Menu

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.

Show posts Menu

Messages - VisualPursuit

#26
Quote from: sharont on November 04, 2013, 07:18:55 PM
Hi,

I'm new to ML.
I have a 5D3 upgraded to 1.2.3.
Can/should I install ML?

Thanks,
Sharon

Sharon, you will have to downgrade to 1.1.3 or wait until someone does the necessary work.
#27
As of today, Canon announced firmware 1.2.3, again with reference to
further bugfixing on the AFMA misadjustment problem.
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#DriversAndSoftware

Let's hope they finally fixed it and that this will help in moving from 1.1.3
as a basis for ML to now 1.2.3.

Yes, I know about the work, and unfortunately I cannot be of much help.
#28
Quote from: timetraveller on October 27, 2013, 09:31:41 PM
Last stable version for the 5D3?

There has never been a stable version, just the Alpha 3 - and this requires
you to downgrade your firmware to 1.1.3, which might give you misadjusted AF.

Nightlies are considered to work generally well, but they work only on 1.1.3.

In the general development discussion is a statement to find what needs to be
done before ML can be ported to 1.2.1. - the developers welcome anybody to
come forward and work on these tasks.

Maybe this call for volunteers with a description of the task would make a good sticky?
#29
Quote from: RenatoPhoto on October 11, 2013, 12:01:34 AM
I have seen this on my 5D3 with fw113.  Dont know what does it!  I have not upgrated to 1.21.
If 1.21 fixed this issue I would consider an important improvement.

Yes, 1.2.1 fixed the problem permanently, which is exactly the reason
I am not going back and thus can't use ML on my 5D MkIII.

Personal preference, of course.
#30
About the AFMA problem: Canon lists it in the description of the 1.2.1 firmware update as follows:
13. Fixes a phenomenon in which the camera changes the AF microadjustment value to -8.

I have had this problem and since sharp images are mission critcal for me I cannot go back to 1.1.3,
which is of course just my personal problem.

In two German forums with a total of 350.000 registered users a number of people have reported
two phenomena, that are immediately linked to up/downgrading firmware.

1) After the upgrade 3rd party batteries that previously worked have been refused.
Some report the batteries not working at all, others (like me) report the camera asks for
permission to use these batteries and then worked like it should. Some of those with
cameras that refused the batteries could not heal the problem by downgrading again.

2) Some People who did not have the AFMA -8 problem before upgrading had it after
downgrading. Given, there is a chance that they did have it but did not notice before.

Canon also states in the firmware upgrade descripion:
Notes:
・ Once the EOS 5D Mark III camera is updated to version 1.2.1, it cannot be restored
to a previous firmware version (Version 1.0.7 through 1.1.3).


They also mention a firmware revision 1.2.0 that was never rolled out as
standalone upgrade but obviously part of factory revision deliveries.

My theory now is that there have been silent hardware upgrades and they
have found a way to make 1.2.1 work on all hardware revision platforms.
Theory 2 is that there might be different versions of 1.1.3 firmware out there,
and downgrading to the standalone upgrade will cause problems on bodies
that have been shipped with a later silent hardware upgrade that included
an upgrade to 1.1.3 without a change of firmware revision numbers.

So - being able to downgrade to the standalone firmware 1.1.3 does not
necessarily mean that this is problem free. One might end up with a body
that has a silent hardware update running a firmware revision that was
written for a body without that update.

I might be wrong on all this, but why should people make up their reports?

Obviously their cameras display a different behaviour with firmware 1.1.3
after up/downgrading to Firmware 1.2.1 and back to 1.1.3. Which in turn
must mean that there must be different versions of 1.1.3, or 1.2.1 changes
things during the upgrade that are untouched by the downgrade.

However, this is too much uncertainty for me.

Please understand that I am not trying to bug anybody or push anybody
towards anything. I want to help, and I can wait for whatever comes our way,
ML 2.3 stable runs fine on my 5D MkII. It's just that the 5D MkIII sees little
video work for lack of a working ML on firmware 1.2.1.

But again, that is my personal problem, not yours. The main part of my work
remains photography, and AFMA -8 does not help that too much.

I appreciate your work, and I am a happy camper with the 5D MkII and 2.3 stable.
#31
Quote from: Audionut on September 20, 2013, 06:09:54 AM
Can you provide more detail about this AFMA error?

Sure. Occasionally the camera sets the AF Micro Adjustment to -8 which results
in images that are out of focus. If you notice, you can reset it - until for no known
reason the camera sets it to -8 again.

It is a problem that might or might not occur the next day, and it is hard to see
on the back LCD display.

So, as a wedding photographer I might shoot a whole wedding with unsharp
images and only notice after it is too late. Not my option.

There have been reports of people suffering from that error ony after downgrading
from 1.2.1 to 1.1.3 again, and not having this problem before up/downgrade.

I had the problem from start, and 1.2.1 fixed it. So I am not going back to 1.1.3,
I will have to wait for ML to be compatible to 1.2.1, whenever that will be.

In the meantime, my 5D Mk3 sees little video work, most is done on the 5D Mk2.
#32
Quote from: RenatoPhoto on September 18, 2013, 03:59:48 PM
2. 113 is good

I beg to differ.

Photography remains my main application, and the AFMA error in 113
gives me random AF problems that are fixed in 121.

Worse: Some people have reported that they suffer from the AFMA error
after downgrading to 113 back from 121 but haven't had that with the
initial 113.

That is of course completely irrelevant for people who don't use their
5D mkIII for anything except filming and who use manual focus pulling.

But for those of us who take still pictures as well, 113 is likely a major problem.

Just sayin.
#33
In the general development forum people have answered what needs
to be done for 1.2.1 before it can be switched.
They have different priorities but would gladly accept help on those
cumbersome jobs.

Unfortunately my skills are not good enough to be any help.
#34
General Chat / Re: ML's Goal?
August 05, 2013, 04:03:25 PM
Quote from: g3gg0 on August 05, 2013, 11:36:38 AM
if someone digs out all the stubs (stubs.S, const.h, hardcoded stuff in modules)

Now THAT is a great answer, and it might help getting the thing going.

Thank you very much!
#35
General Chat / Re: ML's Goal?
August 05, 2013, 07:12:06 AM
I am also one of the people who have stated their wishes, and I realize you
seem to feel this is done as demanding. This was never my intention.

I did so in an attempt to explain how ML is used in my work and give feedback.

Your work is much appreciated and I am in no way asking release dates,
or try to push you towards anything. You guys decide.

What I did do was ask in several places about the support of the current
firmware of the 5D MkIII, and I never received any answer nor could I find
any postings on the background.

There must be a reason why current development is done on 1.3.1, maybe even
a problem.  A quick sentence on that might help others understand what the
problem is and maybe others can step in and help solving it.

Please: I am not trying to push you to do anything, I am just trying to understand
a little background.

You do this for a reason - fill us in and maybe others can help better.

Also, anybody posting builds: A simple "for firmware 1.3.1" makes everything
perfectly clear and stops questions in advance. I have received a warning for
asking if the build announced in a posting would work with 1.2.1.
Did the search before and read everything associated with this build folder,
but could not find out if or if not. So I asked, and a simple "no" would have been
much better than issuing a warning. Lourenco was so friendly to answer my
question by pm. The answer is no and that s fine for now.

#36
Canon has stated that 1.2.1 cannot be downgraded, which leads to the assumption that there might have been a silent HW update in the past. This in turn would explain that users have different experiences regarding 3rd party batteries and AFMA aberrations after up/downgrading.

I had the AFMA problem and will certainly not downgrade again.

Too bad that there is no word on development for the current firmware.
It seems like all effort is put into outdated firmware, and nobody offers
an answer about the reasons for that.

One would think that it would be much smarter to first port what was
achieved already in Alpha 3 to the latest firmware and then proceed from
there instead of later having to start all over.

If anybody knowledgeable reads this: Is there any development for the
current firmware going on?

I am not asking a release date!
#37
Quote from: Audionut on July 17, 2013, 03:20:30 AM
I've got a 5D3 build here.

Does this one work on firmware 1.2.1?
#38
General Help Q&A / Re: Nightly builds for 5D3?
July 10, 2013, 10:30:12 AM
I have asked on several occasions if there is development at all for the current 5D3 firmware.
Everything I see is related to the old firmware.

Nobody bothered to answer.

How wise is it to develop for an outdated firmware and then start all over
for the current firmware?

It seems wiser to me to port what is already finished to the new firmware
(which would give people at least alpha functionality AND the peace of mind
not to suffer from the AFMA-error) and then proceed from there.

RAW might be nice, maybe, in the future.

But focus peaking, magic zoom and waveform display are far more essential to me.

But whenever I asked about this nobody bothered to answer.
#39
Question:
Is it easier to develop ML for v1.1.3 and then port everything to 1.2.1?

Wouldn't it be better to first port it to 1.2.1 with the existing features
and then proceed with RAW?

I have searched the forum, but could not find an answer to that.

The v1.2.1 update fixes one problem I had as well, so I am rather reluctant
to revert back to 1.1.3. However I of course miss the features that we already
had in Alpha 3. I use that on a daily basis with the 5D MkII

I can wait very patiently for RAW (as exiting as it is).
But I'd die for the basic ML that Alpha 3 offered on 1.1.3.

No offense though, and please don't feel pushed.
I appreciate very much what you guys have given us for free.

Michael Quack

(edit: typos)