Author Topic: What are the cheapest 1080p cameras that Magic Lantern works well on?  (Read 3830 times)

yazcui

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 8
I have EF lenses, so preferably an aps-c with EF/EF-S mount. I just want to buy a really cheap camera to test out magic lantern, therefore I'd like to know which cameras run ML very stable. Thanks!

dfort

  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3751
5D Mark III

If I was to do it all over again I'd just go straight for the 5D3 and load the 1.1.3 firmware on it. I'm not kidding about this choice either, you asked for the cheapest 1080p cameras and the 5D3 is the only ML supported camera that actually shoots 1080p video using the full sensor right out of the box.

However, if you want something really cheap just to try out ML, any of the supported cameras that you can get a good deal on will do. I started with an EOSM and it is still one of my favorite cameras to play around with.
5D3.* 7D.206 700D.115 EOSM.203 EOSM2.103 M50.102

Walter Schulz

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7312
Most cameras do 1080p out of the box. He didn't ask for "continuous 1080p24 in uncompressed 14-bit RAW" ...
-> 50D, 500D, 100D will do H.264 just fine.
Photogs and videographers: Assist in proof reading upcoming in-camera help!. Your input is wanted and needed!

yazcui

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 8
5D Mark III

If I was to do it all over again I'd just go straight for the 5D3 and load the 1.1.3 firmware on it. I'm not kidding about this choice either, you asked for the cheapest 1080p cameras and the 5D3 is the only ML supported camera that actually shoots 1080p video using the full sensor right out of the box.

However, if you want something really cheap just to try out ML, any of the supported cameras that you can get a good deal on will do. I started with an EOSM and it is still one of my favorite cameras to play around with.
I've been really considering the 5dm3. It's a bit pricey and if I went that route, I wonder what the video quality would be on it compared to, say the C100? I'm just not wanting to spend too much because I feel 4k will soon be necessary.

dfort

  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3751
Most cameras do 1080p out of the box.

I should have said that that the 5D3 shoots 1080p video "natively" using the full sensor area right out of the box. All of the other ML supported cameras shoot a lower resolution image and upscale it to produce 1080p H.264 video. It is also the only camera that does vertical binning (fact check me on this) so that it doesn't show aliasing artifacts as much as the other cameras.

Off topic, the "professional" Canon cine cameras have 4K sensors and downscale it to produce 1080p video. A C100 is much more practical at shooting video than a 5D3. Sure, if you use ML to shoot raw video on the 5D3 you can get better looking video but you have to spend much more time post processing raw video than the C100's AVCHD file format.

In any case, this could open up a flame war from passionate Magic Lantern users but my previous recommendations still stand. If you're willing to work hard enough the 5D3 can produce results that will match many professional digital cinema camera and if you work really hard at it most of the other ML supported cameras can too.
5D3.* 7D.206 700D.115 EOSM.203 EOSM2.103 M50.102

allemyr

  • Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
5D3 is the only camera in my opinion. Other ones has antialiasing problems.

C100 Mark I hasn't a good image quality and isn't UHD/4k.

5D3 isn't that most pracital camera as mentioned with magic lantern raw. But the image quality when handled right in post is insane.

And shure the 5D3 is cheap compared to cameras that deliver that image but the workflow is not easy as with other cameras that shoot raw. You have to set your workflow up, in Davinci Resolve preferably.

Compare 5D3 raw and C100, for me the 5D3 is the easy winner in image quality. But C100 has a lot of other features.

rsmith02

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 61
For APS-C I think the 600D is the last generation that ML fully works on. You get the magnified focus while shooting, audio meters, the 3x magic zoom, etc. I still use it and it's a fine camera, though not a true 1080p and it doesn't have a headphone jack.

If you have budget, a used C100 would be a great camera for true 1080p with built in ND filters, a headphone jack, etc. with no modifications needed.

Personally I decided to go to Sony for video and stick to Canon for stills. The a6500 is an amazing camera and can do things in video mode even the 5DIV can't.

nikki

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
550d

yazcui

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 8
5D3 is the only camera in my opinion. Other ones has antialiasing problems.

C100 Mark I hasn't a good image quality and isn't UHD/4k.

5D3 isn't that most pracital camera as mentioned with magic lantern raw. But the image quality when handled right in post is insane.

And shure the 5D3 is cheap compared to cameras that deliver that image but the workflow is not easy as with other cameras that shoot raw. You have to set your workflow up, in Davinci Resolve preferably.

Compare 5D3 raw and C100, for me the 5D3 is the easy winner in image quality. But C100 has a lot of other features.

Thanks for the reply. I keep hearing that you need to do more work in post with a 5D3-ML compared to other top-tier cameras, can you explain how the workflow is not as easy? Thanks.

dfort

  • Developer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3751
...can you explain how the workflow is not as easy?

Most cameras shoot in a format that can be used directly in an editing system. You can also easily make proxies for editing.

The MLV (Magic Lantern raw Video) format is not supported by any editing system (that I know of) so you first have to convert it to another format, usually DNG (Adobe Digital Negative) before you can work with it. That extra step can add several hours in post processing time before you can even begin editing or making proxies.

Note that I'm not putting down Magic Lantern, especially ML raw video, it is just that we shouldn't oversell it. Of course you will get a full refund if you try it and don't like it.  ;D
5D3.* 7D.206 700D.115 EOSM.203 EOSM2.103 M50.102

reddeercity

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2221
My 2 cents worth on raw workflow  :) That's what  MLVFS  was originally design to do , import virtual cdng's quickly in to blackmagic resolve (direct to edit) & adobe première direct to edit ,
so no need to exact the mlv files and have drive space taken up.
So kinda there is native support with mlv's , this is what I do sometimes  -- mlvfs (if on pc , quick mount --mouse right click and I have all cdng's of all files)
or Mac same thing click mouse and select mlvfs then mount the CF card or the drive where files are
(better , has nice gui for some basic raw decoding & simple b/w preview+metadata **P.C. has a gui also but I don't need any of there's adjustments**)
import in to Resolve or After Effects , normalize image to a film log , export to Tiffs (PC ) or ProRes4444XQ (Mac) (I'm a FCPX guy) 
so really any app that can import cdng's image sequence can import mlv files thou mlvfs  and work native . But mind you do need to understand some basic
color science (color space , LUT's , etc. ..) and I think some of the user have a hard time understand this and like to have a pre graded image (rec709) that there see in the lcd screen .
In reality  the raw workflow is no more difficult than just using a intermediate (prores file) in fact a simple h264 (mp4 or .mov) is more difficult as there more imperfection
introduced from compression , no matter what camera you use . In some respects raw video is faster to process as there usually no imperfection (must of the times) :D
And if I'm not mistaken I do remember something about @martinhering the app devpl. of  Colorcast [0.4] with Magic Lantern support said that was thinking of making a plugin for mlv's files to edit native .

It all depends on the user level of conform in workflows  , there again my 2 cent .

Dmytro_ua

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
  • Kyiv, Ukraine
I keep hearing that you need to do more work in post with a 5D3-ML compared to other top-tier cameras, can you explain how the workflow is not as easy?

Another 2 cents which are not mentioned here:
You don't have an easy and real time preview of already captured material in your camera.
You have to load a file manager module and preview RAW video files with skipped frames or frame by frame, but not in real time.
Which is not really suitable for professional workflow. But if you're an enthusiastic independent video maker - you can live with this )).
5d3 1.1.3 exp | Canon 16-35 4.0L | Canon 50 1.4 | Canon 100mm 2.8 macro
Ronin-S

IDA_ML

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 811
I've been really considering the 5dm3. It's a bit pricey and if I went that route, I wonder what the video quality would be on it compared to, say the C100? I'm just not wanting to spend too much because I feel 4k will soon be necessary.

If you don't need 4K and can live with 2,5K, go for the 100D.  With the overclocked interface, it can record continuous 8 to 12-bit losslessly compressed RAW video at 2520x1080 resolution and 24fps with sound and is very stable.  In Europe, you can find a used one in a top working condition for 150-200 Euros.

This video:


shot with the 100D will give you an impression of the quality.