This is merely speculation on my part as I haven't even seen a 7D, but I believe the new focus/tracking engine in the 7D differs from Canon's past ones by also using color to track?
Is there a CF for enabling or disabling this? Perhaps once the light falls below a certain level this new program has difficulties. I did read through the earlier posts and am aware that you had switched AF off, but maybe this color tracking ties in with the exposure meter somehow.
Also, I may have overlooked this in the earlier posts but what is your "quality" setting? If you are shooting jpg isn't there always NR applied? Of course, you mentioned your 40D doesn't exhibit this behavior so likely it has more to do with the new focus/tracking/metering system.
Thanks for posting your experience with the new camera.
It matters not what the quality setting is, it performs the same in any setting. There is no way to change the behavior of the metering system other than the normal ways that exist on all other Canon bodies. Make no mistake, all settings for any auto compensation or exposure or focus or anything are off.
I have been clear right from the start that all possible other factors have been looked at.
It is simply a function of the metering systems interfering with the shot speed when light falls ambient light or available light hitting the sensor when in manual exposure mode.
Please email or write or call your local Canon support /service center and complain please. The more voices the faster the fix might appear.
atsi wrote:
Please email or write or call your local Canon support /service center and complain please. The more voices the faster the fix might appear.
Canon already acknowledge it in the manual. It kinda implies that they accept it as the limitation and don't expect to fix it. Good luck though, maybe they'll listen.
atsi wrote:
Robert, the equivalent light that is minimum for full FPS is 3200 f2.8 1/100.
Just curious, in what kind of event/condition do you expect to shoot such a high frame per second with that kind of setting?
I can accept that this limitation might exist where metering is required, but it is not required in manual mode.
As far as where would one shoot this way? Think low light anywhere....... Why include 6400ISO as a standard ISO and 12800 in expansion if you aren't intended to use them?
atsi wrote:
I can accept that this limitation might exist where metering is required, but it is not required in manual mode.
As far as where would one shoot this way? Think low light anywhere....... Why include 6400ISO as a standard ISO and 12800 in expansion if you aren't intended to use them?
What about if you're using flash? unless the flash is on manual mode as well, you'd still need the metering right?
I'm just wondering because I never shoot action, in bright or low light.
Wow, I keep having to repeat myself over and over. I already said in post #13
"The metering should be disabled in manual mode when flash is not used when the shutter button is depressed. It has no use."
This guy doesn't seem to have any problem shooting hockey with ISO3200 and up though so at least we know in real world situation, this camera works fine.
So my question still stands, in what kind of extremely low light situation do you need to shoot the full 8FPS? Surely you can think of a couple of examples.
Birds in flight at sunset, where it has not been possible before, or has because the camera doesn't slow down! Night scenes with cars moving where you want to freeze them and maybe be able to see the license plate. Probably lots of others but why should anyone be limited when it isn't necessary?
This guy doesn't seem to have any problem shooting hockey with ISO3200 and up though so at least we know in real world situation, this camera works fine.
So my question still stands, in what kind of extremely low light situation do you need to shoot the full 8FPS? Surely you can think of a couple of examples.
Any high speed sport shot under lights. ( Hockey, football, basketball, baseball, volleyball...and on and on ) No one NEEDS 8 fps...but if you got it, why not use it. Tell me, when do you need 8 fps under bright sunny conditions.
I just gave you an example of someone using it for hockey with ISO3200. He got the shots he wanted.
This is like complaining about how the highest ISO in any camera is too noisy and not really useable.
Go out and shoot with this camera, should you ever come across any situation where you're limited by the reduced FPS then come back here and complain. Right now you're just complaining because you THINK you might be in some ways limited by it. In other word, much ado about nothing.
n0b0 wrote:
I'm just wondering because I never shoot action, in bright or low light.
n0b0 wrote:
Sorry mate, I didn't read that part.
n0b0 wrote:
So my question still stands, in what kind of extremely low light situation do you need to shoot the full 8FPS? Surely you can think of a couple of examples.
Ok so I answered your questions despite having to repeat the answers from previous posts.
n0b0 wrote:
I just gave you an example of someone using it for hockey with ISO3200. He got the shots he wanted.
What does the ISO have to do with this? Hockey games are fairly well lit. I can shoot ISO 3200 in broad daylight. Don't confuse the use of ISO with the available light.
n0b0 wrote:
This is like complaining about how the highest ISO in any camera is too noisy and not really useable.
Go out and shoot with this camera, should you ever come across any situation where you're limited by the reduced FPS then come back here and complain. Right now you're just complaining because you THINK you might be in some ways limited by it. In other word, much ado about nothing.
So you don't read, make assumptions, and then tell me I only think I know what I am talking about instead of having to deal with these circumstances? I think you should follow your own advice if you say "I never shoot action, in bright or low light.". You don't have any experience with the problem but are willing to tell people what to do....
The point is that this camera does not do as well as the previous models in the same situation, artificially. I did not know this when buying it and only found out now. Let's stop blaming the user for wanting what is normal and stop helping the manufacturer ignore the problem.
The 7D is capable of full 8fps in any light condition in full manual mode but it has been arbitrarily made unable to to do so. It should be fixed and it can be easily by Canon.
P.S.
Oh yes, I purchased this camera partly because of the promise of 8fps and better low light capabilities. So I have a real reason, not some imagined wish list.
n0b0 wrote:
I just gave you an example of someone using it for hockey with ISO3200. He got the shots he wanted.
This is like complaining about how the highest ISO in any camera is too noisy and not really useable.
Go out and shoot with this camera, should you ever come across any situation where you're limited by the reduced FPS then come back here and complain. Right now you're just complaining because you THINK you might be in some ways limited by it. In other word, much ado about nothing.
n0b0, how many hockey games have you shot in rinks that have bad lighting. Umm...let me guess. Would that be ZERO? Come back and give us advise when you have experience with what you are talking about.
Boy, I'm really missing something or I'm just plain dense, but if I understand correctly, if you don't have enough light and need to let in more than is possible by setting 3200 - f2.8 - 1/100, then fps goes from 8 to 4.
The examples cited on when you want high fps at high ISO were birds in flight at sunset and night motorsports.
And 1/100 will get you sharp pictures in those situations? You must be quite good at panning, because even PetKal probably can't do that
Sorry PetKal. I don't know you so I appologize for throwing you under the bus.
Full disclosure! I do not own a 7D, do not shoot BIF at sunset, nor do I shoot night motorsports so please feel free to tell me to shove off
dwweiche wrote:
Boy, I'm really missing something or I'm just plain dense, but if I understand correctly, if you don't have enough light and need to let in more than is possible by setting 3200 - f2.8 - 1/100, then fps goes from 8 to 4.
The examples cited on when you want high fps at high ISO were birds in flight at sunset and night motorsports.
And 1/100 will get you sharp pictures in those situations? You must be quite good at panning, because even PetKal probably can't do that
OK, try ISO 6400 at 1/400 at f2? How about ISO 12800 at 1/800 at F2.8? How about ISO 6400 at 1/200 at f4? All of these are possible uses. None of these are possible at full frame rate with this camera in normal view mode.
The 40d will do 6.5 fps in light that is less than proper exposure at 3200 1/100 2.8 , the 20D will do 5 fps, the 7D goes from being able to do 8 fps to somewhere around 4 fps. So not only does the 7D not do its best, it doesn't even do the best a 20D will in that light condition. Make sense?
Why does the higher FPS count? It matters when you are trying to track an object that is changing in focus or in position and the chances of getting a good shot go up with the number of frames shot. Sometimes birds will stay put and not move until these lousy lighting conditions happen.
Oh yes, more:
What about the use of ND filters? Now I can't think of a hard example but using ND filters will also reduce the light that gets in for the exposure sensor. Lighting can be good but you want to reduce DOF. This might be a problem (probably not). Like I said it is not something I can cite in any way.
I'm confused why this camera would drop from 8-4. Like you point out, if I take my 40D, put a lens cap on and just fire away at full burst, it'll go until the buffer fills up, at it's full CLACK CLACK CLACK! frame-rate.
1 sec= 1/125x8 fps at normal camera settings iso,f-stop,shutter
I think if you go outside these like ISO3200 it takes camera longer to digest and framerate will slow down,EASY
.