I had a A7s as a B camera for a long interview, with a corrupt SD card. Found this site, uploaded the damaged file. And boom, very very fast reply and service. File was fine after repair. Straight back to edit, export - deliver to happy client afterward. And colleagues around Europe has been told about the site. Upload your broken video and we Fix It! Use already uploaded reference. Copy them first on your computer. Recent Uploads. Mavic PRO. Repair your DJI video easily online.
Restore video after a drone crash. DJI Phantom. Your drone Crashed and your video is unreadable. When a crash occurs, good chances your video file will be damaged and not playable. Repair your quadcopter video easily online. Works with all the GoPro available on the market, from the Hero3 to the latest Hero10 H and HEVC We can repair your video files even after: Battery Failure during recording; Camera destruction while recording after a crash, collision, water damage, hard landing, shock, fell Video can recover video files from dashcam after a crash, accident.
Video can repair videos from various dashcam on the market Novatek, Icatch, Mivue, Blackvue, Nextbase Need to recover your crash video for your insurance? We are able to help you. Download our Video Repair Tool. Memory Card Recovery. Download our Memory card recovery tool.
Mac OS X version is coming soon Freeware. By making the payment , you will be able to download the full fixed video. If not, how is it different? Uncompressed 8-bit video is not RAW. How does this compare to e. Just saw the comparison videos in youtube. The difference is breathtaking. I don't do video, so I wonder how people lived with such limited DR before.
Could you please elaborate? Why is the Canon's video "by a massive gulf" better than the Nikon's? Also, I'm not finding any comparison video on youtube comparing the Canons and Nikons. Could you please add a link? Does your mommy know you're on her PC? But you can have a look at 5D3 video comparison before and after ML. Uncompressed is already processed, not raw which can benefit from entirely different re-processing without loss.
The difference is also that uncompressed video output requires a separate recording device. This may sound snob. But it is true. D and D's "uncompressed" video output via HDMI is unusable at a production level due to moire, aliasing and other artifacts.
These problems comes into the video feed along the processing pipeline. There's no single magic pill to fix it. D in terms of moire and aliasing but suffers from low resolution. With the cutting-edge Signal-to-Noise ratio and the enormous 35mm full-frame sensor area, coupled with powerful processing from a PC, you get the Arri level of image quality out of 5D3. I don't think its gonna happen From the conclusion on that article, under "Is hacking legal?
While I would not want to financially Canon for not doing any work that MagicLantern has done, I have to say the 5D3 is now a very serious and amazing tool for creation. Very conflicted here. You'll see this class of cameras take over the video world like a plague, and also very quickly the cinema world will follow.
In fact, the average Joe's DSLR may have an even better sensor than the cinema camera, but is crippled with lousy quality codec that ruins all the magic. Let's not forget global shutter, and an array of physical outputs, compatibility with many industry standard hardware, and as mentioned above, a lot more DR for the cinema look, and for flexibility in all situations. And I agree about the frame rate as well, so far 24FPS seems to be it for the MarkIII, high end cameras doing a lot more with that, when you want at least 60 for some slow mo.
Still, if I can get faster cards, and the hack becomes available on the Mark II so far, kind of then I will have to try it out once it matures for better workflow. The same for all real purposes. Sure someone will test them at the extreme ends of the chart, and find hair-splitting differences.
My point is that regardless of price difference, the RAW output from both will be near identical for all practical purposes. A proper high quality 2k camera is still the most desirable for big budget productions, and it's "only" 2k, just like your DSLR. There's still a difference between the quality you get out of an Alexa or Red Epic and the quality of the raw video from the Mk.
III both in terms of resolution and exposure latitude. The jump in IQ in the Mk. III's raw output compared to its compressed video is an exceptional anomaly; most cameras have virtually the same resolution between the two formats compare the 5D's JPEG and RAW still images, for instance.
So, now that the Mk. III shoots raw, it has the same level of post-production flexibility as an Alexa or Red which is awesome, don't get me wrong! I don't want to downplay the Mk. III's raw -- it's amazing and groundbreaking -- but context is important. Raw isn't what made the Alexa popular; most productions using the Alexa don't shoot raw on it -- they shoot ProRes because the image still looks just as great, despite losing the editing flexibility. Definitely a must-read for any aspiring movie or film-maker.
I've followed the RAW video ability story from early on and I was not convinced this was doable. So this is rather unbelievable and a huge news. Among critics 5D III footage is soft and in actuality many complaint the video resolution is far below the stated P.
The GH2 hacks are by an independent group led by VK. Magic Lantern did not do any hacks for any Panasonic cameras. Your facts are wrong dude. There's little to no chance of this being used on a TV production. Any production with a substantial budget and insurance to worry about most likely won't touch this because of the nature of it being a hack. Even if it's proven to work reliably, it's still outside the regular functionality of the camera and would probably be deemed an insurance risk.
Canon definitely won't like Magic Lantern since they're loosing control over what features are enabled or disabled. The 6D is a great example of how Canon purposely handicaps a camera in multiple ways. And of course, they can always sue. Note that the firmware for the 5d3 is a "Nightly Build" addition to their pre-beta. For both video and non-video users, ML has recently implemented "automatic dot-tune" for micro-focus-adjustment. Also RAW histograms. And much, much more.
Amazing stuff. According to your definition of "handicap", Toyota handicaps the Yaris by not equipping it with a V8 engine. Well a Yaris does not have a V8 engine that is using only 6 cylinders because Toyota wants to sell another car for more money. The capability is there in the Canon camera you just haven't had the ability to access it.
Big difference. I am not sure Canon can do anything about it except void your warranty. Just like putting a super charger on a car, if the engine blows its on me. Federal court just ruled that phone companies cannot prevent you from jail breaking your phone if it is yours and not under contract. I cannot see how Canon can prevent me from changing the Camera or prevent a group from helping. It gets even harder since ML is not even charging.
That's not the issue. The issue is "entitlement" and "naivety". Saying that Canon locks or hides features on purpose is just naive.
Guys, Nikon does it too, not just Canon. When you see a maker disabling a feature that has nothing to do with hardware for example, no bracketing in a lower cost model , what do you think that is?
According to Benarm's definition, it would be exactly like Toyota putting a V8 on every Lexus — only to disable the fuel injection to 2 cylinders on the V6 models so they can charge more for the fully functional V8 version. Timmbits - yes but not to the same degree. Heck Canon still hasn't finished dribbling out something as simple and trivially basic as fully working AutoISO over a decade.
And I don't believe the D hardware is capable of video of this quality no matter what firmware it ran. Look how choppy and aliased the liveview on it is and look at Canon liveview. I'd say it's closer to Toyota placing an electronic rev limiter on their car which limits its top speed to mph.
Then, Magic Lantern comes along and removes the rev limiter allowing the car to generate more power at higher RPMs and to exceed mph.
The downside might be that the engine wasn't tested to handle those high RPMs, and the frame wasn't tested to handle those high speeds. So, the car wears out faster and is at risk of breaking down. In the event it needs to go in for repairs, insurance might not cover it since the user had modified the car outside its original parameters.
Alexa has 14 stops of DR. Canon RAW, even in still mode, doesn't have anything even close to 14 stops. See dxomark. ET2 - DR at view 22MP is not the same as it would be at 2MP, the RAW video might have better as it trades spatial resolution away for less noise in shadows and the highlight levels still have to remain the same and Alexa and such are more like 2MP to compare to than 22MP that said I'm sure the Alexa is no doubt better in many ways but all the same this is utterly mind blowing and nothing else remotely like it comes close.
Also, how do you know the Canon in video mode doesn't skip lines and pixels? If people watch two video samples on You-Tube, both streamed at 5mbps, but one originally based on the 50mbps MOV h. Most of the difference would probably owe to other filter effects applied in the edit process. RAW might be more flexible for complex commercial studio editing, but of no more use to anyone else than to have an wheel truck in the driveway.
Otherwise, this improvement is not really for you. If you did absolutely no post work to either files, then indeed you'd see little difference except in high movement scenes , but as soon as you start "grading" your files, the difference will be great.
Read to any jpg vs RAW debate, and it's the same deal. If Canon really wanted to stop Magic Lantern, they could. But in their interest they don't as it creates another market of users. Take Apple Iphone. If Jailbreak never existed for it, I don't think it would of taken market share as it did. You're wrong about the iPhone.
I'm guessing the same applies to most smartphones. The vast majority of iPhone users are completely tech-inept. That how they sell so many,, pure lowest-common denominator. I own a galaxy note II and I absolutely love it. Nevertheless it lack the reliability and ergonomics of and iPhone by a long shot.
Hopes it forces other vendors to improve their cameras, it is kind of embarrassing for Sony that the A99 is so poor on video.
Sony has a full fleet of professional video camera equipment. If you want better video camera, get the FS FS is very nice for slow mo, but actually the image in raw on the hacked 5D Mark III is much more cinematic looking. Big difference! Sony do need to improve video on their DSLRs, they are behind Canon and Panasonic by a considerable margin when it comes to image quality.
RX1 is such a lovely stills camera. Such a shame there's such a big gap from the stills to video quality on a premium flagship camera. Do you mean this one? Downsampling 4K to 2K improves image quality substantially 2. Recording at a higher resolution allows you to crop the footage and still produce full HD.
Green screen work and effects compositing look a lot better when done at a higher resolution and downsampled. ML makes Canon look like a bunch of old men more worried about what to order for lunch than changing the world. But changing the world is what Canon could be doing if they wanted too.
As with the 5D2 and video, Canon had no clue what they had then and no clue now. There's a difference between what you product can technically do, and what your product can do reliably enough to enable the feature without unleashing a massive technical support burden. One would think Canon would just buy out Magic lantern, or their engineers, and put this stuff into their camera's to begin with?
I know, crazy thought to make a product to max out it's abilities, when someone else can just take your product and make it better for you. That doesn't make you look foolish, does it? They never learn. Canon could buy out or sue MagicLantern, followed by keeping everything the same read: their profit. I bet Canon makes expensive video equipment too Canon has at least 2 reasons: 1.
It doesn't cost Canon to have Magic Lantern right now 2. Canon has it's more expensive video cameras to protect. That said, I do wish these advanced features are supported by the default firmware if the hardware is capable of doing it. ML add on - if it screws up your camera..
It's alot easier for ML to rapidly implement features and release code because they are only working on released cameras, with a very limited I'm a ML semi-newbie, but my impression is that the ML developers are all volunteers. Occasionally, the website will ask for donations to help acquire a recently released model.
It's probably the marketing guys locking the engineers in the basement kinda issue and not that they don'thave the people there to easily do all of this and more. Also how can you buy out something that doesn't exist? ML is not a company. It's unaffiliated hackers working together towards something fun and great. To shoot the same stuff aht at the end of the day woould appear the same to viewers who can't stream at 90mbps and who don't have a big 4k screen?
By Palmi on Macchina Fotografica EOS D solo corpo, cavo con falsa batteria da collegare direttamente al Core, cavo per alimentare la Montatura da collegare al Core, Cavo per la camera di guida da collegare al Core. Tempo per il setup fotografico: 5 minuti. Una gioia. By Riccardo on But how long? In fact, the longer the exposition time that our Related products New.
In Stock. Dovetail clamps. The dovetail clamps provide the connection to telescopes support plates and are useful to create support instruments like side-by-side plates to support two telescopes in parallel on the same mount or to allow the precise positioning of the guide rings to adjust precisely the weight balance.
Our dovetail clamps, unlike the common ones, offer Be the first to review this product. The QHY5L-II mono is the ideal solution for people searching for an affordable but sensitive autoguide camera that can be used also for lunar, planetary and solar high resolution imaging.
Dovetail bars. The Vixen style dovetail plate 90mm PLUS is designed to let you install telescopes or cameras on mounts with Vixen type clamp or photographic heads with Arca Swiss type clamp. This Vixen style dovetail plate is 90mm long and, not only it comes with central threaded holed and slots, but also threaded holes to connect to other PLUS mechanical components
0コメント