# EOS 5D Mark III Firmware 1.2.1 Available for Download



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 30, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/eos-5d-mark-iii-firmware-1-2-1-available-for-download/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/eos-5d-mark-iii-firmware-1-2-1-available-for-download/">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>A list of improvements in firmware version 1.2.1 is listed below.</strong>
</p>
<ol>
<li>Uncompressed HDMI output is now enabled.</li>
<li>Enables the center AF point to autofocus when the camera is used with Canon EF lens/extender combinations whose combined maximum aperture is f/8.</li>
<li>Improves the speed of the camera’s acquisition of focus when using a Canon Speedlite’s AF-assist beam.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the LCD monitor may freeze and display Err 70 or Err 80 when a still photo is taken during Live View or in movie shooting mode.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon that may occur when the continuous shooting priority setting is enabled for multiple exposures, such that, after the sixth image is taken, there is a slight pause before the remainder of the sequence is completed.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the viewfinder display shows incorrect information during AEB shooting.</li>
<li>Communication with the WFT-E7 Wireless File Transmitter has been improved.</li>
<li>When images have been successfully transferred with the WFT-E7 Wireless File Transmitter through the FTP protocol, an “O” will be displayed. When images have not been successfully transferred with the WFT-E7 Wireless File Transmitter through the FTP protocol, an “X” will be displayed.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the camera may not function properly when an Eye-Fi card is used.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the focal length value listed in the Exif information is not displayed correctly for images shot with the EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM lens.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the lens firmware cannot be updated properly.</li>
<li>Corrects errors in the Arabic language menu.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the camera changes the AF microadjustment value to -8.</li>
<li>Fixes a phenomenon in which the on-screen guidance cannot be fully displayed when setting the maximum limit value for the “Setting the ISO Speed Range for Auto ISO” option.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#DriversAndSoftware" target="_blank">Download from Canon USA</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/847545-REG/Canon_5260A002_EOS_5D_Mark_III.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">EOS 5D Mark III at B&H Photo</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Click (Apr 30, 2013)

Finally. 

Thanks for posting this info.


----------



## Viggo (Apr 30, 2013)

Did the flash assist thing get any faster?


----------



## nameless (Apr 30, 2013)

...
15. Removed "support" for 3rd party batteries...


----------



## Viggo (Apr 30, 2013)

nameless said:


> ...
> 15. Removed "support" for 3rd party batteries...



Really?


----------



## nameless (Apr 30, 2013)

Viggo said:


> nameless said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



You can still use them, but you get a warning and they are shown as 100% charged.


----------



## marvinhello (Apr 30, 2013)

There are 15 bullet points in total according to Canon Europe, the missing one is number 14, it should be "The lens compensation data for the EF24-70mm f/4L IS USM lens has been added."


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 30, 2013)

Have already downloaded it but haven't installed yet ... Excited and can't wait to get back home to install


----------



## bholliman (Apr 30, 2013)

nameless said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > nameless said:
> ...



The 6D firmware already has this "feature" :... Somewhat annoying, but I still use my 3rd party batteries. I just have to make sure I always carry a charged spare, since I can't tell how much juice the one in my camera has.


----------



## duydaniel (Apr 30, 2013)

any comment on image quality?


----------



## zazen (Apr 30, 2013)

bholliman said:


> nameless said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...



Is this for ANY third-party batteries?


----------



## caMARYnon (Apr 30, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Have there been firmware updates for Canon lenses that are loaded through the camera?


yes, for 40mm pancake


----------



## psolberg (Apr 30, 2013)

waiting on EOSHD to do a full test, but so far his early conclusions is that the uncompressed HDMI only yields minor improvements. If this is the case, the soft output of the 5DmkIII compared to other cameras, as documented on many of his tests, may in fact be impossible to fix with a firmware update, at least one from canon.


----------



## mrmarks (Apr 30, 2013)

So, why are there two versions for windows in the canon usa site http://usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#DriversAndSoftware ?


----------



## cocopop05 (Apr 30, 2013)

Just upgraded my camera to the new firmware. I can confirm with the 600ex-rt, the autofocus with AF Assist beam is indeed noticeably faster.

Also noticed a small interface change. Before the update when you turn the camera on you would get an almost fullscreen icon of the sensor cleaning process. After the update, you get the Q screen with a small animated icon in the bottom right corner showing the sensor cleaning process is active.


----------



## gbchriste (Apr 30, 2013)

Was hoping they were going to fix the black AF points to illuminate them. Had a really, really hard time a couple of nights ago doing some nighttime street photography. Frequently impossible to find the active AF point unless you turn the camera toward a light colored background.


----------



## smithy (Apr 30, 2013)

Heh, it appears that this firmware has been on Canon New Zealand's website since 18 April... I should have checked earlier, but I had a bunch of paid shoots to do and it wasn't the right time to mess around with firmware.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Apr 30, 2013)

gbchriste said:


> Was hoping they were going to fix the black AF points to illuminate them. Had a really, really hard time a couple of nights ago doing some nighttime street photography. Frequently impossible to find the active AF point unless you turn the camera toward a light colored background.



AF Oneshot is a lot more accurate in low light...plus one can see which AF point is illuminated. 
There's a vast array of different ways of using the AF system on the 5DIII, I'm sure with a little exerimentation a workable solution can be found for your style and genre of photography.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Apr 30, 2013)

psolberg said:


> waiting on EOSHD to do a full test, but so far his early conclusions is that the uncompressed HDMI only yields minor improvements. If this is the case, the soft output of the 5DmkIII compared to other cameras, as documented on many of his tests, may in fact be impossible to fix with a firmware update, at least one from canon.



Meh, there's just a little more color information and the signal is far from uncompressed when using the HDMI output. Magic Lantern is working on a true RAW and 14 bit video recording along with 4:2:2 to the card, something we'll never see from Canon.


----------



## Inspiron41 (Apr 30, 2013)

Any difference between this firmware and the one that was released just last week?


----------



## CarpetFeet (Apr 30, 2013)

Will I lose all my custom settings when performing this upgrade?


----------



## Rat (Apr 30, 2013)

I want the f/8 and bought a 2x mk II extender in anticipation, but I'm going to lose a lot of usability on my 4 third party batteries. Grunt.


----------



## preppyak (Apr 30, 2013)

crazyrunner33 said:


> Magic Lantern is working on a true RAW and 14 bit video recording along with 4:2:2 to the card, something we'll never see from Canon.


And they've already said it will never be something that will work for video people...best they've gotten so far is 720 at 24fps for 2s...the reality is you'll never get long recording times because the camera has a buffer to deal with. 1080p wont happen.

Really, it's an upgrade for time lapsers and may have some cool other uses.



psolberg said:


> If this is the case, the soft output of the 5DmkIII compared to other cameras, as documented on many of his tests, may in fact be impossible to fix with a firmware update, at least one from canon.


That said, what they did find interesting was that the resolution of the DNGs they got from their RAW mode were way higher resolution than just the traditional h.264 video stream from Canon. Not sure if that means that Canon intentionally is crippling it, or if the h.264 encoding loses a lot of resolution, but, that could be useful for some purposes.

Of course, if you want Raw video at 2k, you'd just spend the same amount on a BMCC instead and get a much nicer workflow.


----------



## Bosman (Apr 30, 2013)

Fixes a phenomenon, na naaaa na nana. Phenomenon, na nana na.


----------



## AprilForever (Apr 30, 2013)

Sounds butt kicking!!! But I don't have one...

But, this bodes well for the 7D mk II!!!


----------



## Lee Jay (Apr 30, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> Enables the center AF point to autofocus when the camera is used with Canon EF lens/extender combinations whose combined maximum aperture is f/8.



Question for owners.

Has anyone tried the f/8 AF system with f/2.8 lenses with stacked teleconverters?


----------



## jaayres20 (Apr 30, 2013)

I have two 5D3s and I updated one of them and left the other alone for now. I don't have my 70-200 or 24-70 with me right now but I notice a huge difference in AF speed with my 50mm 1.2 with the 600ex-rt AF lamp. The 50mm 1.2 is a dog in low light and I almost never used it at wedding receptions because of it. This seems to have made a considerable amount of difference. Not only does it acquire focus faster it also seems like it drives the lens a little faster. Maybe I am just imagining that part. I tested them back to back just to make sure and it is the way you would expect it to be with such good camera with great AF capabilities.


----------



## JonAustin (Apr 30, 2013)

cocopop05 said:


> Also noticed a small interface change. Before the update when you turn the camera on you would get an almost fullscreen icon of the sensor cleaning process. After the update, you get the Q screen with a small animated icon in the bottom right corner showing the sensor cleaning process is active.



I'm not seeing this on my copy; I still get the same fullscreen animated icon when I power on and power off. 

However, I have noticed that, with auto sensor cleaning enabled, when I power up / down shortly (i.e., within a few seconds) after the last sensor cleaning cycle, the auto-cleaning doesn't engage. Seems like there must be a timer that skips the cleaning within xx seconds of the last cleaning cycle. (If this isn't new behavior, I just never noticed it before.)


----------



## JonAustin (Apr 30, 2013)

zazen said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > nameless said:
> ...



It's true for my Pearstone battery, which I received in a 5D Mark III package deal from B&H in December. IMHO, removing features through firmware updates -- especially when biased against 3rd-party manufacturers -- is NOT cool.


----------



## bk-productions (Apr 30, 2013)

nameless said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > nameless said:
> ...



But that's really annoying...



mrmarks said:


> So, why are there two versions for windows in the canon usa site http://usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#DriversAndSoftware ?



The firmware is packeg in a .dmg for OSX and a .zip for Windows.


----------



## spinworkxroy (Apr 30, 2013)

> 15. Removed "support" for 3rd party batteries...



Yes, this is true unfortunately..All my 3rd party batteries no longer register with the camera so i won't know how much charge they have left..this really sucks.


----------



## rpt (Apr 30, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> > 15. Removed "support" for 3rd party batteries...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, this is true unfortunately..All my 3rd party batteries no longer register with the camera so i won't know how much charge they have left..this really sucks.


Sorry about that. However, I guess as you have a number of batteries, you must have numbered them in order to keep track of them. I am guessing that you have a "bin" for charged batteries and another for uncharged batteries. Keep them fully charged. _*Always*_ keep a spare. More depending on the shoot. Shoot till the battery dies. Recharge immediately (or as soon as you possibly can...). I think that all you will miss is the flashing battery indicator... As for me, even though I have only Canon batteries, I seldom pay attention to the indicator when I am in the throes of shooting. I usually look at it as an afterthought...


----------



## Roger Jones (Apr 30, 2013)

rpt said:


> spinworkxroy said:
> 
> 
> > > 15. Removed "support" for 3rd party batteries...
> ...



When you are shooting video if the battery conks out when you are rolling you are very likely to lose the current shot. It can be recovered with voodoo but its not easy. 

No audio on the HDMI out makes that feature less useful for recording as well. You'll need to use a good slate and / or roll the recorder and record on internal then try to match the TC in post. Very disappointed that they hyped this feature and failed to mention the NO AUDIO part. Nikon / Sony HDMI out has audio.


----------



## clifton425 (Apr 30, 2013)

Having read the comments about 3rd party batteries, I switched to the Canon battery before doing the firmware update.

When I put the Pearstone battery in I did get the screen saying: "Communication with this LP-E6 battery is irregular. Continue to use this battery?" 
After answering yes, the camera went on to operate normally. The battery levels and charge capabilities are functioning and unchanged from before the firmware update. I only get the Communication screen one time after putting in the Pearstone battery, further camera restarts do not bring up the Communication screen. Removing and replacing the Pearstone battery does bring up the Communication screen, but again, only one time. So it appears that there are some chip differences among 3rd party LP-E6 compatible batteries. (BTW the Pearstone came from B&H)

After the completing the firmware update all my previous custom settings were still in place and unchanged including all my microfocus adjustments.


----------



## rpt (Apr 30, 2013)

Roger Jones said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > spinworkxroy said:
> ...


Roger, sorry, I don't shoot video so I am not sure how easy or difficult it is to keep track of shooting time. There could be a correlation there, but you would have to accumulate shooting times some place that is referenceable by the battery you are shooting with, and correlate that with the current aggregated time for that battery. Sorry, can't think of any other solution at this time.


----------



## kbmelb (Apr 30, 2013)

I posted this in the previous 5D3 Firmware thread but thought I put it here.

Eye-Fi users remove the card before updating.

I used a CF card to update but left my Eye-Fi card in the SD slot and my camera bricked. I tried all the usual things, powering on/off, removing battery, grip and nothing worked. With the power switched still set yo off, I removed the Eye-Fi card and the camera powered up to the Firmware screen and it said "Processing." It stayed like that for a while so I pulled and replaced the battery and powered on to normal operation.

Then I was able to update the FW without issue. I inserted the Eye-Fi card without issue.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Apr 30, 2013)

I have one of the first 5D3s on the market. I running the original firmware. Do I need to update to each firmware to get to the latest, or can I jump right to the last version. Also, how exactly do I update the firmware? How do I get it on to the CF card without a card reader?


----------



## AlanF (Apr 30, 2013)

I found that the original Canon LP-6 with the correct packaging etc purchased on eBay is a fake, but it still works fine - one unexpected good use of the update!

I tried the 70-200mm f/4 L IS with the Canon 2x TC III. The focussing was fine but the quality is not as good as the 100-400mm at 400mm.


----------



## Camerajah (Apr 30, 2013)

You can get the focusing point or points highlighted in red but only for a short time after focus is attained


----------



## amazin (Apr 30, 2013)

Daniel Flather said:


> I have one of the first 5D3s on the market. I running the original firmware. Do I need to update to each firmware to get to the latest, or can I jump right to the last version. Also, how exactly do I update the firmware? How do I get it on to the CF card without a card reader?



Hi, no you dont need to update to each firmware, you can jump straight to the latest version.
To update without a card reader, you just need to install the latest version of EOS Utility and plug your 5D3 to your computer via USB. Then just follow the instruction you'll find on a pdf file inside the zip folder of the new firmware.

Hope it can help you and others.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 30, 2013)

nameless said:


> ...
> 15. Removed "support" for 3rd party batteries...



16. Removed the unofficial support that was apparently left in the f/8 firmware improvement for the 1DX that let the 1.4x TC III work with the 70-300L (if you keep it at 300mm).  (Kinda ironic that they force you to sell your Canon TC and go buy a Kenko it seems or spend an extra $250 for a Kenko and, assuming it is not as sharp, not get the full performance you should be able to and need to get out of the 70-300L. Still hoping that they will put out a 1.2.2 with 'various minor fixes' and they will support this combo unofficially.) I don't have the 1DX but two people are telling me that they see it report as f/8 and work on their 1DX after they put in the f/8 firmware for that body. Canon removed it from the officially reported list (maybe since the TC only fits if you use it on the long end at 300mm) but apparently left the support code in on the 1DX and seemingly removed it  when they took six months to otherwise perhaps copy and paste the code over the 5D3.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 30, 2013)

CarpetFeet said:


> Will I lose all my custom settings when performing this upgrade?



no


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 30, 2013)

preppyak said:


> crazyrunner33 said:
> 
> 
> > Magic Lantern is working on a true RAW and 14 bit video recording along with 4:2:2 to the card, something we'll never see from Canon.
> ...



I wonder if they can feed that 'raw' DNG stuff into the h.264 compressor and get better quality out? Or if they can push it out frame by frame over the HDMI and delete each frame from the buffer afterwards so nothing would ever overflow and you could at least get an 8bit or maybe 10bit crisper image out over HDMI? It seems like it should be possible but it's hard to know the internal Canon subsystem, it might not be, or even if it is, it quite likely might require all sorts of knowledge far beyond what they have been able to hack out so far and might only be reasonably doable by Canon people with full docs and access?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 30, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> > 15. Removed "support" for 3rd party batteries...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, this is true unfortunately..All my 3rd party batteries no longer register with the camera so i won't know how much charge they have left..this really sucks.



They released a new manual document warning about counterfeiting along with this improvement to insure that you don't use phony batteries.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 30, 2013)

Roger Jones said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > spinworkxroy said:
> ...



I didn't test that yet, that is unfortunate. I thought people using beta 1.2.0 said audio over HDMI worked fine? And that some docs for 1.2.1 implied it should work?


----------



## distant.star (Apr 30, 2013)

Bosman said:


> Fixes a phenomenon, na naaaa na nana. Phenomenon, na nana na.



I know it's a phenomenal camera, but I had no idea it's this phenomenal!

The obfuscation of language!

When I worked in software support, the company would not allow the word "problem" to be used. Every problem was an "issue." We also had many "chats" about these things -- So, how's that CGI issue?

And now it's come to this -- not a problem, not an issue, but a phenomenon.

For me, I'm not bothered enough by any of the problems they're fixing, so my cheap batteries and I will go along unmolested by corporate bickering.


----------



## cayenne (Apr 30, 2013)

I wonder how long before Magic Lantern is set up to work with this new firmware?

CC


----------



## skitron (Apr 30, 2013)

So are all of the third party lenses still focusing correctly with this firmware version? I'd hate to think Canon would sabotage them with a firmware update but can't put it past them if they sabotaged third party batteries.


----------



## WillShootPhotos (Apr 30, 2013)

CarpetFeet said:


> Will I lose all my custom settings when performing this upgrade?



Nope - custom settings, your "my menu", etc all stay the same.

- Will


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 30, 2013)

Finally installed it ... delighted that the AF on my Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC still works good without any hiccups due to Canon's new firmware "fix"


----------



## rpt (Apr 30, 2013)

distant.star said:


> Bosman said:
> 
> 
> > Fixes a phenomenon, na naaaa na nana. Phenomenon, na nana na.
> ...


Yup! But you have to admit - phenomenon beats issue or bug hands down...
Even though it still is a bug or a problem...


----------



## psolberg (Apr 30, 2013)

> That said, what they did find interesting was that the resolution of the DNGs they got from their RAW mode were way higher resolution than just the traditional h.264 video stream from Canon. Not sure if that means that Canon intentionally is crippling it, or if the h.264 encoding loses a lot of resolution, but, that could be useful for some purposes.
> 
> Of course, if you want Raw video at 2k, you'd just spend the same amount on a BMCC instead and get a much nicer workflow.



yup. BMCC FTW. 
Regarding the RAW video hack of ML, 
EOSHD has a really interesting update
http://www.eoshd.com/content/10250/canon-5d-2k-raw-feed-update-1920x720-possible-on-1000x-card



> _Canon’s Chuck Westfall and Tim Smith say line skipping on the sensor was necessary to get down from the native sensor resolution of 21MP+ to 2MP, implying this results in moire and aliasing. However the 2K output of the sensor is much cleaner without the same moire issues as the final 1080p video, and resolution is much closer to 1080 lines than the mushy 5D Mark III 1080p is.
> 
> The softer image with moire and aliasing appears to be introduced by the image processor further (and crudely) resizing the 2K raw image, which seems unnecessary. All the camera should need to do is crop to 16:9 and compress the data, not reduce the resolution dramatically further like it is doing. It could be that in order to provide a simultaneous VGA live view feed and 1080p to the SD card, the 2K data has to be downrezed to a middle ground between 640×480 and 1920×1080, then upscaled back to 1080p but I’m purely speculating.
> _



line skipping, yikes.  I'm sure we haven't heard the last of this yet.


----------



## LDS (Apr 30, 2013)

Is the CF formatting after the firmware update really necessary, or removing the firmware file is enough?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 30, 2013)

A tweet from J.M. offers this sample of video taken using the internal recorder with the same settings, old vs. new firmware:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vuwbn2582pv67i3/5d3121.png

So maybe I actually was correct in my initial take where I said it looked like the video was sharper.
Internal vs external seems similar but new vs old firmware seems different.

Maybe it does grab more details and not mush details in shadows as much now.

(I think I have seen a few very weird artifacts with the new firmware though perhaps popping up in video.)


----------



## photosites (Apr 30, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > crazyrunner33 said:
> ...



I checked out the DNG file posted on eoshd.com. Each file is about 5MB. Therefore, to get 30fps, you need a sustained write bandwidth of 150MByte/s (that is 1.2Gbits/s). That will be quite challenging even for the fastest notebook SSD. A 64GB CF card, even if it were fast enough, would only store about 7 minutes of video.

Therefore your suggestion to use the HDMI out is potentially the solution. HDMI 1.0/1.2 supports a bandwidth of 4.95Gbit/s and HDMI 1.3 supports about 10Gbit/s. BTW, does anyone know which version of HDMI is supported by 5D3?

Ofcourse, I am no camera engineer. These are just rough calculations that I came up with.

Lastly, pardon my ignorance in video, doesn't the 'uncompressed HDMI' output as provided by firmware v1.2.1 mean raw? Is the ML DNG just a higher resolution raw compared to the one provided by firmware v1.2.1?


----------



## Rat (Apr 30, 2013)

skitron said:


> So are all of the third party lenses still focusing correctly with this firmware version? I'd hate to think Canon would sabotage them with a firmware update but can't put it past them if they sabotaged third party batteries.


Ew.

Just... ew.

Can't the ML community produce a version that just adds support for 3rd party batts again?


----------



## neighborsgoat (Apr 30, 2013)

WillShootPhotos said:


> CarpetFeet said:
> 
> 
> > Will I lose all my custom settings when performing this upgrade?
> ...


Well, maybe not the custom settings, but I've lost some setups related to the focus point selection on the custom shooting modes (C1-C3 on the mode dial). Before the firmware update, on C1 I had all 61-point automatic selection AF, on C2 I had AF point expansion (the nine center points) and on C3 I had Single point spot AF. After the upgrade to 1.2.1, all three custom shooting modes had single point AF. I had to reprogram them back to what I was used to.


----------



## cthetoy (Apr 30, 2013)

My 3rd party batteries worked with after the firmware upgrade. I bought these batteries off Ebay two weeks ago from Super_techmedia. Batteries from Eforcity failed. I bought those 6 months ago.


----------



## eyeland (Apr 30, 2013)

Maybe someone should start a thread where we can compile a list of working 3. party batteries (and any possible tips or tricks concerning their usage))


----------



## dirtcastle (Apr 30, 2013)

Can someone tell me when mistakes got elevated to "phenomenon" status? 

I'm not picking on CR... it is clearly the industry's boilerplate language. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought a phenomenon was something amazing and hard to explain, rather than simply being a software bug or a hardware shortcoming.


----------



## leGreve (Apr 30, 2013)

Wauw... they really dropped the ball on this firmware upgrade. What a complete waste of time and hype.

I know it's mainly a still camera, but hey, those so-called video upgrades are worthless.

Magic Lantern is doing better things for the 5D than Canon themselves.
I guess that is just what Canon is about.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 30, 2013)

Well now someone else is insisting that the 1.4x TC III + 70-300L + 1DX doesn't report f/8 or AF well so maybe I got bogus info at first. Maybe there is no way to make that combo report f/8. A huge shame, but what can you do, sounds like you can't blame the firmware after all.

(Although they could add a custom function called force f/8 AF mode hint hint ). Not that I expect that to happen. Usually companies with more than 4 employees don't do that sort of stuff. But it would be awesome (and boost Canon TC sales vs Kenko hint hint ))

I guess I'll order the Kenko (apparently it has a chip inside that can spoof things or something and tricks it into reporting f/8 even though the 70-300L doesn't have TC pins) and hope the image quality it provides is enough to make it worthwhile.

To bad the Canon TC III didn't have some fancier logic in it to spoof things when needed or a force f/8 mode custom function is unlikely.

Anyway guess they didn't remove stuff from the f/8 addition so it's all good on their part. Glad we have f/8 ability for what it does handle .

Unless I hear otherwise yet again.


----------



## eyeland (Apr 30, 2013)

dirtcastle said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought a phenomenon was something amazing and hard to explain, rather than simply being a software bug or a hardware shortcoming.


" a phenomenon (Greek: φαινόμενoν, from the Greek word 'phainomenon', from the verb 'phanein', to show, shine, appear, to be manifest (or manifest itself)),[1] plural phenomena, is any observable occurrence."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenon


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 30, 2013)

photosites said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > preppyak said:
> ...



Actually neither are truly RAW since they are debayered and binned in either case and somewhat processed. The 'raw' DNG ML found does retain 14bits though and 4:4:4 I believe, so it's sort of raw in that sense and seems to have had no NR or anything done and seems crisp.

1.2.1 send ucompressed out over HDMI but it is not RAW, it has been debayered, scaled to 1920x1080 and clipped to 8bits and 4:2:2 color information. 

1.2.1 appears to retain more detail in shadows and is crisper (worse AA and artifacts are a question mark) whether recorded internally or externally.


----------



## dirtcastle (Apr 30, 2013)

eyeland said:


> dirtcastle said:
> 
> 
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought a phenomenon was something amazing and hard to explain, rather than simply being a software bug or a hardware shortcoming.
> ...



That definition is phenomenal!! ;-)

NEWSFLASH: Canon fixed all observable occurences!!!

I guess my standards for "phenomena" are too high. :-(


----------



## eyeland (Apr 30, 2013)

agreed 
Too damn high


----------



## mackguyver (May 1, 2013)

For those of us who use Canon batteries and don't care about video (the minority here I guess ), the f/8 autofocus on a non-1D body is amazing and I couldn't be happier! I can't believe that the AF is still so snappy at f/8 and can't wait to get out to shoot some wildlife


----------



## Danack (May 1, 2013)

Went out shooting today with my 5DmkIII, 100-400 + 1.4 TC.

Works so much better with the new firmware compared with taping up the pins. It's actually even about the same speed as a 1DmkIII - but the focus spot seems so small, which is probably more due to the lack of crop factor rather than it actually being a smaller focus zone.


----------



## Lee Jay (May 1, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Enables the center AF point to autofocus when the camera is used with Canon EF lens/extender combinations whose combined maximum aperture is f/8.
> ...



Anyone?


----------



## Zlatko (May 1, 2013)

GMCPhotographics said:


> gbchriste said:
> 
> 
> > Was hoping they were going to fix the black AF points to illuminate them. Had a really, really hard time a couple of nights ago doing some nighttime street photography. Frequently impossible to find the active AF point unless you turn the camera toward a light colored background.
> ...



Someone please clarify: does this firmware update change anything with the problem of AF points not being illuminated as they are on other Canon cameras? It's not mentioned in the list of improvements.


----------



## juanky (May 1, 2013)

I don't have full support on 3rd party batteries, but I still get accurate charge percentage...


----------



## notapro (May 1, 2013)

LDS said:


> Is the CF formatting after the firmware update really necessary, or removing the firmware file is enough?



Wondering about the same thing.


----------



## JonAustin (May 1, 2013)

notapro said:


> LDS said:
> 
> 
> > Is the CF formatting after the firmware update really necessary, or removing the firmware file is enough?
> ...



It isn't strictly necessary to format the CF (or SD) card after updating the firmware; you could just as easily remove the card from the camera, insert it into your PC's card reader, and there delete the firmware update file from the card.

I think Canon stipulates this instruction, as it's the simplest, safest and most straightforward method for ensuring that the firmware update file is removed from the card, and that the card is made ready for capturing more images / video, all without needing to remove the card from the camera.

When I put one of my cards into a card reader after capturing images to it, it has two folders, one containing images and a second named CANON_MISC (or something similar). I don't know if these folders are created during the format process, or when the first image is captured; I've never taken the time to check. But if they are created during the format process, it would be another reason for following Canon's recommended procedure, rather than, say, putting the card into your PC's card reader and formatting it there.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 1, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> nameless said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Although now 1DX users are telling me it doesn't work in that combo and, even worse, now a 5D3 user says it does't report or work with the Kenko either (hopefully this user was using a different Kenko). I don't know. Maybe I got bad info from people at first. I will try the Kenko myself and see what the real deal is. (if someone gives me a 1dx a will test that too and give a definitive answer  )


----------



## Bruno97 (May 1, 2013)

Hi all,

I've been reading this forum for a while and finally decided to post something today... something weird :
Yesterday, right after the 1.2.1 firmware update, my 5D III set the micro adjustments to -8 (in the option for all the lenses). It was set to 0 before.
By the way, I'm not using the general MA option. I'm using specific MA per lens, which are set between +7 and +10 depending on the lens mounted on the body.

That sounded weird to me so I made a couple of tests with my 50L. And it seems that my +10 MA settings lead constantly to out of focus pictures.
I made tests with MA set to 0 and even to -8 and it appeared to be much better !

So now I'm wondering what Canon meant by _*"Fixes a phenomenon in which the camera changes the AF microadjustment value to -8."*_ ?

I'm testing my other lenses today...

Thanks for reading.
Bruno


----------



## Gcon (May 1, 2013)

Can I attach Canon 1.4x III and 2.0x III extenders to my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM at the same time and still get AF at 560mm f/8, or is this crazy talk?

Also I do a lot of Live View focusing for my landscape work, and always have the focus mode in the contrast detect "Live" mode (not "Quick" or "Face" modes) and it often switches inexplicably to the "Face" mode on it's own. I don't know if they are the correct mode names as I don't have the camera in front of me. It's a real "phenomenon" though - phenomenally annoying as it means I can't move the focus rectangle to where it needs to be! Anyone else get that?

-Gcon


----------



## rpt (May 1, 2013)

This is a shot of a hawk in my garden. shot with the 5D3, 100-400L+1.4x @400 so effective 560mm. I have not yet AFMAed it yet so this was shot with live view. The settings were f8, 1/800, ISO 1600. You will notice that he has had a drink of water in the garden as well.


----------



## iP337 (May 1, 2013)

photosites said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > preppyak said:
> ...



So Magic Lantern seem to have found the source of the sensor scan for video, the "file" is a 2K resolution 14bit RAW image but the actual "usable image" is about 1920x1080 pixels, the rest of the 2K file are black bars. Even the "720p mode" is still the same sized 2K file only with a "usable image" of 1920x720 pixels.

Alex (from Magic Lantern) then threw in CHDK's Canon DNG converter to save these RAW images to card. (which I think uses the same CR2 RAW converter already in the camera but instead spits it out as a DNG rather then a CR2) each frame (or DNG "file") is about 5.09MBs for all "usable image" resolutions. (1920x1080 or 1920x720 "useable images" are in the same 2K RAW file, just with more black bars on the 720 one so they are actually the same file size)

The "frame buffer" where these images were found only allows 7.5MB/s through it so it can't write the images to the card fast enough and when the buffer is all fill up with as much as it can take it stops the video recording, at most it's getting about 50 frames, which at 24fps is about 2 seconds of video. (setting the camera's photo mode to JPEG only seems to increase the buffer's write speed, having RAW+JPEG or RAW set limits to 4.9MB/s and about 30 frames before recording stops)

HDMI won't work, Canon's HDMI out basically can't display that much detail; it's limited to 8bit, requires "debayering", 4:2:2 "sub-sampling", and needs to resize that 2K image down to 1920x1080. Once you do all that "compressing" guess what we're left with? Yep the 8bit 4:2:2 uncompressed (not RAW) image that Canon just gave us with this update.

The only way to get these images to card is to "compress" them before sending them through this 7.5MB/s buffer. I don't believe the Magic Lantern team has the ability...http://diffractedmedia.blogspot.com/


----------



## Roger Jones (May 1, 2013)

iP337 said:


> The only way to get these images to card is to "compress" them before sending them through this 7.5MB/s buffer.



Thats what the new black magic cameras will do, write compressed .dng. Also clipping out the interesting part of the frame would save bandwidth, no point in writing the black bars. Remains to be seen if it can compress the frames fast enough.


----------



## swldstn (May 1, 2013)

Ok, just completed the firmware 1.2.1 firmware update (which went fine) but I tested six authentic Canon LP-E6 batteries bought from B&H, Best Buy and Adorama. Two of the six can not be recognized. Four are recognized properly. These are not third party batteries. The all carry Canon markings and to me appear identical to the other four. I reviewed them and cannot find any differences other than the serial numbers. Tomorrow I will contact Canon CPS to understand hopefully what is going on. If the two batteries prove to be counterfeit then I'll claim Canon has a real problem that they need to step up and solve. Both worked fine in all previous firmware versions and had recognized serial numbers. I'll have to find a friends 7D or 5D II to see what they say. 

Just to get my story straight I tried them yet again. Now one of the two failing batteries is being recognized. But of course I put both failing batteries in my BG-E11 at the same time.
(currently only testing in the BG-E11 and not in the body directly). Now only one failing.

So maybe there is a 1.2.2 firmware update in our near future.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 1, 2013)

Well, here's the funny thing...if I use my 5DIII with a 400mm f2.8, I pop a 2x mkII and a 1.4x mkIII TC's on it...it still has full AF, albeit a little slower. That's before and after updating the firmware.


----------



## rpt (May 1, 2013)

After reading about some batteries not being detected correctly, I checked all mine. All ok there. It recognised all three.


----------



## AlanF (May 1, 2013)

Gcon said:


> Can I attach Canon 1.4x III and 2.0x III extenders to my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM at the same time and still get AF at 560mm f/8, or is this crazy talk?
> 
> Also I do a lot of Live View focusing for my landscape work, and always have the focus mode in the contrast detect "Live" mode (not "Quick" or "Face" modes) and it often switches inexplicably to the "Face" mode on it's own. I don't know if they are the correct mode names as I don't have the camera in front of me. It's a real "phenomenon" though - phenomenally annoying as it means I can't move the focus rectangle to where it needs to be! Anyone else get that?
> 
> -Gcon



It would be a miracle - the series III TCs cannot physically be stacked.


----------



## jabbott (May 1, 2013)

swldstn said:


> So maybe there is a 1.2.2 firmware update in our near future.


Or in another six months... grumble grumble


----------



## eos650 (May 1, 2013)

Gcon said:


> Can I attach Canon 1.4x III and 2.0x III extenders to my Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II USM at the same time and still get AF at 560mm f/8, or is this crazy talk?
> 
> Also I do a lot of Live View focusing for my landscape work, and always have the focus mode in the contrast detect "Live" mode (not "Quick" or "Face" modes) and it often switches inexplicably to the "Face" mode on it's own. I don't know if they are the correct mode names as I don't have the camera in front of me. It's a real "phenomenon" though - phenomenally annoying as it means I can't move the focus rectangle to where it needs to be! Anyone else get that?
> 
> -Gcon



Do you by chance have orientation base focus set? I don't know if/how that function might effect the live view focus mode, if at all, but it's worth considering. Another thing to consider is if you are using one of the custom modes (C1, C2, C3), it could be changing you focus mode, when you switch to or from these settings.


----------



## markojakatri (May 1, 2013)

I have noticed a very useful way to use Tv in low light situations. If I set Safety shift to ISO, I'm able to balance flash to available light. I can set iso as 100 and shutter speed as I want. In low light I would use big appertures anyways, so its okay if camera will set it itself. Now if that shutter speed isn't possible with maximum aperture and iso 100, camera will raise iso. That's very cool feature and I wish Av would work same way if I use minimum shutter speed in auto iso menu. It works perfectly without flash, but with flash its fixed to iso400. 

Anyways, could some one test how Tv+safety shift+flash works in new firmware. Just to be sure I'm able to use this nice feature in future too.


----------



## djh901 (May 1, 2013)

*5D MARK III 1.2.1 FIRMWARE AND BATTERY CONNECTION PROBLEMS*

I noticed after the firmware install 1.2.1 that my 5D3's are now having issues with the batteries and the camera is sending out this notice--- "lost communications with the battery" it does this with 3rd party and Canon stock battery's as well. I do use the Canon Camera Grip which hold 2 batteries ---never had any problem with regular or 3rd party batteries with the original firmware in the 5D3---
anyone notice this problem. I did advise Canon Professional Services. ???


----------



## jrista (May 1, 2013)

Does anyone know if the f/8 center point support works in Expansion or Zone modes? I'm curious if this f/8 AF support is as good as the 1D X, or if it is literally JUST the center point in single-point mode. Thanks!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 1, 2013)

jrista said:


> Does anyone know if the f/8 center point support works in Expansion or Zone modes? I'm curious if this f/8 AF support is as good as the 1D X, or if it is literally JUST the center point in single-point mode. Thanks!


The camera automatically limits you to the center point and surrounding 4 assist points either spot or non spot mode. With a TC attached, those are the only options available to you.

I'd guess that this is to prevent user issues from those who try to use points that won't work.


----------



## jrista (May 1, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Does anyone know if the f/8 center point support works in Expansion or Zone modes? I'm curious if this f/8 AF support is as good as the 1D X, or if it is literally JUST the center point in single-point mode. Thanks!
> ...



Ok, so its the same center-point f/8 AF with the option of using AF Expansion mode. Thanks!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 1, 2013)

CarpetFeet said:


> Will I lose all my custom settings when performing this upgrade?


 
No, but unless you do a camera reset, you might have problems crop up.


I recommend a camera reset after a new firmware installation, just to be safe. Software is carefully tested, but there are billions of combinations of settings possible, so reset the camera.


----------



## bass1 (May 1, 2013)

Hi,

Has anyone with Vello's BG-C9 grip tried to upgrade? Is the grip still being registered normally?

Thanks,
bass


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 1, 2013)

JonAustin said:


> notapro said:
> 
> 
> > LDS said:
> ...



It doesn't really matter if it is there or not anyway as far as I've ever seen. Unless you go to the update firmware menu the camera seems to ignore the file.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 1, 2013)

Bruno97 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I've been reading this forum for a while and finally decided to post something today... something weird :
> Yesterday, right after the 1.2.1 firmware update, my 5D III set the micro adjustments to -8 (in the option for all the lenses). It was set to 0 before.
> ...



I don't think so, mine still report normal numbers. It was supposed to stop them from all getting set to -8. Maybe that bug got trigger right as you were changing firmware and then 1.2.1 simply kept the -8 in tact.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 1, 2013)

iP337 said:


> HDMI won't work, Canon's HDMI out basically can't display that much detail; it's limited to 8bit, requires "debayering", 4:2:2 "sub-sampling", and needs to resize that 2K image down to 1920x1080. Once you do all that "compressing" guess what we're left with? Yep the 8bit 4:2:2 uncompressed (not RAW) image that Canon just gave us with this update.



Not so sure about that. Those DNG frames look a lot crisper don't they?

1. Those DNG are not true RAW are they?They are already de-bayered. No loss there.
2. As you say only 1920x1080 of the frame was valid info anyway. So no loss there.
3. Even if you lose the 4:4:4 and 14bits (not that canon seems to be 14bits to start though) won't we still retain all that extra crispness at least?


----------



## Raoul (May 1, 2013)

markojakatri said:


> I have noticed a very useful way to use Tv in low light situations. If I set Safety shift to ISO, I'm able to balance flash to available light. I can set iso as 100 and shutter speed as I want. In low light I would use big appertures anyways, so its okay if camera will set it itself. Now if that shutter speed isn't possible with maximum aperture and iso 100, camera will raise iso. That's very cool feature and I wish Av would work same way if I use minimum shutter speed in auto iso menu. It works perfectly without flash, but with flash its fixed to iso400.
> 
> Anyways, could some one test how Tv+safety shift+flash works in new firmware. Just to be sure I'm able to use this nice feature in future too.



I tested it, it works with the new firmware.
Thanks for the tip, this could make things much easier for me, I hate the fact that Auto ISO is locked at 400 with flash in AV...


----------



## iP337 (May 2, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> iP337 said:
> 
> 
> > HDMI won't work, Canon's HDMI out basically can't display that much detail; it's limited to 8bit, requires "debayering", 4:2:2 "sub-sampling", and needs to resize that 2K image down to 1920x1080. Once you do all that "compressing" guess what we're left with? Yep the 8bit 4:2:2 uncompressed (not RAW) image that Canon just gave us with this update.
> ...



I am not sure what you mean but Magic Lantern's 14bit DNGs do not compete with HDMI. Yes the DNGs are sharper because they are not compressed down like the HDMI image is. The part of my post that you quoted is explaining why we can't send the 14bit DNG through the HDMI out as a 14bit RAW image (this HDMI can't handle that much detail) and that is why I think what Canon is giving us is the best its HDMI port can do.

1. DNG and CR2 are the same, both use the same lossless RAW algorithm and both are not de-bayered. The De-bayering is preformed in your computer (usually automatically) with a viewer or editor that supports De-bayering.

2. Unfortunately we can't send that 2K RAW image through HDMI and even if we could the 1920x1080 portion is offset to the upper right so without cropping and resizing the HDMI would likely keep a black bar on the left and bottom but cutoff the right and top sides of the actual image. 

3. Canon starts with 14bit RAW images for video (that's the nice sharp DNGs we're getting), but reducing that down to 8bit loses about 2 stops of dynamic range and potentially causes banding in fine gradients (usually the sky). lowering the 4:4:4 to 4:2:2 will cause a 50% loss of sharpness (crispness) and 4:2:0 will cause a 75% loss.

http://diffractedmedia.blogspot.com/


----------



## iP337 (May 2, 2013)

I just talked to CPS Hollywood the other day and got into a conversation about what 3rd party accessories I should get, and they warned me not to use any 3rd party batteries because they might blow up in camera, I told them I've been using Canon DSLRs with only 3rd party batteries for about 10 years and not only have I never had that happen but I've also never heard about it either but the lady insisted that they have seen it... 

I don't mean to be an alarmist but now with this extra warning in camera about 3rd party batteries and the fact they tweaked the camera to misread some chipped 3rd party batteries I can't help to wonder if they did something that might make this happen :/ like no longer restricting something on the higher capacity aftermarket battery. I've had batteries from other stuff blow up on me before (an Apple Macbook, an Avid portable M-Audio recorder and a few cellphones) they just bloat up and no longer work. 

This is probably just some marketing trick to scare me into giving them more money but I wouldn't surprised. (who the hell is running Canon now a days anyway?)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 2, 2013)

iP337 said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > iP337 said:
> ...



The HDMI port on it can do 1920x1080. What is compressed about HDMI? You can hook a computer to a TV through HDMI and the computer signal going over HDMI is not compressed at all.
14bits the HDMI probably can't handle, so the depth resolution would have to be less, down to at least 10bits I think and quite possibly 8bits, but the spatial resolution could retain the full DNG stream sharpness.

(that said the 1.2.1 actually does appear to be a bit sharper than the old firmware, either over HDMI or compressed internally, at least, which is good)



> 1. DNG and CR2 are the same, both use the same lossless RAW algorithm and both are not de-bayered. The De-bayering is preformed in your computer (usually automatically) with a viewer or editor that supports De-bayering.



But the Bayer sensor is 22MP and these are 2MP so unless they are just reading a non-bayered mini-block, which they aren't something sort of de-bayer must be done already. Look at sRAW and mRAW they are are not in the original complete Bayer state and they are stored in a RAW file too.



> 2. Unfortunately we can't send that 2K RAW image through HDMI and even if we could the 1920x1080 portion is offset to the upper right so without cropping and resizing the HDMI would likely keep a black bar on the left and bottom but cutoff the right and top sides of the actual image.



You might have to clip off the left and right side junk and send an offset address so it starts reading it below the top junk. You wouldn't even have to do that if the HDMI accepts an offset to get to each new lines address. I have no idea how it is setup, it might have something like that so no clipping is needed at all. COnsidering how many modes it can put out that might very well be the case.



> 3. Canon starts with 14bit RAW images for video (that's the nice sharp DNGs we're getting), but reducing that down to 8bit loses about 2 stops of dynamic range and potentially causes banding in fine gradients (usually the sky). lowering the 4:4:4 to 4:2:2 will cause a 50% loss of sharpness (crispness) and 4:2:0 will cause a 75% loss.



cutting chroma resolution doesn't hit perceived resolution nearly that hard, the luminance resolution is still full
but yeah obviously going over HDMI unless it was HDMI with 10bit support it would lose a bunch of DR


----------



## Bruno97 (May 2, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Bruno97 said:
> 
> 
> > Hi all,
> ...



Good point, thanks.


----------



## iP337 (May 2, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> The HDMI port on it can do 1920x1080. What is compressed about HDMI? You can hook a computer to a TV through HDMI and the computer signal going over HDMI is not compressed at all.
> 14bits the HDMI probably can't handle, so the depth resolution would have to be less, down to at least 10bits I think and quite possibly 8bits, but the spatial resolution could retain the full DNG stream sharpness.
> 
> (that said the 1.2.1 actually does appear to be a bit sharper than the old firmware, either over HDMI or compressed internally, at least, which is good)



I don't understand. 4:2:2 and 8bit are forms of image compression, and I don't think these HDMI ports can't produce higher color depth or sub-sampling than that. When Canon says "uncompressed" they mean no frame or resolution compressions, but there is still chroma compression. Your HDMI signal from a computer is most likely compressed, since HDTVs use rec.709 which is 8bit and there is no point in an 8bit DNG.



> 1. DNG and CR2 are the same, both use the same lossless RAW algorithm and both are not de-bayered. The De-bayering is preformed in your computer (usually automatically) with a viewer or editor that supports De-bayering.
> 
> But the Bayer sensor is 22MP and these are 2MP so unless they are just reading a non-bayered mini-block, which they aren't something sort of de-bayer must be done already. Look at sRAW and mRAW they are are not in the original complete Bayer state and they are stored in a RAW file too.



When I say CR2 I mean RAW which is not de-bayered in camera. sRAW and mRAW are not really raw, they have been de-bayered and sub-sampled at 4:4:4 in camera then to a smaller resolution by averaging the formed 'pixels' and then losslessly compressed with CR2 but information has already been lost compared a pure CR2 raw file. You may be right that the same process might have already been used for these 1931 x 1088 14bit RAW images Magic Lantern found, but it is unlikely. The images require a program that applies de-bayering to view them and most people agree that video resolutions are achieved by line skipping (Canon has even admitted to it) or in this case combining 'sensel' data in 3x3 blocks before any processing (de-bayering) is done. Also Panasonic has admitted that they "bind their pixels in 2x2 block before any processing is done" then (like the sRAW files) they process them into YCrCb and down to the appropriate resolution before sending it to the h.264 encoder.



> You might have to clip off the left and right side junk and send an offset address so it starts reading it below the top junk. You wouldn't even have to do that if the HDMI accepts an offset to get to each new lines address. I have no idea how it is setup, it might have something like that so no clipping is needed at all. COnsidering how many modes it can put out that might very well be the case.



hmm, my point is that HDMI (especially the one's in these Canon DSLRs) don't support resolutions over 1920 x 1080 so the 2K image needs to be down-resed or cropped and positioned (like the Canon official firmware already does) 



> cutting chroma resolution doesn't hit perceived resolution nearly that hard, the luminance resolution is still full
> but yeah obviously going over HDMI unless it was HDMI with 10bit support it would lose a bunch of DR



Ah you're right, a lot of the sharpness will be held in the luminance (duh) but not even the C100 and C300 support 10bit HDMI so I doubt they included a 10bit HDMI port here.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 2, 2013)

> I don't understand. 4:2:2 and 8bit are forms of image compression, and I don't think these HDMI ports can't produce higher color depth or sub-sampling than that.



All HDMI does 4:4:4 no sweat. 

Higher levels of HDMI do deep color. I think starting with HDMI 1.2 10bit and even 12bit are supported. It's certainly possible that the 5D3 has an older HDMI maybe 1.1 or such and doesn't support above 8bits.

It is true that those are forms of image compression, I was referring to motion compression though, like h.264/mpeg2/etc. sort of compression.




> When Canon says "uncompressed" they mean no frame or resolution compressions, but there is still chroma compression.



Yeah, that is what I meant. No motion/frame compression.



> Your HDMI signal from a computer is most likely compressed, since HDTVs use rec.709 which is 8bit and there is no point in an 8bit DNG.



I don't think REC709 has anything to do with bit depth. It just sets tone transfer functions and primary locations AFAIK. Most HDTV don't quite match REC709 primaries, most undershoot at least some of the primaries a bit, although it is the assumed goal that they will be at least somewhat reasonably close. 

And setting the tone response curve part of the spec to REC709 TRC on the set itself looks awful since they process the movies assuming the destination space will actually be more like Gamma 2.2.

Virtually no HDTV or monitors are more than 8bit displays (although some have up to at least 14bits color engines inside so you have room to calibrate without banding and the fancy ones with 3D 4bit LUTs and stuff that are wide gamut can even shift around color spaces and primary locations and so on and you get it all done while retaining perfect saturation curves and everything) are there are few that internally dither to 10bits if sent 10bit signal (such as NEC PA series I believe, some claim that some of them may be 100% true 10bits though, not sure, I don't have a 10bit video card to test it) and a very few that I think actually truly can show 10bits (HP Dreamcolor maybe?? not sure). I think some super fancy scientific and perhaps broadcast ones may be true 10bit or even 12bit, very esoteric monitors, not sure.

Most video cards don't put out more than 8bits so nothing is getting compressed even in a bit depth sense on HDMI out and all these monitors support full chroma resolution. HDMI does 4:4:4 so nothing gets compressed over that (unless you specifically set the computer to compress that). In regular modes many HDTV take the 4:4:4 input and chop it to 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 though. Lots of them have PC modes and such where you can get around that and they retain 4:4:4 pathways.



> When I say CR2 I mean RAW which is not de-bayered in camera. sRAW and mRAW are not really raw, they have been de-bayered and sub-sampled at 4:4:4 in camera then to a smaller resolution by averaging the formed 'pixels' and then losslessly compressed with CR2 but information has already been lost compared a pure CR2 raw file. You may be right that the same process might have already been used for these 1931 x 1088 14bit RAW images Magic Lantern found, but it is unlikely.



They have to have something done to them because we have 22MP Bayer sensor and yet these are 1931x1088 and we know that the FOV of them is way wider than a huge crop factor would be so there is no way they can be untouched. At the least they would have to have been debayered insome sense and then rebayered I'd think, which would seem strange. I haven't looked inside the files though to see what is there yet.

Also if that 1931x1088 is in Bayer format then it's not really a true 4:4:4 you can get out of it anyway since Bayer format is not full chroma resolution by definition.



> The images require a program that applies de-bayering to view them and most people agree that video resolutions are achieved by line skipping (Canon has even admitted to it) or in this case combining 'sensel' data in 3x3 blocks before any processing (de-bayering) is done.



Well the non-5D3/1DX cameras certainly do a ton of line skipping. The 5D3 does vastly less or none and thus it gets that near 2 stops SNR boost over the 5D2 from that alone, it is not tossing away all those extra samples.
Combing the blocks and matching to adjacent is processing and taking the initial bayer setup and doing all sorts of stuff to it.



> Also Panasonic has admitted that they "bind their pixels in 2x2 block before any processing is done" then (like the sRAW files) they process them into YCrCb and down to the appropriate resolution before sending it to the h.264 encoder.



I think Canon said the C100 series uses 2x2 blocks too.



> > You might have to clip off the left and right side junk and send an offset address so it starts reading it below the top junk. You wouldn't even have to do that if the HDMI accepts an offset to get to each new lines address. I have no idea how it is setup, it might have something like that so no clipping is needed at all. COnsidering how many modes it can put out that might very well be the case.
> 
> 
> 
> hmm, my point is that HDMI (especially the one's in these Canon DSLRs) don't support resolutions over 1920 x 1080 so the 2K image needs to be down-resed or cropped and positioned (like the Canon official firmware already does)



Yeah you can't send the full DNG straight over HDMI but you might not need to clip off the top/bottom/sides and then rewrite to the buffer and then send. The top and bottom don't matter since you could just give it the address of where the image part starts instead of the address at the top left and it will end at 1080 and won't read the bottom junk. The left and ride sides, might need to be clipped. But it is quite possible that there is an offset value that says jump so and so many bytes to get to the next line and it could be adjusted to automatically skip over the left and right junk. If you have programmed graphics hardware at the register level such things may be familiar. I don't know how the system is setup in this case.





> Ah you're right, a lot of the sharpness will be held in the luminance (duh) but not even the C100 and C300 support 10bit HDMI so I doubt they included a 10bit HDMI port here.



Very probably true (although it's not impossible they use HDMI 1.2 parts since so much stuff these days does, maybe it's mostly what is even made these days and they get better deals on big batches??? no clue, quite possible not though).


----------



## THX723 (May 3, 2013)

Canon Digital Learning Center (DLC) now updated with a piece on this new HDMI/AF firmware update:

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2012/5d3_clean_hdmi_out.shtml


----------



## Etienne (May 3, 2013)

Quick question for anyone:

How long did the firmware upgrade take?

thx


----------



## THX723 (May 3, 2013)

Just a few minutes.


----------



## skitron (May 3, 2013)

Very pleased to report 100L + Yongnuo 568 w/assist is very snappy in low light with this firmware. I was worried Canon might sabotage the third party lens focus, but Sigma 50 works fantastic with this firmware update.


----------



## rpt (May 4, 2013)

Etienne said:


> Quick question for anyone:
> 
> How long did the firmware upgrade take?
> 
> thx


Not long. May be about 10 minutes. Why do you ask? I did not note the time.


----------



## Daniel Flather (May 4, 2013)

I went from 1.0.7 to the new firmware and the camera seems to be 100%.


----------



## Daniel Flather (May 4, 2013)

Etienne said:


> Quick question for anyone:
> 
> How long did the firmware upgrade take?
> 
> thx




I took me about 5 minutes.


----------



## melbournite (May 4, 2013)

I can't see anything in the upgrade that is enticing for me to do so, in fact because of the battery issue, quite the opposite.

I don't need uncompressed HDMI output and I haven't encountered any of the 'phenomenons'. I always update to the latest firmware or software for that matter but because of the 'battery phenomenon', (I only have two third party batteries), I'm holding off.

Anyone else in the same boat?


----------



## tpatana (May 4, 2013)

melbournite said:


> I can't see anything in the upgrade that is enticing for me to do so, in fact because of the battery issue, quite the opposite.
> 
> I don't need uncompressed HDMI output and I haven't encountered any of the 'phenomenons'. I always update to the latest firmware or software for that matter but because of the 'battery phenomenon', (I only have two third party batteries), I'm holding off.
> 
> Anyone else in the same boat?



For me the IR-assisted AF is big thing, so I downloaded the FW floating around even before official Canon release.


----------



## melbournite (May 4, 2013)

tpatana said:


> melbournite said:
> 
> 
> > I can't see anything in the upgrade that is enticing for me to do so, in fact because of the battery issue, quite the opposite.
> ...



Well, it's the only one that was playing on my mind in rare jobs it's required for (for me). But till then, I can certainly hold off.


----------



## iowapipe (May 5, 2013)

I will not weigh in on the specifics of the output other than to point out that over on the planet5d forum a gentleman, who has contact with the Atomos engineering group, says that the output from the port may actually be 10-bit.

You, who are much more in the know, may find the information interesting. (if it is indeed accurate)
Check the forum for the firmware upgrade. There are only 8 or so posts.


----------



## jlev23 (May 5, 2013)

the one question i have is picture style, seemed that my user 3 profile gave me a second neutral setting, i wonder if this is what canon intended for us to use as a "best" hdmi output picture style? i was hoping for a canon log picture style that lets us view a rec 709, or does it do that anyway without using a picture style?
anyone have any info or discoveries on this? im sick of using cinestyle and dealing with banding skies.
thanks in advance!


----------



## J.R. (May 5, 2013)

Did anyone notice that the date-stamp on the file is 8 April 2013? What was Canon doing delaying it for 22 days?


----------



## J.R. (May 5, 2013)

Etienne said:


> Quick question for anyone:
> 
> How long did the firmware upgrade take?
> 
> thx



Updated just now ... took 4 mins 10 seconds using the CF card. SD may be slower.


----------



## rpt (May 5, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Quick question for anyone:
> ...


Bah! These accountants! Expecting light to travel at a constant velocity!


----------



## Rat (May 5, 2013)

About 4 minutes here too. The battery tests are of the bizarre sort - maybe because I use an (original) grip. I found that the warnings about fake batts are only given when the battery compartment has been opened, so you can switch your camera off and on again without having to answer the questions. So far, so good, and I can absolutely work with this.

With two Phottix batteries, however, it only complains about one (specifically the one to the right) and it refuses to doubt the other until you remove the one about which it was complaining in the first place. Same story with the two no-names from China. At first testing, it seem to correctly register battery capacity though, and the battery indicator is no longer blinking until the first shot (which I really hated)(edit: after going to sleep, it does blink. Dammit. /edit). I'll post back if I find different behavior.

The weirdest thing is, prior to the update, I used a borrowed guaranteed original LP-E6 from a 7D wielding friend, and *it complained then, too*. 

And _damn!_ I'm happy that I bought a 2x TC for my 70-200/4! I now have a 400/8 and it works faster than expected, too! Happy! More exclamation marks! 

Nope. Couldn't care less about the video


----------



## J.R. (May 5, 2013)

rpt said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...



I couldn't help it, neither could you ;D ;D ;D

Cheers ... J.R.


----------



## rpt (May 5, 2013)

J.R. said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > J.R. said:
> ...


Ha Ha Ha! Obviously you were an engineer in all of your previous births. All photographers (who capture particles traveling at a constant velocity) are...


----------



## VirtualRain (May 7, 2013)

Has anyone had Eye-Fi problems since updating their firmware?

My camera will no longer activate my Eye-Fi card when I "enable it" in the menu. It's not working but I don't know whether it's the new firmware or the card is just bad since I haven't used the Eye-fi wireless in awhile.

EDIT: Never mind, I got it working. It turns out that the firmware update changed playback of my dual cards to use the CF card which means images I lock as a flag to selective transfer via Eye-Fi wasn't getting recognized and thus the card didn't think there was any images to transfer. Changing the playback card to the Eye-Fi card fixed this.


----------



## jaayres20 (May 7, 2013)

I just used both of my 5D3s at a wedding last Saturday and they both have the firmware update. I shot 2,700 pictures with at least 1000 being in a very dark fast moving reception and I nailed just about every shot I took. There is a huge difference in the focus speed with the AF assist beam now. It once caused the focus to slow way down and now it speeds it up drastically. My 50mm 1.2 used to say in my bag because it would simply not focus in the dark. I used the heck out of it and shot at 1.2 most of the time with most being keepers. When I use the 24-70 f/2.8L II, I feel like I am cheating because it focuses on whatever I want instantly. I am very happy!


----------



## JonAustin (May 9, 2013)

jaayres20 said:


> I just used both of my 5D3s at a wedding last Saturday and they both have the firmware update. I shot 2,700 pictures with at least 1000 being in a very dark fast moving reception and I nailed just about every shot I took. There is a huge difference in the focus speed with the AF assist beam now. It once caused the focus to slow way down and now it speeds it up drastically.



That's great news, thanks for sharing!

I had a big photo shoot a couple of weeks ago (school yearbook portraits), using my 5D3 with the older 1.1.3 firmware, with an EF 100mm f/2.8L IS macro (tripod-mounted / IS off). I was using a four Speedlite setup (all 600EX-RT's), with the master in the hotshoe (non-firing), two more aimed into umbrellas and one illuminating the backdrop. I was running the camera from my laptop using the latest version of EOS Utility.

The room was otherwise dimly lit; a situation over which I had no control. The slowness of achieving AF was quite frustrating, but I just dealt with it and muddled through. I haven't had a chance to try out a similar setup since the firmware update, but am eager to do so.

On a positive note (somewhat off-topic), the ability to setup the 600EX-RTs without regard to line-of-sight to the master, and to tweak individual Speedlite output via the EOS Utility are fantastic!


----------



## chrispysmithusa1 (May 11, 2013)

Ok, I'm feeling pretty dumb right now. ???-I went to the Canon website to load the new firmware to my computer. The only thing coming up an update procedure PDF. Is the firmware hiding in there somewhere. Help would be appreciated Thanks in advance!


----------



## East Wind Photography (May 11, 2013)

That didn't happen because of the fw update. It's a long standing bug. When you remove a card and close the door the camera ignores your settings and reverts to the card that's still there. EVEN WHEN THE POWER IS OFF. You then have to go back and set all of your card settings again. If you take a card out and leave the door open, then reinsert the card, the settings will be retained.



VirtualRain said:


> Has anyone had Eye-Fi problems since updating their firmware?
> 
> My camera will no longer activate my Eye-Fi card when I "enable it" in the menu. It's not working but I don't know whether it's the new firmware or the card is just bad since I haven't used the Eye-fi wireless in awhile.
> 
> EDIT: Never mind, I got it working. It turns out that the firmware update changed playback of my dual cards to use the CF card which means images I lock as a flag to selective transfer via Eye-Fi wasn't getting recognized and thus the card didn't think there was any images to transfer. Changing the playback card to the Eye-Fi card fixed this.


----------



## rpt (May 11, 2013)

chrispysmithusa1 said:


> Ok, I'm feeling pretty dumb right now. ???-I went to the Canon website to load the new firmware to my computer. The only thing coming up an update procedure PDF. Is the firmware hiding in there somewhere. Help would be appreciated Thanks in advance!


So go here:
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#DriversAndSoftware
In the first drop list select the OS.
In the next drop list select the version

Next click the *Firmware* link below.

Now under "File Description" you will see "EOS 5D Mark III Firmware Version 1.2.1 [<Operating system>]".
Click it.

That will lead to a Disclaimer and an End User License Agreement and a button that reads "I Agree - Begin Download" (I would not have capitalized "A", "B" and "D" - but then that is me...). Click it to download the firmware.

Hope this helps.


----------



## cayenne (May 11, 2013)

rpt said:


> chrispysmithusa1 said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, I'm feeling pretty dumb right now. ???-I went to the Canon website to load the new firmware to my computer. The only thing coming up an update procedure PDF. Is the firmware hiding in there somewhere. Help would be appreciated Thanks in advance!
> ...


Ok, I know this sounds boneheaded.....
I've found the firmware update to download, but I don't see the instructions there on HOW to install the firmware safely on the camera...?

Am I missing the link there on this?

Thanks,

cayenne


----------



## readycool (May 11, 2013)

Instructions are in same zip file as firmware (just in separate folder)


----------



## East Wind Photography (May 11, 2013)

You can do it using the EOS Utility or you can simply copy the .FIR file to the root directory on your SD or CF card. Then press Menu on the camera and go to the Firmware option. You can upgrade from there. Also dont forget to remove the FIR file or format your card.



cayenne said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > chrispysmithusa1 said:
> ...


----------



## rpt (May 11, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> You can do it using the EOS Utility or you can simply copy the .FIR file to the root directory on your SD or CF card. Then press Menu on the camera and go to the Firmware option. You can upgrade from there. Also dont forget to remove the FIR file or format your card.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



East Wind and readycool are both right. Looks like it is best you unzip the file and look in the folder. There are instructions in 5 languages. Take your pick...


----------



## smithy (May 12, 2013)

Dave_NYC said:


> Interesting. I just tried my 70-200 Mk II 2.8 with my YN622c output AF assist trigger and it's definitely faster too. Used to get focus lock confirmation in 1 to 1.5 second range in a totally dark room, now it's half a second or so.
> 
> My 24-70 Mk II 2.8 is a bit faster as well. Previously locked in the .5 to 1 second range (usually closer to the half second, now it's in the bit less than half a second range.
> 
> Both of them, in short, feel snappier - the 70-200 more than the 24-70 - when using the YN622c AF assist beam capability.


+1

I jumped in the deep end the other day and did a shoot using my FW 1.2.1 5D3 with YN622c/YN568EX (plus two studio strobes), and it worked really, really well. My 24-70 (Mark I) 'seemed' to focus faster and more reliably. There was hardly an out-of-focus shot in the entire batch, and the shooting took place in very low light with a fast-wriggling subject.


----------



## archiea (May 12, 2013)

iP337 said:


> I just talked to CPS Hollywood the other day and got into a conversation about what 3rd party accessories I should get, and they warned me not to use any 3rd party batteries because they might blow up in camera, I told them I've been using Canon DSLRs with only 3rd party batteries for about 10 years and not only have I never had that happen but I've also never heard about it either but the lady insisted that they have seen it...
> 
> I don't mean to be an alarmist but now with this extra warning in camera about 3rd party batteries and the fact they tweaked the camera to misread some chipped 3rd party batteries I can't help to wonder if they did something that might make this happen :/ like no longer restricting something on the higher capacity aftermarket battery. I've had batteries from other stuff blow up on me before (an Apple Macbook, an Avid portable M-Audio recorder and a few cellphones) they just bloat up and no longer work.
> 
> This is probably just some marketing trick to scare me into giving them more money but I wouldn't surprised. (who the hell is running Canon now a days anyway?)



I think its part alarmist, part reality. Canon can't QC third party battery manufacturers. While I'm sure a quality 3rd party battery vendor wouldn't put out a failing product, thats not stopping some cheap knock off vendor from providing batteries for canons and users purchasing them. All it takes is one battery failure and canon is correct in their assessment. And considering all the battery options I see on ebay, I see it more a likelihood that a user would buy one just to save a few bucks. 

If you are going to spend $3K on a camera, a $70 battery is part of the cost of doing business. Playing lottery with a microprocessor controlled power source is a risk. 

If I put out a pro product, I'd definitely put out a boilerplate statement about using OEM accessories just to save me the pain. Sure OEM cost more, but you are paying for reliability.


----------



## East Wind Photography (May 12, 2013)

Could be a bit of marketing but it likely stems from the fact 1) there are a lot of counterfeit batteries out there and 2) both the counterfeit and 3rd party batteries are often made cheaply...maybe the same actual batteries just packaged and labeled differently. Some of them burn up and melt down while charging AND once installed in the camera.

To be honest, I've never had a 3rd party battery last as long as a canon battery in both shots per charge and battery life. You really get what you pay for. As far as other 3rd party accessories go, I have also figured out that the canon accessories are mostly built better and have less issues.

I've stopped wasting my money and have just bought the canon accessories as that is usually where I end up anyway.



archiea said:


> iP337 said:
> 
> 
> > I just talked to CPS Hollywood the other day and got into a conversation about what 3rd party accessories I should get, and they warned me not to use any 3rd party batteries because they might blow up in camera, I told them I've been using Canon DSLRs with only 3rd party batteries for about 10 years and not only have I never had that happen but I've also never heard about it either but the lady insisted that they have seen it...
> ...


----------

