Author Topic: Canon 70D (Read 2314877 times)

renowilliams · « **Reply #550 on:** March 26, 2015, 11:31:32 PM »

Congrats on the new camera. You'll like the 70D. When you get more money saved, I suggest the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 lens as it is great on the 70D.

Loliplol · « **Reply #551 on:** March 27, 2015, 08:21:48 PM »

I just downloaded it and installed it! It works great, but there are some bugs.

Like:
- Live View laggs (sometimes)
- ML Menu just closes on it's own
- Well, I guess this isn't a bug, but where is raw video? I saw some YouTubers recording in raw and I can't find it.
- It says my camera is running on 70 degree celsius.

Thing that I couldn't find that there are or aren't:
- Audio monitoring thingy (I have no idea where to activate it)
- Raw video

If you could like reply or something, that would be awesome! Raw video is very important to me

Licaon_Kter · « **Reply #552 on:** March 27, 2015, 08:55:42 PM »

Quote from: Loliplol on March 27, 2015, 08:21:48 PM

- ML Menu just closes on it's own

Known issue, I have it too on M1, kinda annoying: https://bitbucket.org/hudson/magic-lantern/issue/1974/6d-in-live-view-mode-ml-menu-times-out

Quote from: Loliplol on March 27, 2015, 08:21:48 PM

- Well, I guess this isn't a bug, but where is raw video? I saw some YouTubers recording in raw and I can't find it.

In the video menu of ML, kinda last?

Loliplol · « **Reply #553 on:** March 27, 2015, 09:03:18 PM »

Quote from: Licaon_Kter on March 27, 2015, 08:55:42 PM

In the video menu of ML, kinda last?

Found it! Thanks!

camcramdigital · « **Reply #554 on:** March 28, 2015, 01:35:09 AM »

Temps while recording are being reported at 60 degree Celsius - is this normal?

Loliplol · « **Reply #555 on:** March 28, 2015, 09:47:21 AM »

Quote from: camcramdigital on March 28, 2015, 01:35:09 AM

Temps while recording are being reported at 60 degree Celsius - is this normal?

My went to 70! I think it's normal, SD card get's pretty hot while writing on it.

Okay, so here are my reports:
- My ML info display is not showing (That thingy you must turn off the canon info on the display, it's not showing up.)
- LiveView still laggs
- It's very glitchy. I press the trashbin, it opens the Canon menu. (sometimes)

Plus a question. What program reads .raw video? My premiere won't, after effects said nope too!

X-STATE · « **Reply #556 on:** March 28, 2015, 11:53:38 AM »

Quote from: Loliplol on March 28, 2015, 09:47:21 AM

Plus a question. What program reads .raw video? My premiere won't, after effects said nope too!

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?board=49.0

TKF Productions · « **Reply #557 on:** March 28, 2015, 07:06:31 PM »

Not sure if this question is appropriate here or if I should ask it in the other threads, but I'm trying to convert the .mlv file to something useable. I downloaded the FUSE MLV to cDNG converter and everything worked fine and I got the DNG files, however, when I tried to import them into After Effects I get the following error:

"After Effects error: the file format module could not parse the file. ( 45 :: 35 )

Anybody know how to fix this or how to get the .MLV files properly converted?

Guitarshredder1 · « **Reply #558 on:** March 29, 2015, 04:03:04 PM »

Just realized that with MLV, it always goes to the Canon LiveView when recording, regardless of what you selected in the menu, even hacked no preview.

UWP · « **Reply #559 on:** March 30, 2015, 05:55:17 PM »

I've been travelling the last weeks and used ML a lot. Right now I have the version from March 6, I'm mostly using dual ISO and Advanced Bracketing. Dual ISO is very stable, big congrats on that! But with advanced bracketing I got some Err 30 when doing this:

Starting to shoot a series. Sometimes the longest pic had been too long (I'm sometimes a bit impatient) and I thought maybe I don't need the long exposure pic, so I just switched the camera off. Immediatley I'm getting Err 30 with the hint to take off the battery and reinsert it. Of course nnothing else happened, after this everything is going on fine, just had to reenable all modules.

I could see kind of log on the SD card afterwards, would it be useful to extract and post it here? Or doesn't it help at all? And I always get the same error while switching off during advanced bracket shoot. I don't know if it's good or bad to test it that way, but at first it happened and to be sure that it will always happen while switching off I tried it 3 or 4 times and yes: always the same, Err 30.

For me it's a marvellous firmware, I can do lots of nice things with it! Here's an example of one of my bracketing shots:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=812094518843617&l=2f35cd3554

Thank you for this wonderful peace of software!

UWP

nikfreak · « **Reply #560 on:** March 30, 2015, 06:08:30 PM »

Better use the latest build from 1st post.
If you manage to get the ERR30 afterwards again plz post a detailed instruction on how to reproduce it.

UWP · « **Reply #561 on:** March 30, 2015, 06:17:37 PM »

Quote from: nikfreak on March 30, 2015, 06:08:30 PM

Better use the latest build from 1st post.
If you manage to get the ERR30 afterwards again plz post a detailed instruction on how to reproduce it.

Ok, I'll try the next days!

UWP

RafQue · « **Reply #562 on:** March 30, 2015, 10:03:48 PM »

Quote from: UWP on March 30, 2015, 05:55:17 PM

Here's an example of one of my bracketing shots:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=812094518843617&l=2f35cd3554

Thank you for this wonderful peace of software!

UWP

Hi UWP,

Wow! I just luv your HDR bracketing pic!
Man, I can't wait to make sum myself...

I will go to South Africa next month and I hope I will be able to do some nice HDR bracketing shooting over there.
But I don't want to sound like sum other people in this thread who are also waiting on a build for their revision, so please don't feel strained in any way, because I'm really thankful for your effort, Nikfreak!

Grtz,
RafQue

UWP · « **Reply #563 on:** March 31, 2015, 01:11:28 PM »

Quote from: RafQue on March 30, 2015, 10:03:48 PM

Hi UWP,

Wow! I just luv your HDR bracketing pic!
Man, I can't wait to make sum myself...

Thank you!

I can also recommend dual ISO, although the output is not as impressive, but it's fair enough:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=783824978337238&l=66dc5b613d

(This one has been made with a 650d, the quality with a 70d should be much better)

The work-side is just a bit more but here you can do HDR in one-shot, that's especially by day very helpful!

Have a nice time in South Africa, lots of good pictures for you!

UWP

Walter Schulz · « **Reply #564 on:** March 31, 2015, 01:53:09 PM »

Quote from: UWP on March 31, 2015, 01:11:28 PM

(This one has been made with a 650d, the quality with a 70d should be much better)

"Much better"? May I ask why?

UWP · « **Reply #565 on:** March 31, 2015, 02:08:38 PM »

Quote from: Walter Schulz on March 31, 2015, 01:53:09 PM

"Much better"? May I ask why?

Dual ISO is about 2 shifting ISO lines. One is normally with ISO 100 and the second one should be higher. The 650d has first noise at ISO 200 and a bit more at ISO 400. ISO 800 is really visible noise at the pics. To get much exposure gain you should always have a big difference between both "poles", but ISO100/1600 was too much for a good quality dual ISO pic with the 650d so I had to go down to 100/800 but even here I got noise in the result. When I'm doing 100/800 with the 70d there's almost no noise, the pics are very clear. I first have this good result with a 650d with 100/400 while the result with 100/1600 is also quite ok with the 70d. And when I compare the normal pics: 70d has almost no noise upto ISO 800, with ISO 1600 I can see the first disturbing pixels, the 650d is way worse regarding ISO quality. BTW, with the 650d I always had to do bracketing HDRs with ISO100. ISO 200 lead to too much noise in the resulting pic. With the 70d it's possible to do bracketing HDRs with ISO 400 (the bridge has been made with ISO 400) with almost no noise. 70d is just a better camera or has got a better sensor/technical stuff/processor inside, whatsoever. The results are obvious for me.

UWP

dmilligan · « **Reply #566 on:** March 31, 2015, 02:51:55 PM »

Higher ISOs have less noise (per photoelectron) not more (otherwise it would be pointless to use them). Therefore, using a higher recovery ISO with dual ISO will result in less noise in the final image, not more. This is the whole entire reason dual ISO exists and is useful.

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=10111.0
http://clarkvision.com/articles/iso/index.html
http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/index.html

UWP · « **Reply #567 on:** March 31, 2015, 04:04:50 PM »

Quote from: dmilligan on March 31, 2015, 02:51:55 PM

Higher ISOs have less noise (per photoelectron) not more (otherwise it would be pointless to use them). Therefore, using a higher recovery ISO with dual ISO will result in less noise in the final image, not more. This is the whole entire reason dual ISO exists and is useful.

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=10111.0
http://clarkvision.com/articles/iso/index.html
http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/index.html

All of this might be right, but the results speak their own language. Higher ISO = less quality, especially regarding noise patterns. That's what I can see on all my pics. Even in dual ISO I can see the effect although of course a ISO 100/1600 pic is way better than just a ISO 1600 pic, even with the 650d.

Frank7D · « **Reply #568 on:** March 31, 2015, 05:35:20 PM »

"All of this might be right, but the results speak their own language. Higher ISO = less quality, especially regarding noise patterns. That's what I can see on all my pics. Even in dual ISO I can see the effect although of course a ISO 100/1600 pic is way better than just a ISO 1600 pic, even with the 650d."

I get different results from you, though (on the 7D). For me, lower ISO results in larger noise grain and more obvious vertical banding. Can you describe what "less quality" means to you?

UWP · « **Reply #569 on:** March 31, 2015, 05:56:16 PM »

Quote from: Frank7D on March 31, 2015, 05:35:20 PM

I get different results from you, though (on the 7D). For me, lower ISO results in larger noise grain and more obvious vertical banding. Can you describe what "less quality" means to you?

I'll try to bring some test pics to show. I guess it will be weekend until then. Right now I don't have time for shooting pics.
But I'll try to show!

Loliplol · « **Reply #570 on:** March 31, 2015, 06:11:42 PM »

Magic Lantern for 70D is probably like the best thing ever made. Raw video is just epic, it does need more space and things, but the video looks awesome!

But I can't find that audio monitor thingy. Is it in the latest verison or is it still in development?
Also, anamorphic thingy is just epic for filming "film"-like stuff!

dmilligan · « **Reply #571 on:** March 31, 2015, 06:12:26 PM »

@UWP,

Take two photos with the same shutter speed and aperture, one at ISO 100 and one at ISO 1600. In post, bump the exposure of the ISO 100 shot by ~4 EV to match the ISO 1600 shot. Now, compare the two.

Now, with the same shutter speed and aperture (and the same scene), take a dual ISO shot at 100/1600. Process it with cr2hdr and increase the exposure to match the first two. Compare with the first two.

You will find that:
* The ISO 100 shot has a lot of noise in the shadows
* The ISO 1600 shot has a lot less noise, but a lot of it may be overexposed
* The ISO 100/1600 shot has the same noise as the ISO 1600 shot, but it is not overexposed (it's exposed like the ISO 100 shot)

DeafEyeJedi · « **Reply #572 on:** March 31, 2015, 06:48:56 PM »

Quote from: dmilligan on March 31, 2015, 06:12:26 PM

You will find that:
* The ISO 100 shot has a lot of noise in the shadows
* The ISO 1600 shot has a lot less noise, but a lot of it may be overexposed
* The ISO 100/1600 shot has the same noise as the ISO 1600 shot, but it is not overexposed (it's exposed like the ISO 100 shot)

Agreed. BIG time!

UWP · « **Reply #573 on:** March 31, 2015, 07:20:46 PM »

@dmilligan,

Quote from: dmilligan on March 31, 2015, 06:12:26 PM

Take two photos with the same shutter speed and aperture, one at ISO 100 and one at ISO 1600. In post, bump the exposure of the ISO 100 shot by ~4 EV to match the ISO 1600 shot. Now, compare the two.

Now, with the same shutter speed and aperture (and the same scene), take a dual ISO shot at 100/1600. Process it with cr2hdr and increase the exposure to match the first two. Compare with the first two.

Sounds interesting, I'll try, although I don't have tools which can do "exactly +4 EV", I'll have to do it by looking at the pictures, when they're "equally bright". Thank you, I'm always willing to learn!

UWP

Marc_Petzold · « **Reply #574 on:** March 31, 2015, 09:55:00 PM »

Hello Guys

It´s time to create a version for the other revision. The 4b is stable in the basic applikations. We must look to the other revision that we may know whether there are big differences in dealing with the other hardware. I do not think this is just a copy from 4b with a other startpoint or so.

br
Marc

News:

Author Topic: Canon 70D (Read 2314877 times)