5D Mark III with Continuous RAW Video Recording

[peederj]

and might be better than the C300 and definitely better than the BlackMagic Cinema Camera.

The BMCC still has more than a stop better DR (than the 5D3), and as of now, more resolution for continuous shooting. And while the c300 is a much easier camera to use, BMCC's best image blows the c300 out of the water.

Oh please not more BMCC Koolaid. The C300 image (especially recorded externally) is one of the cleanest 1080p images in the entire business with virtually no moire or false color artifacts and lovely color science. The BMCC fanboys (some of whom are or were apparently secretly in the employ of Blackmagic Design) keep repeating nonsense but repeating something ad nauseum does not make it true. IQ test: hand a better DP (who isn't taking money or gear from either company, and who didn't learn what they know from reading online forums) a C300 and a BMCC and see which one s/he hands to the intern to shoot BTS.

Yes even Andrew (who I think, to his credit, is too random a figure for anyone to consider buying off) has declared the BMCC dead with this new hack. It's just about as annoying to use as RAW on a BMCC and the 5d3's a much better sensor and camera. I think even the official HDMI out from the 5D3 recorded into a Ninja 2 is a superior image to BMCC RAW.

RAW is really not all that as so many people insist. If the only choice is between RAW and JPEG, ok, we all choose RAW. But ProRes 422 HQ 10 bit with a log gamma is every bit as good as RAW in practice, and vastly more practical. JPEG (and the video version MJPEG) is very lossy like H.264 is, and 4:2:0 AVCHD is very constricting in post. But the system we have working today with the 5D3, recording the entire pixel-binned sensor in 8 bit 422 with Cinestyle onto a Ninja 2 in ProRes HQ is quite a nice image. (Though not nearly as nice, lowlight or otherwise, as the C series image externally recorded.)

This RAW hack will give only an incremental improvement over that, in one of two ways. You will get 12 bit color but still it will be subsampled to 4:2:2 (not exactly RAW in my book, which I define as "a lossless record of all sensor information"). And your dynamic range will be stored in full fidelity 14 bit as opposed to being mapped to a gamma...gaining you about 1 stop in practice and a bit less propensity for banding than using the Cinestyle/Ninja approach. Worth constantly swapping costly CF cards and then having huge post hassles for? Maybe in an extreme HDR run-n-gun situation where it would be more hassle to use gels/lights/reflectors/butterflies to control DR.

The other thing against this hack is, if they are using the full sensor, they must be downsampling (binning?) to 1080p or similar resolutions. Which will give at least some of the 5D3 soft video look. Either that or they are cropping (and I understand at least in some settings they are) to the native resolution of the sensor. This cropping to 1:1 pixel is going to be terribly noisy and will require NR in post. You can also get this cropping/digital zoom trick with the current HDMI out, by zooming in 5x or 10x in focus assist and recording the zoomed image (which comes out 4:3 but you can crop in post) and it is noisy too.

Overall I think this is a good development only because it silences a lot of idiocy coming from the Blackmagic fanboys. I don't know how their paid operatives will spin this, other than "We don't force you to use hacks! We're on your side!" Well the entire Blackmagic camera line is a series of hacks so that doesn't change much. If ML is able to make this really pleasant in practice (perhaps with a hi-def codec...I will have to see how MJPEG looks) then this will replace the HDMI out/Ninja option for people not needing long shooting times. But I don't see any scenario where this hacked 5D3 is a superior image to a C300 or C100 + Ninja 2 under any circumstances. That's silly talk.

 

[cayenne]

Looking forward to this once there are faster and more affordable cards in the next year or so. Canon more than likely had zero involvement with this, it was discovered on accident while creating a histogram for RAW photography. Seeing this live DNG feed through the HDMI is not possible, this has been discussed extensively on the Magic Lantern forums. Heat is also not so much of an issue because the sensor is already pushing out the RAW feed.

BMCC will still be the way to go for RAW video due to it being more reliable and the easier workflow with compressed RAW, but this is a gamechanger for people on a budget or hobbyists.

I have read about the DNG feed not being able to be fed through the HDMI, but, I wonder if this 'raw' feed discovered here could be sent through the cable?

After all, it is just data...it would be the bee's knees (did I just really say that?) if they could push this data out of the HDMI, or maybe even the USB connection to the camera, to an external recorder.

At that point, all bets are off on this I'd say....

C

 

[Chewy734]

I wonder why the Canon legal team would look the other way on this hack since it's on the 5D3, but throw down the hammer whenever hacking the 1D X is mentioned?

 

[Midphase]

Definitely a potential game changer for some narrative work, and people doing really short clips. But anyone doing event work (weddings, etc) wouldnt really be able to use it. I remember how mad people were at the 4GB limit (which meant 12mins or so); no way they'd settle for 700 frames.

But, since I'm one of the people who records short clips, I'd love this capability in my 60D, even if its for 10-15s

Just to clarify, it would appear that the amount of footage that the 5D3 is able to record is limited only by the card size. We're not talking about 700 frames, we're talking 24 minutes on a 64gig card (apparently with no overheating issues).

Stay tuned!

 

[East Wind Photography]

Will be interesting to see if they can get RAW video out on the HDMI port as well. If so then that opens the world up to using a blade...forget the CF cards.

Regarding heat, they did not say that heat wasnt an issue. They said that they did not know if heat would be an issue or not. Canon does build in some safeguards to protect the camera from self destructing into a ball of flames. The issue here is now long will the 5D3 record RAW video before the camera shuts down. That's where the difference lies with the 1DC and CXXX series. They can pretty much shoot video all day without a heat problem.... STILL, the 5D3 may very well be an option when a budget is of concern and the videographer doesn't mind spending some down time to cool off.

Yes it's still early in the development and we may find out that this mode causes permanent damage to internal components due to inadequate heat dissipation....but if you are running ML then you already understand that could happen at any time for any reason.

Definitely a potential game changer for some narrative work, and people doing really short clips. But anyone doing event work (weddings, etc) wouldnt really be able to use it. I remember how mad people were at the 4GB limit (which meant 12mins or so); no way they'd settle for 700 frames.

But, since I'm one of the people who records short clips, I'd love this capability in my 60D, even if its for 10-15s

The thing to remember is this is still in early stages.

They are already working on continuous shooting.
The other issue there is the size and costs of the 1000x and 1066x cards.
I wonder if or when they get the HDMI out working as well, you could hook it up to an Ninja 2 and basically have no need for space or card issues?

The 1Dc is basicaly a 1Dx with other Software and a bigger heat sink.
I'm not sure if it is the same problem here but I'd be carefull not to damage my 5D due to more heat from the raw output.

They are claiming that heat is not really an issue, in reality the 1DX "should" be hackable and not have the heat issues too.
The thing stopping them there is Canons legal team.

I wonder how long it will take before Canon come down on ML for releasing this.
It could put a large dent in C100/C300 sales.

 

[Midphase]

I wonder why the Canon legal team would look the other way on this hack since it's on the 5D3, but throw down the hammer whenever hacking the 1D X is mentioned?

I think it's because the two cameras are purchased by different types of people. I own a 5D3, but would not dream of buying a 1D X or 1D C...if I needed to shoot in 4K, I'd rather rent (probably a RED Scarlet or the upcoming BMCC Pro).

Canon understands that a hacked 5D3 will see a surge in sales due to Magic Lantern, but they also understand that a hack in the 1D X to match the 1D C specs would result in a drop in purchases for that camera.

Say what you will about Canon, but they're not idiots.

 

[Midphase]

Will be interesting to see if they can get RAW video out on the HDMI port as well. If so then that opens the world up to using a blade...forget the CF cards.

My understanding is that HDMI encodes data in such a way that it is not designed to transmit RAW. It does support 422 uncompressed, but as we have seen the results are not particularly stellar. I think there is a good deal of confusion as to the difference between RAW and Uncompressed.

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

Oh please not more BMCC Koolaid. The C300 image (especially recorded externally) is one of the cleanest 1080p images in the entire business with virtually no moire or false color artifacts and lovely color science. The BMCC fanboys (some of whom are or were apparently secretly in the employ of Blackmagic Design) keep repeating nonsense but repeating something ad nauseum does not make it true. IQ test: hand a better DP (who isn't taking money or gear from either company, and who didn't learn what they know from reading online forums) a C300 and a BMCC and see which one s/he hands to the intern to shoot BTS.

Look at the videos online, the evidence is overwhelming, the very best of the c300 is outclassed by the very best from the BMCC. And the DR advantage is a fact.

Yes even Andrew (who I think, to his credit, is too random a figure for anyone to consider buying off) has declared the BMCC dead with this new hack. It's just about as annoying to use as RAW on a BMCC and the 5d3's a much better sensor and camera. I think even the official HDMI out from the 5D3 recorded into a Ninja 2 is a superior image to BMCC RAW.

Now you are just talkin crazy. The 5D3 does not have a better sensor, it has a bigger sensor. The BMCC more than a stop advantage in DR, and a higher native ISO.

Sure there are other codecs that are almost as good as raw, but you don't get those on any Canon Camera other than the c500.

 

[Chewy734]

I think it's because the two cameras are purchased by different types of people. I own a 5D3, but would not dream of buying a 1D X or 1D C...if I needed to shoot in 4K, I'd rather rent (probably a RED Scarlet or the upcoming BMCC Pro).

Canon understands that a hacked 5D3 will see a surge in sales due to Magic Lantern, but they also understand that a hack in the 1D X to match the 1D C specs would result in a drop in purchases for that camera.

Say what you will about Canon, but they're not idiots.

So, you're telling me that a hacked 5D3 won't cannibalize sales of their higher-end cameras and video recorders? I find that hard to believe. I also find it hard to believe that a large number of 1D C cameras are being sold, as opposed to the 1D X. People who need the 1D C to shoot video all day long will continue to buy the 1D C. People who want to occasionally shoot video on the 1D X should be allowed to use the potentially more unstable hack if they want.

Is it true that if there are any rules ML would be breaking by modifying the 1D X, it would be the same as when modifying the 5D3?

 

[peederj]

I wonder why the Canon legal team would look the other way on this hack since it's on the 5D3, but throw down the hammer whenever hacking the 1D X is mentioned?

Well first of all the 1DC is just Canon's hack on the 1DX. I don't buy that there is some required heatsink, that's window dressing. They don't want 3rd parties competing for sales of hacks at that price point ($5,000+).

The second thing is the 1DX has a proper downsampler for its video rather than the 5D3's pixel binning. Which is necessary given the sensor dimensions (unless they wanted to go back to the hideous 1st gen line skipping). And so a hacked 1DX recording less lossy compression (with more actually distinguishable pixels, and more luma/color levels, in more situations) would give the C series a run for its money while this 5D3 hack is just going to please the ambitious kids that think they're getting a bargain. For those kids $3000 for a 5D3 is a lot of money and about all Canon can expect out of them. But people who will buy a 1DX are professionals that will prefer going C-series and Canon wants to usher them that way (for their own benefit I may add) rather than have them confused by kids and their hacks.

 

[cayenne]

Is it true that if there are any rules ML would be breaking by modifying the 1D X, it would be the same as when modifying the 5D3?

Of course, IANAL....but if ML is doing a clean room reverse engineer of the hardware, and are not enabling the un DRM'd use of copyright material, and if they are to a lessor note, not breaking any encrypted software owned by Canon on the hardware, they they should be perfectly within their legal rights to 'hack' the hardware and run whatever software they want on it.

You buy a car...and you can do pretty much what you wish with it, and the manufacturer can't touch you for those actions. Largely, Canon can't stop you from doing what you wish with the hardware once you buy it.
If you want to install and run completely new software on it, your perfectly legal to do so.

There is no difference I can see, between doing it on a 5D3 or a 1Dxyz.

However, as I posted before, often it doesn't matter if the company has legal standing or not, they can bring suit, and it is a contest on who has the deepest pockets for $$ that wins in the end, by dragging on the case endlessly.

But we need to remember, that at least to date....when you BUY hardware, nothing prevents you from opening it up, playing with it as you see fit or enhancing or destroying it.

It is YOURS.

Disseminating information or means for others, as long as it doesn't involve enabling copyright infringement, should be perfectly legal too.

 

[Chewy734]

Well first of all the 1DC is just Canon's hack on the 1DX. I don't buy that there is some required heatsink, that's window dressing. They don't want 3rd parties competing for sales of hacks at that price point ($5,000+).

The second thing is the 1DX has a proper downsampler for its video rather than the 5D3's pixel binning. Which is necessary given the sensor dimensions (unless they wanted to go back to the hideous 1st gen line skipping). And so a hacked 1DX recording less lossy compression (with more actually distinguishable pixels, and more luma/color levels, in more situations) would give the C series a run for its money while this 5D3 hack is just going to please the ambitious kids that think they're getting a bargain. For those kids $3000 for a 5D3 is a lot of money and about all Canon can expect out of them. But people who will buy a 1DX are professionals that will prefer going C-series and Canon wants to usher them that way (for their own benefit I may add) rather than have them confused by kids and their hacks.

Perhaps you are right, but this would be similar to let's say...

BMW suing tuning companies for selling a $500 tune for their turbo-charged 335i cars, giving it a potential performance boost over their top-of-the-line M3 (which costs like $20k more). Does it cannabalize the sales for the M3? Sure. But people still buy the M3, and people still tune their 335i cars.

But, perhaps that analogy isn't equivalent, since the M3 also has suspension upgrades, etc. But, wouldn't that also be similar to the speculated heat sink upgrades on the 1D C, for example?

 

[Chewy734]

However, as I posted before, often it doesn't matter if the company has legal standing or not, they can bring suit, and it is a contest on who has the deepest pockets for $$ that wins in the end, by dragging on the case endlessly.

Ahh, yes... you are right about that. I didn't mean to go off on a tangent here, I was just curious if anyone knew why Canon was hell bent on protecting their 1D line as opposed to their more popular 5D line, that's all.

That being said, this is really cool news, and I hope that Canon doesn't curtail this project.

 

[East Wind Photography]

So let's be clear... ML does not modify the camera firmware with perhaps the exception that it needs to be able to boot from the card. ML software rides on top of the firmware so it's considered and Add-on.

I think it's because the two cameras are purchased by different types of people. I own a 5D3, but would not dream of buying a 1D X or 1D C...if I needed to shoot in 4K, I'd rather rent (probably a RED Scarlet or the upcoming BMCC Pro).

Canon understands that a hacked 5D3 will see a surge in sales due to Magic Lantern, but they also understand that a hack in the 1D X to match the 1D C specs would result in a drop in purchases for that camera.

Say what you will about Canon, but they're not idiots.

So, you're telling me that a hacked 5D3 won't cannibalize sales of their higher-end cameras and video recorders? I find that hard to believe. I also find it hard to believe that a large number of 1D C cameras are being sold, as opposed to the 1D X. People who need the 1D C to shoot video all day long will continue to buy the 1D C. People who want to occasionally shoot video on the 1D X should be allowed to use the potentially more unstable hack if they want.

Is it true that if there are any rules ML would be breaking by modifying the 1D X, it would be the same as when modifying the 5D3?

 

[cayenne]

So let's be clear... ML does not modify the camera firmware with perhaps the exception that it needs to be able to boot from the card. ML software rides on top of the firmware so it's considered and Add-on.

I think it's because the two cameras are purchased by different types of people. I own a 5D3, but would not dream of buying a 1D X or 1D C...if I needed to shoot in 4K, I'd rather rent (probably a RED Scarlet or the upcoming BMCC Pro).

Canon understands that a hacked 5D3 will see a surge in sales due to Magic Lantern, but they also understand that a hack in the 1D X to match the 1D C specs would result in a drop in purchases for that camera.

Say what you will about Canon, but they're not idiots.

So, you're telling me that a hacked 5D3 won't cannibalize sales of their higher-end cameras and video recorders? I find that hard to believe. I also find it hard to believe that a large number of 1D C cameras are being sold, as opposed to the 1D X. People who need the 1D C to shoot video all day long will continue to buy the 1D C. People who want to occasionally shoot video on the 1D X should be allowed to use the potentially more unstable hack if they want.

Is it true that if there are any rules ML would be breaking by modifying the 1D X, it would be the same as when modifying the 5D3?

Sure and good point!!

However, if ML changed and became a firmware replacement....there is nothing illegal about that at all.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Holy crap! Beyond speechless!
AWESOME NEWS!!!!




(How the holy heck is that hackers with no documentation or even access to Digic can pull this off in like 3 weeks and Canon has had this locked away for over a year??

Man if they released the camera like this this thing would've still be permanently out of stock to this very day and made 5D2 sales look like a joke! There wasn't even remote competition for this when the 5D3 had first been released! Black Magic may not even have gotten off the ground.)

 

[Marsu42]

I am always hesitant to post new ML features from the dev stage here because general users aren't advised to use the stuff yet - but since the news ended up here anyway:

Another great feature of this discovery is the raw histogram which will let you actually see if anything is under- or overexposed in raw and not just in jpeg like with the vanilla Canon fw.

 

[RGF]

For those of us who still shoot stills, wonder if they can do anything to improve the camera. Like bracketing focus for focus stacking, ...

 

[Midphase]

So, you're telling me that a hacked 5D3 won't cannibalize sales of their higher-end cameras and video recorders? I find that hard to believe.

What I'm saying is that they are different cameras for different types of users. I think that maybe we could say that the $5k price is the demarcation line (some would argue that it's $3k). Pretty much every indie filmmaker that I know owns a 5D2, a 7D or one of the cheaper models. Practically nobody that I know owns a 1D C, a C300, or a RED (unless they're a rental house). I think Canon understands this market demarcation, and they know that a hacked 5D3 will not cannibalize sales of their higher end cameras...we were never going to buy them anyway. They also know that higher end cinematographers don't really want hacked gear, people who shoot commercials or medium to high budget films use Alexas, or RED's or the 1D C, and those guys will not be "tempted" by a hack...no way.

As I said, I think Canon is many things (not all positive), but I don't think they're idiots.

 

[Barrfly]

14-bit RAW on Canon 5D Mark III vs. factory default - Night Image Quality & Dynamic Range on Vimeo