Messages

Thanks, A1ex.

600D is not compiling, as noted on the downloads page. I can compile, but don't have the skills to debug. This seem to be the issue:

Code Select Expand

../../src/raw.c: At top level:
../../src/raw.c:1510:26: error: 'PREFERRED_RAW_TYPE' undeclared here (not in a function)
static int lv_raw_type = PREFERRED_RAW_TYPE;
                          ^
../../src/raw.c:1510:12: warning: 'lv_raw_type' defined but not used [-Wunused-variable]
static int lv_raw_type = PREFERRED_RAW_TYPE;
            ^
../../Makefile.filerules:23: recipe for target 'raw.o' failed
make: *** [raw.o] Error 1


A1ex, I can help.

2.3 is a very old build. Nightly builds by date are the way it's done now. So the date of the nightly build tells you how up-to-date the code is. More details:

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=14280.0

Thanks, A1ex!

Never mind.

Found the issue. If the SET button is programmed to a special function other than "normal"  (I had mine set to Flash Exposure Comp), ML does not recognize it as pressed during boot.

escho (and anyone else with a 600D), could use please check if your camera bypasses Magic Lantern if you press the SET button while turning it on? This is the documented behavior, but does not work on my cam with builds clear back to 2014. Trying to understand if the issue is my cam or ML.

Thanks.

A1ex,

Had a couple of issues. See PM.

A1ex, check my PMs to you. The issue was that the camera was set to power down after two minutes, which was interrupting the tests. Since I've switched that setting to always on, all the tests I've run have been successful. I've been using the build for about a week with no issues.

Pretty sure I sent you links to the output of my test results.

I've been working with it for a few days and it seems solid so far.

I'm willing to consider it. What would the testing involve, and how much risk to the camera? (I know: I get to keep the pieces.)

Thanks, dmilligan, for what I find to be a great explanation of the situation.

hege.cc/magic-lantern/ was set up by user Datensuppe. He hasn't been active here since last September,. The code that appears on the site is from a cron job he set up. (see this post: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=15360.msg153980#msg153980)

I have pointed people a few times to these builds. Will go back and edit my posts if possible with a warning not to use them.

What I wanted to say to irvcobb: If the ML/600d hasn't changed from April 9, maybe it's because it works. That's a testimony to the quality those dev deliver: No complaints in 5 months.

No complaints here. But newbies tend to see "nightly builds" as meaning either (a) "latest and greatest" at which point they feel they are missing something with an apparently older build or (b) "too scary to touch" which isn't the case with ML.

ML is amazing, and I get the thrill of creating something this cool. But not everyone is or wants to be a coder, and not everyone understands the way such things work.

I used to code, and in assembly. I understand the technical challenge, the thrill of problem solving, and even the beauty of a good hack. My interests are elsewhere now, and the occasional note here trying to clarify for a newbie is about all I have the time of skills for.

Yuriy may never contribute back to the code base. But he may use ML to take some very satisfying images, and he may contribute back to the community in other ways, seen or unseen. And maybe that's enough, at least I think it is.

Why firmware for EOS 600D is not updated from April 19?

Apparently for a number of reasons, including that the current code doesn't always compile for the 600D, the programmer who was coordinating 600D builds has disappeared (?), and the main dev  for the  project is very busy.

Thanks a lot, Datensuppe. Seems to work as expected here.

Edit: as of January, 2016 these builds no longer work and may be risky to use. Suggest using the official build instead.

RM, I could be wrong myself, but I'm not sure you understand the way ML works and what to expect. ML does not change the firmware in the camera - it runs from the SD card. So you'll never get ML if you don't have it installed on the card you have in your camera when you turn it on. With ML on the card and the camera turned on, you can press the trash can button on the back of the camera to show the ML menus. Until you turn on some ML options, this is the easiest way to see if ML is running.

So
No maintainer -> no build -> no thread ?

I'm curious about the apparently stalled status of ML for the 600D. The most recent build available is magiclantern-Nightly.2015Apr19.600D102.zip, but I see that other cameras have much more recent builds. I also see that there is no thread for the 600D on the Camera-specific discussion portion of this forum, and that https://builds.magiclantern.fm/jenkins/job/600D.102/ states that the project is disabled.

Is the 600D no longer supported? Or do more recent ML builds include code that does not apply to the 600D and therefore there are no new builds for it? Or (most likely) do I simply not understand how the ML build process and availability works?

Please forgive my lack of understanding, but I'm curious as to the status of ML for the 600D. The most recent build available is magiclantern-Nightly.2015Apr19.600D102.zip, but I see that other cameras have much more recent builds. I also see that there is no thread for the 600D on the Camera-specific discussion portion of this forum, and that https://builds.magiclantern.fm/jenkins/job/600D.102/ states that the project is disabled.

Is the 600D no longer supported? Or do more recent ML builds include code that does not apply to the 600D and therefore no new builds for it? Or (most likely) do I simply not understand how the ML build process and availability works?

Irv

Did you make your new SD card bootable? If not, look here:  http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/EOScard

https://bitbucket.org/magiclantern/magic-lantern/downloads/magiclantern-v2.3.550D.60D.600D.50D.500D.5D2.zip

Thank you, a1ex.

You're right. I'm a little dyslexic about DualISO. Expose for the lights and let DI bring in the darks, and for some reason I think about it the other way around.

But I have learned something. Always figured the converter just looked at alternating rows rather than exposure. Thanks.

Don't think so - you can see the DualISO stripes in the pic.

Here's the pic:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2209462/IMG_9664.CR2

I get the "This doesn't look like a DualISO" message.

Have tried in Lightroom using the plugin and also from the command line. (Win 8.1)

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Irv