I still think the most plausible is Canon didn't want to make firmware with the cLog update available to the general public.
Upvote
0
Oh God, this!!! Shooting basketball games and if I shoot to quick after a rest or after chimping I will lose the next burst of shots with a black screen lock up sometimes requiring battery removal. So very annoying, happens about once a game over 1500-2000 images.After shooting several sport events this weekend, a fix for this damn, anoing, pictures loosing Error 70 is still number one on my wishlist. As much as I appreciate further upgrades...
OK, so how does that differ from what car manufacturers do? I never hear anyone complain that Toyota "Crippled" the Avalon because they didn't include the fancier audio system that they put in the Lexus ES350 (hypothetical example). I remember years ago that a company called Pioneer made a model 770, 880, and 990 (or something like that) as the number got higher, the price went up and you got more features. Canon is doing the same thing. So what? You want the fancy model; you need to pay the fancy price. That's how the world works.David,
The addition of cLog on the 5D4 was software, not hardware.
And, [Respectfully[ Canon like other manufacturers does "cripple" [call it what you like] or omit features that could be included on body's in order to "protect" sales of higher end models. This doesn't have to do with someone's knowledge. Firmware updates that add functionality does not negate what was initially [purposely] omitted. It does enhance the user experience and value, but only after the fact.
I agree that it is mostly a marketing gimmick. Olympus has had the feature for years and it seems like - from user comments over the years - that times when it can be used are almost never. Users try it a few times, and when it works, you think, this is cool, but then realize the differences between pixel shift and not are so minor, and the times it works so rare, that you never use it again and forget that your camera even has that feature. Really a feature for pixel peepers, in my opinion. Putting it on a 45 MP camera, which already has enough MPs for almost every user, is really just for marketing. The R6, perhaps, could benefit from it, but not the R5, in my opinion.I've tried pixel shift before. The times when the image stays absolutely the same between the multiple exposures at slightly different times, and there is also absolutely no camera shake whatsoever, and the focus is so sharp that there is no blur between pixel elements are almost never realized in my experience. Therefore "pixel shift" is one feature that I think is great to exist for marketing to sell more cameras, but is absolutely worthless to me. Your mileage may vary, of course, so I respect those who feel differently.
I shoot a fair amount of architecture, typically with TS-E lenses on a tripod. To me, that seems like a subject that can significantly benefit from pixel shift, if not for the increased resolution then mainly because pixel shift eliminates color moiré (which often occurs with high-frequency repeating patterns, like bricks-and-mortar).But, if it happens, we'll see. I'll be glad to be proven wrong if someone can make pixel shift a worthwhile function.
From my experience, it works well on the newer EM1 Mark III and the OM1, but it only works if you have a good lens. Oddly enough, the hand held high resolution mode works very well for astrophotography landscapes and can replace a tracker when shooting up to 60 second exposures.I agree that it is mostly a marketing gimmick. Olympus has had the feature for years and it seems like - from user comments over the years - that times when it can be used are almost never. Users try it a few times, and when it works, you think, this is cool, but then realize the differences between pixel shift and not are so minor, and the times it works so rare, that you never use it again and forget that your camera even has that feature. Really a feature for pixel peepers, in my opinion. Putting it on a 45 MP camera, which already has enough MPs for almost every user, is really just for marketing. The R6, perhaps, could benefit from it, but not the R5, in my opinion.
But, if it happens, we'll see. I'll be glad to be proven wrong if someone can make pixel shift a worthwhile function.
I shoot a fair amount of architecture, typically with TS-E lenses on a tripod. To me, that seems like a subject that can significantly benefit from pixel shift, if not for the increased resolution then mainly because pixel shift eliminates color moiré (which often occurs with high-frequency repeating patterns, like bricks-and-mortar).
I'd agree with most of that, it *does* seem more of a gimmick than something of real value to most of us (you could say the same about 8K).I agree that it is mostly a marketing gimmick. Olympus has had the feature for years and it seems like - from user comments over the years - that times when it can be used are almost never. Users try it a few times, and when it works, you think, this is cool, but then realize the differences between pixel shift and not are so minor, and the times it works so rare, that you never use it again and forget that your camera even has that feature. Really a feature for pixel peepers, in my opinion. Putting it on a 45 MP camera, which already has enough MPs for almost every user, is really just for marketing.
Since you can skip in-between versions, it will lean more towards the latter system.Just out of interest: when we install an upgrade, is it just amending/replacing a few elements of the existing firmware? Or does is delete all the old firmware, including that which came when we bought the camera, and replace it in its entirety?
Firmware update means the old firmware is replaced by the new firmware.Just out of interest: when we install an upgrade, is it just amending/replacing a few elements of the existing firmware? Or does is delete all the old firmware, including that which came when we bought the camera, and replace it in its entirety?
It depends, but usually for hardware devices such as these running microcontrollers, it's a replacement of the entire software on the device.Just out of interest: when we install an upgrade, is it just amending/replacing a few elements of the existing firmware? Or does is delete all the old firmware, including that which came when we bought the camera, and replace it in its entirety?
Yes, no harm. I have absolutely no objection to it being added, and as you and others have pointed out, there will be some applications for it's use. I guess my main point would be, don't get too excited about it unless you plan on using it in those very specific instances where it might work and be useful. You will not suddenly have a 180 MP (or whatever they will rate it as) camera for doing landscapes, wildlife and most other applications.I'd agree with most of that, it *does* seem more of a gimmick than something of real value to most of us (you could say the same about 8K).
But there are circumstances where pixel-shift does work, e.g. architecture, product and artwork photography. It's quite feasible that resolutions far in excess of 45MP would be needed for such applications, depending on the size and viewing distance of the eventual print.
It certainly does no *harm* to include the feature, and if it helps Canon to sell more cameras, it's to all our benefit, as it makes Canon a stronger company, with more money to invest in development.
FYI: I JUST REGISTERED AND AM NEW HERE, great to join I always enjoy reading CR...Pixel-shift would be a great feature that will be useful to certain users, but personally I'd rather see:
- exposure bracketing with electronic shutter
- variable fps with electronic shutter
- major reduction in EVF lag from standby
- AF initiated within any AF zone and tracked across entire frame
- animal-eye AF that worked with a much wider variety of animals
- much stickier AF tracking with less tendency to hop onto backgrounds
Now, if we got ALL of these, I'd be a very very very happy bunny!
View attachment 207871
I’m afraid the R7 does not have pixel shift.FYI: I JUST REGISTERED AND AM NEW HERE, great to join I always enjoy reading CR...
I believe the R7 has this feature and I too wish the r5 has it, so
In was talking about the ability to initiate at tracking from any af mode, like on the r7, not pixel shift. Of course the r7 has no pixel shift feature.I’m afraid the R7 does not have pixel shift.
My Fuji GFX100 has pixel shift.I agree that it is mostly a marketing gimmick. Olympus has had the feature for years and it seems like - from user comments over the years - that times when it can be used are almost never. Users try it a few times, and when it works, you think, this is cool, but then realize the differences between pixel shift and not are so minor, and the times it works so rare, that you never use it again and forget that your camera even has that feature. Really a feature for pixel peepers, in my opinion. Putting it on a 45 MP camera, which already has enough MPs for almost every user, is really just for marketing. The R6, perhaps, could benefit from it, but not the R5, in my opinion.
But, if it happens, we'll see. I'll be glad to be proven wrong if someone can make pixel shift a worthwhile function.