7D Owners have you seen this?

Heard about this, but havent seen it in mine yet, and have been using rapid fire a bit, will be watching this though.
 
That looks like a pretty serous problem if you ask me, maybe it can't handle the said fps?
 
Highly doubt it'll only be US models. My personal shooting doesn't really bring it up as a problem or hasn't yet but for the sake of others, I hope it gets fixed soon.
 
edbarton said:
Highly doubt it'll only be US models. My personal shooting doesn't really bring it up as a problem or hasn't yet but for the sake of others, I hope it gets fixed soon.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have used a tongue in cheek smiley :lol:
 
Sounds like the buffer hasn't cleared the previous image data. Shouldn't be too hard for a firmware update to correct
 
sounds more like the sensor is taking too long to recover
software could fix it but I bet it slows down the max fps!
 
Will be easily fixed by slowing down the fps a little. i wouldn't be surprised if fps went from 8 to 7.5 or similar. US and UK 7D's are exactly the same apart from the £500 battery charger we are supplied:). Personally I have not even tried gattling-gun mode on my 7D so wouldn't notice the problem if I had it.
 
my guess too would be residual charge on the sensor and they'll have to slow down the frame rate
 
I've just read this on the Canon uk site.

FAQ: Important announcement regarding abnormal images captured with the EOS 7D Digital SLR camera.


We have confirmed that in certain camera settings and shooting conditions, the phenomenon described below may occur in images captured by the EOS 7D Digital SLR camera.

In images captured by continuous shooting, and under certain conditions, barely noticeable traces of the immediately preceding frame may be visible.
This phenomenon is not noticeable in an image with optimal exposure. The phenomenon may become more noticeable if a retouching process such as level compensation is applied to emphasize the image.

Cause


Canon is currently investigating and analyzing the cause of this phenomenon, and we are planning to release a firmware update to address this issue.
Answer:



We are planning to post the relevant information about support measures for this phenomenon on our Web site in early November.

We offer our most sincere apologies to customers using this product who have been inconvenienced by this issue. Going forward, we will spare no effort in our quality management to make sure our customers can use our products with confidence. We hope our efforts will earn your understanding
 
No problem on mine ive used continuous shooting quite a bit in testing in a viariety of lighting conditions at high and low iso's
Regards
Lost
 
I don't use a 7D, but I see that Canon aren't trying to deny any problem like they did with the mark III - let's hope they learned a lesson from that fiasco. They do seem confident that a firmware update will do the trick. I certainly hope so for all of you.
 
I think that the problem is only visible with areas that change in high-contrast, at at speed.

I think that it might also be only visible at the ends of the sequence (as the sensor gets hotter?)
It might be my eyes, but it might possibly be visible here.
However, I have had to run auto-levels, bump up the brightness and sharpness, in order to just maybe get a smidgen, or it might be my imagination.
This is the rear of a car, moving to the right quickly. I think that just maybe, there is a car shaped shadow, covering just aroud a cm to the left.



If this really is the issue, then it is a non-issue to me.
 
could this be something to do with the amount of pixels on the 7D sensor, it must be very dense to get that many on a crop sensor
 
wack61 said:
could this be something to do with the amount of pixels on the 7D sensor, it must be very dense to get that many on a crop sensor
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

(physically) Directly no, the pixel size would have no bearing on the fact that there might be a residual image.

(electrically) However, due to the fact that the pixel size is smaller, there will be less light hitting each sensor. This would mean that each sensor would have a smaller range, from 0 to full to be considered at each 'time step' to determine what light has hit the sensor (bit confused that sentance).
Thus, this signal would be 'amplified' if necessary to make it easier to read in with the processor. Should there be any residual 'data' (charge) in the sensor, then this would be amplified too. The amount of residual (ratio) compared to the amount of charge required for a full signal will be increased (higher noise to signal) due to the fact that the range is decreased.

If you look at an item discharging, when it is full, the rate of discharge is high, when it has almost fully discharged, the rate of discharge is low. For a given technology, if, say, you loose 90% of your charge per second (per time-base), then you will have 10% left after 1, 1% after 2, 0.1% after 3 (roughly), at which point it could be considered all-but empty. If you use the same actual rate of loss (not the percentage), but have the maximum set at where 10% might have been, then you could consider the item discharged after 2 time-bases. However, if you then amplify this data to get to the 100% values, then you would have a real amount of charge left.

But that is kinda suposition based on what they are probably doing within their sensors (only a Canon eningeer involved with the original tech could say for certain)
 
Try doing a massive OTT levels adjustment to something where you have panned something and the subject has changed position/size in the frame as it has moved past you - obviously something like a car on a big piece of tarmac or an aircraft against the sky.

Should be fixable in firmware with some timing changes to the system for reasons as well explained above.
 
I have had another play with mine shot a 4 gig card in varying conditions continously filling buffer, cars on road and sparrows in back garden flying to feeders no problems at all processed some there was no visible problem with them auto focus worked fine just hope this isnt going to turn into another 1d mk3 for some people.
 
Well I haven't been doing any wildlife shots so far, but will be next week in the Galapagos and I'll compare it with the 1Ds 3 which I'm also taking.
Yesterday at the Canon show at Islington (which everyone seemed to miss except Stew and Sue Fisher and was excellent) Haasleblad wanted a look at my 7D and I took some images of their model with the 7D and my 50mm 1.2
The results were simply stunning, the detail with the 7D and 100% crop (which really is only for pixel peepers) was unbelievable and the Blad guys were pretty impressed.
While I like others want this for wildlife, as a general purpose body albeit with a 1.6 crop, this is a serious body.
I'm only trying to put in to perspective the price and competence of this latest offering and I think it's a pity that it's been released so close to the new 1D4, which I also looked at and is very impressive.
Everyone is going to try and knock Canon at the moment, lets give them a fair crack at the whip. Some of their lenses are fantastic.
 
Like with "pattern noise" on the 5D MkII's you will probably only notice the issue if you go looking for it. I had not seen any mention of this until Canon posted the service note. If it was a major issue it would already have been widely reported. I cannot see the point of trying to reproduce the problem so people can feel justifiably unhappy with what is a good all-round camera. If you shoot 8fps in challenging lighting conditions I bet most cameras will give less than ideal results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top