gloopglop

Indeed, but as Andrew said, like with the D800, they can tell you all they want that it's clean 4:2:2 10 bits from the HDMI, but if it's just 4:2:0 8bits, "rewrapped" in a 4:2:2 10 bits signal, it doesn't matter, it's just the same "crappy" signal in a beautiful box ;) but they get to tell you that it's great, cause they're not actually lying...

I know it is not raw, but have you looked into a 2nd hand Sony F3? I've seen some amazingly cheap prices, kits for $5k or so.... couple it with a BM recorder and you are shooting 10bit S-log at 13 stops DR with alot of nice video features and quality audio.

This video is a commercial for the 5D3, you'll notice the advert link right below the video.  It basically shows someone who doesn't know (or intentionally) f***s-up the BMCC in post. 
 
 
This is comparing the BMCC to 5D3 h264, not 5D3 raw.  H264 makes the 5D3 look soooo much worse than it actually is. 

Check de updated chart: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgQ2MOkAZTFHdFFIcFp1d0R5TzVPTVJXOEVyUndteGc#gid=5
Continuous 1856x1004 is possible. Works for me on a Komputerbay 64GB 1000x card.
 

Some more observations.  I've been trying to make the EOS-M a nice portable RAW camera (720p), as an alternative to the BMPCC.  One of the obstacles are the focus dots that appear in the raw frames.  They generally turn into pink dots after debayering (because most are in the red pixels).  Someone created "PInk Dot Remover" in Java which is certainly a very slick and effective piece of software  However, it doesn't get all the dots (interpolate around the "hot" focus pixels).  The first dev is no longer around, nor the second guy who took it up.  I also wanted something in Windows, just to make my workflow easier.
 
Anyway, I use a C# project open-sourced by g3gg0 (one of the lead rock stars) to get me going.  It has a function to read pixels from the RAW files, but not to write them.  I ask him if he can do it and he says he's too busy.  No problem.  I figure it can't be too hard.  Well, it takes me hours upon hours, and I can't do it..  I finally go back to him and another developer and ask them what the format of the RAW data is.  They don't seem to know!  Seems incredible to me.  How can they not know the basic format of pixel data in RAW files?  I believe the answer is that they took routines from elsewhere and modified them a bit without knowing exactly what these routines do (lots of bit-wise arithmetic).  They were able to get each pixel's value into a ushort and that was it.  As smart as they are, they are overloaded by technical stuff, which I believe even they can't get completely on top of.
 
I finally figured out that the data was encoded as a 14-bit stream where each other byte was swapped with the one before it.  If I had known the original format I could have figured this out easier.  The point of this story is that as much as the devs seem to know, the stuff is monstrously difficult on so many levels.  Knowing what I know now, I'm amazed ML continues to move forward.  However, if one or two of those key guys quite that would be the end, or severely slow down the development of ML.  I believe this is not unlikely.  Because...
 
Video is a narrative medium.  Yes, it's fun to take some RAW video of your garden, kid, tugboats, etc.  After that, no one wants to watch a video that doesn't tell some kind of story.  Story requires scripting, editing, actors, lighting, audio, etc., etc.  I don't know if this is heresy, but I can't see why someone would use a 5d3 to shoot a film when they could use a BMCC or any of the other dedicated cameras for that purpose.  Now that the BMPCC seems to get in stock I"m thinking, I have $850 in a used 50D (CF card+10-20mm) to shoot RAW, what am I thinking!  I've already watched 2 people on the ML forum sell their 50ds, or try to.  I may be next.  The other thing about narrative video, VERY FEW people actually do it.  That is a VERY SMALL market.  And many of them, like Andy, don't have the time or need for any kind of RAW-type workflow.
 
Yes, I believe the 5D3 is a better value than the BM cameras, but only if you're going to spend the time/effort to get the most out of the RAW feed.  If you just need basic improved dynamic range, the BM cameras make so many things easier.  And they will continue to improve.
 
Because the devs won't try to make ML stable on these cameras, or even allow the general public discussion of a to-do list, I can't see it growing beyond a "cool" hack.  Maybe I'm too close to it.  Familiarity is starting to breed contempt ;)

I agree. The big ticket will be if they follow suit from the first one by putting 2 updated Digic V +'s in it.... Only for the sake of ML however, lol.

I think the future of ML will be strongly influenced by the next 7D2 release.
 
If Canon does not cripple it, we might get a true S35 RAW camera for $2000, it could seriously become THE most popular indie cinema camera and ML will thrive on that wave. 
 
The announcement of 7D2 is scheduled for March 2014.
 
Time will tell...

Would I shoot a commercial project with Magic Lantern Raw on the 5D. Yes, I would, but I would have multiple 1000x CF cards that I know worked. Lens Rentals and other places are offer Magic Lantern 5D rental packages so it's safe to use. Audio might be a problem but...who really uses DLSR internally recorded audio anyway? I feel that the Magic Lantern features make the 5D Mark 3 an incredibly versatile camera. Crop Mode shooting is just icing on the cake. I can take a 70-200mm f/2.8 and make it a 400mm f/2.8 and lose nothing IQ wise. The detail is wonderful.



This was shot with crop mode on a 24-70mm f/2.8.




I can't see myself shooting h264 anymore except for wedding shoots or other event type of shooting. I do like what Blackmagic is doing. I went back and fourth between the 5D and the BMCC and finally settled on the 5D and I'm very satisfied with it.

There are in my experience, maybe 2 or 3 devs that come to mind on the team that seem to represent themselves in a professional manner and give you a sense of comfort when it comes to what they say and produce. Alex and Gheggo come to mind immediately. There are also a handful of devs that know how to program, but don't instill much in the way of confidence. When I had a 6D, the thread for its development would often go freaking binary, and it just started to look like a young smart kid in rockstar mode playing around and talking in code to people who obviously had no idea what he was talking about. I decided to quit before I bricked a $2000 camera. Other than that, the "mature" crowd of ML are basically responsible for delivering the best hybrid camera on the market right now with the Mark 3. A 22mp still camera that shoots 14bit raw full hd. It sucks, because Canon threatened the free world with legal action to protect a $12,000 8-bit camera... the possibilities of the 1DX would've been awesome had ML decided to begin development on it with all of that processing power to work with.

As much as I love ML, and I've been working with it intensively for 3 months now, it is NOT a professional hack and I have no sense that it ever will be.  Each devs work independently to implement cool features that HE wants to work on; they work together only by chance.  There are conflicts and rivalries beneath the surface.  There is no ML leader, I can see, who sets priorities or goals.  However, yes, if you're happy with a build and it shoots fine there is no reason it won't work forever.  
 
It appeals to me because video is a hobby and I love photography.  I get the sense from other posters that followers are either old farts like me (relatively speaking) or young aspiring film-makers who can't afford professional equipment.  This isn't to say people aren't using it professionally; they are.  But you want to be realistic.  If you're shooting something important enough where you have actors showing up, grips, lighting, an audio person, etc., you're going consider renting equipment, or going with something like the BM cameras that are designed for this purpose.
 
As great as the video is from the 5D3, it remains a STILLS camera designed for stills.  
 
In short, the 5D3 on ML "CAN" do professional video, but you may not want to.
 
The real benefit I think you'd see from getting a 5D3 and doing RAW on it is the learning experience.  I've learned more about photography in the past 3 months wrestling with RAW than I could ever imagine.  In order to do it well, you have to learn about RAW non-bayered images, and all that goes into making them usable.  So if you feel you're still learning, and have the money, this is the camera you want.  (I don't have a 5D3 by the way, I bought a used 50D and EOS-M.  You don't have to spend a lot of money to work with ML RAW!)

I think it has probably plateaued now... there will be improvements to workflow and higher continuous shooting at higher resolution (in crop mode)... but certain things just can't be improved on, as they have to continuously tell people who ask for full frame 4K, or 120fps.... (though they occasionally have a breakthrough with new code).
 
As Ben stated above though.... You could buy it now , install a stable version and never update it again and you would still have a great camera for the coming years. The 5D range also hold their resale price well, so we the next big thing comes along, you could sell and reinvest.
 
One thing, have you though about audio? I know they are making some strides on that side of things, but it might never sync perfectly

If they stopped development tomorrow, the ML RAW hack will stand as one of the greatest free "upgrades" any hardware has ever received. The image is phenomenal, rivaling top-end digital cinema systems. Even when the 5d4 comes out and Canon defeats ML in hardware, people are going to keep using 5d3s. 
 
Any improvement going forward is going to yield limited visual improvements. However, as CF cards get faster, it might be possible that we see the hack allow for overcranking/slow-motion at 1080p. 60fps would be a good start.

Very interesting article, however from my current viewpoint in Thailand, it seems that these big manufacturers might be making up their shortfalls in Asia. The amount of Chinese tourists sporting semi pro and pro Canons and Nikons is mind-boggling. Three or four thousand dollar cameras dangling around their necks. The new money in China must regard these big ass cameras as some sort of status symbol. The local cafes see them all sporting iphones and tablets , but unlike other areas in the world, you see them actually using the big cameras. Maybe its a passing fad,  maybe not - maybe a whole stream of photographic creativity will emerge from Asia in the next ten years. I also noticed at a local shopping centre  that Nikon was doing a big promotion for advanced DSLR's to a packed audience of local Thais and Chinese.

I've seen the Canon 1D C go for under £5000 on eBay at the moment.
 
An absolutely terrible depreciation on the used market from the launch price of double that.
 
It's for that reason I'm unlikely to ever invest more than £5000 in a camera... That and the fact they become obsolete after a year.
 
The Sony F3 for example - was £12,000... Now £4000 used! It's perfectly good... 10bit codec, lovely low light, FS100 Super35mm sensor, HD-SDI, XLR, ND, you name it.

I would take built in NDs over 4K any day of the week.
My job consists of getting the shots of actual happenings with no chance of directing(news). You can't really stop a politician or rescue worker or whoever to screw on an ND. 
 
If this camera takes on the "AG" video name, asking for NDs is not that unreasonable.
 
I can see that 4K is much better than NDs for marketing, but in my world(and I bet in yours as well) NDs has much more value. Sure the ability to reframe in post is nice, but I don't know how many in the market for this camera will deliver 4K masters...

I say, if it moves, post it :)

For those interested.  Check this link.  Good stuff on this website.  Link to contrast handling for the 7 cameras in the heading.  Lot's of info on other aspects too - search thru. 
http://www.cinematography.net/edited-pages/NZCS-Contrast.html
 

Alexa is the best, beatific detail, clean gain and shadows due to dual gain-stage sensor readout, lovely grain, no magenta blowout like Epic, no plastic sharp look like F65...
 
They nailed it.
 
Would be great to see 5D MKiii raw added to the list.

I started watching La Jette last night but my daughter said the soundtrack was going to give her nightmares :)   But I could already see that it deserves to be on the "minimalist" list.  
 
I went to see Rush last night with my brother in law.  Looks like it was shot on high-ISO film-stock.  Afterwards, I looked it up and discovered they shot on a multitude of cameras, from Arris down to 5Ds.  Lots of FX too, from backgrounds to crash sequences.  I enjoyed the film and what I thought impressive is how the technology never interfered, that is, I never felt something was done for technology's sake.   
 
They could have used a 5D3 with the ML hack, but they used an Arri, because that is what was available to them and they used the best tool in their budget.  That didn't stop them from using 5Ds for other stuff, or other cameras.  Most important, they didn't use film though though they lovingly recreated that look.
 
JG, my oldest daughter has probably watched Kill Bill a gazillion times.  She in art school now.  I play that old foggy "that stuff is stupid" :)  But I agree, Pulp Fiction is straight up great film-making.

This is an experimental/narrative film I made for my practice-based Fine Art PhD several years ago. Technically it will certainly be regarded as very poor in the context of this site: it was shot on an HV20 in 2008 and admitedly before I understood much about the technical aspects of filmmaking. However it was made in art school, not film school, and appropriately to this thread intentionally explores the degradation/materiality of the video/film image: the "poor" image is the point of the film.
 
The thesis I wrote alongside it had a significant section about La Jete and how it related to ideas that went into my film. No prizes for guessing the main film it alludes to though!
 
This is a recent re-edit, which has shortened it a bit. Go to Vimeo to watch in HD, and please use headphones or good speakers if you can - the audio is dense and relies on good stereo separation. 
 
Critique welcomed (though please bear in mind that I'm very aware of its technical "deficiencies")!!
 
https://vimeo.com/63100819
 
 

Olly, some PhD student could certainly go to town on the second video!  There's an interesting detachment.  You didn't linger on any shots that one might linger on ;)  He's living the dream, yet it goes by so quickly, you can't see him actually enjoying it.  Is life lived as a dream enjoyable?
 
As for my narrative videos.  As much as I would love to shoot some of my scripts, I don't have the time, money, or appetite for the sacrifice involved.  When one says, "just go out and do it", that's easy to say if you're single or don't know just how much you need from others to get it done.  If you have a family, the risks are very high.  Once we had our first child I recognized that people don't watch the films I would have loved making.  I don't know if I could do a good film; I do know my natural audience would be very small.  In any case, masterpieces exist and few people watch them as it is.  So I spend my time trying to turn people onto them. 
 
I've been working on technical issues involved in making the EOS-M a good RAW shooter.  If I succeed some filmmaker might use the camera to shoot a reel that gets them the opportunity to do a film I would call a classic. Certainly, I would love to shoot something worthwhile with it.
 
We are all part of each other's narratives.  Or as one of my friends so wittily put it, "we all play bit-parts in each other's screenplays"

http://vimeo.com/77825876

The Sony RX1 has amazing stills but awful video! I began thinking how could I use this otherwise great little camera for video? The answer is to rough up the image beyond comprehension, with trick filters. Here's how I did it.

Read the full article here

Here is some test footage from my a brand new Panasonic G6, I think it is the most universal camera and the shoots are not so videoish :-) :
 
 https://vimeo.com/77921309

I was out and about the other day and saw some fellow filming with a very odd thing in his camera hotshoe.
 
It was a small motor with a small eccentric weight which gently vibrated the camera at some set speed. He explained that is was a cheap (<£10) way of ridding moire from his footage.
 
I thought he was maybe quite mad, but later found that Pentax are using their in-body stabilisation to perform the same function.
 
How weird is that?

here we go again