# Magic Lantern Cracks the EOS 5D Mark IV



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 7, 2016)

```
<p>It looks like the intuitive folks at Magic Lantern have cracked the EOS 5D Mark IV and will begin work on adding features for a possible future firmware release.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that reverse engineering of this kind is very difficult work, and we may not see any releases for the EOS 5D Mark IV for quite some time, but it’s nice to know they’re working on it.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=17695.msg172713#msg172713">Read all about the progress at Magic Lantern</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Valvebounce (Nov 7, 2016)

Hi Folks. 
This us good news for 5DIV users, and for the rest of us it reminds us that ML is still there and making progress. 

Cheers, Graham. 



Canon Rumors said:


> <p>It looks like the intuitive folks at Magic Lantern have cracked the EOS 5D Mark IV and will begin work on adding features for a possible future firmware release.</p>
> <p>Keep in mind that reverse engineering of this kind is very difficult work, and we may not see any releases for the EOS 5D Mark IV for quite some time, but it’s nice to know they’re working on it.</p>
> <p><a href="http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=17695.msg172713#msg172713">Read all about the progress at Magic Lantern</a></p>
> <span id="pty_trigger"></span>


----------



## douglaurent (Nov 7, 2016)

It would be funny if Canon, who are not the brightest candle in the room anymore, could be saved by a magic lantern. Seriously, all the functions that ML have added to Canon cameras should put a shame in everybody's face at Canon for not taking up on it.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Nov 7, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> It would be funny if Canon, who are not the brightest candle in the room anymore, could be saved by a magic lantern.



Canon is in need of saving? Their financials relative to market don't support that.


----------



## asl (Nov 7, 2016)

Cool, hope they "make" it for an eventual 6dII as well.


----------



## Jopa (Nov 7, 2016)

Wondering why did they skip the 5DS/R? Unfair


----------



## Valvebounce (Nov 8, 2016)

Hi Jopa. 
It is possible the reason is as simple as no camera to work with. My understanding is that they are reliant on volunteer camera bodies to crack, if no one on the team had a 5DS/R and no one offered to loan one to crack then no ML for that camera. 
Of course it could also be down to hours in the day, i.e. not enough hours in the day to crack all canon bodies, or it could be any one of a multitude of other reasons. 
There is a very long blog/forum thread on the ML site that probably contains the answer somewhere if you can find it! 

Cheers, Graham. 



Jopa said:


> Wondering why did they skip the 5DS/R? Unfair


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 8, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Wondering why did they skip the 5DS/R? Unfair



Its a totally different thing to crack a camera with dual processors, much more difficult.


----------



## ricky_005 (Nov 8, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Wondering why did they skip the 5DS/R? Unfair


Cause it sucks, and will have a short life.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 8, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Wondering why did they skip the 5DS/R? Unfair



Because they are -primarily interested in improving video performance and the 5DS/R is singly uninteresting to video centric 5D buyers.


----------



## CanoKnight (Nov 8, 2016)

I get the feeling Canon wanted it to be easily crackable in order to spur sales. I don't think they expected the IV to sell as well as the III and II, so an 'easter egg' was built in.


----------



## Otara (Nov 8, 2016)

Mine is that ML is more why it stayed at CF cards, to bottleneck the performance regarding raw etc.


----------



## Joakim (Nov 8, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Its a totally different thing to crack a camera with dual processors, much more difficult.



Why is that more difficult? I don't know a thing about cracking.


----------



## kklerikk (Nov 8, 2016)

7dmkii as the same problem, 2 year and nothing. It's very difficult to make reverse engineering. In the past Canon release specifics. After C series stopped.


----------



## msatter (Nov 8, 2016)

WOW this excellent news!


----------



## AWR (Nov 8, 2016)

People really don't understand ML, best one I heard was when some 5DIV reviewer called it a company. Ugh.
This "news" is in the same way off. Testing started from the first cameras shipped and to make it usable will take time.
And as some have pointed out, not all cameras end up with working ML goodies for your regular shooter. 

Anyway, 5DIV is kind of "on hold", because the biggest news for the last days has been breakthroughs in the 10-bit and 12-bit RAW recording.
It'll take the 5DIV's biggest competitor, 5DIII to a next level in cinematography.

5DIV will get it's share of attention, and you never know when the breakthrough is here, but it will be a bigger news then. Right now there is nothing to use.

Magic Lantern is such a great thing that everybody should spend month or two reading the forum. 
You don't have to be interested about cameras or understand coding. You'll get a nice perspective for doing things.

And for those who wonder about Canon's view, well they have taken many kind of actions. Implementing ML stuff in to their products and making sure that ML needs to make miracles by crippling their own product for their sad C-series. And even threaten with law suits. All the nice things that nice company, that has ten different ways crippled DSLR's in their line up, would do.


----------



## Machaon (Nov 8, 2016)

AWR said:


> All the nice things that nice company, that has ten different ways crippled DSLR's in their line up, would do.



Let's wait and see how far ML can uncripple the 5DIV, let the beast show its full potential.


----------



## enraginangel (Nov 8, 2016)

I am about a month or two away from selling all my Canon gear. I was considering the 5D Mark IV but the disappointing 4k features is making me look elsewhere. If the Magic Lantern folk can add a decent codec with a reasonable bitrate, I may look back at the 5D Mark IV, but I'm now eyeing the GH5 as my next camera.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Nov 8, 2016)

enraginangel said:


> I am about a month or two away from selling all my Canon gear. I was considering the 5D Mark IV but the disappointing 4k features is making me look elsewhere. If the Magic Lantern folk can add a decent codec with a reasonable bitrate, I may look back at the 5D Mark IV, but I'm now eyeing the GH5 as my next camera.



What lenses will you be selling?


----------



## photojoern.de (Nov 8, 2016)

Thank you guys from Magic Lantern so much for providing your software! It adds some wonderful features to my 6D. The software is working like a charm. Anybody who is serious about photography with his canon should spend some time in looking at ML!


----------



## rrcphoto (Nov 8, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Wondering why did they skip the 5DS/R? Unfair



dual digic cameras are hard.


----------



## rrcphoto (Nov 8, 2016)

enraginangel said:


> I am about a month or two away from selling all my Canon gear. I was considering the 5D Mark IV but the disappointing 4k features is making me look elsewhere. If the Magic Lantern folk can add a decent codec with a reasonable bitrate, I may look back at the 5D Mark IV, but I'm now eyeing the GH5 as my next camera.



awesome.. please post a lens list.


----------



## gsealy (Nov 8, 2016)

enraginangel said:


> I am about a month or two away from selling all my Canon gear. I was considering the 5D Mark IV but the disappointing 4k features is making me look elsewhere. If the Magic Lantern folk can add a decent codec with a reasonable bitrate, I may look back at the 5D Mark IV, but I'm now eyeing the GH5 as my next camera.



Same here. +Metabones speed booster.


----------



## rfdesigner (Nov 8, 2016)

I took a look at the video posted in the ML link.

https://youtu.be/bSpXJadCfcQ

@~2min in

and they were talking about C-LOG for the mkIV via some download for the camera (not ML). Has anyone tried this because if it's good then it would mean you CAN do C-LOG on the MKIV without ML.

I'm no video guru so I might have got this all wrong.


----------



## enraginangel (Nov 8, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> enraginangel said:
> 
> 
> > I am about a month or two away from selling all my Canon gear. I was considering the 5D Mark IV but the disappointing 4k features is making me look elsewhere. If the Magic Lantern folk can add a decent codec with a reasonable bitrate, I may look back at the 5D Mark IV, but I'm now eyeing the GH5 as my next camera.
> ...



24-105mm kit lens and Sigma 70-200mm OS. I've already kinda sold them to a friend, but they haven't given me money yet.


----------



## koenkooi (Nov 9, 2016)

rfdesigner said:


> I took a look at the video posted in the ML link.
> 
> https://youtu.be/bSpXJadCfcQ
> 
> ...



If you're interested in picture styles, have a look at http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=16299.0, where they have manually recreated log styles and are working on understanding the format and how the camera handles it to see what the possibilities are.


----------



## Josh Denver (Nov 9, 2016)

That is absolutely fantastic!!!!

A magic lantern version for the 5D4 would simply make it the absolute best photo/video hybrid on the market, thanks to ML, not Canon!

For video it would allow for Full Frame 2K RAW, 14BIT to internal CF cards with full AF using the touch panel. Never have there been such a movie making machine, ever! 

And those who need 4K can simply switch to 1.6x/s35 crop mode. 

Of course you get way more features that companies like Sony and Canon reserve for their highest end cinema cameras, like 0.1 frame rate tuning, advanced intervalometer, false colour, waveform monitor, most advanced accurate peaking on any camera I've seen for manual glass, plus HDR modes that take dual gain frame by frame exposure blending and even single exposure HDR with alternating gain lines of pixels! 

A full fledged RAW cinema camera, a s35 4K 422 video camera, an HD h.264 documentary camera, a timelapse powerhorse, all with Canon's unparalleled colour science. Plus all that being a full 30mp high DR landscape camera, a 7fps 61AF sports horse, a wireless studio camera, a perfect high DR wedding camera, really everything the 5D4 can do when coupled with the transformative power of ML. 

And 14bit HD Cinema DNG RAW Canon picture-style-coloured images vs Anemic h.264 8bit UHD Sony-coloured images, no thanks, I'll take the Canon, 

especially when the Canon does 4K too in s35 crop mode but at higher quality 422 codec with better colours, AF, heat decipation, ruggedness, all at a price of one small A7 camera, which ends up as big when you attach your lenses, only a little more awkward to carry and shoot with. 

Seriously ML making its way into the FF DPAF 7fps 4K 5D4 is a huge leap towards a complete camera and a huge boost for the 5D4 video appeal where it's only lacking now.


----------



## Jopa (Nov 10, 2016)

Josh Denver said:


> That is absolutely fantastic!!!!
> 
> A magic lantern version for the 5D4 would simply make it the absolute best photo/video hybrid on the market, thanks to ML, not Canon!



Imagine what ML can do to the 1dx2: 4k 60p DCI RAW APS-H with DPAF for $6k!


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 10, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Josh Denver said:
> 
> 
> > That is absolutely fantastic!!!!
> ...



They won't touch the 1 series. Canon would destroy them.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Nov 10, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Josh Denver said:
> ...



How?

Is ML breaking any laws (ML doesn't seem to think so - http://www.magiclantern.fm/about.html)?
If so, would canon have better luck going after them than adobe or Microsoft (etc, etc) has preventing people who code keygens and authorization hacks, apple going after iOS jailbreak hackers, etc?

I tend to agree they probably won't mess with 1-series cameras. Not because they fear the wrath of canon, but because they are a group of enthusiasts who likely can't justify buying that kinda of hardware to experiment with to serve a group of users unlikely to risk impacting the stability of their gear.


----------



## Josh Denver (Nov 10, 2016)

Yes they'd make a pretty much killing machine if they went on the 1DX2, Which allows a higher data rate (CFast 2), could easily do 4K RAW 14bit internally with DPAF. 

Sadly. Will never touch it. 

Let's be optimistic. Very sharp HD 14bit raw at FF and 4K MJPEG 422 at S35 is an amazing combo too!


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 10, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



End user licenses, defensible or not Canon lawyers could destroy ML without a thought, just sending a few letters to the website owners could force them to either shut it down or defend themselves in court. Like I say Canon might well not win, or even have a chance of winning, but they have the bank to outspend any amateur. When the 1DC came out the rumour was that Canon made it clear that the C line firmware was 100% out of bounds. If you own a 1DC and need a firmware update you can't do it yourself, you have to send it in to Canon. This has all been discussed here before when the 1DX and 1DC came out, although there are hardware differences between the two. There used to be a very active ML guy here Marsu42, who had a lot of info on it all.

Given the umlockable capabilities contained inside the 1DX MkII, and the view I am sure Canon would take in that cracking it could cost them C line sales, I'd expect them to take a similarly dim view of a patch for the 1 series.


----------



## Stu_bert (Nov 10, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



In addition, if you check on the ML forums, the lead guys there state they will not touch the 1 series kit and they've been pretty consistently resolute about that since the MK III days.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Nov 10, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Sure they could threaten the host, but I mean actually ending ML development. ML isn't like a company, it's a bunch of largely independent developers. Canon causing their web host to shut them down wouldn't kill them any more than their web host going out of business would - they could just move hosts, or abandon a central website entirely.

I know they said they won't touch 1-series cameras, but fear of reprisal from canon sounds silly.


----------



## Valvebounce (Nov 10, 2016)

Hi 3kramd5. 
The how and why Canon might shut down ML for touching the 1 series is pretty irrelevant when this is taken from the page you link to, under the heading scope!

*Quote
The EOS-1D and Cinema series of Canon cameras fall outside of ML project scope because of their prohibitive price and narrow user base. We are not aware of any firmware enhancements for these cameras, nor do we support such efforts.
*
Cheers, Graham. 



3kramd5 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Nov 10, 2016)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi 3kramd5.
> The how and why Canon might shut down ML for touching the 1 series is pretty irrelevant when this is taken from the page you link to, under the heading scope!



I still have the curiosity factor, though. I don't think canon would be able to effectively stop them let alone destroy them. They could temporarily distrupt the website, which could easily be moved to a host who wouldn't fear empty lawsuits (such as a Russian server, for example), or the code could be bit torrented like so much actually illegally shared software. 

[intellectual property]





[/intellectual property]

They don't develop for 1d because they choose not to; it's too small of a target. There are orders of magnitude more people using the lesser priced models, and that's where they aim their development.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 10, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> Valvebounce said:
> 
> 
> > Hi 3kramd5.
> ...



Effectively of course they could. The combined wealth of all the ML developers is probably much less than 3 or 4 million dollars, Canon legal department could gobble every cent of that up in defending motions and legalese. They don't need to have a case, they don't need to face off against a company. They have myriads of corporate lawyers on retainers just waiting to be set loose, these guys (and girls) are trying to make a name for themselves and will find every cent you own (I have personal experience of being on the wrong side of a large corporate legal department, even though in my case the corp was 100% in the wrong and liable).

So on a strictly court case based legal argument, especially considering the very broad consumer laws and protections in Europe, you might be correct in that the ML team are not doing anything technically illegal. But that is moot when corporations can tie anybody smaller than them up in knots with the staff they have on retainer looking for a fight. That ML still exists is proof positive that Canon are granting tacit permission to do what they do, but no more.

As a side note, I have the EOS-M and run ML on it, I will be very interested to see if they go back to the EOS firmware for the M5 so ML can run on that too. So far the original M is the only M with ML compatibility.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Nov 10, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Valvebounce said:
> ...



The combined corporate legal might of the major software companies worldwide has been impotent to prevent piracy (for every pirate bay shut down, two more open); the overwhelming pocketbooks of Apple has been unable to prevent jailbreak developers (which is similar in nature to magic lantern); the insurmountable pocketbooks and legal power of the world governments have largely been unable to prevent publication on a very public website (wikileaks) of sensitive state information.

I'll stipulate that canon *could* expend the resources to go track down people who have an easy option to move to dark web anonymity, and could initiate lawsuits bankrupting the individuals with paperwork. Could. You said they would. You think it's worth Canon's while?


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 10, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > 3kramd5 said:
> ...



That is a completely different scenario, you have millions of uploaders and downloaders for torrents hosted by quick witted domain and domicile savvy owners that make millions off advertising. An impossible thing to put back in the bottle. ML probably have half a dozen core 'developers' who can't even afford a range of cameras to test and live in their mum's spare room (bless them).

The Apple analogy is also different enough to not count. Do you know how much the first jailbreak for any firmware revision is paid? Some have been over $100,000, there is value and prestige in cracking a device owned in the 100's of millions. How many Canon 1DX MkII's are there? How many 1DX MkII owners are interested in the additional ML capabilities? What is the 'prize' money value of cracking the 1 series firmware? Virtually nothing, and ML disavow trying and wouldn't post it even if somebody did it, why do you think that is?

Like I said, this has all been discussed at length with knowledgeable ML participants in the past. They specifically said Canon have let it be known the 1DC firmware is off the table, this seems to effectively include all 1 series cameras. This is not my opinion, it is me relaying comments from those involved first hand. I do not know the specific approach Canon would use to flex their displeasure, but I have zero doubt they could eliminate ML as we know it. Sure you could still get what they currently have via Demonoid or Piratebay, but personally I believe they could cause the few active developers enough trouble for them to no longer consider it a viable or worthwhile project.

Remember corporations have more than one option in instances like this, they could even nullify the development comparatively cheaply by 'sub contracting' the active developers.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 16, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



totally different, in that case it was adding 4k to a camera that did 'not' have it 1DC vs 1DX

with 1DX2 it already has 4k so ML would just be the same sort of fiddling as with any other body so it would be no different in this case

i'm not sure if even the 1DX2 cards are fast enough to handle 4k RAW, or maybe they are?


----------



## rrcphoto (Nov 16, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



it's a gray area. keep in mind that canon supports cameras that run ML, so while they don't officially support it; they are far better than other companies at supporting the "hacked" cameras.

there was a rumor that if ML touched the 1 series that ML would face the might of canon's legal team. the firmware is encrypted.

from wiki:

"In the United States even if an artifact or process is protected by trade secrets, reverse-engineering the artifact or 
process is often lawful as long as it has been legitimately obtained"

you legitimately obtain the firmware package, you do not legitimately have the right to decrypt it for public use.

it would be a grey area that I doubt ML would even want to touch.

I do see that ML was not that interested in going to the 1 series, mostly because of the camera expense - but I'm sure the potential threat helped as well.


----------



## YellowJersey (Dec 6, 2016)

I'm not entirely sure that hacking a camera would _necessarily_ violate the manufacturer's IP. It depends largely on the code used. I'm not sure how ML works exactly, but if it's a set of custom firmware that doesn't rely on proprietary code, then there's little Canon could do about it. It would be like Microsoft suing a Linux distro for people installing Linux on their computers instead of using Windows. That said, I'd be surprised if ML doesn't rely on anything proprietary. Plus, the precedent set regarding jailbreaking iphones is in ML's favour. 

I wouldn't say it's worth it for Canon to care about ML. People still have to buy Canon products to install ML on, and shutting ML down would probably send ML users elsewhere rather than to the more expensive products Canon would rather them buy. But, never underestimate how pigheaded and short sighted a corporation can be. Apple has shown clear contempt for users who don't user their products the way Apple wants them to and thrown childish temper tantrums (re: legal action) over it. Canon strikes me as being a bit like the Apple of the camera world, so I wouldn't put it past them to throw a hissy fit over ML and try to shut them down. 

Corporations really don't understand the concept of good will. It's more of a hostage taking situation now. When it comes to good will and consumer loyalty, I think Fuji and Panasonic are doing it right.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Dec 6, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



sure, they could offer to hire th ML devs. But as for the rest of it, I respectfully disagree; I don't believe that canon could effectively shutdown an unofficial, opt-in group of individuals with no physical common area or financial ties and easy access to anonymity via TOR and non-centralized distribution via bit torrent. Hell, they can't even stop for profit companies like sigma and tamron from reverse engineering their lens protocol.

The Apple analogy is apt. The fact that money is offered makes it easier to track and yet apple, who can probably afford 50 lawyers for each one working for canon, is impotent to stop it.

Maybe the ML developers *believe* that canon can squash them and accordingly won't try with a 1D, but I think they're shying away from an empty threat.


----------

