7D Firmware officially announced

[candyman]

O, and another thing. What is it with the UDMA 7 and speed?

Sandisk is offering a 600x (90MB/s) 64GB CF and they mention it as: UDMA 6
Transcend is offering a 600x (90MB/s) 64GB CF and they mention it as: UDMA 7

Both have the same specifications but are not the same UDMA?

UDMA is the way in which the card can talk to the camera.

The speed is how fast the card can read/write internally.

Okay.
So to stay with the example of the two cards mentioned here; I have to choose the Transcend to take full advantage of the firmware new introduced maximum RAW buffer since it is a UDMA 7 with 90MB/s. Correct?

[DB]

O, and another thing. What is it with the UDMA 7 and speed?

Sandisk is offering a 600x (90MB/s) 64GB CF and they mention it as: UDMA 6
Transcend is offering a 600x (90MB/s) 64GB CF and they mention it as: UDMA 7

Both have the same specifications but are not the same UDMA?

UDMA is the way in which the card can talk to the camera.

The speed is how fast the card can read/write internally.

Plus the maximum write speed on a UDMA 6 card is 133MB/sec, but is up to 167MB/sec for UDMA 7, so > 25% faster (in terms of actually getting the data from the camera processor onto the memory card).

It seems that Canon have tried to address this issue back in April 2011 with firmware 1.2.5, but with not too much success (see link below). Now it appears that they've mastered the problem.

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/blogs/2011/20110426_eos7d_firmware125.shtml

It would appear that firmware 2.0 for the 7D will create a big uptick in demand for UDMA 7 CF cards, which by the way are quite difficult to find (on eBay only find one seller in Brooklyn, NY) and most sellers just say UDMA-enabled (not version 5, 6 or 7).

[DHaass]

One thing to note in the small print from the Canon USA site speaking to the firmware update:

* Figure based on ISO 100, Standard Picture Style and with UDMA CF memory card.

** Figure based on updated firmware, ISO 100, Standard Picture Style and with UDMA 7 CF memory cards. Note: UDMA 7 CF memory card read/write speeds are not fully supported with the EOS 7D Digital SLR camera, if using UDMA 7 memory cards, the read/write speeds will be equivalent to UDMA 6.

[jasonkrasnov]

Does anyone know the deal for the GPS integration? 

I heard you can map out a route using google maps as well via a mounted receiver that can be attached?

[Marsu42]

But I keep asking myself, would Canon be offering this firmware and hyping it to this degree if they were about to kill off the 7D series? These are the actions of a company trying to buy some time between upgrades, not a company about to radically reposition or dump a model.

You might be right, and since Canon seems to be very conservative (euphemism for non-innovative), maybe all will stay the same:

The 70d in q4/2012 might be a release like the 5d3: upgraded body (metal) and firmware (afma), but just a face-lifted sensor with the current tech. And then, maybe in q4/2013 with the time they just bought the 7d2 with a real sensor upgrade as the new aps-c flagship.

[japhoto]

But I keep asking myself, would Canon be offering this firmware and hyping it to this degree if they were about to kill off the 7D series? These are the actions of a company trying to buy some time between upgrades, not a company about to radically reposition or dump a model.

You might be right, and since Canon seems to be very conservative (euphemism for non-innovative), maybe all will stay the same:

The 70d in q4/2012 might be a release like the 5d3: upgraded body (metal) and firmware (afma), but just a face-lifted sensor with the current tech. And then, maybe in q4/2013 with the time they just bought the 7d2 with a real sensor upgrade as the new aps-c flagship.

There could be many reasons for the bigger firmware upgrade. It could be that the demand for this 3 year old camera is down and they have loads of them in stock (or parts for 7D cameras that can not be used in another model). So they try to make it more appealing over the coming 70D with this firmware so they can keep selling it.

Sure it's good to see that Canon as a company is "supporting" the older gear as well, but I can also see why people are not too impressed with this upgrade in the whole. Most of the "new features" are quite trivial with a few exceptions and they sure are done in a way that doesn't even start to step on the toes of the more expensive models in the Canon lineup. The much wanted bracketing is one of these things.

It's a free update, which is great (although the timeline and the hype before it is ridiculous). What I don't get is the mentality that some here have about praising the update because it adds features to the camera that weren't even there when it was first bought. I think camera manufacturers should go even further with the firmware updates and definitely do them more often. As a piece of consumer electronics a camera isn't cheap so with the 7D I'm pretty sure they could have improved on the AF and more importantly the noise levels via firmware updates.

Maybe that's just me, but as consumers I think we should demand that the support from the manufacturer should be more than just incremental and trivial updates. With film cameras it was a different deal, but DSLRs could be made better just by implementing a new firmware. The manufacturers seem to be stuck in the film ages still...

And yes, I do see the reason why they do things this way, but it isn't necessarily the best way to do business.

[AvTvM]

1. the current firmware upgrade even if it is free is: too little, too late
2. rather than this hyped, free FW update  I would have preferred Canon to provide an open interface for third party software providers like Magic Lantern for the 7D. THEN we would be receiveing firmware updates that would be truly innovative and worthwiloe. Rather than the lukewarm Canon software junk.

3. Buffer depth: the table at the bottom of Canon's marketing info on  firmware 2.0.X,
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/EOS7D_firmware_compare
and the small print at the very bottom state, that RAW buffer goes from 15 to 23 frames in succession if a 8GB CF card ("standard speed" - whatever that may mean) is in the camera. 25 RAWs in succession were achieved using an UDMA-7 CF Crad with 128 GB (unfortunately they don't say which specific make and model). The smallprint footnote states, that UDMA-7 is not supported by the 7D (irrespective of firmware version). UDMA 7 cards operate at the same speed as UDMA-6 cards in the 7D. Unfortunately Canon leaves it open, whether 25 RAWs in a row could also be achieved with an UDMA-6 card and/or with CF cards smaller than 128 GB.

So I guess we will have to wait until Rob Galbraith tests the new 7D firmware with CF cards of various speeds and sizes. I hope he is gin to do this.

My take on this is, that Canon has tweaked the firmware a little bit to make better use of faster CF cards - but that's all there is to it. Many users report that they do get 24-26 RAWs in succession with thze 7D and current firmware plus some of the faster CF cards.

Certainly this firmware upgrade does NOT make the 7D a new, better camera. It is basically the smallest possible patch to some of the shortcomings the camera had all along.  This is not to say, it is a bad camera - I use one myself and generally am fairly happy with it. However, items like Auto ISO, exposure bracketing and some other lacking or poorly implemented features could and should have been fixed much better and much sooner with one of the many firmware updates we already had. Rather than just correcting spelling mistakes in the Greek or Korean language menus. 

 

[Marsu42]

Maybe that's just me, but as consumers I think we should demand that the support from the manufacturer should be more than just incremental and trivial updates.

That's the well-known problematic point: demand how? Writing forum posts? Buy less Canon gear or switch to Nikon as a regular consumer? All of these won't be noticed or for the wrong reasons. The things that might work is cps professionals telling Canon they're considering to switch to another brand because of mediocre support.

And yes, I do see the reason why they do things this way, but it isn't necessarily the best way to do business.

I hate to say it, but personally I think Canon is rather clever engineering people into buying the most expensive stuff which they never though they'd to a short time ago. Canon now just has to meet the competition, i.e. upgrade their sensors like on the 1dx and do r&d on mirrorless.

[japhoto]

Maybe that's just me, but as consumers I think we should demand that the support from the manufacturer should be more than just incremental and trivial updates.

That's the well-known problematic point: demand how? Writing forum posts? Buy less Canon gear or switch to Nikon as a regular consumer? All of these won't be noticed or for the wrong reasons. The things that might work is cps professionals telling Canon they're considering to switch to another brand because of mediocre support.

And yes, I do see the reason why they do things this way, but it isn't necessarily the best way to do business.

I hate to say it, but personally I think Canon is rather clever engineering people into buying the most expensive stuff which they never though they'd to a short time ago. Canon now just has to meet the competition, i.e. upgrade their sensors like on the 1dx and do r&d on mirrorless.

I do agree with you here, not buying Canon gear doesn't do any good since other manufacturers do things quite similarly so the "message" wouldn't go through. Although I must say that when I had 4/3rds gear, Olympus did for example release optimizations to their AF systems both for bodies and lenses (the lenses also had upgradeable firmware). And to my knowledge the issues were pretty minor and they released a fix in a reasonable time frame. I don't know if that's too much to expect, but again I agree that I don't know how this change could be made.

Also I tend to agree with you on the business side of things, I meant originally that it's not perhaps the most ethical way to do business, but yes, it is damn effective. Just look at the 5D - series, making sure there was a lack of much needed features on the MkII they can pretty much ask for what they want for the MkIII. But at the same time I feel that they could trickle the features down from the 1D - series to their flagship APS-C - sensor camera (at the moment 7D). I don't think that for example adding better bracketing to the 7D or its successor would affect the sales of the 1DX.

It would be really cool if someone would release a modular DSLR like the computers are at the moment. With upgradeable "motherboard", sensor, AF-system, body etc. I'd be all over that

[Marsu42]

It would be really cool if someone would release a modular DSLR like the computers are at the moment. With upgradeable "motherboard", sensor, AF-system, body etc. I'd be all over that

It would be completely sufficient to provide documented firmware hooks for 3rd party firmware like magic lantern to do more things outside live view, and without time-consuming reverse engineering. They could also invent a "this will void your warranty" flag if they fear too many bricked bodies returning.

Actually, I think this would benefit Canon because ml only runs on Canon's very good digic processors (well, except dual cpu bodies like the 7d). And because 1d or 5d users would still buy the same camera body and not say "Well, ye know, the 600d does unlimited bracketing with magic lantern, why would I need a 5d3?". So imho, this specific shortcoming is poor business due to sheer, blatant ignorance and arrogance.

[skitron]

1. the current firmware upgrade even if it is free is: too little, too late.

I agree. I passed on the 7D for the sole reason it did not have manual audio control. Now it finally has it but the rest is getting rather dated. So good for existing owners, but no incentive to buy one unless a really cheap price.

[Marsu42]

So good for existing owners, but no incentive to buy one unless a really cheap price.

At least with working auto-iso, the 7d is up to par to newer bodies and it's possible to circumvent the sensor's problems by setting an upper iso limit like on the 60d. So imho if you need a high fps camera with ok iq, the 7d at the current price could be counted as "cheap" given the Canon & Nikon competition in this sports sector.

[SDsc0rch]

The unexpected firmware that only makes this very good camera even better by adding new features beyond those you purchased it with is not good enough for you people? OMG

^this^

[AvTvM]

So good for existing owners, but no incentive to buy one unless a really cheap price.

At least with working auto-iso, the 7d is up to par to newer bodies and it's possible to circumvent the sensor's problems by setting an upper iso limit like on the 60d. So imho if you need a high fps camera with ok iq, the 7d at the current price could be counted as "cheap" given the Canon & Nikon competition in this sports sector.

I do  not consider AUto-ISO "solved". Canon has supplied the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM... and it comes three years after the cam has been released. A cheap, extremely simple poiece of software code.  Every Nikon from  the D80 and better has a better Auto ISO implementation than firmware 2.0.X for the  7D, Canon's APS-C flagship camera.

And the 7D's lease on life probably  expires  the very minute Nikon brings out a DX D400. If they decide to ever get one to market. :-)  Until a possibly superior D400 materializes, I do prefer my 7D over the Nikon D300s, despite the D300s' better Auto-ISO feature. :-)

[gabriele]

Would have been nice if they added some of those functions on the way more expensive Canon EOS 5D Mark II.