5D2 RAW video Builds 14-Bit

Started by a.d., May 20, 2013, 05:27:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


I realize we are all resolution junkies here but I seriously doubt anyone could pick out a 1856 frame upscaled to HD vs a 1880 frame upscaled to HD. It is less the 2% difference in resolution. I  bet if someone posted 10 shots with 9 1856 and 1 that was 1880 scaled to HD you wouldn't be able to pick out the 1880. Pixel peeping at %200 percent is virtually unnoticeable even when toggling back and forth, I can only see the slightest difference it very high contrast areas. Everywhere else shows no change and I certainly cannot say that one looks better than the other. I had to constantly remind myself which on was which when I was trying to determine if one was better. I have 20/15 vision BTW.

The difference in quality is so tiny it really isn't even worth the extra effort, I don't think it should even be called a quality difference just a difference. I would recommend shooting 1856 to get longer record times and smaller file sizes - 1856 is continuous and 1888 is not after all. I know there will be the "I want the highest resolution and best quality possible even if it is 1 pixel" replies, but in reality the quality difference is only in your head. If you disagree show us an example of how much better it is, if you can.


1880 is continous BTW, so that didn't wash.


1880 at 16:9 is nearly 80 MB/s at 24P, I have never seen anyone get that continuous on a MKII. Not to mention on MLV with audio won't be. That was the least important thing since the point was if the little bit of extra resolution was worth the effort. If you really want it they can probably add in both and you can crop off the extra 8 pixels in post.

My point is that the dev's do this work for us in their spare time and if they want to make things easier for them by sacrificing some resolution that is basically unnoticeable, maybe that is the best thing for ML.


No not at 16x9 but 1:85.1 @ 75MB/s ,16x9 I get about 3500 frames
The point is they could easily support the max resolution by there own words.
I don't think any camera should be limited because of short comings of


@a.d., pravdomil or ted: feel free to create a thread in the Raw Video section, for Magic Lantern. This section will be shutdown, as announced last week.

Third party builds are no longer accepted on this forum, so please contribute your changes to the main repository.

ted ramasola

Dear 5DmkII Users,

Most of the essential features introduced by a.d. and pravdomil have been reviewed and were eventually integrated into the ML nightlies. Some are still being reviewed, new improvements from 3rd party developers are going to be implemented in a new method that the developers have agreed upon that will no longer necessitate the need for a third party section.

All 5DmkII with Magic Lantern related inquiry or posts are now directed to go here: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=11205.0
It is an easy to find sticky under the Raw Video Section

Currently A1ex is working on a simplified installer that will allow you to install directly from the nightly builds, until then the old method is still being used.

This thread will now be closed.

5DmkII  / 7D


Well all extras provided by us was already implemented into ML.
Only two features are remaining (1880 width and  crop marks for GLDraw Off), but this is small changes so there no reason why keep this fork updated.
Thanks for all a. d. and ML team !