Rest well Canon EOS 7D series [CR2]

[Michael Clark]

Off topic, but it is also worth noting that at those smaller newspapers that still employ a photographer it is usually the photographer's responsibility to supply his or her own equipment if he or she wants to use anything more sophisticated than a T3i that the paper bought seven years ago. And, at the near minimum wage rates that most newspapers pay, the cost and reach advantages of a 7DII far outweigh the disadvantages.

The handful of full time staffers I know who are using a 7D Mark II for sports are supplied the camera by the newspaper. Those same papers require their part-time freelancers to supply most of their own gear but usually allow them to use company owned equipment (mostly lenses or light kits) when the staffer isn't currently using it. I don't doubt there are other small papers where this is different, but most small papers no longer have any full-time staffers taking photos (unless you count the reporters/writers that are now also taking photos with anything from a phone to a pro body to support their own stories).

 

[Michael Clark]

The crucial point of my post is that as simply derived from Ohm's law, power is given by V^2/R where V is the voltage of the battery and R is the resistance of the circuit. That is, it is the voltage of the battery that determines the power it produces to focus a lens, not the capacity of the battery.

As an aside, you were confusing the work done to charge a battery, which is related to its capacity, with its power. Nothing circular about that.

Again, I never said the capacity of the battery directly determines how fast a lens AFs. What I said is that Canon allows some cameras with higher capacity batteries to supply more power to the AF motor in the lens.

Since every Canon ILC of which I am aware uses batteries that are greater than 6.0V, it should be patently obvious that the cameras themselves have voltage regulators, since the pin on the camera/lens interface that supplies voltage to the lens is 6V. Thus, the resistance observed by Ohm's law, as far as the battery is concerned, is controlled by the camera's voltage regulator, not the lens' AF motor.

 

[Michael Clark]

I have a question: Since there is no power derived from nothing if Canon introduced a circuit to boost voltage then shouldn't this be done at the expense of maximum current allowed?

Otherwise they could lower the resistance of internal circuitry that drives the lens - assuming it does have a significant resistance of course - since the total resistance that determines the current is the internal resistance of the battery plus the driving circuitry's resistance plus the lens' motor resistance.

It seems to be more the case that Canon doesn't limit or reduce the power supplied to the lens in the faster AF cameras as much as it does in the slower ones. The VBat pin on the EF interface between camera/lens nominally supplies 6V. The batteries that cameras with EF lens mounts use are all rated 7.2V or more.

 

[BillB]

Say a DSLR and a mirrorless camera have the same size battery. The battery of the mirrorless powers the EVF. Would this mean that the mirrorless would AF more slowly than the DSLR?

 

[unfocused]

The handful of full time staffers I know who are using a 7D Mark II for sports are supplied the camera by the newspaper. Those same papers require their part-time freelancers to supply most of their own gear but usually allow them to use company owned equipment (mostly lenses or light kits) when the staffer isn't currently using it. I don't doubt there are other small papers where this is different, but most small papers no longer have any full-time staffers taking photos (unless you count the reporters/writers that are now also taking photos with anything from a phone to a pro body to support their own stories).

Yeah, wasn't disputing anything, just adding to it. It varies by employer and, yes, most small papers these days have cut their photography staffs.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I've never said the actual battery capacity in terms of mAh is the determining factor in AF speed. What I've said is that Canon allows some cameras with larger battery capacity to supply more power to the AF motor in the lens.

Again, I never said the capacity of the battery directly determines how fast a lens AFs.

Oh, you never said battery capacity determines AF speed? Really? Let’s look, shall we?

You don't lose anything the EF lens can do on an EF body when it is used on an R body, except perhaps slower AF due to lower battery capacity.

So in fact, that’s exactly what you said. No amount of weaseling, tangential arguments or red herrings you toss out will change the reality that you were wrong. The fact that you lack the maturity to simply admit it is truly pathetic.

I’m sure you’ll just deny it again, claim you ‘meant’ something else, point out that you used the word ‘perhaps’, or rely on ‘alternative facts’...typical tactics for people too cowardly and weak to admit their mistakes. The truth is right there for all to see, in your own words.

Regardless, I will not continue responding to your lies.

 

[unfocused]

Canon must be doing something right if forum participants are reduced to fighting over batteries.

 

[Michael Clark]

Oh, you never said battery capacity determines AF speed? Really? Let’s look, shall we?



So in fact, that’s exactly what you said. No amount of weaseling, tangential arguments or red herrings you toss out will change the reality that you were wrong. The fact that you lack the maturity to simply admit it is truly pathetic.

I’m sure you’ll just deny it again, claim you ‘meant’ something else, point out that you used the word ‘perhaps’, or rely on ‘alternative facts’...typical tactics for people too cowardly and weak to admit their mistakes. The truth is right there for all to see, in your own words.

I'll admit that the way I said it there could have been taken to mean what you seem obsessed to insist is the only possible interpretation. I'm willing to correct that.

You don't lose anything the EF lens can do on an EF body when it is used on an R body, except perhaps slower AF (because Canon limits the amount of power some cameras allow to pass through to the lens' AF motor, probably) due to lower battery capacity (or increased power requirements of certain cameras, such as mirrorless models, or both, in order to extend battery life).

Regardless, I will not continue responding to your lies.

Promises, promises...

 

[AlanF]

Say a DSLR and a mirrorless camera have the same size battery. The battery of the mirrorless powers the EVF. Would this mean that the mirrorless would AF more slowly than the DSLR?

I don’t think the battery size is the important factor in determining the difference in AF speed between mirrorless and DSLR. The EVF current will certainly cause the battery to drain faster. The AF speed difference is due mainly to Canon having a much larger number of data points from the DPAF in mirrorless having to be processed and analysed.

 

[AlanF]

I'll admit that the way I said it there could have been taken to mean what you seem obsessed to insist is the only possible interpretation. I'm willing to correct that.

You don't lose anything the EF lens can do on an EF body when it is used on an R body, except perhaps slower AF (because Canon limits the amount of power some cameras allow to pass through to the lens' AF motor, probably) due to lower battery capacity (or increased power requirements of certain cameras, such as mirrorless models, or both, in order to extend battery life).




Promises, promises...

You are continuing to confuse work and power. It costs the same amount of work ie battery capacity to move the AF elements from A to B slowly as it does rapidly unless there is a velocity dependent drag. If you put in twice the power, you will do it in half the time, but it will use up the same amount of battery capacity since work done = power multiplied by time. Twice the power multiplied by half the time is the same as half the power times twice the time. But, maybe there other factors.

 

[Durf]

Canon must be doing something right if forum participants are reduced to fighting over batteries.

The battery powers the camera so you can take photos! That's all you need to know!!!! LOL

 

[tron]

On a practical side I wish for a battery pack that not only gets 2 batteries but it uses them with many combinations like:

1. The ability to drive big teles faster (like the 11V battery of EOS 1 series).
2. The ability to replace only one of the two while camera is continuously ON like during a time lapse.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The battery powers the camera so you can take photos! That's all you need to know!!!! LOL

That’s one viewpoint, personally I prefer to understand how the things I use work. I suppose that may have something to do with my reasons for becoming a scientist...

 

[koenkooi]

On a practical side I wish for a battery pack that not only gets 2 batteries but it uses them with many combinations like:

1. The ability to drive big teles faster (like the 11V battery of EOS 1 series).
2. The ability to replace only one of the two while camera is continuously ON like during a time lapse.

I wish the USB-C port could be used to do that. I suspect Canon isn't doing that for thermal reasons.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I wish the USB-C port could be used to do that. I suspect Canon isn't doing that for thermal reasons.

Agreed on both. Else, would be a great option for using an external battery for time lapse.

 

[AlanF]

That’s one viewpoint, personally I prefer to understand how the things I use work. I suppose that may have something to do with my reasons for becoming a scientist...

I always wanted to know how things work even before I knew what a scientist was. Nice to have been subsequently paid for finding out how things work. I can recommend science as a career. Curiosity is an essential element of being a scientist as well as wanting to communicate what you have learned.

 

[Shutterbug]

The handful of full time staffers I know who are using a 7D Mark II for sports are supplied the camera by the newspaper. Those same papers require their part-time freelancers to supply most of their own gear but usually allow them to use company owned equipment (mostly lenses or light kits) when the staffer isn't currently using it. I don't doubt there are other small papers where this is different, but most small papers no longer have any full-time staffers taking photos (unless you count the reporters/writers that are now also taking photos with anything from a phone to a pro body to support their own stories).

I have to have my own full set of gear (inc. taking care of backups) as a freelancer and don't have access to staffer's gear. AFAIK I don't think our paper even has a photog staffer anymore. The writers aren't usually carrying a full set of gear and would use their phone. The NY Daily News fired all their photographers on staff. The NYPost might have a few left. Of the 10+ local PJ's I know, everyone has to take care of their own gear. AP does gear up their staffers. NYTimes might be different, don't know.

 

[Michael Clark]

You are continuing to confuse work and power. It costs the same amount of work ie battery capacity to move the AF elements from A to B slowly as it does rapidly unless there is a velocity dependent drag. If you put in twice the power, you will do it in half the time, but it will use up the same amount of battery capacity since work done = power multiplied by time. Twice the power multiplied by half the time is the same as half the power times twice the time. But, maybe there other factors.

Where have I said that focusing faster uses more total energy (work) than focusing slower? What I said was that Canon seems to restrict some cameras to focusing slower to extend battery life. If it takes twice as long to move the the AF elements, then that camera can't be drawing more energy to move them again until the first move has been completed. The camera with the faster AF can move the focusing elements twice as far (or 'out and back') in the same timespan. Moving them twice as far takes twice as much work, thus uses twice as much energy in the same amount of time.

 

[BillB]

Where have I said that focusing faster uses more total energy (work) than focusing slower? What I said was that Canon seems to restrict some cameras to focusing slower to extend battery life. If it takes twice as long to move the the AF elements, then that camera can't be drawing more energy to move them again until the first move has been completed. The camera with the faster AF can move the focusing elements twice as far (or 'out and back') in the same timespan. Moving them twice as far takes twice as much work, thus uses twice as much energy in the same amount of time.

So how does it extend battery life if the same amount of energy is required to focus the lens whether it happens quickly or more slowly? Either way the same amount of energy is expended to focus the lens.

 

[Michael Clark]

I have to have my own full set of gear (inc. taking care of backups) as a freelancer and don't have access to staffer's gear. AFAIK I don't think our paper even has a photog staffer anymore. The writers aren't usually carrying a full set of gear and would use their phone. The NY Daily News fired all their photographers on staff. The NYPost might have a few left. Of the 10+ local PJ's I know, everyone has to take care of their own gear. AP does gear up their staffers. NYTimes might be different, don't know.

I'm not talking about major, corporate newspapers in metropolises. I'm talking about small town newspapers that are typically locally owned. I'm talking about the (Talladega, AL) 'Daily Home.' The Anniston (AL) Star. The Decatur (AL) Daily. The (Florence/Muscle Shoals/Tuscumbia/Sheffield, AL) Times-Daily. The Moulton (AL) Advertiser. The Hartselle (AL) Enquirer, The Tuscaloosa (AL) News, and similar papers. They each have (at least until Friday - you never know right now), respectively, 1, 2, 2, 0, 0, 1 full-time staffers. Most had (and many still have) enough company owned gear for staffs of, respectively, 3, 4, 4?, 1, 2, 5 staffers that they have employed within the past 2-3-4 years. Most of those with staffers left (maybe all?) also use part-time freelancers. The ones with no staffers use some p/t freelancers but mostly rely on their reporters for local photos and the wires for statewide stories. The last time I saw the weekend p/t guy from the Decatur Daily about three weeks ago, he was using a 1D X he'd recently been assigned that had been previously assigned to a staffer at the Times-Daily (the same local family/company owns both papers) before she left for another job and was not replaced a little over a year ago. His other body was his personal 7D Mark II. I know not who owned the 70-200 lens (it looked from a brief glance like the original f/2.8 IS) on the 1D X. He owns the EF-S 17-50mm f/2.8 that was on his 7D2. Before he was issued the 1D X, he was using the 7D2 with a third party 70-200/2.8 and his "short" body was a personally owned Sony α6000.

The two largest cities in the region, Huntsville and Birmingham, no longer have any staffers. They get their local coverage via AL.com freelancers from all over the state. The last full-time AL.com staffer retired in September and was not replaced. After he retired, he now freelances (sports only during the fall plus state basketball tournaments) for AL.com. He had been a long-time staffer at the Huntsville Times for most of his career.

AL.com, and their holdings: The Huntsville Times, The Birmingham News, The Mobile Press-Register, The Mississippi Press, and several advertising/media companies, are owned by Advance Local Media, LLC. Advance Media owns similar statewide companies in many U.S states.

As far as the reporters go, most of them do use phones. But there are some notable exceptions in my area.

The Decatur Daily has a long-time reporter that has also done local youth sports photography on the side for a number of years and he now sometimes shoots with "real" gear. I know not if it is his or The Daily's, but it is Nikon gear and they are a Nikon shop (other than the freelancer who shoots Canon and got a Canon body from the Times-Daily that has been a Canon shop since long before the Sheltons who started the DD in around 1915 bought the T-D a few years ago). There's also a retired reporter from the DD that has long been a photo enthusiast who now writes p/t for the Moulton weekly and shoots with (his personally owned) Pentax gear to support his own stories.