Greetings! First post from me here, just want to open by saying congrats to all devs involved and major thanks!
I have a MARK II 5D and am just beginning to get into shooting. Am wondering a few things.
We have an anamorphic lens. My understanding is unsqueezed this fills the entire frame, correct?
And then the software performs the squeeze which displays it letterboxed on the 4:3 camera screen, right?
But the letterboxed 4:3 display on the camera is not actually the resolution being recorded...
The full frame is still recorded, regardless of if you have an anamorphic lens on it or not, right?
So why should you ever change the recording ratio? Or are people talking about only changing the playback ratio?
I've heard people saying that you can set ML to record 1920x(Insert various cropped vertical sizes here) to do anamorphic.
It would be wonderful if I could record full RAW with anamorphic lens but technically, the full 1920x1080 frame is still being
recorded unsqueezed, right? What is the point in cropping then? Wouldn't you be cropping the full unsqueesed image?
I know that on Blurays that play in 1920x1080 but are 2.35:1 - they open a true 1080p screen but only display 1920x817 right?
But isn't this just for playback? Is there an advantage to using anamorphic which let's us record in 1080p because the
full vertical resolution isn't being used or is this just during playback because the full vertical resolution is used during recording?
Sorry to be so verbose! Tried to explain that best as possible!

I am seriously eyeballing a Komputerbay 1000x 64GB card even though 65megs seems the max transfer rate.
Does anyone have any definitive proof that it is a hardware limitation and that no greater speed will ever occur without
hardware modification? Each build seems to bring different results - sometimes better, sometimes worse.
I keep remembering back in the old days when they got an extra 4k of RAM out of the Commodore 64 by using the cassette buffer...
Software tricks can sometimes do amazing things! - And what about hardware mods?
I've heard HDMI is too slow to take the RAW signal. What about splitting the load out CF and HDMI simultaneously?
(Dump raw binary data partly out hdmi and partly to CF in order to grab the full thing then join together later?)
The way I understand, the CPU is fast enough, it's just the CF interface which is bottle necking it, correct?
Thank you for taking the time to listen!!!
P.S. - I had to use a crappy SD to CF adapter to install ML. I have a 300x CF card but unfortunately, no USB adapter for it!
(I have a USB adaptor for the SD, that's why I had to use it!)
Normally, I would just get the files from the camera off the 300x card by hooking to the camera's USB port. However...
It seems the camera won't let me WRITE to the card from the USB so I can not get the ML files onto my 300x card until I get
a CF USB adapter which I plan to order with the Komputerbay 1000x 64GB later this week. In the meantime I am wondering...
Is there a way to enable write to CF card from camera's USB port?
By the way the horrid SD to CF adapter benches at about 1.7 megs hahha so it is useless!
I can play with ML and look at all the functions but I can not record anything!
