benjolino

though i´m a 5d mark3 owner, i absolutely agree with you. for the most paid things the 5d mark raw is not a solution. even if the hack gets stable. the data rates alone make it impossible to use for documentary shooting for example. i´m really happy that this hack exists and i can play around with it but let´s see if it becomes a good way to work. i doubt it. 
i also think you all should not blame canon so much. it´s a normal strategy for companies to offer different product for different prices and costumers. for example i know somebody how works for bmw in the development. the 316, the 318 and the 320i have the same engine, they just crippled the lower end engines and sell them cheaper. it´s more efficient to produce a higher number of engines and make them less strong for lower end cars, the to produce 3 different engines. all bmw would be much more expensive if they would produce 3 different engines. even if canon  would would use the same sensor in the 600d and the mk3, i would still buy the mark3, because i want a magnesium body and not a plastic camera.
for example the canon ef 50mm 1,4 and the ef 50mm 1,2 are both very good lenses. but the 50mm 1,2 has a much better build quality and a bit better image and it costs 5 times the price. but if you work every day with this lens and earn money with it, then you maybe wanna buy it. i don´t start thinking is this really 5 times better then the 50 1,4? or is canon a greedy bitch because of this? i just think about if the things, this pro lens offers, is worth the more money for me personally. it´s easy like that.
i mean who would think the 5d mark raw is the right tool for one when he works every day with it? and i don´t mean making test shots and playing around. this is important to do and i´m really thankful that it´s been done, but if i can get a nearly the same image quality then the mark raw with a proress codec, and a good handling of the camera and the post workflow. this doesn´t sound too bad for me.
it´s really funny that everybody buys canon and complains about them at the same time... lol

though i´m a 5d mark3 owner, i absolutely agree with you. for the most paid things the 5d mark raw is not a solution. even if the hack gets stable. the data rates alone make it impossible to use for documentary shooting for example. i´m really happy that this hack exists and i can play around with it but let´s see if it becomes a good way to work. i doubt it. 
i also think you all should not blame canon so much. it´s a normal strategy for companies to offer different product for different prices and costumers. for example i know somebody how works for bmw in the development. the 316, the 318 and the 320i have the same engine, they just crippled the lower end engines and sell them cheaper. it´s more efficient to produce a higher number of engines and make them less strong for lower end cars, the to produce 3 different engines. all bmw would be much more expensive if they would produce 3 different engines. even if canon  would would use the same sensor in the 600d and the mk3, i would still buy the mark3, because i want a magnesium body and not a plastic camera.
for example the canon ef 50mm 1,4 and the ef 50mm 1,2 are both very good lenses. but the 50mm 1,2 has a much better build quality and a bit better image and it costs 5 times the price. but if you work every day with this lens and earn money with it, then you maybe wanna buy it. i don´t start thinking is this really 5 times better then the 50 1,4? or is canon a greedy bitch because of this? i just think about if the things, this pro lens offers, is worth the more money for me personally. it´s easy like that.
i mean who would think the 5d mark raw is the right tool for one when he works every day with it? and i don´t mean making test shots and playing around. this is important to do and i´m really thankful that it´s been done, but if i can get a nearly the same image quality then the mark raw with a proress codec, and a good handling of the camera and the post workflow. this doesn´t sound too bad for me.
it´s really funny that everybody buys canon and complains about them at the same time... lol

though i´m a 5d mark3 owner, i absolutely agree with you. for the most paid things the 5d mark raw is not a solution. even if the hack gets stable. the data rates alone make it impossible to use for documentary shooting for example. i´m really happy that this hack exists and i can play around with it but let´s see if it becomes a good way to work. i doubt it. 
i also think you all should not blame canon so much. it´s a normal strategy for companies to offer different product for different prices and costumers. for example i know somebody how works for bmw in the development. the 316, the 318 and the 320i have the same engine, they just crippled the lower end engines and sell them cheaper. it´s more efficient to produce a higher number of engines and make them less strong for lower end cars, the to produce 3 different engines. all bmw would be much more expensive if they would produce 3 different engines. even if canon  would would use the same sensor in the 600d and the mk3, i would still buy the mark3, because i want a magnesium body and not a plastic camera.
for example the canon ef 50mm 1,4 and the ef 50mm 1,2 are both very good lenses. but the 50mm 1,2 has a much better build quality and a bit better image and it costs 5 times the price. but if you work every day with this lens and earn money with it, then you maybe wanna buy it. i don´t start thinking is this really 5 times better then the 50 1,4? or is canon a greedy bitch because of this? i just think about if the things, this pro lens offers, is worth the more money for me personally. it´s easy like that.
i mean who would think the 5d mark raw is the right tool for one when he works every day with it? and i don´t mean making test shots and playing around. this is important to do and i´m really thankful that it´s been done, but if i can get a nearly the same image quality then the mark raw with a proress codec, and a good handling of the camera and the post workflow. this doesn´t sound too bad for me.
it´s really funny that everybody buys canon and complains about them at the same time... lol

though i´m a 5d mark3 owner, i absolutely agree with you. for the most paid things the 5d mark raw is not a solution. even if the hack gets stable. the data rates alone make it impossible to use for documentary shooting for example. i´m really happy that this hack exists and i can play around with it but let´s see if it becomes a good way to work. i doubt it. 
i also think you all should not blame canon so much. it´s a normal strategy for companies to offer different product for different prices and costumers. for example i know somebody how works for bmw in the development. the 316, the 318 and the 320i have the same engine, they just crippled the lower end engines and sell them cheaper. it´s more efficient to produce a higher number of engines and make them less strong for lower end cars, the to produce 3 different engines. all bmw would be much more expensive if they would produce 3 different engines. even if canon  would would use the same sensor in the 600d and the mk3, i would still buy the mark3, because i want a magnesium body and not a plastic camera.
for example the canon ef 50mm 1,4 and the ef 50mm 1,2 are both very good lenses. but the 50mm 1,2 has a much better build quality and a bit better image and it costs 5 times the price. but if you work every day with this lens and earn money with it, then you maybe wanna buy it. i don´t start thinking is this really 5 times better then the 50 1,4? or is canon a greedy bitch because of this? i just think about if the things, this pro lens offers, is worth the more money for me personally. it´s easy like that.
i mean who would think the 5d mark raw is the right tool for one when he works every day with it? and i don´t mean making test shots and playing around. this is important to do and i´m really thankful that it´s been done, but if i can get a nearly the same image quality then the mark raw with a proress codec, and a good handling of the camera and the post workflow. this doesn´t sound too bad for me.
it´s really funny that everybody buys canon and complains about them at the same time... lol

i don´t really like the anamorphic lens. there is too much weakness for me, especial in the corners. the quality of the 5d mk raw is amazing but i prefer modern lenses which perform really god. i don´t need this nostalgic retro trash look...

thanks for the comment. i´m soooo sorry not to have the same opinion than you........

Andrew wrote..
"Colour cast
I notice that noise in the shadows and blacks in general have a magenta cast if you have a warmer white balance and the magenta tint slider to the right but if you put the magenta tint slider back towards green, the warmer yellows go way too green for my liking. This could be a light issue rather than a camera one. Energy saving practical lights do give a green cast. The solution in post was to avoid anything higher than 3200k white balance – this was more keeping with the LED practical light I had for fill lighting in the scene any way."
 
 
 
 
 
Usually when developing RAW files, the magenta tint at the dark areas is due to RAW Black Point set at a lower than the correct value. Inverselly if the BP is higher than the correct we take green tint.
This behavior is because of the WB multiplicators which are almost always bigger for the R and B channels than the Green. So the result is excessive R and B components which combined gives magenta tint plus less contrast and the combination is magenta fog ...
 
Canon 5DIII's RAW Black Point (photo mode) is at 2047-2048. Same was the BP with the first gen DNGs by ML, those was not cropped and included the side "optically black" area where one can measure the Black Point value with RawDigger (and I did so ..it was 2047).
But ML tags the BP (DNG metadata) a bit lower at 2038. I believe this is an error by ML team and the BP should be 2047-2048.
There is a possibility that they chose lower BP to have the beneffit of lower noise (negative and positive deviations counteract) and better gradation at the darks ... and correct the resulting inbalance and lowish contrast with a LUT at a later stage (something that looks to me a very difficult task).
 
At the moment a user can change this tag in DNG exif (with exitool) or develop the raw with Rawtherapee and set there (in RT) the Raw.Black levels at +10.0.
 
BlackMagick went the other way .. set the BP higher (to clip what is mostly noise) .. thats why there was the problem with greenish tint developing the early DNG samples.