Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

RUMOR: Canon working on a RAW Recorder for 5D2?

Tom Lowe

Tom Lowe

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
8,520
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Take this with a big grain of salt. I saw it on dvinfo:

I was at Calumet in San Francisco and was renting a Nikon lens for the weekend to use with my 5D. The rental department manager told me the Canon representative was in the prior week and was talking to him about the 5D and explained that Canon was very surprised at the response the camera has gotten with the film making community. They rushed the video mode out to compete with the D90 and said the video firmware update is going to happen shortly to address some of the issues people are having with manual control.

The exciting thing is that the Canon rep said they are also working on a recording device that will capture a raw image via the HDMI port.

Take it with a grain of salt but it sounded pretty legit.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-hd/208918-possible-new-firmware-info.html
Click to expand...

:eek6::eek6::eek6:

If this is true, it would definitely shake things up.

I only wonder if this rumor is sort of getting two different things mixed up - the 5D2 firmware upgrade, and the rumored Canon RAW recorder for a forthcoming APS-C video camera? OR, could it be that the RAW recorder would work for both?

Is HDMI even capable of sending RAW data out of a camera? Would you need a more robust connection?
 
Tom said:
Take this with a big grain of salt. I saw it on dvinfo:



:eek6::eek6::eek6:

If this is true, it would definitely shake things up.

I only wonder if this rumor is sort of getting two different things mixed up - the 5D2 firmware upgrade, and the rumored Canon RAW recorder for a forthcoming APS-C video camera? OR, could it be that the RAW recorder would work for both?

Is HDMI even capable of sending RAW data out of a camera? Would you need a more robust connection?
Click to expand...

According to folks I know who are very credible - this is true. I hear firmware update + RAW recorder for new, forthcoming camera.
 
But what about RAW recorder for 5D2?

Can an HDMI cable even handle this, though? I'm not technical enough to know the answer to that.
 
Your post repeats a

( ) plausible ( ) random (X) ridiculous ( ) hilarious

internet rumor. This rumor is:

( ) Verifiably false.
(X) Technically impossible.
( ) Falsifiable by simple logic.
( ) Illegal.
( ) Void of any truth whatsoever.
( ) Contra the laws of physics.
( ) Obviously untrue on the face of it.
( ) Must have been intended as a joke originally.
(X) Highly unlikely.
( ) May be similar, in some obscure way, to reality.
( ) Theoretically possible, but doubtful.
( ) May actually happen, but don't bet on it.
( ) It is possible, after flying cars are mainstream.

And the circumstances surrounding the rumor:

(X) Posted by a friend of a friend's uncle's brother.
( ) It started out as someone making up stuff.
( ) It was posted on a different forum out of context.
( ) Someone else submitted that post as proof.
( ) Now it's on a popular rumors web site.
( ) The original post now links to the rumor site.
( ) The popularity has already given it a Snopes.com page.
( ) It has been reported by local news as true.

Your post only worsens the situation due to the following:

( ) Buoying the legitimacy of false rumor web sites.
( ) Boosting the ad revenue for rumor web sites.
(X) Spawning more wasted discussion of rumors.

and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

(X) Rumors are a waste of time.
(X) Wishful thinking does not make it true.

;)
 
Don't know but this is really closed to what CanonRumors said:
-------------------------------------------------
I’ve been told that Canon lent 4 5D Mark II’s to a certain company with a firmware version not currently available.
The firmware is geared towards video. No word on whether or not some manual controls have been added.
I’ve been asked not to mention the industry or the project, so I won’t.
------------------------------------------------------

It would be great to see Canon not forgetting the rest of the world (half) with people using PAL system (25p)
 
What is the resolution of the HDMI-out live preview while recording? Couldn't someone just use a capture card to capture that?

-michael zaletel
(shooter)
 
michael zaletel said:
What is the resolution of the HDMI-out live preview while recording? Couldn't someone just use a capture card to capture that?

-michael zaletel
(shooter)
Click to expand...

It's the same res that the integrated screen... something ridiculous around 640 pixels wide I believe. While recording.
 
Daniel García said:
It's the same res that the integrated screen... something ridiculous around 640 pixels wide I believe. While recording.
Click to expand...

yes but the limitations Canon has slapped on the 5D2's HDMI port could be changed with this rumored firmware upgrade.

Daniel, care to share with us why this is "technically impossible"?
 
Daniel Browning said:
Just the same part you wondered about: raw data over HDMI.
Click to expand...

Raw files from the 5d2 are about 12 MB/Frame, x24 frames means 288 MB/sec, thats megaBYTES per sec, or 2.3 Gigabits/sec

I dont think HDMI can handle that kind of throughput, if it could, it would have been integrated as a data channel and not a video signal channel.

I'm looking around and I see some numbers for HDMI ranging from 1.0 Gb/s and 1.5 Gb/s, with some mentions of future versions of 5 Gb/s, so it might not be that far off.

However, I seem to remember Jim saying that recording that much data that fast is expensive, and there is no way around it. This was the argument about the RAW recorder which cost 100k
 
J. Bernard Vallon said:
Raw files from the 5d2 are about 12 MB/Frame, x24 frames means 288 MB/sec, thats megaBYTES per sec, or 2.3 Gigabits/sec

I dont think HDMI can handle that kind of throughput, if it could, it would have been integrated as a data channel and not a video signal channel.

I'm looking around and I see some numbers for HDMI ranging from 1.0 Gb/s and 1.5 Gb/s, with some mentions of future versions of 5 Gb/s, so it might not be that far off.

However, I seem to remember Jim saying that recording that much data that fast is expensive, and there is no way around it. This was the argument about the RAW recorder which cost 100k
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we aren't talking about the same resolution as the stills, just 1080p. I doubt it's true raw, but probably uncompressed, which is totally possible over HDMI. Many people have been capturing 1080p uncompressed from HD cameras through the HDMI port using capture cards like the Black Magic Design intensity and Intensity Pro.
 
Wow, i totally didn't get the April fools joke, all day I've been thinking this is going to be an amazing lens... hahaha. But really, it would be a huge hit!
 
future shock

future shock

J. Bernard Vallon said:
However, I seem to remember Jim saying that recording that much data that fast is expensive, and there is no way around it. This was the argument about the RAW recorder which cost 100k
Click to expand...

That is only for shooting slow motion, there are many easy ways to record RAW at 24fps, RAW 2K is very easy to do at low cost.

You can record 12bit data to 12 CF cards used in parallel, maybe 24 it depends on the max write speed. Do 12 CF cards cost 100K? Maybe they should shop somewhere else for parts?

CF cards can write 8 bits at a time, you a logic element called a "shift register" to turn the "serial" data of each of the 12 (or 16) parallel data bits out of the sensor into blocks of 8 or 16 bits, that is you turn the 12 bits into blocks of 8x12 bits that require 1/8 the bandwidth to write. This is something that is very simple to do.

RED co. do not want to make a RAW mode camera, and are not open to ways to make it work at low cost, they only want to make a wavelet compressed camera. I am more than happy to help them design a true raw camera for filmmaking if they want to that would cost not much more than what the have now. Filmmakers do not need record times longer than four minutes per shot since films do not have shots longer than four minutes.

1920x1080x12bits= 3.2MB/frame uncompressed.

3.2*24=76.8MB/sec

If you use lossless Delta encoding you can reduce the file size by up to 1/3 so the bandwidth would vary from about 25.6MB/sec to 76.8MB/sec. You can send that over 3 or 4 USB cables.

The data rate for each bit (of the 12) is,

1920x1080x24=50.4M bits/sec

50.4/8=6.3M Bytes/second going into each of the CF cards.

or

50.4/16=3.15M Words/ second if you use 16bit writes into the CF cards.

If you use 24 CF cards you divide the bandwidth per card by half, if you use 24cards and lossless Delta compression you divide the bandwithd to 1/2 to 1/6 over using no Delta and 12 cards.

You do not need fiber optics or anything expensive to build to true RAW camera for filmmaking at high quality without compression artifacts. Acam dII is having some problems getting over 15fps, but if they do not want help its their loss, as well as ours, the not invented here mentality does not advance filmmaking technology or make for better images in films made.

What RED Co. faced years ago with RAW recording is very out of date, the world has moved forward, those are out of date issues, 24fps is not hard to do with todays parts.

Think of it this way, if the DSLR can shoot RAW at 1fps then using 24 CF cards would have enough bandwidth to store 24fps given that the sensor and other parts of the camera can run at full speed, and the FLASH memory write limits the frame rate. For filmaking I use a 24fps sync motor and shoot 24fps, slow motion is not used in many films that have gotten awards over the years, it is not a required feature for a motion picture camera.

If you build a 3K camera with an academy/scope size sensor that records one to four minutes per memory magazine true RAW at 24fps with Delta true lossless encoding you have all you need for filmmaking that will be transfered to 35mm prints for projection.

If Canon wants to make something that works right and is free of compression artifacts then they will be doing a service to the quality of films yet to be made, if not then it is another half measure.

You can make a "shoot then dump" camera that records up to one to four minutes into FLASH or DRAM, then dumps that slower over USB etc. into a laptop or netbook. When filmmaking you shoot for maybe 15seconds to a minute, then you talk to the actors for a few minutes, then you shoot again, so when you let up on the trigger the camera can dump the last shot shot so by the time you are ready for the next take the camera's memory is empty to use again, like a large FIFO. If you need to shoot again right away, you can go to "shoot then swap" mode and swap the cameras memory module, then later download the modules to the laptop or netbook.
 
J. Bernard Vallon said:
Raw files from the 5d2 are about 12 MB/Frame, x24 frames means 288 MB/sec, thats megaBYTES per sec, or 2.3 Gigabits/sec...
However, I seem to remember Jim saying that recording that much data that fast is expensive, and there is no way around it. This was the argument about the RAW recorder which cost 100k
Click to expand...

Red does it by applying some serious compression to the RAW data. What makes you think that Canon couldn't do the same thing, using either a licensed compression engine (perhaps, oh I don't know, maybe.... Cineform Raw?) or one of their own choosing?
 
strange.. when pederson (mark) says it is true.. it is because it is true.. he's offhollywood (respect) after all

maybe the xlh1 successor.. not yet the 5d2
 
Daniel Browning said:
Your post repeats a

( ) plausible ( ) random (X) ridiculous ( ) hilarious

internet rumor. This rumor is:...
Click to expand...


That's funny, Daniel. Thanks for the laugh :rofl:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top