Magic Lantern Cracks the EOS 5D Mark IV
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
I took a look at the video posted in the ML link.
https://youtu.be/bSpXJadCfcQ
@~2min in
and they were talking about C-LOG for the mkIV via some download for the camera (not ML). Has anyone tried this because if it's good then it would mean you CAN do C-LOG on the MKIV without ML.
I'm no video guru so I might have got this all wrong.
https://youtu.be/bSpXJadCfcQ
@~2min in
and they were talking about C-LOG for the mkIV via some download for the camera (not ML). Has anyone tried this because if it's good then it would mean you CAN do C-LOG on the MKIV without ML.
I'm no video guru so I might have got this all wrong.
Upvote
0
3kramd5 said:
24-105mm kit lens and Sigma 70-200mm OS. I've already kinda sold them to a friend, but they haven't given me money yet.
Upvote
0
rfdesigner said:
If you're interested in picture styles, have a look at http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=16299.0, where they have manually recreated log styles and are working on understanding the format and how the camera handles it to see what the possibilities are.
Upvote
0
That is absolutely fantastic!!!!
A magic lantern version for the 5D4 would simply make it the absolute best photo/video hybrid on the market, thanks to ML, not Canon!
For video it would allow for Full Frame 2K RAW, 14BIT to internal CF cards with full AF using the touch panel. Never have there been such a movie making machine, ever!
And those who need 4K can simply switch to 1.6x/s35 crop mode.
Of course you get way more features that companies like Sony and Canon reserve for their highest end cinema cameras, like 0.1 frame rate tuning, advanced intervalometer, false colour, waveform monitor, most advanced accurate peaking on any camera I've seen for manual glass, plus HDR modes that take dual gain frame by frame exposure blending and even single exposure HDR with alternating gain lines of pixels!
A full fledged RAW cinema camera, a s35 4K 422 video camera, an HD h.264 documentary camera, a timelapse powerhorse, all with Canon's unparalleled colour science. Plus all that being a full 30mp high DR landscape camera, a 7fps 61AF sports horse, a wireless studio camera, a perfect high DR wedding camera, really everything the 5D4 can do when coupled with the transformative power of ML.
And 14bit HD Cinema DNG RAW Canon picture-style-coloured images vs Anemic h.264 8bit UHD Sony-coloured images, no thanks, I'll take the Canon,
especially when the Canon does 4K too in s35 crop mode but at higher quality 422 codec with better colours, AF, heat decipation, ruggedness, all at a price of one small A7 camera, which ends up as big when you attach your lenses, only a little more awkward to carry and shoot with.
Seriously ML making its way into the FF DPAF 7fps 4K 5D4 is a huge leap towards a complete camera and a huge boost for the 5D4 video appeal where it's only lacking now.
A magic lantern version for the 5D4 would simply make it the absolute best photo/video hybrid on the market, thanks to ML, not Canon!
For video it would allow for Full Frame 2K RAW, 14BIT to internal CF cards with full AF using the touch panel. Never have there been such a movie making machine, ever!
And those who need 4K can simply switch to 1.6x/s35 crop mode.
Of course you get way more features that companies like Sony and Canon reserve for their highest end cinema cameras, like 0.1 frame rate tuning, advanced intervalometer, false colour, waveform monitor, most advanced accurate peaking on any camera I've seen for manual glass, plus HDR modes that take dual gain frame by frame exposure blending and even single exposure HDR with alternating gain lines of pixels!
A full fledged RAW cinema camera, a s35 4K 422 video camera, an HD h.264 documentary camera, a timelapse powerhorse, all with Canon's unparalleled colour science. Plus all that being a full 30mp high DR landscape camera, a 7fps 61AF sports horse, a wireless studio camera, a perfect high DR wedding camera, really everything the 5D4 can do when coupled with the transformative power of ML.
And 14bit HD Cinema DNG RAW Canon picture-style-coloured images vs Anemic h.264 8bit UHD Sony-coloured images, no thanks, I'll take the Canon,
especially when the Canon does 4K too in s35 crop mode but at higher quality 422 codec with better colours, AF, heat decipation, ruggedness, all at a price of one small A7 camera, which ends up as big when you attach your lenses, only a little more awkward to carry and shoot with.
Seriously ML making its way into the FF DPAF 7fps 4K 5D4 is a huge leap towards a complete camera and a huge boost for the 5D4 video appeal where it's only lacking now.
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:
How?
Is ML breaking any laws (ML doesn't seem to think so - http://www.magiclantern.fm/about.html)?
If so, would canon have better luck going after them than adobe or Microsoft (etc, etc) has preventing people who code keygens and authorization hacks, apple going after iOS jailbreak hackers, etc?
I tend to agree they probably won't mess with 1-series cameras. Not because they fear the wrath of canon, but because they are a group of enthusiasts who likely can't justify buying that kinda of hardware to experiment with to serve a group of users unlikely to risk impacting the stability of their gear.
Upvote
0
Yes they'd make a pretty much killing machine if they went on the 1DX2, Which allows a higher data rate (CFast 2), could easily do 4K RAW 14bit internally with DPAF.
Sadly. Will never touch it.
Let's be optimistic. Very sharp HD 14bit raw at FF and 4K MJPEG 422 at S35 is an amazing combo too!
Sadly. Will never touch it.
Let's be optimistic. Very sharp HD 14bit raw at FF and 4K MJPEG 422 at S35 is an amazing combo too!
Upvote
0
3kramd5 said:
End user licenses, defensible or not Canon lawyers could destroy ML without a thought, just sending a few letters to the website owners could force them to either shut it down or defend themselves in court. Like I say Canon might well not win, or even have a chance of winning, but they have the bank to outspend any amateur. When the 1DC came out the rumour was that Canon made it clear that the C line firmware was 100% out of bounds. If you own a 1DC and need a firmware update you can't do it yourself, you have to send it in to Canon. This has all been discussed here before when the 1DX and 1DC came out, although there are hardware differences between the two. There used to be a very active ML guy here Marsu42, who had a lot of info on it all.
Given the umlockable capabilities contained inside the 1DX MkII, and the view I am sure Canon would take in that cracking it could cost them C line sales, I'd expect them to take a similarly dim view of a patch for the 1 series.
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:
In addition, if you check on the ML forums, the lead guys there state they will not touch the 1 series kit and they've been pretty consistently resolute about that since the MK III days.
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:
Sure they could threaten the host, but I mean actually ending ML development. ML isn't like a company, it's a bunch of largely independent developers. Canon causing their web host to shut them down wouldn't kill them any more than their web host going out of business would - they could just move hosts, or abandon a central website entirely.
I know they said they won't touch 1-series cameras, but fear of reprisal from canon sounds silly.
Upvote
0
Hi 3kramd5.
The how and why Canon might shut down ML for touching the 1 series is pretty irrelevant when this is taken from the page you link to, under the heading scope!
Quote
The EOS-1D and Cinema series of Canon cameras fall outside of ML project scope because of their prohibitive price and narrow user base. We are not aware of any firmware enhancements for these cameras, nor do we support such efforts.
Cheers, Graham.
The how and why Canon might shut down ML for touching the 1 series is pretty irrelevant when this is taken from the page you link to, under the heading scope!
Quote
The EOS-1D and Cinema series of Canon cameras fall outside of ML project scope because of their prohibitive price and narrow user base. We are not aware of any firmware enhancements for these cameras, nor do we support such efforts.
Cheers, Graham.
3kramd5 said:
Upvote
0
Valvebounce said:
I still have the curiosity factor, though. I don't think canon would be able to effectively stop them let alone destroy them. They could temporarily distrupt the website, which could easily be moved to a host who wouldn't fear empty lawsuits (such as a Russian server, for example), or the code could be bit torrented like so much actually illegally shared software.
[intellectual property]
[/intellectual property]
They don't develop for 1d because they choose not to; it's too small of a target. There are orders of magnitude more people using the lesser priced models, and that's where they aim their development.
Upvote
0
3kramd5 said:Valvebounce said:
I still have the curiosity factor, though. I don't think canon would be able to effectively stop them let alone destroy them. They could temporarily distrupt the website, which could easily be moved to a host who wouldn't fear empty lawsuits (such as a Russian server, for example), or the code could be bit torrented like so much actually illegally shared software.
[intellectual property]
[/intellectual property]
They don't develop for 1d because they choose not to; it's too small of a target. There are orders of magnitude more people using the lesser priced models, and that's where they aim their development.
Effectively of course they could. The combined wealth of all the ML developers is probably much less than 3 or 4 million dollars, Canon legal department could gobble every cent of that up in defending motions and legalese. They don't need to have a case, they don't need to face off against a company. They have myriads of corporate lawyers on retainers just waiting to be set loose, these guys (and girls) are trying to make a name for themselves and will find every cent you own (I have personal experience of being on the wrong side of a large corporate legal department, even though in my case the corp was 100% in the wrong and liable).
So on a strictly court case based legal argument, especially considering the very broad consumer laws and protections in Europe, you might be correct in that the ML team are not doing anything technically illegal. But that is moot when corporations can tie anybody smaller than them up in knots with the staff they have on retainer looking for a fight. That ML still exists is proof positive that Canon are granting tacit permission to do what they do, but no more.
As a side note, I have the EOS-M and run ML on it, I will be very interested to see if they go back to the EOS firmware for the M5 so ML can run on that too. So far the original M is the only M with ML compatibility.
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:3kramd5 said:Valvebounce said:
I still have the curiosity factor, though. I don't think canon would be able to effectively stop them let alone destroy them. They could temporarily distrupt the website, which could easily be moved to a host who wouldn't fear empty lawsuits (such as a Russian server, for example), or the code could be bit torrented like so much actually illegally shared software.
[intellectual property]
[/intellectual property]
They don't develop for 1d because they choose not to; it's too small of a target. There are orders of magnitude more people using the lesser priced models, and that's where they aim their development.
Effectively of course they could. The combined wealth of all the ML developers is probably much less than 3 or 4 million dollars, Canon legal department could gobble every cent of that up in defending motions and legalese. They don't need to have a case, they don't need to face off against a company. They have myriads of corporate lawyers on retainers just waiting to be set loose, these guys (and girls) are trying to make a name for themselves and will find every cent you own (I have personal experience of being on the wrong side of a large corporate legal department, even though in my case the corp was 100% in the wrong and liable).
So on a strictly court case based legal argument, especially considering the very broad consumer laws and protections in Europe, you might be correct in that the ML team are not doing anything technically illegal. But that is moot when corporations can tie anybody smaller than them up in knots with the staff they have on retainer looking for a fight. That ML still exists is proof positive that Canon are granting tacit permission to do what they do, but no more.
As a side note, I have the EOS-M and run ML on it, I will be very interested to see if they go back to the EOS firmware for the M5 so ML can run on that too. So far the original M is the only M with ML compatibility.
The combined corporate legal might of the major software companies worldwide has been impotent to prevent piracy (for every pirate bay shut down, two more open); the overwhelming pocketbooks of Apple has been unable to prevent jailbreak developers (which is similar in nature to magic lantern); the insurmountable pocketbooks and legal power of the world governments have largely been unable to prevent publication on a very public website (wikileaks) of sensitive state information.
I'll stipulate that canon *could* expend the resources to go track down people who have an easy option to move to dark web anonymity, and could initiate lawsuits bankrupting the individuals with paperwork. Could. You said they would. You think it's worth Canon's while?
Upvote
0
3kramd5 said:privatebydesign said:3kramd5 said:Valvebounce said:
I still have the curiosity factor, though. I don't think canon would be able to effectively stop them let alone destroy them. They could temporarily distrupt the website, which could easily be moved to a host who wouldn't fear empty lawsuits (such as a Russian server, for example), or the code could be bit torrented like so much actually illegally shared software.
[intellectual property]
[/intellectual property]
They don't develop for 1d because they choose not to; it's too small of a target. There are orders of magnitude more people using the lesser priced models, and that's where they aim their development.
Effectively of course they could. The combined wealth of all the ML developers is probably much less than 3 or 4 million dollars, Canon legal department could gobble every cent of that up in defending motions and legalese. They don't need to have a case, they don't need to face off against a company. They have myriads of corporate lawyers on retainers just waiting to be set loose, these guys (and girls) are trying to make a name for themselves and will find every cent you own (I have personal experience of being on the wrong side of a large corporate legal department, even though in my case the corp was 100% in the wrong and liable).
So on a strictly court case based legal argument, especially considering the very broad consumer laws and protections in Europe, you might be correct in that the ML team are not doing anything technically illegal. But that is moot when corporations can tie anybody smaller than them up in knots with the staff they have on retainer looking for a fight. That ML still exists is proof positive that Canon are granting tacit permission to do what they do, but no more.
As a side note, I have the EOS-M and run ML on it, I will be very interested to see if they go back to the EOS firmware for the M5 so ML can run on that too. So far the original M is the only M with ML compatibility.
The combined corporate legal might of the major software companies worldwide has been impotent to prevent piracy (for every pirate bay shut down, two more open); the overwhelming pocketbooks of Apple has been unable to prevent jailbreak developers (which is similar in nature to magic lantern); the insurmountable pocketbooks and legal power of the world governments have largely been unable to prevent publication on a very public website (wikileaks) of sensitive state information.
I'll stipulate that canon *could* expend the resources to go track down people who have an easy option to move to dark web anonymity, and could initiate lawsuits bankrupting the individuals with paperwork. Could. You said they would. You think it's worth Canon's while?
That is a completely different scenario, you have millions of uploaders and downloaders for torrents hosted by quick witted domain and domicile savvy owners that make millions off advertising. An impossible thing to put back in the bottle. ML probably have half a dozen core 'developers' who can't even afford a range of cameras to test and live in their mum's spare room (bless them).
The Apple analogy is also different enough to not count. Do you know how much the first jailbreak for any firmware revision is paid? Some have been over $100,000, there is value and prestige in cracking a device owned in the 100's of millions. How many Canon 1DX MkII's are there? How many 1DX MkII owners are interested in the additional ML capabilities? What is the 'prize' money value of cracking the 1 series firmware? Virtually nothing, and ML disavow trying and wouldn't post it even if somebody did it, why do you think that is?
Like I said, this has all been discussed at length with knowledgeable ML participants in the past. They specifically said Canon have let it be known the 1DC firmware is off the table, this seems to effectively include all 1 series cameras. This is not my opinion, it is me relaying comments from those involved first hand. I do not know the specific approach Canon would use to flex their displeasure, but I have zero doubt they could eliminate ML as we know it. Sure you could still get what they currently have via Demonoid or Piratebay, but personally I believe they could cause the few active developers enough trouble for them to no longer consider it a viable or worthwhile project.
Remember corporations have more than one option in instances like this, they could even nullify the development comparatively cheaply by 'sub contracting' the active developers.
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:
totally different, in that case it was adding 4k to a camera that did 'not' have it 1DC vs 1DX
with 1DX2 it already has 4k so ML would just be the same sort of fiddling as with any other body so it would be no different in this case
i'm not sure if even the 1DX2 cards are fast enough to handle 4k RAW, or maybe they are?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
- Contains 3 staff post(s)