Subforums
-
The EOSHD YouTube Channel (24,321 visits to this link)
17,334 topics in this forum
-
- 1.3k replies
- 534.8k views
-
- 5.8k replies
- 2m views
-
- 706 replies
- 343.3k views
-
- 9.1k replies
- 2.9m views
-
- 0 replies
- 2.7k views
-
- 1.8k replies
- 818.2k views
-
- 21 replies
- 3.7k views
-
- 10 replies
- 352 views
-
- 78 replies
- 5.9k views
-
- 5 replies
- 343 views
-
- 30 replies
- 10.7k views
-
- 0 replies
- 87 views
-
- 22 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 34 replies
- 53.7k views
-
- 35 replies
- 4.7k views
-
- 14 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 32 replies
- 2k views
-
- 1 reply
- 271 views
-
- 19 replies
- 3.9k views
-
- 10 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 14 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 0 replies
- 326 views
-
- 17 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 30 replies
- 5k views
-
- 1 reply
- 836 views
-
- 548 replies
- 250.8k views
-
- 322 replies
- 165.8k views
-
- 521 replies
- 182.7k views
-
- 1 reply
- 544 views
-
- 6 replies
- 888 views
-
- 29 replies
- 52.2k views
-
- 57 replies
- 11.3k views
-
- 7 replies
- 984 views
-
- 22 replies
- 4.3k views
-
- 74 replies
- 15.7k views
-
- 5 replies
- 798 views
-
- 11 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 5 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.5k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.3k
-
Total Posts352.7k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
By Andrew - EOSHD · Posted
I've resurrected the GH1, GH2, GF1 hack project today and aim to port ptools to Mac OS. I also want find out if apps and code can run off the SD card like it does on Canon's cameras with autoexec.bin If so, we can go far beyond just patching firmware parameters for bitrates! Also looking into GX80. I can enter service mode on my GX80 and G9 II but they are much, much more locked down than the GH1 was. After the GH2, Panasonic went ape shit and tightened everything up - much more so than Canon and Sony did. It might also be possible to flash custom firmware, that enables an app store type thing - running code off the card with modded firmware. This is riskier as flashing buggy firmware still in development to test it in-camera does risk a bricking moment. That's why it might be necessary to make an emulator first or at least use an ARM emulator to test stuff on the Mac before flashing to the camera. It helps to understand the risks clearly, for all camera hack projects. Here they are from least to most severe: [NO ALARM BELLS. Least risky] - The Canon stuff is lowest risk, the official firmware has an official Canon feature that runs code off the card in-camera, the only firmware adjustment is a parameter to set it to do so (its like setting a Lumix into service mode with a key combo, but writes a flag via the firmware updater). This is a lovely way of doing custom camera features - but labours under the misconception of the uneducated users who think that it's illegally hacked custom firmware - in fact it's more like an app store for a phone. [JUST A FIRE DRILL. A bit more scary but rare] - The risk of crashing a camera mid-EPROM write, cameras might update or save menu settings to the EPROM and if you're extremely unlucky and your app running in the background for some reason crashes the camera during that brief moment you could end up with corrupted ROM data. This is what Magic Lantern warn about but its never happened to me in all of 15+ years, seems very rare for others too. Also add to this category - probing shit via USB. [QUIET ALARM BELLS should be ringing especially if using a lower-tier LLM for the modded firmware or code] - The in-between solution - small changes to the firmware machine code, a recompiled binary flashed to the camera to enable some path in like a service mode or auto-execution of code from the card. That does require a customised firmware flashed to the camera and so needs real care not to fuck it up. [BIG FUCKING LOUD BELLS. Not something I would try on an expensive camera, but I would experiment this way on a beaten up old one] - The all-out custom firmware route - all the mods and apps are flashed to the firmware so they run from the ROM, it's very risky as anything buggy that might interfere with the booting of the camera might lock you out-forever and need a re-flash of the firmware ROM at an official service centre, or even a mainboard replacement. -
By Andrew - EOSHD · Posted
There's a difference between a hack and a piece of software and I don't agree that there's a blanket legal problem with selling third party hacks anyway. There's a lot of naivety and bedwetting when it comes to the legal side. If you get a DMCA from Canon, so be it. Nobody in their right mind is going to come fishing in my bank account with a $5000 per hour lawyer just to get my last £1.50 which I spent at Greggs. The Nintendo Switch emulators use a private key that's property of Nintendo to break encryption, which does make them illegal. Booting software via existing camera system features is not the same at all. If you stay away from the illegal stuff like bypassing firmware signing, distributing private encryption keys, it helps! -
By John Matthews · Posted
Does this still look like a "GoPro"? -
By fuzzynormal · Posted
Man, welcome to being an old man, my man. Come on in. Water's fine. You just float away. -
Yes, indeed, there was a Sanity X. And here it is: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Ia_XapId-Ag-8tH-2L8jLoWnIcuS4XNb?usp=sharing The only difference between Sanity X and Sanity 5.1 pertains to the 24P 1080 settings. In Sanity X the high setting has a bitrate of 100M and the low setting is 38M (which is the same bitrate as the high setting of Sanity 5.1). So, you actually have Sanity 5.1 available inside of Sanity X. All the other frame sizes and frame rates (including interlace) are the same as Sanity 5.1. The only real change is the addition of the 100M bitrate for 24P 1080. Is it worth it? I'll let you be the judge!
-
