Canon 650D 1.0.1 [Status: Alpha / OBSOLETE]

[Walter Schulz]

Not available, but there is a workaround: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=3697.msg44640#msg44640
and my post below that one.

Ciao, Walter

[papkee]

Alright folks, I have a new video out showcasing RAW on the 650D.

I used the latest build along with Foorgol's Pink Dot Remover (http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6658)

Enjoy!

[spider]

When I use the Raw recording and the 5x magnification in LV I get first  graphical errors and than the LV in grayscale.
Is it in grayscale to save power?  When I start the record the actual section will be recorded?
I am a bit worried because of the graphical errors so it is save to use?

[midnite]

Alright folks, I have a new video out showcasing RAW on the 650D.

I used the latest build along with Foorgol's Pink Dot Remover (http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6658)

Enjoy!

nice film feel but... i have a felling that raw videos from 650d lacks "quality" i don't know any other words to describe this. i mean, it doesn't look like a raw video from mark iii. of course mak iii is a lot better camera but, i have a 1366x768 resolution laptop, so i can't see too much difference between 1080p and 720p and raw videos from mark iii is looks just  superior on my laptop's screen. i wonder why?

is it because lame postprocessing skills we (i) got?

[donjames150]

nice film feel but... i have a felling that raw videos from 650d lacks "quality" i don't know any other words to describe this. i mean, it doesn't look like a raw video from mark iii. of course mak iii is a lot better camera but, i have a 1366x768 resolution laptop, so i can't see too much difference between 1080p and 720p and raw videos from mark iii is looks just  superior on my laptop's screen. i wonder why?

is it because lame postprocessing skills we (i) got?

Mostly I think it's that the Mark III is full frame and so it has more pixels to start with. In general more pixels equals better quality (example 300dpi vs 72dpi). We're already at a 1.6 crop factor and then we're cropping that to get our raw videos. But hang in there, even with that, I can clearly see that a 1280 x 720 crop is still sharper than my h264 1280 x 720 and you get a better dynamic range with raw.  Some of it is filming technique as well. Lighting, not panning too fast, not using handheld, all that is important. Right ISO, right shutter speed and aperture, that is all important in a scene looking good. I bought a motorized panning head for around $130 because I just couldn't get a slow consistent pan and my youtube videos were always jerky. The motorized head was the answer for that.

[spider]

nice film feel but... i have a felling that raw videos from 650d lacks "quality" i don't know any other words to describe this.

I think the quality is very good.

[kazeone]

okay so side question, Im thinking of shooting video in a Club, we are holding Go Go Girl Auditions, should I film in raw or should I just film with the cannons native software? the lighting wont be ideal Im sure, so any suggestions would be welcomed and super sorry if this is just to off topic.

[donjames150]

okay so side question, Im thinking of shooting video in a Club, we are holding Go Go Girl Auditions, should I film in raw or should I just film with the cannons native software? the lighting wont be ideal Im sure, so any suggestions would be welcomed and super sorry if this is just to off topic.

the lighting issue will be the same whichever way you choose. Maybe shoot HDR? I've only shot short clips but it probably will handle larger ones. Try some test runs in similar light.

[kazeone]

the lighting issue will be the same whichever way you choose. Maybe shoot HDR? I've only shot short clips but it probably will handle larger ones. Try some test runs in similar light.

HDR is fine for still objects and slowly moving around them, not so much in a still position and objects are fast moving, it creates a nasty ghost effect.

Yeah I will have to maybe do a few test videos before just seeing if anyone had any direction to point me to cut down on some of the workload.

[midnite]

Mostly I think it's that the Mark III is full frame and so it has more pixels to start with. In general more pixels equals better quality (example 300dpi vs 72dpi). We're already at a 1.6 crop factor and then we're cropping that to get our raw videos. But hang in there, even with that, I can clearly see that a 1280 x 720 crop is still sharper than my h264 1280 x 720 and you get a better dynamic range with raw.  Some of it is filming technique as well. Lighting, not panning too fast, not using handheld, all that is important. Right ISO, right shutter speed and aperture, that is all important in a scene looking good. I bought a motorized panning head for around $130 because I just couldn't get a slow consistent pan and my youtube videos were always jerky. The motorized head was the answer for that.

actually i don't say 650d raw vids are all crap, i only compare it to m3. people that own m3 have also other professional equipment, maybe that is why they look superb. so i think you are probably right, it is mostly about handholding, fast hand moves and not messing with camera settings enough.

[papkee]

nice film feel but... i have a felling that raw videos from 650d lacks "quality" i don't know any other words to describe this. i mean, it doesn't look like a raw video from mark iii. of course mak iii is a lot better camera but, i have a 1366x768 resolution laptop, so i can't see too much difference between 1080p and 720p and raw videos from mark iii is looks just  superior on my laptop's screen. i wonder why?

is it because lame postprocessing skills we (i) got?

It's most likely a combination of several factors:

1- The video was upscaled from 1472x612 to 1920x1080 so there's bound to be some loss in quality there.
2- It was shot run-and-gun with little time to adjust for lighting.
3- The light was just bad that day, going from cloudy to sunny and back every few minutes
4. Most of the 5D3 users spend plenty of time shooting and have access to better glass. This was shot in a span of about ten minutes while my family was visiting the tower and I had to kinda keep up with them.

So if I had actually planned shots, spent time on shooting, and/or had a better camera the results would've been substantially different. However for a sub-$1000 camera the fact that I'm able to get any RAW whatsoever is a very big deal itself. Soon I will be shooting a real short film that actually does the RAW on this camera justice.

[donjames150]

actually i don't say 650d raw vids are all crap, i only compare it to m3. people that own m3 have also other professional equipment, maybe that is why they look superb. so i think you are probably right, it is mostly about handholding, fast hand moves and not messing with camera settings enough.

M3 is $3300 new, 650D around $700 new (no lens).  Like BMW vs Honda Civic. But I drive a civic and am very happy with it. And I don't think the M3 video quality is 5 times better than the 650D. With all the tools ML has given us, we can shoot GREAT video, but much of it is knowledge and skill. Sure M3 users don't have to try as hard, but who has that kind of money? Of course most of your crop sensor lenses won't work on a full frame cam. I have one out of 3 that will. I think the 650D shoots plenty good video, even for professional use. But you have to master it, whereas you don't have to master a more expensive camera as much.

[rainman]

Just posting so I can subscribe and get back in the action. Still on pre-alpha and doing fine for the most part. Need to update and see if the few bugs I had noticed are still there.

Cheers!

[foorgol]

Im thinking of shooting video in a Club, we are holding Go Go Girl Auditions, should I film in raw or should I just film with the cannons native software?

Besides all photographic considerations, I would start with a pragmatic question: are you willing / able to shovel really huge amounts of data? One RAW frame 1472x626 is about 1.7 MB. If you shoot 24 or 25 fps, you end up with 2.5 GIGABYTE PER MINUTE. If you shoot e. g. 30 minutes footage (what I would consider not much given your setting), you have 75 GB sitting on your CF cards and (later) on your disk.

And at least during pink-dot-removal, this doubles for a short while: 150 GB.

And after you develop the RAWs into MJPG, you might have approx. 1/5 of the size, so about 15 GB...

And other figure: for me, rawtherapee and all four cores at 2.9 GHz ("Turbo Mode" ) need approx. 2 seconds / frame for applying some color correction, tone mapping and noise removal on a 1280x720 image. So my machine would need 50 minutes to convert one minute of 25 fps RAW material to JPG. Depending on your computer, your pace my vary, of course.

All I want to say is: RAW is nice but not really handy...

[kazeone]

Besides all photographic considerations, I would start with a pragmatic question: are you willing / able to shovel really huge amounts of data? One RAW frame 1472x626 is about 1.7 MB. If you shoot 24 or 25 fps, you end up with 2.5 GIGABYTE PER MINUTE. If you shoot e. g. 30 minutes footage (what I would consider not much given your setting), you have 75 GB sitting on your CF cards and (later) on your disk.

And at least during pink-dot-removal, this doubles for a short while: 150 GB.

And after you develop the RAWs into MJPG, you might have approx. 1/5 of the size, so about 15 GB...

And other figure: for me, rawtherapee and all four cores at 2.9 GHz ("Turbo Mode" ) need approx. 2 seconds / frame for applying some color correction, tone mapping and noise removal on a 1280x720 image. So my machine would need 50 minutes to convert one minute of 25 fps RAW material to JPG. Depending on your computer, your pace my vary, of course.

All I want to say is: RAW is nice but not really handy...

thank you, see that right there was some very useful information, okay I will shoot with the cannons settings, I have an ultra 64gb card and an extreme 32gb and an extreme 16gb card to use during the filming and shoots.

[blade]

can anyone give me the Drop box link of daily compile downloads

See first page?

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6320.0

[satriani]

Hey guys,
just for info, no changes no update of daily builds, like today

[mdfaisal]

thank you, see that right there was some very useful information, okay I will shoot with the cannons settings, I have an ultra 64gb card and an extreme 32gb and an extreme 16gb card to use during the filming and shoots.

Maybe you can play the cbr setting.  I have panasonic gh2 hacked and personally i love the contrast and color of my gh2 than any 5dmk2 video.  (Not raw video just plain canon).  And basically the hacked gh2 is to improve the bitrate video, the file becomes larger than standard. The file containt more information like color,  dynamic range,  and others.

Well i havent experiment the cbr setting in ml menu.  But i think this option is 2nd best option besides than ml raw video. And the last t
Option i want to record is using canon/standard video. The quality is not as good as my gh2 hacked. Although it only micro 4/3.

[dngrhm]

Option i want to record is using canon/standard video. The quality is not as good as my gh2 hacked. Although it only micro 4/3.

Maybe redirect raw video process and quality conversation here....
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5780.75

[neilp1]

Hi there

Great work. I wanted to second a question made in post 45, which i dont think was addressed yet (although i may have missed it). Is auto bulb ramping (sunrise, sunset etc) supported? i can find the manual settings under intervalometer, but cant find any auto settings.

Also, is there a 'correct exposure' indicator? like the +/- 3EV graph with the square slider on the native canon screen? cant seem to find one.

Thanks

[a1ex]

Automatic bulb ramping was replaced with ETTR + post deflicker.

For exposure indicator, you can use the ETTR hint from the histogram.

[mdfaisal]

Maybe redirect raw video process and quality conversation here....
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5780.75

sorry for my bad english.   
What I mean is the best quality for recording a video using 650D is:
1. Raw video. Biggest file. files handling is more complicated. (2,5 GB per minute)
2. Using Bit Rate in ML menu. Right now Im using CBR 1,2x.  ==> big file (1,3 GB for 3 minutes video)
I never used/experiment with VBR but I think this is very promising. having a good quality video with smaller file size
3. Standard canon video default

its only my oppinion... 

[neilp1]

Automatic bulb ramping was replaced with ETTR + post deflicker.

For exposure indicator, you can use the ETTR hint from the histogram.

from a different thread

Also try it instead of bulb ramping: enable intervalometer, auto ETTR and post deflicker. In theory, this should give 100% flicker-free timelapse on the entire exposure range (from 1/8000 to 30 seconds). I'll try it this weekend hopefully.

Both methods use robust statistics (that percentile thingie from the old bulb ramping), so I expect very good results.

That is awesome. Hopefully get a chance to play with that this weekend. Anyone have any example timelapses they have made using this feature? would be great to see.

cheers

[AgentJJ]

After installing ML:
If I disable the bootflag on the camera but leave the card as is (with its bootflag enabled and autoexec.bin), will the camera boot its normal firmware as normal?
I'm assuming the camera will just start bootloader @ 0xFFFF0000, load up its main firmware and jump in at 0x00800000 to run it while completely ignoring the card (regardless if the card is bootable).  Is this correct?

[neilp1]

Automatic bulb ramping was replaced with ETTR + post deflicker.

For exposure indicator, you can use the ETTR hint from the histogram.

I tried looking for this tonight, but cant find the ETTR menu in the expo tab. Has it been implemented in the 650D already, or is it due soon? im using the Satriani build from 07-02-2013.

Cheers