PDA

View Full Version : 7D Firmware hack progress?



sdeming
07-21-2010, 05:17 PM
I'm just wondering if there has been any progress on this yet?

Ruben Senderey
07-21-2010, 05:43 PM
unfortunate ,no....

gene_can_sing
07-21-2010, 06:03 PM
I think it's going to be a moot point fairly soon. According to canonrumors.com, Canon is about to release several new camera including 2 video camera with lens changing abilities (not sure if they're going to be large sensor or what). So probably not too far in the distant future the question will not be so much which has the better IQ (as it is right now btw. the GH1 and 7D), but what lenses you prefer and which crop factor you'd rather work with APS-C or Micro 4/3rds

I know Panasonic is release the AF100, and I am sure that Canon is going to come out with something along the same lines.

Rakesh Jacob
07-21-2010, 06:49 PM
Most of us just want AGC disabled, maybe we should just start a prayer/meditation group and put that "out there" LOL

Cassius
07-21-2010, 06:59 PM
There really aren't many things that I can think of for a hack to accomplish. I was under the impression most of us use external recorders anyway, so even AGC, the only real issue, isn't much of an issue. I wouldn't expect large image quality changes like we got with the GH1. That particular camera happened to be full of ridiculous coding issues.

Rakesh Jacob
07-21-2010, 07:11 PM
Dude sync sound is such a pain in the butt! If I could have the option to not have to do that or have an ugly, relatively bulky $400 box attached to the bottom of my camera, I would be doing a TON more narrative stuff. Such a simple thing would make my life better, atleast untill real APS-C video cameras come out anyways.

boulder
07-21-2010, 07:42 PM
There really aren't many things that I can think of for a hack to accomplish. I was under the impression most of us use external recorders anyway, so even AGC, the only real issue, isn't much of an issue. I wouldn't expect large image quality changes like we got with the GH1. That particular camera happened to be full of ridiculous coding issues.

In this day and age to have to bother with synch sound is preposterous. The ability to record DECENT sound on a camera that does video is an expectation...and then if someone is really picky they can do dual sound. I do not use dual sound, I disable the AGC but then I lose a channel.

AGC IS an issue.

Rakesh Jacob
07-21-2010, 09:02 PM
In this day and age to have to bother with synch sound is preposterous. The ability to record DECENT sound on a camera that does video is an expectation...

Thank you!!!! Could not agree more! I mean they even have audio in for gosh sakes, why destroy it with stupid AGC? It's not like we're asking them to ADD a feature... just the ability to disable it.

NoxNoctus
07-21-2010, 11:46 PM
As much as I'd like it removed as well, I really don't understand how syncing audio in post is such a huge issue. If you're marking your shots properly it's pretty easy to batch rename by take numbers and sync from the clapper with the dslr's built in mic. Just shot part 1 of my feature and editing a bit now, synced all audio from the 5 days in no time at all

Cassius
07-22-2010, 12:29 AM
Besides the syncing not being an issue, for me personally having a non-tethered recordist is actually working out better than camera audio ever did. It's faster to work with on set or at an event, allows easier positioning for everyone and lets him sound gather without tying up the camera. If AGC were disabled it wouldn't change anything for me... but that's me. Everyone's situation is different. That said, on topic for this thread, clearly there's a decent population of people who are dealing with this just fine; so not a lot of incentive for a programmer, unless it's a really easy fix. Which it never is.

Luis Caffesse
07-22-2010, 12:38 AM
... and sync from the clapper with the dslr's built in mic.

Just FYI - if you're using sticks you should really sync the sound of the clap on your master audio to the frame of the sticks coming together (NOT to the sound of the clap from the DSLR built in mic).

With the mic and camera iin different positions (and different distances from the source of the sound) you can't count on the audio matching up for sync from both sources. Syncing up that way could leave you with audio that is anywhere from 1 to 3 frames off sync.

NoxNoctus
07-22-2010, 01:30 AM
Thanks for the heads up, never really thought about that, but for the most part I use it to get close, as the first thing I see on the camera's waveform is the spike from the clap, so lining up audio close is a very short task

Barry_Green
07-22-2010, 10:13 AM
Thank you!!!! Could not agree more! I mean they even have audio in for gosh sakes, why destroy it with stupid AGC? It's not like we're asking them to ADD a feature... just the ability to disable it.
Because (say it with me) it's not designed for the purpose we're all trying to put it to.

I think this one issue alone brings home the differences between something like an AF100 and trying to frankenstein a GH1/7D/etc into a production environment and makes me bust out my favorite saying: "Buy the best, and you only cry once." :thumbsup:

fingersonface
07-28-2010, 02:27 PM
I think bringing in new tools that were not designed for a film production tool but adapting them helps evolve the industry. Computers weren't originally designed for film production but look at all the possibilities they provided the industry. I use a 7d all the time for my jobs and the workflow has always been pretty smooth. IMHO i have only one quote. "Its Alive!!!!!.....ITS ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Rick Burnett
07-28-2010, 02:42 PM
Because (say it with me) it's not designed for the purpose we're all trying to put it to.

I think this one issue alone brings home the differences between something like an AF100 and trying to frankenstein a GH1/7D/etc into a production environment and makes me bust out my favorite saying: "Buy the best, and you only cry once." :thumbsup:

Yeah, but let's be honest, I shouldn't have to pay $4500 more just to be able to turn off AGC :P

And really, all Frankenstein wanted was to be loved!

Haha.

boulder
07-28-2010, 05:00 PM
Because (say it with me) it's not designed for the purpose we're all trying to put it to.

I think this one issue alone brings home the differences between something like an AF100 and trying to frankenstein a GH1/7D/etc into a production environment and makes me bust out my favorite saying: "Buy the best, and you only cry once." :thumbsup:

I don't understand people not agreeing that canon could simply put an option to disable agc...what is your reason for not seeing this is a reasonable request? Why all the pushback?

boulder
07-28-2010, 05:09 PM
I AM happy with my 7D purchase, and I purchased it knowing that AGC may never be disabled and I CAN work around it. But, I think it's a reasonable request to option to disable it. It never hurts to have an easy audio source of DECENT quality. I'm not saying that they need to do it for the semi-pros here, it's simply an option you would expect to have, and it IS reasonable to request that they give us this option in the future no matter how reluctant you dual sound must-have's are.

EDIT: Case in point...I shot underwater last weekend and wanted the audio. It woudl have been SOOOOO much simpler if the AGC was off as I couldn't fit anything more than the camera into the underwater housing. And sure, you may say "the camera wasn't designed for that"...but you know what? These cameras will go all kinds of places they wern't DESIGNED for...

...they are cameras!

Barry_Green
07-28-2010, 05:25 PM
I don't understand people not agreeing that canon could simply put an option to disable agc...what is your reason for not seeing this is a reasonable request? Why all the pushback?
There's no pushback, there's just acknowledgement that it isn't gonna happen. The more they add, the more they have to support. None of these requests are unreasonable. But none of them are gonna happen, either.

I'd go so far as to say that not only is the request for manual audio/disabling AGC not unreasonable, it's mandatory.

But it still isn't gonna happen. Camera manufacturers do not, as a matter of regular business, modify or add features to cameras through firmware. They use firmware for bug fixes.

I've never said they SHOULDN'T do it. I've only told people that they WON'T do it.

boulder
07-28-2010, 05:33 PM
I think they will if another camera starts takeing away thier marketshare. Likely? No. But I wouldn't lay money that it won't happen.

And remember it was pressure from users that made them give the 5D the firmware update they got.

mcgeedigital
07-28-2010, 06:21 PM
I think they will if another camera starts takeing away thier marketshare. Likely? No. But I wouldn't lay money that it won't happen.

And remember it was pressure from users that made them give the 5D the firmware update they got.

And they still made it several sub menus down just to do it.

And you can't even watch OR adjust your audio levels WHILE YOU RECORD.

Hardly a step up at all.

Barry_Green
07-28-2010, 09:27 PM
I think they will if another camera starts takeing away thier marketshare. Likely? No. But I wouldn't lay money that it won't happen.
I would definitely bet money that it won't happen. You'll see a revised 7D (7D Mark II?) before you see a firmware update that adds features to it.


And remember it was pressure from users that made them give the 5D the firmware update they got.
Y'know, I don't think so. I think it wasn't pressure from users at all. Not saying that there wasn't a clamor for it, but -- there's clamor for stuff all the time, and it never amounts to anything.

Instead, I think that what happened was they saw an opportunity to get the camera placed with a few Hollywood types, and the resulting overall image "halo" that accompanied it, that got 'em to do it. And it even shocked the president of digital imaging for Canon, who said he'd been with the company for (what... 20 years?) and he'd never seen them ever do something like that, and he would have been willing to bet money that they wouldn't do it. So the added features through a firmware update stands alone as a unique exception, certainly not as the general rule.

Rick Burnett
07-28-2010, 09:33 PM
I have to agree with you here Barry. In the typical Canon way of business it is "Let's release another camera with SOME of these features so they will upgrade" :) How they've done it in the past. Just look at the incremental changes between the HV20, HV30 and HV40 and why in the HELL can they not make the EXACT same camera with just NO tape. Sorry, not Canon. All the other HF and HG models are different and NOT as good.

boulder
07-28-2010, 10:22 PM
It's a tough thing trying to figure out Canon. They throw a few more curve-balls than most companies...those who think they have them figured out usually end up being wrong. Here's hoping.