Messages

256

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Low light capture

« on: November 02, 2021, 12:24:05 PM »

Mechanically the 1.4 and 2.1 are completely identical (on the outside at least).
 Even Screen and some of the Circuit Boards inside are the Same and you could interchange them between each another.
 RAM, Batteries, Fan and IO/ Buttons are all the Same, Firmware is the Same.
 Mainboards are similar but need to be a bit different, Sensor and Some of the Cooling is completely different obviously.
 Meaning apart from the Sensor and the Mainboard its basically the Same Camera.
 Meaning also, you can use any Adapter you can fit onto an 2.1 on an 1.4 and the other way around also.
 

257

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Low light capture

« on: November 02, 2021, 08:49:10 AM »

well, getting the Correct Speedbooster is one thing, Mounting it to the Chronos is an entirely different Beast to tackle!
 The "correct" or better said clean and Easy way would be an interchangeable MFT Mount Plate for the Chronos, There is Quite a bit of Info on this Forum already about adapting MFT or Speedboosters to the Chronos, if you want check it out. However, i currently am in the Process of writing an very detailed DIY Guide specifically on how to attach Metabones Speedboosters to the Chronos Cameras and also on how to adapt anything else MFT-Mount onto an Chronos. Still Heavily in Progress, expected to hit the Forum Soon, maybe might as well wait for that, should be an order of magnitude easier to do than anything else we have available so far in terms of options, but cant release that yet, still incomplete.
 Will post a Link to that Thread, when its done.

258

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Low light capture

« on: November 02, 2021, 08:30:07 AM »

Seen that Video, and was pretty impressed myself, that they were able to capture that.
 Just as a very wild guess, id say at 1000 fps you will have a fair chance of capturing that with an fast lens, and YES, i would highly recommend that 0,58x Speedbooster for that. Not sure if f/1.3 will cut it for that, you will be happy for any bit of light you can get for stuff like that!
 Up to 3500fps you probably would be able to do capture it on an 2.1, but dont quote me on that.
 Anything above might be possible, but pretty sure wont look pretty, if you are able to make it work (that being Said, i dont know how the 1.4 behaves in low light. HPC was able to capture quite impressive "low Light" stuff with their Monchrome 1.4 at High framerates).
 .
 I mean, given that the Thing emits light when hit hard, you can still always find a way to just somehow hit it harder and make it emit more Light

259

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Fastest saving method

« on: November 02, 2021, 08:18:04 AM »

Hi, not 100% sure what exactly you mean with "(in HD and 1000fps)", as some people use the Term "HD" on its own while meaning Standard HD /HD ready 1280x720p HD or 720pHD, and 1920x1080 is almost exclusively referred to as "FullHD" usually, but depending on context "HD" could also be FullHD Resolution.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p  So for now i will just assume you probably meant 1920x1080p 1000fps, as its the Highest Framerate @ Highest Resolution the Camera can Output, while still also trying to answer the Same Question if you meant 1280x720p 1000fps, as that would also have a legit advantage over actual Full HD in your specific usecase.
 .
 The 2.1 with 32Gb Memory can hold 11,0368s worth of real time footage at 1920x1080p 1000fps and 24,8410s worth of real time Footage at 1280x720p 1000p.
 Save time to SD Card is about 1m20s for 2000frames (2 seconds at 1000 frames per Second = 2000 Frames) at 1920x1080p in H.264 with Maximum Bitrate (60Mbps), and only very slightly faster in 1280x720p (like 1m10s or 1m15s) from a quick test i just did (sample size 1 for each, so your results might be different...).
 External SSD will be a bit faster, but in reality also just marginally, meaning you might shave off 10 or so seconds, 20 at best, if i had to guess. SSD to SD Card Save Speeds are a lot different for DNG Footage, but for H.264 not all that much.
 External SSD will be the Fastest for this, Transfer via Ethernet should be quite a bit slower i assume, but i have no real experience on this, never actually tried that and compared speeds on that.
 HDMI will only output a real time Video Feed from the Sensor @ 60fps when recording, and in Playback mode also just a 60 fps Feed off your Slowed Footage at whatever Speed you play it back, or freeze Frame, depending on what the Internal Monitor shows. so also not really suited to extract footage, and if you do, A LOT SLOWER than about any other method (probably still faster than Saving in DNG, but whats the Point in doing that).
 .
 Given that you will need the Majority of your 5 Minute Time Frame, if you tried to save your 2s Clips individually, you probably are able to get 5 clips Recorded that way.
 Record the First one Right away, save, immediately record the next one, save, etc.
 You would probably want to set up some kind of Script for that, to save time, because else you almost sure will only be able to get like 2 to 4 in that time Frame that way, because of setting Save start and end Points and all that.
 .
 Best way to do that would in my opinion be to use the Segmented Recording Mode, which would allow you to split your 32GB into Segments of exactly 2 Seconds each, which would give you 5 and a Half Clips of that Length in that Time Frame (assuming 1920x1080p), or 6 Clips, if your "2 Second" Clip Length isnt meant as exactly 2.00Seconds as in exactly 2000 frames, and could be 1,833s for each clip.
 .
 Lowering your Resolution (720pHD still looks good enough and still provides Plenty of detail, and is also 16:9, so can be easily used with other 16:9 Aspect Ratio Footage, if you need to maximize the Amount of clips. if you need FullHD Resolution for some Reason, like selling the Clips or something is obviously a different story...) to 1280x720p would allow you to record 13 clips of 1,91s Length each in Segmented recording mode on a 32GB 2.1, so unless you absolutely need the Resolution for some Reason, and your main objective here is only to maximize the number of individual clips recorded within a 5 Min Timeframe at any cost, consider lowering the Resolution as much as practical for your application.
 1024x576p at 1000fps would already give you 38,814s of record time, meaning 20 clips of 1,94s Length each, fyi.
 .
 So if i was in your situation, i would look into segmented Recording, no matter what kind of resolution you end up going with. No matter how hard you tried, you most likely wont be able to record more than that what will fit into 32GB RAM anyways, if it has to be also saved within 5 Minutes, so why even try. On 720pHD you are probably even at a huge advantage compared to Straight up saving, when just filling up your RAM, and Saving later.

260

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Low light capture

« on: November 02, 2021, 07:02:45 AM »

Define "Low Light"...
 While the Chronos Cameras do need a ton of Light compared to most usual Modern VDSLRs and such to produce high Image Quality, they can still offer somewhat decent Light Sensitivity if needed. Image usually does look "not as nice" to "pretty bad", if you do that, but if just capturing something to see what is going on at all is your goal, it is usually able to.
 I dont know about the 1.4 in particular, as i am an 2.1 Owner and user, but for the 2.1, the Higher Framerates dont work with High Gain Settings. Meaning, for The Higher Framerate Stuff this camera is capable of, you will still need a Lot of light no matter what, but for the "lower End" of Framerates up to like ~3000 or ~5000ish FPS you can push Analog and digital Gain quite a bit.
 Also depends on your Lens.
 If you have some Ultra Fast Lens, which is very Possible on the 1.4, you can capture a lot more Light than with some Standard Lens.
 Now most people would probably already use an 1.4 with something like that f/1.2 Zoom Lens, so you wouldnt gain a ton from going to a f/0.9 Prime Lens or something like that, but a 0,58x Speedbooster with an f/1.2 Lens on it would give f/0.7 which is quite a bit and worth considering (Metabones 0,58x Speedbooster would work very well for the 1.4!).
 .
 I did quite a bit of Low Light Testing with my 2.1, mostly to figure out how well it would be suited for available Light Shooting in Everyday Lighting Situations without being able to add or Modify Lighting.
 .  Can you provide any kind of Reference Exposure Settings /camera Model you are able to capture Said Faint Light Event with to give an Estimate of how bright it actually is? Like ISO 6000 1/60s f/2.8 or something, that would help a lot actually answering your Actual Question itself.

261

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Focus peaking assist?

« on: October 29, 2021, 09:19:48 PM »

Sweet. Thank you.

No Problem.

262

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Focus peaking assist?

« on: October 29, 2021, 12:04:01 PM »

Just worked my way through the Manual, but cant seem to find any actual images of it, but its Called "Focus Aid" and described in detail on page 67 (cant currently set up my 2.1 to share an image of it, maybe someone else can post an image or something.).
 https://www.krontech.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/RE-PDEV-10009-Chronos-User-Manual-Full-Software-Version-0.7.0.pdf

263

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Focus peaking assist?

« on: October 29, 2021, 11:58:32 AM »

It does! You can do a 2x digital zoom in on the Internal Monitor by double tapping and go back to normal by double tapping again. Only Center of image though.
 It does also have some kind of Focus Peaking Option, which you can activate, which will display areas that are in Focus Colored.

264

Software Dev / Re: Will there ever be a 100,000 FPS version again?

« on: October 23, 2021, 06:42:06 AM »

Interresting indeed.
 Kind of sad, that there isnt an easy way to push more FPS, as that would actually be handy to have in some Rare situations for me, but obviously there has to be some kind of technical Limit somewhere i guess.
 Lighting is not that much of an issue, if you shoot Macro, and just Use one of those 300W or 500W LED Monolights as Direct Backlight, filling the Frame, very close to your subject. You can get pretty close with them, and i did use them in this Way already for some things, to get VERY short shutter Speeds. If you work with temperature Sensitive stuff, or you run the Risk of Melting your lens or something, you can still just set up your shot, turn the Lights on for a Second or so, and turn it back off.
 More Sensitivity (or better said More sensitivity at still very high image Quality) is of course always welcome, but having a much higher Framerate available at all on this camera in the First place would have been a huge thing, even if at 0dB gain only or something like that.
 Lighting is generally problematic with the 2.1 as with almost any other "normal" Highspeed-Camera, but i would have found a way to use it if i had to, even if insane amounts of Light would have been needed.
 Anyways, i agree, that the camera as is, is already pretty amazing.
 .
 Also thanks for the Update on this!

265

Software Dev / Re: Will there ever be a 100,000 FPS version again?

« on: October 23, 2021, 02:50:34 AM »

I have requested a full datasheet from Luxima.  I'll be curious to read some of the actual details and limitation of the sensor.   I would bet the 700k FPS figure is something crazy like 32x8 pixels and the rest of the hardware would need to be specially configured, but the datasheet should spell that out.  Because the Chronos 1.4 can actually do ~110k FPS, my guess is that the image overhead for those kinds of speeds would also be possible on the 2.1 as the rest of the hardware is essentially (maybe exactly) identical.

A quick check of the H.264 codec wiki makes it seem that very small vertical resolutions should be possible, but it's extremely likely that the library they are using on the Chronos has a limit.  H.264 is a very complex codec and is really optimized for large resolutions and block sizes.  Just having raw image support at these experimental resolutions would be totally acceptable to me, but they might not want to do that.  Personally, I never use the H.264 output and always using DNG for maximum quality.

I have quite a bit of software development background and am very comfortable reading their code, but it's complex not because the code is complex, it's complex because the algorithms implemented to handle the hardware are complex.

Once I see the datasheet, I may make a copy of the firmware and start playing around with it for fun.

Any Progress / Updates on the 2.1 Datasheet /-mod?

266

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Back panel display on off option?

« on: October 17, 2021, 11:57:38 AM »

Currently not, sadly. At least as far as i know.

267

Software Dev / Re: Faster save by RAM "dump" instead of creating image/movie files?

« on: October 12, 2021, 01:08:06 PM »

For RAW its supposed to be Faster than all other Formats. Compressed H.264 Is however still fastest overall from what i know, just because of the way smaller Filesize to write to memory.
 .
 See Page 90 of the User Manual for a Comparison:
 https://www.krontech.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/RE-PDEV-10009-Chronos-User-Manual-Full-Software-Version-0.7.0.pdf
 .
 Saving in RAW Format seems to not be too popular amongst the average user, just because H.264 is overall just a lot faster and Smaller file size, and CinemaDNG is a lot easier to work with and wont need to be converted later, and can be directly imported to most advanced Video Editing Software. Only heard a few people use it where they still want some kind of uncompressed Footage, and Save Speed is absolutely critical.
 I tried Saving in RAW, but stayed with CinemaDNG because it just saves me all the work of converting, which makes it overall still fastest uncompressed Format for me, if i factor in processing time after Shooting, even if it takes a little bit longer to save technically. If i need to move really fast, and i just try to get footage at all and not tickle out the Last bit of Quality, i would use H.264 Anyways, its like a order of magnitude faster.

268

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Filming Rocket Testing - settings advice welcome.

« on: October 11, 2021, 08:37:15 AM »

My hope was that I could send this camera to the facility with someone who is not familiar with photography but that is out of the question.

 Well, yes. IŽd call that very optimistic. Shooting Highspeed-Stuff like that can already be challenging for People who actually know what they are doing, so just having a random Person operate the Camera would be a pretty risky bet unless you are very sure about your Exposure Settings being spot on. You still could try, but chances to get good resulting footage with Fire and Rockets involved and also just a single chance at actually getting the shot would be very low by just guessing exposure i assume.  .
 Also the 50 Feet cable seems pretty short. just did the math, and thats like 15 Meters. I casually carry a 5 Meter BNC Cable in my Camera Case at all times in case i ever need it, which is just so it wouldnt be to bulky to carry around. 15 Meters still is not what i would consider a "long" cable, so i was a bit surprised that you have not found a longer one yet, but maybe thats just a thing in Germany or something, but 50 to 100 Meters are still somewhat standard, even longer ones are actually rare, but do exist, as i wrote above.
 .
 And regards the Tests / Test Shots: I was very aware that your Rockets would probably be single use with only one chance to capture the Action, thats why i recommended to do two tests or more to really get your Exposure correct for that one Shot you want to be sure to capture at best possible settings. If you figure out the Settings for it, you should be able to get very reproducible results, no matter the Environmental Light or Camera Operator, given of course these Rockets are at least somewhat comparable in Brightness and all that.
 .
 Also depends on just how important it is to get the Shot here. If you shoot an explosion like the First Nukes ( Cost actually expressed in % of GDP and that exact experiment can not be redone ever again) i mentioned earlier or something that is as crazy unique as that, you want to be sure you dont mess up here and get the Shot, thats what i would call highly Critical. If you can redo it with at least somewhat reasonable effort, i wouldnt worry too much about running 100 Test Shots before, and maybe just Try it (testing still never hurts) and adjust exposure as i go on with testing.

269

Software Dev / Re: Faster save by RAM "dump" instead of creating image/movie files?

« on: October 10, 2021, 03:04:21 PM »

There is an option like this on the Chronos, you can save in RAW, which will essentially dump the Entire RAM Data into one massive File, which needs to be processed by the PC later.

270

Chronos User Discussion / Re: Filming Rocket Testing - settings advice welcome.

« on: October 05, 2021, 01:43:15 PM »

Also found an 300m long one, which should be almost 1000feet, but no idea what this one would cost in USD or EUR or how much shipping would be, if they even ship to US or wherever you are, seems to be from india?
 .
 https://rujohnmegaconcepts.com/shop/300m-sdi-cable-75-ohms-3g-6g-hd-sdi-cable/