Personal View site logo
Firmware hack for Canon Vixia Legria?
  • 38 Replies sorted by
  • chauncychauncy

    I have no idea what you're trying to accomplish. You quote results from tests from two different sources that have nothing in common but a chart. The data isn't valid because it's from different testers. Who knows what each did.

    Clearly you also have no idea how big of a deal hacking a firmware is. No one will spend time on a fixed lense consumer camcorder. It's not worth it becase you cannot build out the camera with other lenses and gear.

    If you're so in love with the tm900 or vixia or whatever then use it.

    But enough with the image in tm900 or vixia is better than the gh2 in this one chart test two different guys did. The camera isn't in the same league. It's too limited in what it can do

    But in the right conditions it can take nice video.

    So use it. But hacking a firmware is a massive job. We lucked out becuase of V and his knowledge. Buy the best camera you can afford without a hack. If one comes along, great. But V's already said he won't do it for this, so respect that.

  • AriaAria

    My one problem with camcorders is the lens which limits you and is not consistently good across its entire range. It also doesn't allow for the Artistic range I can get with my GH13. I've been collecting old Minolta Rokkor-X lenses and it's been a blast :). These Primes have their own unique look and that is a HUGE part of the appeal.

    Any rez test of a DSLR will be effected by the lens you use. Better lens with high Rez in mind will give u very good results while also giving a more filmic quality. My Vixia does not look as good at the long end and that's a consideration as well.

    The Hack issue remains. What do you need from a hack??? Higher bitrate? Some other missing or limited feature?

  • peternappeternap

    @ stears To hack something you need to have this first." Do you think about the hardware (camcorder/camera) or the firmware file?

    I think what he was saying was that he needed a camcorder, time and motivation....

    I PM'ed him about a hack recently which he wasn't especially interested in...but I was prepared to give him a camera to hack.

    I doubt he's made out of money or time and what he's accomplished so far is incredible, but if he's not interested, he has no motivation.

  • AriaAria

    If you're looking to build up some quality Lenses for a GH, i'd suggest looking at Minolta Rokkor-X lenses. They're small, good quality and cheap. You can get a 50mm f1.4 for way below $100.00. I paid about $50 for mine. There are also so great Vivtars for that system. Old Nikon D lenses are also a great bargain. I think the benefits of a GH outweigh the supposed cost of building out what you need if you're smart about spending.

  • Mark_the_HarpMark_the_Harp

    @subco I'm tempted certainly to replace my Canon XHA1 machines with something like this - to have in addition to my GH2.

    But it does really depend on what you're shooting. I like the form factor / ease of use of camcorders and even here at home the other day, when I lit and shot a piece to camera for a project, I used an XHA1 over my hacked GH2. Not that the GH2 doesn't produce much better pictures, but to be honest it's not as easy to use (besides, the location material had been shot on the XHA1 and I needed it to match).

    Why use an older camcorder on location in preference to the GH2? Because the camera person had to grab footage with the minimum wasted frames in a fast-moving environment among a group of 35 people moving around in a room, with good on-board sync sound and over a period of 3 hours, and the GH2 couldn't have done this without loads of add-ons. In good light, a camcorder like this, which records at 25mbps CBR, is still "OK" in image quality (not as good as the GH2) but crucially, has excellent OIS and a 20:1 zoom ratio and built-in XLR / 48v inputs. Plus, it's big enough to not knock over if accidentally left unattended for a few seconds. Hence why I chose it over the GH2. If I'd had something like the HC-X900 I'd have used that, again in preference to the GH2.

    I think the GH2 is amazing and I love this camera, but if you need to get the max amount of useable footage in a situation like the above, the GH2 isn't in my opinion the best choice and something like the HC-X900 may suit better.

    Or better still, get both?

  • DrDaveDrDave

    Aliasing, color, focus tracking, smoothness at 24p and zoom all better on my Canon G10; sharpness slightly better on the GH2, no question. DOF, lenses, etc. Would I like to turn an $400 M400 into a G10 or better yet, a high bitrate G10? Holy cow!!!!! yuppers.

  • DrDaveDrDave

    If you want really sharp, go for the GH2 with the Olly 45mm :) The Canon is what I would call "sharp enough". I do a lot of work with things that cause stair-stepping, so for me the sharpness is less important than the skin color and the aliasing. Low light is indeed good, but not miraculous--try before buy. Anyway, they are all cheap, basically, for what you get.

  • StearsStears

    Guys, Utmost all DSLR cameras have worse real (optical) video resolution (LW/PH) than Flag-ship consumer camcorders. Please check it in www.camcorderinfo.com. And please compare DSLR cameras with camcorders, which were designed produced in the same year!

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @Stears

    I warned you about posting same things again and again.

  • duchduch

    @Stears > we all know what you're pointing out.

    You said earlier "perhaps the best solution is a large perfectly 1920*1080 pixel sensor". Yep, it is, get a Sony PMW-F3 if that's what you want. You'll get every bit of detail you can squeeze out of 1080, down to the last vertical line. Guaranteed from use.

  • AriaAria

    Agreed that there are some really sharp small chip cams but I don't understand what the end game is here. Even if I got a higher bitrate for my Vixia it still would have the same limitations of a camcorder. I wouldn't be able to change lenses and get the exact look I can get with the vast array of lens options I can with my GH. Unless I'm shooting nothing but architecture and landscapes, which I don't, that extra sharpness isn't worth the limits.

    The Vixia is more convenient but even if I had more rez I wouldn't say it gave me more creative options and that's the beauty of DSLRS. It's not just about ultimate sharpness/resolution. My Vixia image is a bit sterile in comparison tho it has it's value for me in certain instances.

Add a Comment