Rather than get involved in another BF debate I shall remove my post. However no matter how skeptical you may be it happened. Why on earth would I say it did if it hadn't!
Last edited:
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Canon 7D Mk II is announced and available for pre-order (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter Ashraf Kotb
- Start date
Rather than get involved in another BF debate I shall remove my post. However no matter how skeptical you may be it happened. Why on earth would I say it did if it hadn't!
tdodd
Just call me Tim
It's not that the failure rate increases, but that losing 32GB of photos in one hit would be more upsetting than only losing 16GB or 8.
FWIW I've been switching a pair of Transcend 32GB 133X cards between my 7D, 5D2, 1D3 and 5D3 since 2009 and I've never had a failure or corruption. Today I ordered a fresh pair of Transcend 32GB 800X CF cards to give a turn of speed to my DSLRs when shooting action and a Transcend 32GB 600X for my new Canon G7X which is on its way to me as I type.
The only card failure I've ever had was a 2GB cheapo which was DOA, and that was for my 30D back in 2006. No other card of any format or size has failed for me since.
Marcus Conway - ebirder
Well-known member
I have had several Sandisk cards fail over the years. Of all sizes. I have slowly switchd to Transcend and have had no failures with them yet. Cards will and do fail. I just went through a spate about 18 months ago with Sandisk. I must say I was able to recover using the complementary software the camera just refused to read the card.
Agree with Hampers though about going for the smaller sizes. One you lose less images and two they are cheaper to replace.
Agree with Hampers though about going for the smaller sizes. One you lose less images and two they are cheaper to replace.
south banker
Well-known member
I know what Hampers is saying..i too only use small cards..
same as GYRob 8gb & 16gb..
next card will be 8gb..would rather have 4x8 instead of 1x32.
same as GYRob 8gb & 16gb..
next card will be 8gb..would rather have 4x8 instead of 1x32.
Dave Williams
Well-known member
I know what Hampers is saying too but we are all of differing opinions when it comes to risk. I have 2x 64Gb cards and lots of 32Gb ones and don't think twice about the consequences.If anything it's the damage done to the card by constantly removing it from a device that makes it most at risk and that particularly applies to SD cards I would have thought.
The only cards that have failed me were some Sandisk CF ones purchased on Ebay. Difficult to tell the difference but they turned out to be counterfeits.
Going to the extremes of cautiousness I once met someone who once having put a lens on his DSLR never took it off again for fear of getting the sensor dirty.
The only cards that have failed me were some Sandisk CF ones purchased on Ebay. Difficult to tell the difference but they turned out to be counterfeits.
Going to the extremes of cautiousness I once met someone who once having put a lens on his DSLR never took it off again for fear of getting the sensor dirty.
south banker
Well-known member
Ive just realised something..i was thinking why i thought 8gb was plenty for me..
I dont spray n pray but more importantly i shoot in jpeg..i personally dont see benefit of raw because i dont do that much processing..also i go for flight shots so to me jpeg better..but we are going off route here so back to 7dii..
I read you can use old 7d battery but need seperate charger for 7dii..is this correct?
I dont spray n pray but more importantly i shoot in jpeg..i personally dont see benefit of raw because i dont do that much processing..also i go for flight shots so to me jpeg better..but we are going off route here so back to 7dii..
I read you can use old 7d battery but need seperate charger for 7dii..is this correct?
graham catley
Well-known member
I have quite a few 1GB cards and the off 256 MB card if anyone wants to put 4 shots on a card: times have changed rapidly on the storage front: SD cards are stupidly slow at writing compared to the same rated CF card so worth bearing in mind when doing machine gun shooting.
When photographing flying passerines I always use a central spot focus and place it 3mm to the right of the eye of the bird using shooting scenario 4 with my personal tracking adjustments and lots of bovine deposits. AF is better but still designed for subjects the size of a small bus not a 20 gram bundle of feathers bounding along erratically.
When photographing flying passerines I always use a central spot focus and place it 3mm to the right of the eye of the bird using shooting scenario 4 with my personal tracking adjustments and lots of bovine deposits. AF is better but still designed for subjects the size of a small bus not a 20 gram bundle of feathers bounding along erratically.
I have one 32GB (and two 16GB handy just in case) CF card I use in my 7D and a couple of older slower 8GB cards lying around too. I have used many different memory cards over the years and only had 2 fail on me: one Transcend 32GB CF card and a micro SD card in my phone. If it happens, it happens.
I shoot RAW only and to my mind 32GB is the sweet spot, it'll be over 1000 shots even with the new 20MP sensor. I've only ever filled such a large sized memory card 3 or 4 times (and that was when I was machine gunning BIFS in very good conditions and very close to the birds) so I know I almost certainly won't be caught short. I'll get a 64GB SD card (very cheap these days) to back up on trips or to use as 'overflow' on the rare occasions I need it.
I shoot RAW only and to my mind 32GB is the sweet spot, it'll be over 1000 shots even with the new 20MP sensor. I've only ever filled such a large sized memory card 3 or 4 times (and that was when I was machine gunning BIFS in very good conditions and very close to the birds) so I know I almost certainly won't be caught short. I'll get a 64GB SD card (very cheap these days) to back up on trips or to use as 'overflow' on the rare occasions I need it.
MJN
Well-known member
lewis20126
Well-known member
Dave Williams
Well-known member
According to the body top screen a 16Gb card will hold approximately 461 shots on the 1DX and 512 on the 5D3.
I hadn't given it much thought until I just tried the cameras but MP's don't appear to dictate the file size, the 5D having more than the 1DX. I'm sure someone will give a technical explanation.
As for the single focus point 3mm to the right of the eye, I use exactly the same scenario as Graham but it does vary too, sometimes it's to the left depending on which way the bird is flying.:t:
I hadn't given it much thought until I just tried the cameras but MP's don't appear to dictate the file size, the 5D having more than the 1DX. I'm sure someone will give a technical explanation.
As for the single focus point 3mm to the right of the eye, I use exactly the same scenario as Graham but it does vary too, sometimes it's to the left depending on which way the bird is flying.:t:
Julian H
Well-known member
Alan,
To address your question about the 7DMK II from a birder/photographer point of view. I have a 40D and was going to upgrade to the 5DMKIII primarily for two reasons:
1). The files out of that model are awesome.
2). I get FULL autofocus with a teleconverter on my 400 mm 5.6 prime lens.
5D MKIII is a full frame sensor, but the extra megapixels will allow me to crop in tighter without losing as much quality as I would do if I do the same crop with the lower mp files from my 40D.
However that model is nearly double the cost of the 7D MKII.
The main reasons to me for upgrading now to the 7D MK II are:
- the 7D MK II is the only prosumer body that will fully autofocus with the 400m and a teleconverter
- better autofocus, larger MP and 10 fps with improved buffer performance
- the 7DMKII is still a 1.6x crop factor body (unlike the 5DMK III)
The added file sizes and auto-focus improvements and 10 fps are all gravy at that point. Thankfully, living here in the US, ISO is not an issue since we have light here
Obviously trying to shoot a Lancy in a rainstorm on Shetland will require a higher ISO, so for instances like that, shooting at 1600 with a nice non-noisy file would be ideal. It looks as though the 7D MK II might be fine with that.
Anyway, my friend has a beta test version and will be sending me over some files. Proof will be in the pudding as they say, but I for one am hoping Christmas comes early!!
To address your question about the 7DMK II from a birder/photographer point of view. I have a 40D and was going to upgrade to the 5DMKIII primarily for two reasons:
1). The files out of that model are awesome.
2). I get FULL autofocus with a teleconverter on my 400 mm 5.6 prime lens.
5D MKIII is a full frame sensor, but the extra megapixels will allow me to crop in tighter without losing as much quality as I would do if I do the same crop with the lower mp files from my 40D.
However that model is nearly double the cost of the 7D MKII.
The main reasons to me for upgrading now to the 7D MK II are:
- the 7D MK II is the only prosumer body that will fully autofocus with the 400m and a teleconverter
- better autofocus, larger MP and 10 fps with improved buffer performance
- the 7DMKII is still a 1.6x crop factor body (unlike the 5DMK III)
The added file sizes and auto-focus improvements and 10 fps are all gravy at that point. Thankfully, living here in the US, ISO is not an issue since we have light here
Obviously trying to shoot a Lancy in a rainstorm on Shetland will require a higher ISO, so for instances like that, shooting at 1600 with a nice non-noisy file would be ideal. It looks as though the 7D MK II might be fine with that.Anyway, my friend has a beta test version and will be sending me over some files. Proof will be in the pudding as they say, but I for one am hoping Christmas comes early!!
Last edited:
lewis20126
Well-known member
Alan,
To address your question about the 7DMK II from a birder/photographer point of view. I have a 40D and was going to upgrade to the 5DMKII primarily for two reasons:
1). The files out of that model are awesome.
2). I get FULL autofocus with a teleconverter on my 400 mm 5.6 prime lens.
5D MKIII is a full frame sensor, but the extra megapixels will allow me to crop in tighter without losing as much quality as I would do if I do the same crop with the lower mp files from my 40D.
However that model is nearly double the cost of the 7D MKII.
The main reasons to me for upgrading now to the 7D MK II are:
- the 7D MK II is the only prosumer body that will fully autofocus with the 400m and a teleconverter
- better autofocus, larger MP and 10 fps with improved buffer performance
- the 7DMKII is still a 1.6x crop factor body (unlike the 5DMK III)
The added file sizes and auto-focus improvements and 10 fps are all gravy at that point. Thankfully, living here in the US, ISO is not an issue since we have light here
Anyway, my friend has a beta test version and will be sending me over some files. Proof will be in the pudding as they say, but I for one am hoping Christmas comes early!!
Julian
Thanks, a good summary - I will get a 7DMKII - the only question now is when...
cheers, alan
Just a thought on card sizes and reliability.
Quite a while back I was photographing Ogmore Castle one evening whilst waiting for the Golden Moment I was chatting with another guy who was standing in the river taking pictures. He was advocating smaller cards as you loose fewer shots if it fails - quite right. But my contention was that if you use a card of twice or more times the capacity then you have half (or less) the chance of it failing, result = exactly the same risk namely more chance of losing fewer shots or less chance of losing more shots. At this point his small card needed replacing, yes you can guess what happened next - PLOP straight into 3 feet of water! I did manage not to fall about laughing but it was literally within 30 seconds of my statement so it was hard!
Quite a while back I was photographing Ogmore Castle one evening whilst waiting for the Golden Moment I was chatting with another guy who was standing in the river taking pictures. He was advocating smaller cards as you loose fewer shots if it fails - quite right. But my contention was that if you use a card of twice or more times the capacity then you have half (or less) the chance of it failing, result = exactly the same risk namely more chance of losing fewer shots or less chance of losing more shots. At this point his small card needed replacing, yes you can guess what happened next - PLOP straight into 3 feet of water! I did manage not to fall about laughing but it was literally within 30 seconds of my statement so it was hard!
Dave Williams
Well-known member
At 10 fps 16Gb soon disappears. I know lots of folk seem quite disparaging about high shutter rate photography but it does make a lot of difference if you are trying to capture a particular moment. I have seen lots of outstanding Kingfisher shots recently and the frame rate increases the likelihood of capturing the the action. It's not spray and pray at all. It takes planning and skill although I do smile when I see people post comments like "well timed" as if it was the only shot taken.
If you are in a hide with someone who is needlessly rattling off shots it can be quite irritating and that's why I am interested to hear the 7D2 in action both on the highest frame rate and the silent one. I find my 5D3 a huge benefit over the 1DX in these situations.
As for changing cards, similar situation as John3F's experience. I was lucky enough to have some superb opportunities for photographing a Grey Phalarope recently. The location surrounding the bird's favoured pool was wet and muddy. Not somewhere you want to take lots of gear and certainly not start using muddy fingers to start changing cards or searching pockets for replacements. I took hundreds of shots and most would think it was total overkill but I was after a particular moment and I only came close a couple of times. Fellow togs would understand, everyone else who might have turned up whilst I was there would think I was an irritant I guess.
As for the 7D2's AF capabilities, they are the same as the 5D3 and 1DX's. They are an improvement on previous bodies I have owned but if you are only using a single focus point the focus modes are pretty irrelevant and in some cases don't work and I have to agree with Graham's earlier comment that they are more use with large objects anyway. I was delighted with my results using all 61 focus points when the Tour of Britain cycle race came to our locality but for small objects in a cluttered background I still struggle to hold focus as much as I ever did. Again choice of lens, closeness to the subject etc make just as big a difference as the camera body itself.
I am still well down the photographic learning curve and as so many have commented in the past, it's the photographer that is important not the tools. Well , not quite always correct, but there is a large element of truth.
The 7D2 will no doubt be a nice piece of kit but the hype surrounding it's launch might convince you in to thinking you'll be able to perform miracles with it. That is not necessarily true !
If you are in a hide with someone who is needlessly rattling off shots it can be quite irritating and that's why I am interested to hear the 7D2 in action both on the highest frame rate and the silent one. I find my 5D3 a huge benefit over the 1DX in these situations.
As for changing cards, similar situation as John3F's experience. I was lucky enough to have some superb opportunities for photographing a Grey Phalarope recently. The location surrounding the bird's favoured pool was wet and muddy. Not somewhere you want to take lots of gear and certainly not start using muddy fingers to start changing cards or searching pockets for replacements. I took hundreds of shots and most would think it was total overkill but I was after a particular moment and I only came close a couple of times. Fellow togs would understand, everyone else who might have turned up whilst I was there would think I was an irritant I guess.
As for the 7D2's AF capabilities, they are the same as the 5D3 and 1DX's. They are an improvement on previous bodies I have owned but if you are only using a single focus point the focus modes are pretty irrelevant and in some cases don't work and I have to agree with Graham's earlier comment that they are more use with large objects anyway. I was delighted with my results using all 61 focus points when the Tour of Britain cycle race came to our locality but for small objects in a cluttered background I still struggle to hold focus as much as I ever did. Again choice of lens, closeness to the subject etc make just as big a difference as the camera body itself.
I am still well down the photographic learning curve and as so many have commented in the past, it's the photographer that is important not the tools. Well , not quite always correct, but there is a large element of truth.
The 7D2 will no doubt be a nice piece of kit but the hype surrounding it's launch might convince you in to thinking you'll be able to perform miracles with it. That is not necessarily true !
GYRob
Well-known member
Your last paragraph is spot on Dave , and I will add there is not a focus system out there that will latch onto even something like a Kestrel and hold it in perfect focus all the time .
I can see a lot of confusion once the masses start to use the this new camera because of the hype, I don't doubt it will be good but not a miracle worker when birds in flight come into it.
Rob.
I can see a lot of confusion once the masses start to use the this new camera because of the hype, I don't doubt it will be good but not a miracle worker when birds in flight come into it.
Rob.
Julian H
Well-known member
I see lots of talk about tech specs and the like and to expound on Dave's post, it is down to the photographer to work with the tools he is given to make good artistic images.
In my estimation, the 7D used with the 400mm 5.6 Canon lens is probably the best rig going for those that only want to invest a few grand and like to travel light. For flight stuff it is a killer lens. The slightly noisier files due to the large number of megapixels is a prone of contention for some, but I shot a Baird's Sand with my friend's 7D and was impressed by the files at their native pixels (see processed file attached). If the 7D MK 11 is an improvement on the noise and quality of file, it is a no-brainer upgrade for me from my 40D solely for the autofocus capabilities with a teleconverter!
In my estimation, the 7D used with the 400mm 5.6 Canon lens is probably the best rig going for those that only want to invest a few grand and like to travel light. For flight stuff it is a killer lens. The slightly noisier files due to the large number of megapixels is a prone of contention for some, but I shot a Baird's Sand with my friend's 7D and was impressed by the files at their native pixels (see processed file attached). If the 7D MK 11 is an improvement on the noise and quality of file, it is a no-brainer upgrade for me from my 40D solely for the autofocus capabilities with a teleconverter!
