Volumetrik

Thank you ! I love this camera.
Ok so following feedback I got from the magic lantern forum, I did another test. This time, I am testing the highlight detail retention capabilities of different bit depths.
First the variables :
Canon 5D Mark II 2.1.2 w/94k actuations
Canon 35mm F/2 IS
VAF 5D2 AA Filter
SanDisk ExtremePro 32Gb UDMA 7 160MB/s CF card
magiclantern-crop_rec-3k_Updated_Center_4.20pm-5D2-eXperimental.2019Nov14.5D2212 from Reddeercity
100 ISO
1866 x 1044 1.00x Crop @ 23.976 fps 1/50s
Methodology :
I started with a very over-exposed sky and brought down the exposure by 1/3 ev using the aperture.
Test starts at f/6.4 and using the raw zebras as mentioned in the thread. I then pulled back two settings in ACR, exposure and Highlights. Exposure is brought down relatively to the aperture setting so that the resulting image is the same exposure across the board. Highlights are always pulled back @ -100.
I did two rounds, first at 10-bit and the second at 14-bit. Something that I encountered however during the recording is that the RAW zebras did not show while recording 10-bit footage. They were displaying fine while looking at live-view without recording, but as soon as I started recording, the zebras turned standard.
Here is what I am talking about. First image is while recording 14-bit, second while recording 10-bit.


Here is a reference picture of the scene I made with my iPhone 7 Plus :



Onto the test itself.
Here is the 14-bit :

And here is the 10-bit :

Don't forget that you can click on these images to view in full resolution.
Can you tell the difference ? 😛

Here are all my files from the test, DNG's, xmp profiles created in ACR, PSD files, exported JPEGs and everything in between.
Conclusion :
It seems that both 14-bit and 10-bit depths handle high exposure detail very, very well. Both can be ''metered'' about the same for the highlights. From what I can tell, we lose detail in the clouds at f/6.4 and f/7. We start seeing consistent detail in the clouds at f/8. Coincidentally, f/8 is when the black bars in the RAW zebras don't appear anymore. I would conclude that using zebras for exposing and looking for an exposure just before black bars is a great way of getting all the highlight capacity of the sensor. I had trouble seeing the difference in this scene from 10-bit and 14-bit. In my eye, they both seem equal. I did not test 12-bit because the difference was marginal compared to 14-bit in the first test. 
The bulk of the difference that I wanted to expose is between the two extremes. This does support my hypothesis in the first test that highlight detail seems unaffected by bit depth. 
I also took the good exposure picture (f/8) and pushed the shadows to 100%. I looked for areas where I could see differences. Here is another example of the green cast in the shadows when pushed to the extreme (Shadows -100) :

You can see what I am talking about in two places : the back of the stop sign and the window frame. In the 10-bit portion (left) you can see some green cast in the recovered shadow areas, but the cast is much less severe than the initial test. There is however much more grain. Its especially visible in the window frame section in the middle.
Conclusion of the conclusion :
10-Bit seems AS GOOD AS as 14-Bit for highlight detail retention @ 100 ISO. For shadow detail when pushed up +100, 14-Bit still holds an advantage, albeit less than previously thought.

Thank you ! I love this camera.
Ok so following feedback I got from the magic lantern forum, I did another test. This time, I am testing the highlight detail retention capabilities of different bit depths.
First the variables :
Canon 5D Mark II 2.1.2 w/94k actuations
Canon 35mm F/2 IS
VAF 5D2 AA Filter
SanDisk ExtremePro 32Gb UDMA 7 160MB/s CF card
magiclantern-crop_rec-3k_Updated_Center_4.20pm-5D2-eXperimental.2019Nov14.5D2212 from Reddeercity
100 ISO
1866 x 1044 1.00x Crop @ 23.976 fps 1/50s
Methodology :
I started with a very over-exposed sky and brought down the exposure by 1/3 ev using the aperture.
Test starts at f/6.4 and using the raw zebras as mentioned in the thread. I then pulled back two settings in ACR, exposure and Highlights. Exposure is brought down relatively to the aperture setting so that the resulting image is the same exposure across the board. Highlights are always pulled back @ -100.
I did two rounds, first at 10-bit and the second at 14-bit. Something that I encountered however during the recording is that the RAW zebras did not show while recording 10-bit footage. They were displaying fine while looking at live-view without recording, but as soon as I started recording, the zebras turned standard.
Here is what I am talking about. First image is while recording 14-bit, second while recording 10-bit.


Here is a reference picture of the scene I made with my iPhone 7 Plus :



Onto the test itself.
Here is the 14-bit :

And here is the 10-bit :

Don't forget that you can click on these images to view in full resolution.
Can you tell the difference ? 😛

Here are all my files from the test, DNG's, xmp profiles created in ACR, PSD files, exported JPEGs and everything in between.
Conclusion :
It seems that both 14-bit and 10-bit depths handle high exposure detail very, very well. Both can be ''metered'' about the same for the highlights. From what I can tell, we lose detail in the clouds at f/6.4 and f/7. We start seeing consistent detail in the clouds at f/8. Coincidentally, f/8 is when the black bars in the RAW zebras don't appear anymore. I would conclude that using zebras for exposing and looking for an exposure just before black bars is a great way of getting all the highlight capacity of the sensor. I had trouble seeing the difference in this scene from 10-bit and 14-bit. In my eye, they both seem equal. I did not test 12-bit because the difference was marginal compared to 14-bit in the first test. 
The bulk of the difference that I wanted to expose is between the two extremes. This does support my hypothesis in the first test that highlight detail seems unaffected by bit depth. 
I also took the good exposure picture (f/8) and pushed the shadows to 100%. I looked for areas where I could see differences. Here is another example of the green cast in the shadows when pushed to the extreme (Shadows -100) :

You can see what I am talking about in two places : the back of the stop sign and the window frame. In the 10-bit portion (left) you can see some green cast in the recovered shadow areas, but the cast is much less severe than the initial test. There is however much more grain. Its especially visible in the window frame section in the middle.
Conclusion of the conclusion :
10-Bit seems AS GOOD AS as 14-Bit for highlight detail retention @ 100 ISO. For shadow detail when pushed up +100, 14-Bit still holds an advantage, albeit less than previously thought.

Thank you ! I love this camera.
Ok so following feedback I got from the magic lantern forum, I did another test. This time, I am testing the highlight detail retention capabilities of different bit depths.
First the variables :
Canon 5D Mark II 2.1.2 w/94k actuations
Canon 35mm F/2 IS
VAF 5D2 AA Filter
SanDisk ExtremePro 32Gb UDMA 7 160MB/s CF card
magiclantern-crop_rec-3k_Updated_Center_4.20pm-5D2-eXperimental.2019Nov14.5D2212 from Reddeercity
100 ISO
1866 x 1044 1.00x Crop @ 23.976 fps 1/50s
Methodology :
I started with a very over-exposed sky and brought down the exposure by 1/3 ev using the aperture.
Test starts at f/6.4 and using the raw zebras as mentioned in the thread. I then pulled back two settings in ACR, exposure and Highlights. Exposure is brought down relatively to the aperture setting so that the resulting image is the same exposure across the board. Highlights are always pulled back @ -100.
I did two rounds, first at 10-bit and the second at 14-bit. Something that I encountered however during the recording is that the RAW zebras did not show while recording 10-bit footage. They were displaying fine while looking at live-view without recording, but as soon as I started recording, the zebras turned standard.
Here is what I am talking about. First image is while recording 14-bit, second while recording 10-bit.


Here is a reference picture of the scene I made with my iPhone 7 Plus :



Onto the test itself.
Here is the 14-bit :

And here is the 10-bit :

Don't forget that you can click on these images to view in full resolution.
Can you tell the difference ? 😛

Here are all my files from the test, DNG's, xmp profiles created in ACR, PSD files, exported JPEGs and everything in between.
Conclusion :
It seems that both 14-bit and 10-bit depths handle high exposure detail very, very well. Both can be ''metered'' about the same for the highlights. From what I can tell, we lose detail in the clouds at f/6.4 and f/7. We start seeing consistent detail in the clouds at f/8. Coincidentally, f/8 is when the black bars in the RAW zebras don't appear anymore. I would conclude that using zebras for exposing and looking for an exposure just before black bars is a great way of getting all the highlight capacity of the sensor. I had trouble seeing the difference in this scene from 10-bit and 14-bit. In my eye, they both seem equal. I did not test 12-bit because the difference was marginal compared to 14-bit in the first test. 
The bulk of the difference that I wanted to expose is between the two extremes. This does support my hypothesis in the first test that highlight detail seems unaffected by bit depth. 
I also took the good exposure picture (f/8) and pushed the shadows to 100%. I looked for areas where I could see differences. Here is another example of the green cast in the shadows when pushed to the extreme (Shadows -100) :

You can see what I am talking about in two places : the back of the stop sign and the window frame. In the 10-bit portion (left) you can see some green cast in the recovered shadow areas, but the cast is much less severe than the initial test. There is however much more grain. Its especially visible in the window frame section in the middle.
Conclusion of the conclusion :
10-Bit seems AS GOOD AS as 14-Bit for highlight detail retention @ 100 ISO. For shadow detail when pushed up +100, 14-Bit still holds an advantage, albeit less than previously thought.

I know this is an old topic, but I wanted to see for myself the differences that full frame MLV raw video bit-rate does on the 5D2 so here is a quick test I did.
First the variables :
Canon 5D Mark II 2.1.2 w/94k actuations
Canon 35mm F/2 IS @ F/7
VAF 5D2 AA Filter
SanDisk ExtremePro 32Gb UDMA 7 160MB/s CF card
magiclantern-crop_rec-3k_Updated_Center_4.20pm-5D2-eXperimental.2019Nov14.5D2212 from Reddeercity
100 ISO
1866 x 1044 1.00x Crop @ 23.976 fps 1/50s
I shot the same scene with both highlights and shadows clipping so we can have a good sense of dynamic range.
Using the ML spot-meter, the sky is 100%, the wall in-between the two windows is 55% and the towel is 1%.
Here is an example of the ACR settings I used. I only changed two things : Highlights and Shadows

First test : ACR settings : -100 Highlights & +100 Shadows : This is an extreme test, you can see banding so this is not usable footage, but a good example.

Second test : ACR settings : -70 Highlights & +70 Shadows : This is the highest shadows I could push before seeing banding, so I would consider this the limit of usable footage.

You can click on the images to view in full resolution. Areas to look at are the electric baseboard as it shoes the color shifting very clearly. Towel shoes the banding and the wall in between the two windows shows the effects on middle exposure (55%).
Conclusion :
I found that the cleanest was the 14-Bit (not surprising) compared to the two others. However, this is not a continuous setting on the 5D2 as it starts skipping frames around 24-26 seconds. The 12-Bit sounds like a good compromise as I can pretty much get it continuous with sound. It does have a very slight color shift towards green in the -100+100 test and a bit more banding visible on the towel, but in the -70+70 it looks (to my eye) 99% the same as the 14-Bit. The 10-bit is the worst of the bunch (again, not surprising) but I was very surprised at the green color shifting in the shadows. It was much more visible than I anticipated. Finally, the banding is less severe in the towel, but the green noise takes over that whole area anyways. Overall, the highlight retention of all the bit depths seem to be roughly equal, as I cannot see a difference between them.
Conclusion of the conclusion :
I will be using the 12-bit for 95% of shooting scenarios, especially ones where I need longer takes than 24-26 seconds. I'll use 14-Bit if I am in a low-light situation where I know I will need to pull up exposure and shadows. Finally, I'll never touch 10-bit as the color shifting is too severe for my taste.
Hope you found my tests useful !

I know this is an old topic, but I wanted to see for myself the differences that full frame MLV raw video bit-rate does on the 5D2 so here is a quick test I did.
First the variables :
Canon 5D Mark II 2.1.2 w/94k actuations
Canon 35mm F/2 IS @ F/7
VAF 5D2 AA Filter
SanDisk ExtremePro 32Gb UDMA 7 160MB/s CF card
magiclantern-crop_rec-3k_Updated_Center_4.20pm-5D2-eXperimental.2019Nov14.5D2212 from Reddeercity
100 ISO
1866 x 1044 1.00x Crop @ 23.976 fps 1/50s
I shot the same scene with both highlights and shadows clipping so we can have a good sense of dynamic range.
Using the ML spot-meter, the sky is 100%, the wall in-between the two windows is 55% and the towel is 1%.
Here is an example of the ACR settings I used. I only changed two things : Highlights and Shadows

First test : ACR settings : -100 Highlights & +100 Shadows : This is an extreme test, you can see banding so this is not usable footage, but a good example.

Second test : ACR settings : -70 Highlights & +70 Shadows : This is the highest shadows I could push before seeing banding, so I would consider this the limit of usable footage.

You can click on the images to view in full resolution. Areas to look at are the electric baseboard as it shoes the color shifting very clearly. Towel shoes the banding and the wall in between the two windows shows the effects on middle exposure (55%).
Conclusion :
I found that the cleanest was the 14-Bit (not surprising) compared to the two others. However, this is not a continuous setting on the 5D2 as it starts skipping frames around 24-26 seconds. The 12-Bit sounds like a good compromise as I can pretty much get it continuous with sound. It does have a very slight color shift towards green in the -100+100 test and a bit more banding visible on the towel, but in the -70+70 it looks (to my eye) 99% the same as the 14-Bit. The 10-bit is the worst of the bunch (again, not surprising) but I was very surprised at the green color shifting in the shadows. It was much more visible than I anticipated. Finally, the banding is less severe in the towel, but the green noise takes over that whole area anyways. Overall, the highlight retention of all the bit depths seem to be roughly equal, as I cannot see a difference between them.
Conclusion of the conclusion :
I will be using the 12-bit for 95% of shooting scenarios, especially ones where I need longer takes than 24-26 seconds. I'll use 14-Bit if I am in a low-light situation where I know I will need to pull up exposure and shadows. Finally, I'll never touch 10-bit as the color shifting is too severe for my taste.
Hope you found my tests useful !

@Mike Mgee I think intelligent political discussion still has its place. However intelligent political discussion and forums don't really mix well from my experience. It can start well, but as soon as some bad apples come into the mix, it sours the discussion for everyone else.
Andrew, I think what you are doing is fine. After all, it's your forum. No one here registered without knowing that you run the show, your name is on the banner after all ! 

@Mike Mgee I think intelligent political discussion still has its place. However intelligent political discussion and forums don't really mix well from my experience. It can start well, but as soon as some bad apples come into the mix, it sours the discussion for everyone else.
Andrew, I think what you are doing is fine. After all, it's your forum. No one here registered without knowing that you run the show, your name is on the banner after all ! 

A7SIII is going to be like Half-Life 3

Field of view differences below. Same distance.
 
4K
iso 200
Canon 50mm f1.8
Standard Canon EF Adaptor f1.8 

 
4K
iso 200
Canon 50mm f1.8
Metabones Canon EF Adaptor f1.2

Just arrived and testing.
 

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 

That whole channel is really weird. It's like a front for her adult content it seems. Mucho weird

V2 of our 3C Cinema Camera Control App now includes support for the Tilta Nucleus Nano focus controller.

The Nucleus Nano wheel connects wirelessly to the 3C app over Bluetooth LE and enables you to use the wheel to electronically control focus of your native MFT and adapted EF (with smart adapter) lenses on the Pocket 4K without using a motor.
Electronic control of the lenses can be a big advantage when using the Pocket4K on a gimbal to keep the weight down or to keep any rig smaller and not require additional powering for the motors.
In addition, it also circumvents issues that arise when using the motor with small native lenses that don't lend themselves particularly well to using focus gear straps and often have limited manual throw.
It also enables you use the hardware REC button on the Nucleus Nano wheel to control the Start/Stop of the camera and the record status is returned back to the wheel to illuminate the switch when the camera is recording.
As the Nucleus Nano wheel is fully integrated into 3C it also enables you use it to create the 6 focus storage positions which you can then choose to automatically switch to either in Snap mode or multi speed Transition modes.
The Setup screen of 3C now includes two scanners for easy selection of the camera and the Nucleus Nano wheel once Bluetooth mode is selected in the wheel.

V2 will be submitted to the Play Store for publication on the 11th October and will be available as a free automatic update for existing users.
 

ACR gives nicer colours and cleaner image than Resolve. To avoid flicker don't use shadows, highlights, whites, blacks or contrast - use exposure slider or curves instead. Or better still, forget about grading in ACR, buy Cinelog and grade later.
For fast jobs I use Resolve. For maximum IQ I bite the bullet and transcode overnight to 444 Cinelog masters using ACR for AE. Search for a Smart Import 2 script.

Thanks for the positive feedback.
Much appreciated.
Please buy it
I've run out of gaffer tape making this one so that integration will have to wait for a while.
 

My Canon FD 70-210 F4 lens, Canon FD 2x teleconverter and Fotga FD to MFT adapter have all arrived now, and first impressions are wow..  this is a really nice lens.
Test pics from it to come.

As I started this mess I wanted to give an update some time later
 
AVC-I at 400 Mbps beats the xxxx out of ProRes 422 and I could not see any difference to ProRes 422 HQ at naked eye and pixel peep
Looking for explanations I believe is due to two things
1. intraframe predictive coding on 16x16 blocks that achieves high level of compression than standard discrete cosine transform in ProRes
2. CABAC entropy encoding squeezing additional bits without loss in the clips
It is difficult to average what the benefits are compared to ProRes but is not difficult to see that they are at least 30% based on perceived quality
As there are no fast enough SD cards this is limited to 30p on the GH5 but in terms of non RAW capture this appears to be very good
 
And with this I think I have closed the case I opened myself

Man that would be a VERY exciting comparison

I just received my EM1 Mkii from B&H used department and immediately loaded V3 on it. 

I am using the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 and the autofocus performs flawlessly. As good as Canon Dual Pixel AF IMO and more reliable than the Nikon Z6. 
I love the colors on the camera and I feel the size of this body is just perfect. THIS is what I wanted. The EM1X was overpriced and always having a grip made it unnecessarily bulky for a MFT camera. Going to do a review on this new setup soon. 

I feel the upcoming Panasonic Leica 10-25mm f1.7 paired with this camera will be my go to "YouTuber" camera for a while. I love the color science and IBIS is magical. Only thing "missing" is a good 120fps mode...which I can just get with my Z6 when I occasionally need it. 

So for now my current setup is this:
1DC on a tripod in my studio setup for that 4K MJPG Canon Log.
EM1 Mkii for vlog style, run and gun shooting.
Nikon Z6 for 120fps and run and gun shooting/ backup cam.
Leica Q (which I just picked up used for a steal) pictures of my kid and everyday life/ instagram shots. 

Can't wait to see your video!
I wonder is there anyone gonna do GH5/EM-1 II video af comparison

Alright

BMPCC/Beastgrip/ND filters and 14-42pz in hand
Waiting on the 17mm f2.8

Will be shooting Friday and Saturday

Should be interesting

I will share the results

Sub $500 quasi anamorphic setup?
Crazy times

 

Wasabi batteries have worked really well for me. 

DisplayCal is a great software, free and open source, plus it's more powerful than the stock softwares from Spyder and Xrite.

I calibrated my display with it and did the calibration with the Spyder's stock software to compare.

The software DisplayCal applies a driver level correction while the software from Spyder did like an overlay which glitched in certain applications and was visually much less accurate.

Yes it will be on Kickstarter.
I understand the apprehension about Kickstarter to be honest but rest assured nothing of mine will ever be going on there until it is ready to go from a functionality point of view, which both this and the small one already more or less are.
The problems with Kickstarter invariably happen when it is being used to fund development rather than just funding production.
I'll put up a small video when time allows next week to show both of them in operation.
The small one has another trick (or two) up its sleeve that I'll also show in the video.

DisplayCal is a great software, free and open source, plus it's more powerful than the stock softwares from Spyder and Xrite.

I calibrated my display with it and did the calibration with the Spyder's stock software to compare.

The software DisplayCal applies a driver level correction while the software from Spyder did like an overlay which glitched in certain applications and was visually much less accurate.