing camera with high dynamic range, professional video formats and interchangeable lenses for under 1000 €. And we also know that the Canon DSLR could have all these features and more if Canon would allow us to have them. Actually the Canon DSLR could be even better than the Blackmagic cameras since they have much bigger sensors.

Now where Magic Lantern has unlocked all these stunning features on the Canon DSLR, they are just one step away from being the best cameras in the affordable film industrie. And it is sad that Canon wastes this potential completely :(

50D, 5D Mark II, 5D Mark III, Blackmagic Cinema Camera, Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera and Blackmagic Production Camera 4K.

That are your only options at the moment, if you want to record RAW vdeos in high resolutions.

The 60D has a write speed limit of 21 Megabyte/s. It can't be fixed, it is an hardware issue. And there's no lossless compression that can be achieved in camera that reduces the file size to 1/4 of the original size. So, yes. The 50D would be the better bet. No just at this point but in general if you can live without flipscreen and internal audio.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8