plucas

Magic Lantern has perhaps already reached a terminus of sorts. It's a wonderful utility that has allowed us to shoot RAW video on a budget, but we haven't seen a RAW module come to any Canon camera that was released after 2013. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) In essence, the modern DIGIC processors or sensors are much more complex and the brilliant team of developers at ML are only able to develop the software in their spare time. No doubt Canon has already taken steps to make ML builds more difficult to port to their newer cameras. Filmmakers like Rubidium (Crimson Engine) still often use the 5Diii ML as their C200 B-cam and that's of course bad business for Canon, who'd rather that professionals settle for an EOS R or buy a second Cinema camera.

Update to what I earlier said. There's a new build from March 7th and it allows you to record 1832x1024, 24/25fps, 14 bit lossless, 16:9 with "Realtime" preview. Sounds good but here's some limitations to keep in mind: ISO only good to 400; any higher makes it vulnerable to "hot pixels" DPAF works effectively only in "zone" mode; not with "Face tracking" No 46fps/48fps slow motion in 1080p mode (as with the EOS M, for example); 60fps only in 720p. See this thread: https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=14309.3300

It's a good question. Although I've never used it, when I looked into the 70D and ML, it seemed like it was under-developed compared to the EOS M and the 5Diii and 6D. I thought I read that the DPAF increases the crop factor to around 1.82X. Andrew Reid has nonetheless enjoyed using it. I don't know what build he's used.

What would look better for 60fps between the EOS R and C100ii? It's a shame that the EOS R grays out the 60fps option in the higher quality crop-mode.

It looks like ML development on the EOS M is actively ongoing. There are new experimental builds available every week or two. It has a great (small) form factor, accepts a speedbooster, and thereby allows you to film with a 1.14X field of view crop. It upscales to 4K decently. The weakness is the low light performance and lack of autofocus but compared to the 50D, I can't imagine you'll fare worse. If you need any conviction about the potential of the EOS M, search "Zeek magic lantern" on Youtube.

The 1080p on the M50 is mushy and soft. I much prefer the 1080P ML RAW from the EOS M. Mind you, ML on the M50 would solve that, but notwithstanding the genius of the ML team, there's no likelihood of that in the foreseeable future.

Pro photographers might switch from the 1DXii if the Mark 3 features IBIS.

My bad! Should've made clear that this is somebody else's rig. It just impressed me; that's all. It does show though how useful the EOS M has become for serious hobbyists.

The EOSMPCC:

From Zeek: slow-motion test on the EOS M.

I suppose that's right. It helps best to apply a light source rather than rely on ISO. I could imagine a use for higher ISO if you want to capture a deeper depth of field for your scene and natural light is poor. I live, for example, near a bridge that crosses a river in Geelong and would love to shoot the sunset there over the horizon. Otherwise I've thought about buying one of those Neewer LED light panels that hook on to a hot shoe for the EOS M but a smartphone with the backlight turned on could work well enough too if the focus object is nearby. Encouraging to hear that the EOS M with the speedbooster is a near match for the 5Dii. Thanks again, Zeek.

For anyone who has used both the EOS M and 5Dii, what's the relative ISO capabilities when using Magic Lantern? With the EOS M, I get lots of noise after 160-200. One of Andrew's articles made mention of noise at higher ISOs like 800 and 1600 (but that they added an attractive film-like grain). Can the 5Dii keep a cleaner image at higher ISOs than the EOS M?

Thanks for the tip! Perhaps that 45fps option in 1080p for 2 seconds max could still be useful if slowed down to 50%. Four second B roll clips are very short but if you take enough of them, you could still end up with enough material for decent B roll. I don't know if that's what you used but you look to utilise some slow motion from the EOS M in your "Quick Night Test" video - near the start with the traffic lights, the phone box clip, and on the shoes. I'm about to next try out the Tamron 85 1.8 SP VC, which arrived today.

I look forward to your vid. I shot a test video for my wife's jewellery making business over the weekend with the EOS M (ML). Some things I noted: The 46fps mode from the Danne build gets me about 2 seconds in 14 bit lossless. (I didn't try it on any other setting.) The 50fps in 720p mode looks like... 720p (interestingly the resolution was listed as about 1790-ish x 600-ish), and I was getting moire in some scenes I noticed what looked like some aliasing(?) too in the MCM rewire mode in 1080p (see the top of the ring): Does anyone know if aliasing is normal with ML on the EOS M? Or is it prone to come out with certain lenses? I used an EF 50mm 1.8 STM.

Hence, why Magic Lantern on the M50 would work so well. You'd have DPAF, flip-screen, and the focal reducer option for your full-frame lenses, not to mention C Mount possibilities too.

How we feel about Canon sometimes:

It's like Bernie Ecclestone's final years at the helm of F1. F1 still had little or no presence on social media.

I've used the Viltrox EF-EOSM2 Speedbooster with a 50 1.8 STM and even at F1.2 and ISO 100, there was a lot of noise in a dimly lit room. Some is fine, of course - it adds that film-like grain. Your footage here looks great though: Must re-try with at least one good source of light, perhaps also the dual-ISO option, and to bring down the shadows as you have in the clip above.

Thanks. I'll definitely try that dual ISO. 12-13 stops of DR is very appealing too. I have wondered if there's something wrong with my copy of the EOS M because the noise is terrible indoors and without a lot of light. Hopefully it's user error.

Zeek's film presents for the MLV App are great. I think you need to over-expose without clipping highlights to achieve best results but, as said above, it holds a lot of detail. I've found low light fliming tricky though because there's so much noise.

Thanks Jip-Hop and Stephen. Continuous autofocus would have been great but 14 bit RAW for $150 was bound to have limitations like this.

Perhaps a silly question from an about-to-be first time ML user: does the EOS M autofocus work with Magic Lantern?

Sure. Some took that tweet as a cover of sorts. Who, for example, speaks about RAW photography in terms of "RAW recording"? Similarly, the 4:2:2 for the C200 was an independent rumor from Canon Rumors.