20D only has a 6 frame buffer for RAW? WTF CANON!

[SENster7]

Ya know I was all excited about the 20D, but to hear that it only has a 6 frame buffer for RAW? I mean Canon WTF? You know that this will totally piss all of us off who shoot only in RAW, and drive us straight to the 1D MK II, once again Canon thanks for making marketing the top priority!!! So mad right now!!!

[drisley]

I'm with you on this one :evil:

Why release an "updated camera" with a smaller buffer?!
Of course they always advertised the improved jpg buffer.

[SENster7]

Ya know what, no, I am so mad that I am considering jumping to the dark side, yes Nikon, I said it! I should just put it all up for sale and just go Nikon!!!

[DReb-MO]

Looking forward to your postings in the Marketplace so I can pick up some of that gear.

[CoolToolGuy]

Geez, it isn't even out of the warehouse yet and already they're lining up to return them. :roll:

Have Fun,

[drisley]

Ya know what, no, I am so mad that I am considering jumping to the dark side, yes Nikon, I said it! I should just put it all up for sale and just go Nikon!!!

I'm not sure if I would go that far, but it certainly has soured my excitement. Everything else looks so good, but that is almost a deal breaker.
I also dont like the double frame long exposure noise reduction, but I'm not sure if that is a necessity to get images as noise free as the 10D, or just an added feature to get better images at long exposures than the 10D.

[SENster7]

Well I was all happy to hear about the 23 frame buffer, of course I knew it would be for jpeg, but to see RAW be limited down from 9 of the 10d to 6 to the 20d really is bad news for me. Especially since all I do is shoot RAW, this would mean I would need to learn to nail WB in jpeg everytime, otherwise I would be limited with the 6 frame buffer for RAW. It just really irks me that Canon would do this, ONLY, to encourage those who rely on RAW to go with the MKII with the bigger buffer for RAW.

[robertwgross]

Before, some of us used cameras with 6 Mp per frame, and a buffer of 8 or 9 frames.

Now, with this 20D thingy, it is 8 Mp per frame, and a buffer of 6 frames.

It sounds like they just used the same size buffer, and it just gets used differently.

---Bob Gross---

[SENster7]

Before, some of us used cameras with 6 Mp per frame, and a buffer of 8 or 9 frames.

Now, with this 20D thingy, it is 8 Mp per frame, and a buffer of 6 frames.

It sounds like they just used the same size buffer, and it just gets used differently.

---Bob Gross---

So you think that there might be some hope that there won't be a speed issue with the smaller buffer when shooting RAW?

[Sketcher]

Deal breaker!?

Come on guys, it's the 300D/10D saga all over again. Quit your pissing and moaning and put your money where your perceived sense of RAW processing is. You want a bigger RAW frame buffer? pay for it. :)

Actually, go ahead and switch to the "Dark Side"... And them there over in the Nikon camp will say "you switched Camera Systems because of one camera model's RAW buffer!?"... Heh heh, even Nikonians wouldn't go to that extreme.

[drisley]

Another sour note.
The 20D viewfinder is supposedly darker and "coarser" than the one on the 10D.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/20d-part1.shtml

Canon knows what sells.... megapixels, megapixels, and megapixels.

[CoolToolGuy]

As I mentioned in another thread, the 20D handles raw differently than the 10D and other previous Canon DSLRs. It creates 2 files for every raw shot instead of embedding the JPG in the raw file. I notice that the 20D creates .CR2 files, the same format as the 1D MKII. I wonder if the MKII does the same thing. And, by the way, even though the buffer for raw on the MKII is bigger (20 frames) it is still half that of the buffer for JPG (40 frames).

Have Fun,

[drisley]

Personally I would turn off the jpg (that is an option I hope!) and only shoot Raw.

[Mike H]

... And, by the way, even though the buffer for raw on the MKII is bigger (20 frames) it is still half that of the buffer for JPG (40 frames).

Have Fun,

Yes, but that buffer never seems to fill. Maybe I don't shoot fast enough (though basketball season is on its way), but the Mark II buffer seems like it's plenty. :D

Mike H

[Sketcher]

Another sour note.
The 20D viewfinder is supposedly darker and "coarser" than the one on the 10D.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/20d-part1.shtml

Canon knows what sells.... megapixels, megapixels, and megapixels.
Somebody needs to take deep breaths and exhale slowly, repeat, then back up and reposition one's reading glasses.

Is the trade-off worthwhile in this case? I believe so. Unless one looks though the viewfinder of a 1Ds, and then one realizes the huge gap that exists in viewfinder brightness and size between models and between these price ranges. The reason that I believe that consumers will accept the situation is because in the end they are getting perceived value, and the somewhat darker and grainier viewfinder of the 20D is a price they'll likely be willing to pay.

The comparison is regarding a 1Ds, which if you're considering in the first place you wouldn't be agonizing over 20D specs right now.

BTW, the 20D is not just an increase in Megapixels, has a new CMOS sensor combined with DIGIC II processing.

Stop the alarmist neffing already and read some specs. If it's all really that difficult to bear, cowboy up and get a 1 series.

[SENster7]

As I mentioned in another thread, the 20D handles raw differently than the 10D and other previous Canon DSLRs. It creates 2 files for every raw shot instead of embedding the JPG in the raw file. I notice that the 20D creates .CR2 files, the same format as the 1D MKII. I wonder if the MKII does the same thing. And, by the way, even though the buffer for raw on the MKII is bigger (20 frames) it is still half that of the buffer for JPG (40 frames).

Have Fun,

So why didn't Canon do the same with the 20D? 23 for jpeg and say 11.5 for RAW? Atleast it would have been more than the 9 with the 10D! Well I guess all we can do is wait and see how this really is with the 20D.

[CoolToolGuy]

Whew! Perhaps this is why some of the regulars and moderators are keeping a low profile today.

We should all wait at least until the shipping labels to the retailers have been printed before we decide to sell all of OUR stuff on eBay. Perhaps there is a good reason for this, and who knows, perhaps there is a Russian working on a firmware solution as we speak.

You guys should go get a warm glass of milk and sleep on it.

Have Fun,

[drisley]

Somebody needs to take deep breaths and exhale slowly, repeat, then back up and reposition one's reading glasses.

The comparison is regarding a 1Ds, which if you're considering in the first place you wouldn't be agonizing over 20D specs right now.

BTW, the 20D is not just an increase in Megapixels, has a new CMOS sensor combined with DIGIC II processing.

Stop the alarmist neffing already and read some specs. If it's all really that difficult to bear, cowboy up and get a 1 series.

Actually, the viewfinder is a comparison with the 10D NOT the 1Ds...
My reading glasses are fine....yours?

As mentioned, the 20D has been reduced in size over the 10D and previous models in this line from Canon. Such shrinkage is not without its price though. It has been achieved by reducing the size of both the pentaprism and the instant return mirror. This makes the viewfinder a bit dimmer and a bit coarser than the previous generation.The coarseness isn't all that apparent indoors or under low contrast outdoor light conditions, but outdoors on a bright sunny day it's painfully obvious. (Canon claims that the coarseness to aid manual focusing, but that's just marketing BS; simply an attempt to turn a deficiency into a feature).

[Adam Hicks]

And as far as the 'darker viewfinder' comment, they were testing a pre-release camera... maybe it's different for production models, etc.

Frankly I hope the 10D guys stay put. I don't want to be behind you in line (plus the more 10D's for sale cheap on eBay the less I get for my DRebel!)

Adam

[SENster7]

So me and drisley can't vent about things we don't like about the 20D??? I think we have EVERY RIGHT to vent, especially if we are upset about the viewfinder and ridiculous 6 frame RAW buffer. Makes me wonder if the 6 frame RAW buffer doesn't irk more of you, either you have 1D MKIIs and don't care, or only use RAW when ordering your burgers???

[CoolToolGuy]

So me and drisley can't vent about things we don't like about the 20D??? I think we have EVERY RIGHT to vent, especially if we are upset about the viewfinder and ridiculous 6 frame RAW buffer. Makes me wonder if the 6 frame RAW buffer doesn't irk more of you, either you have 1D MKIIs and don't care, or only use RAW when ordering your burgers???

I think you're venting over specs. Wait until you put one in your hands before you threaten to swap suppliers. But certainly, you are entitled to vent.

Have Fun,

P.S. So am I. :wink:

[drisley]

:lol:
The 6 frame buffer definately irks me the most.
I have a 300D, so the viewfinder is probably similar. I just know alot of people complain already about the 10D viewfinder.
I also just read another review that seemed to prefer the 20D viewfinder over the 10D's. I guess that is a subjective decision.

The 6 frame buffer is unforgiveable though. But that is a stat Canon neatly tucks away. Since the 10D offered 3 seconds worth of burst raw images, the 20D should offer the same, ie a 15 frame Raw buffer.

I guess for a 300D owner, it's a 50% improvement, for a 10D owner, it's a 33% reduction in performance.

[CoolToolGuy]

:lol:
The 6 frame buffer definately irks me the most.
I have a 300D, so the viewfinder is probably similar. I just know alot of people complain already about the 10D viewfinder.
I also just read another review that seemed to prefer the 20D viewfinder over the 10D's. I guess that is a subjective decision.

The 6 frame buffer is unforgiveable though. But that is a stat Canon neatly tucks away. Since the 10D offered 3 seconds worth of burst raw images, the 20D should offer the same, ie a 15 frame Raw buffer.

Sometimes market research tells them what is popular and what is not. Or what is a deal-breaker and what is not. Perhaps the increased raw buffer will show up in a future camera - stay tuned for Photokina! (just a guess)

Have Fun,

[SENster7]

Yeah they want those who need the speed for RAW to go to the 1D MKII, they aren't stupid, they have us hooked like crack addicts...

[CoolToolGuy]

I really do think there is a wide, gaping hole between the 20D and the 1DMKII that they need to fill. Sounds like the perfect opening for an EOS 3D, don'tcha think?

Have Fun,

[SENster7]

I really do think there is a wide, gaping hole between the 20D and the 1DMKII that they need to fill. Sounds like the perfect opening for an EOS 3D, don'tcha think?

Have Fun,

The Nikon D200 will fill the gap nicely between the 20D and the 1DMKII, there I said it!

[CoolToolGuy]

I really do think there is a wide, gaping hole between the 20D and the 1DMKII that they need to fill. Sounds like the perfect opening for an EOS 3D, don'tcha think?

Have Fun,

The Nikon D200 will fill the gap nicely between the 20D and the 1DMKII, there I said it!

Well, I might be interested in your 70-200 and your 420EX at the right price. After all, they fit such useless cameras. Let me know. :wink:

Have Fun,

[Persian-Rice]

Have no fear the 1D's are still here!

[SENster7]

I really do think there is a wide, gaping hole between the 20D and the 1DMKII that they need to fill. Sounds like the perfect opening for an EOS 3D, don'tcha think?

Have Fun,

The Nikon D200 will fill the gap nicely between the 20D and the 1DMKII, there I said it!

Well, I might be interested in your 70-200 and your 420EX at the right price. After all, they fit such useless cameras. Let me know. :wink:

Have Fun,

LOL, isn't there some law against taking advantage of the extremely pizzed off? I'm going to bed before I lose all my gear in my rage!

LOL

[Persian-Rice]

What makes me sad is that they are trying to make the camera sound like a very fast one, but in all reality, it's still exremely similiar to the 10D in terms of speed...........

[CoolToolGuy]

I really do think there is a wide, gaping hole between the 20D and the 1DMKII that they need to fill. Sounds like the perfect opening for an EOS 3D, don'tcha think?

Have Fun,

The Nikon D200 will fill the gap nicely between the 20D and the 1DMKII, there I said it!

Well, I might be interested in your 70-200 and your 420EX at the right price. After all, they fit such useless cameras. Let me know. :wink:

Have Fun,

LOL, isn't there some law against taking advantage of the extremely pizzed off? I'm going to bed before I lose all my gear in my rage!

LOL

Finally, success!

I have faith that you'll come to your senses in the morning, call your favorite retailer, and get your name on a 20D waiting list.

Have Fun,

[timmyquest]

What makes me sad is that they are trying to make the camera sound like a very fast one, but in all reality, it's still exremely similiar to the 10D in terms of speed...........

Your basing this on very little information.

Patients people...

[Persian-Rice]

What makes me sad is that they are trying to make the camera sound like a very fast one, but in all reality, it's still exremely similiar to the 10D in terms of speed...........

Your basing this on very little information.

Patients people...


Im basing it it on the noise ratio charts, reviews Ive read and plain ole specs................You can put me on the list of expected a lot more people.........

[Cadenza]

Calm, everybody!

After all, I read somewhere around here
that it's the photographer that takes the
picture, not the 20D and its punny sized
RAW buffer. [Again, who was it that took
the best pictures in the world using a
pinhole camera?]

[Sketcher]

Actually, the viewfinder is a comparison with the 10D NOT the 1Ds...
My reading glasses are fine....yours?

As mentioned, the 20D has been reduced in size over the 10D and previous models in this line from Canon. Such shrinkage is not without its price though. It has been achieved by reducing the size of both the pentaprism and the instant return mirror. This makes the viewfinder a bit dimmer and a bit coarser than the previous generation.The coarseness isn't all that apparent indoors or under low contrast outdoor light conditions, but outdoors on a bright sunny day it's painfully obvious. (Canon claims that the coarseness to aid manual focusing, but that's just marketing BS; simply an attempt to turn a deficiency into a feature).

LOL, you got me there! Sort of. It's a matter of subjectivity being that he specifically compares the viewfinder brightness in contrast to the 1Ds rather than "previous generation" further along in the article as I quoted. I'll check my perscription and adjust my reading lamp; my recommendation for your breathing excersizes still stands.

[blinking8s]

if it feels and focus's anything like my Elan 7n....im gonna break down fast...buffer or not

[DocFrankenstein]

Have no fear the 1D's are still here!
Doesn't help me one single bit :? I'm not getting a pro body any time soon in the future, I want a XXD camera with a nice buffer :evil:

[Sketcher]

What makes me sad is that they are trying to make the camera sound like a very fast one, but in all reality, it's still exremely similiar to the 10D in terms of speed...........
eh, sounds like this?

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/CanonEOS20D/Samples/20d_d70_10d.mp3

[timmyquest]

What makes me sad is that they are trying to make the camera sound like a very fast one, but in all reality, it's still exremely similiar to the 10D in terms of speed...........
eh, sounds like this?

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/CanonEOS20D/Samples/20d_d70_10d.mp3

Sounds fast to me :-)

RAW is fantastic but personally, key word perhaps, when i'm in a situation where the camera is filling up the buffer i'm not shooting raw. It is just added work, but maybe that is just me.

[drisley]

What makes me sad is that they are trying to make the camera sound like a very fast one, but in all reality, it's still exremely similiar to the 10D in terms of speed...........
eh, sounds like this?

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/CanonEOS20D/Samples/20d_d70_10d.mp3
Yes, that is fast, but that is JPG mode, not Raw.
But atleast the CF write speed on the 20D is blazingly fast, so that will help.

Boy, the 20D mirror slap sure sounds different than the 10D's

[drisley]

:)

[DocFrankenstein]

Boy, the 20D mirror slap sure sounds different than the 10D's
That thing sounds like a gun being cocked :twisted:

You can actually use your camera in a dark alley as a self defence tool :shock: :P :lol:

[tommykjensen]

Hey people have You already forgotten the first line of the press release?

Canon aims this camera for wedding and portrait photograpers

CANON'S NEW 8.2-MEGAPIXEL EOS 20D DIGITAL SLR DELIVERS SPEED, PRECISION AND VALUE TO NEWS, WEDDING AND PORTRAIT PHOTOGRAPHERS


And since when is a big raw buffer required for this type of photography?

[Longwatcher]

Finally had a chance to read full review,
I wish DP review would test using RAW images, instead of JPEG, I don't
shoot jpeg, unless playing with the camera. My other grip with the review was he only ran it for 30 seconds. I would have preferred a full minute as I once tested my 10D using small jpeg mode and it went like crazy for 10 frames and then slowed to 1 FPS for almost the full minute. The 20D and D70 would apparently still take more in that time, but I wonder if it would be closer near the end.

If the buffer limit really is 6 frames of RAW and if the CF card still takes as long to write when the buffer is full, then I don't think I will be getting the 20D because of the frustration it will cause me.

On an average model shoot I will hit the 10D's buffer 2 to 3 times shooting at about 1 frame per second (I use to hit it 3-4 times with the D60 and I did not take as many). I can do the math and figure that shooting RAW directly to computer won't work out although I do like the USB 2.0. So that leaves the question how much time does the 20D take to clear a RAW frame from the buffer to an average CF card. My 10D takes about 3 seconds on average per image with the cards I use. I usually don't need 3 FPS much less 5 FPS (although it can't hurt), but I do need a buffer that will allow me to go for as long as possible at about 1 FPS. A 6 frame buffer is just not going to do it for me.

Just my opinion on the buffer.

[drisley]

Here is my simulation of what the 20D would sound like if you shot Raw with a Sandisk Extreme card....

20D Raw MP3 (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d_raw_sim.mp3)

[timmyquest]

And since when is a big raw buffer required for this type of photography?


I'm assuming (and hoping) your being sarcastic. And although i agree with it, i dont know how often a wedding photographer is shooting off 6 shot bursts of pictures.

Still, it isnt all that impressive, but that is the only thing i'm finding unimpressive, especially if their claims of ISO 1600 performance are true.

[drisley]

Longwatcher, the 20D is MUCH faster at writing to CF cards than the 10D (3.5x faster).
It's apparently the fastest DSLR now when writing to CF cards, even faster than the MKii, but the Mkii has SD as well.

I dont really shoot sports per se. More fast action at fitness and bb shows.
I just hate not being able to shoot when the buffer is full. I'm never really holding down a burst of shots, but rather maybe one every couple of seconds. On the Rebel, that can fill the buffer and leave you looking at the "Busy" message.
I think with the speed of the 20D's CF write, and the fact that you can continue to shoot while it writes, I may be happy in the end.

[robertwgross]

Before, some of us used cameras with 6 Mp per frame, and a buffer of 8 or 9 frames.

Now, with this 20D thingy, it is 8 Mp per frame, and a buffer of 6 frames.

It sounds like they just used the same size buffer, and it just gets used differently.

---Bob Gross---

So you think that there might be some hope that there won't be a speed issue with the smaller buffer when shooting RAW?

I didn't say that at all. Nor did I even think it.

---Bob Gross---

[blinking8s]

ok...ok...I'll admit it...

this camera gives me WOOD

lol

a) its in my affordable price range

b) ive outgrown the 300d....this looks like a damn nice replacement for me

c) as long as it holds up in reviews...im sold

d) drisley's arguement for the buffer is solid

[Persian-Rice]

Sketcher, unfortunately, thats not what it's going to sound like when shooting RAW. My main problem is that I need to shoot RAW almost all the time.

Tommy, they also are gearing it toward photojournalists, where all around speed is critical...............

I guess if the ISO 1600 deal is true, and I think many of us need some serious convincing, but then it will be worth looking at. Other then that, no one should be as naive as to order it on day 1, at least wait around for some reviews or something, wait to see if it has any problems.

I was hoping to get something in between the 10D and MKII when it comes to price and performance. Problem is, after the announcement of the 20D, I'm still looking................

[timmyquest]

ok...ok...I'll admit it...

this camera gives me WOOD

lol

a) its in my affordable price range

b) ive outgrown the 300d....this looks like a damn nice replacement for me

c) as long as it holds up in reviews...im sold

d) drisley's arguement for the buffer is solid

[drisley]

Sketcher, unfortunately, thats not what it's going to sound like when shooting RAW. My main problem is that I need to shoot RAW almost all the time.....
Here is my simulation of what the 20D would sound like if you shot Raw with a Sandisk Extreme card....

20D Raw MP3 (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d_raw_sim.mp3)

[Persian-Rice]

Sketcher, unfortunately, thats not what it's going to sound like when shooting RAW. My main problem is that I need to shoot RAW almost all the time.....
Here is my simulation of what the 20D would sound like if you shot Raw with a Sandisk Extreme card....

20D Raw MP3 (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d_raw_sim.mp3)

Ya I heard it, its pretty quick, but I have used quite a bit quicker, I have become a spoiled little brat you can say haha.

[karusel]

This camera clearly states for whom it is made. Let's consider a comparison to 10D: regardless of evolution the sensor is 1,6 crop, pixels increase, fps increase, RAW max. frame buffer decreases.

It's the numbers, marketing for the consumers, more pixels, more fps, better camera, am I rite, am I rite? :roll:

[SENster7]

I found this on another forum, this makes perfect sense why only the 6 frame RAW buffer...

The Canon 10D has RAW files of about 6 mb. It has a buffer of 9 RAW. 9*6=54. So the buffer is probably about 64 mb. It could possibly be smaller (48 mb), if DIGIC could process fast enough.

Now the Canon 20D has a new RAW format: CR2. 1DII owners (which also uses the CR2 format) have been saying that RAW files are about 10 mb (rather than the 8 mb you may expect).

So, 6*10 = 60mb. About the same size as the 10D. Thus, I believe the buffer size is identical between the 10D and 20D.

So, Canon, not wanting to increase the price of the 20D by using a 128 mb buffer, decided to go the economical route.

So the reason the 20D only does 6 RAW is probably not because Canon is out to screw us or differentiate it further from the 1DII. It's probably just one of the many compromises that has to happen to create a $1500 DSLR these days.

(Yeah, I know it does MORE jpeg than the 10D does. This is probably because DIGIC II can process and store JPEG much faster than DIGIC I ever could)

Interesting...

[CyberDyneSystems]

BOTTOM LINE

The 20D will shoot raw frames FASTER than he 10D (5fps Vs. 3fps)

And it will buffer and write them to the CF Card faster allowing more consecutive RAW frames when shot at speeds lower than 5FPS.

With the MkII the write speed to the CF card is soo fast that unless you shoot at 8FPS ypu NEVER fill the buffer. Never. (when used with a fast CF card or MD)

I'm not sure the 20D is quite up to that task.. but I suspect with it's write speeds that are 3.5 TIMES FASTER THAN THE 10D... that there is NO QUESTION that the 20D will shoot more than the 10Ds 9 frames under any cisrcumstance other than a 5FPS spray and pray session.. in fact.. it may even do that with more than 9 frames.

[maderito]

BOTTOM LINE

The 20D will shoot raw frames FASTER than he 10D (5fps Vs. 3fps)

And it will buffer and write them to the CF Card faster allowing more consecutive RAW frames when shot at speeds lower than 5FPS.

With the MkII the write speed to the CF card is soo fast that unless you shoot at 8FPS ypu NEVER fill the buffer. Never. (when used with a fast CF card or MD)

I'm not sure the 20D is quite up to that task.. but I suspect with it's write speeds that are 3.5 TIMES FASTER THAN THE 10D... that there is NO QUESTION that the 20D will shoot more than the 10Ds 9 frames under any cisrcumstance other than a 5FPS spray and pray session.. in fact.. it may even do that with more than 9 frames.

Thanks CDS.

Everyone has their individual issue with the 10D that they hope the 20D will solve.

For me, it's autofocus speed and accuracy. Ron Galbraith's incredibly informative review compares the 20D favorably to the EOS 3, calling it a "mini EOS 3" because of its smaller size and comparable AF focusing properties. Perhaps an exaggeration (in terms of AF capabilities), but the new 20D seems to be a decisive improvement over the 10D.

I spent last winter averaging 10-20% keepers while shooting indoor sports at high ISO (800-1600). Worse - I can't even claim that any of the good shots were really sharp. I concluded that the equipment wasn't right for the task - and that's why pros laugh at we who bring 10D equipment to a sporting event.

The 20D seems to approach pro level capabilities for sports and photojournalism work. I'm definitely interested (but not yet sold) and look forward to hands on reviews.

I don't care about the RAW buffer issue. I don't have a heavy finger on the shutter button. I don't really understand why everyone is so exercised about this apparent design compromise. It won’t interfere with the way I work and probably keeps the camera within my "affordable" range.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I have to agree on the "heavy finger" sentiment...

I think it was Kenny G as well as your own comments in the past that made me seriously rethink my own use of "burst" shots.

In a post Kenny said something along the lines that with a 1D he could in fact trigger the shutter much faster than 3FPS in single shot, and do so WHEN he wanted the shots...

As soon as I got my 1D.. I was totally taken abck by both the shutter response as compared to a 10D and the "freaky" 8FPS that is .. well just waaaaay too fast to be usefull in 99% of the situations!

I have now taken to "trigggering bursts" manually with the MkII... I figure I'm able to accurately and specifically time shots at about 5FPS on my own.. and I get the timings I want..

Much better results are possible than 5FPS in "spray and pray"

[MarkH]

I'd like to see reviews showing the number of shots in RAW at different fps speeds. I suspect that a 1 fps you could shoot RAW till the CF card is full, completely blowing away the 10D. At 2 fps the 20D might still beat the 10D.
At 3 fps I would think that 7 or 8 frames might be realistically acheivable.

When you really need speed there is always the option of shooting JPG, mmmm 5 fps for over 20 shots.

If the buffer just isn't up to your requirements then the obvious solution is to buy the 1D MkII, which is also 8MPix.

[Andy_T]

The Nikon D200 will fill the gap nicely between the 20D and the 1DMKII, there I said it!

Right, when it comes out in 2006 ... :lol:

I hope the 6 picture RAW buffer refers to the RAW+large JPG option and is larger with RAW+small JPG.

Best regards,
Andy

[Tom W]

The Nikon D200 will fill the gap nicely between the 20D and the 1DMKII, there I said it!

Right, when it comes out in 2006 ... :lol:

I hope the 6 picture RAW buffer refers to the RAW+large JPG option and is larger with RAW+small JPG.

Best regards,
Andy

Good point, Andy. Or shooting just RAW alone (if you can do that - I haven't looked at the specs). Certainly, there is a finite buffer size and a speed at which the buffer empties depending on CF card.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I just re-read Rob Galbraiths preveiw.. it seems that his test model would only shoot 6 frames raw consecutively no matter what speed CF card or joeg embeded or not :(

Now.. he did not mention what happens at 3 fps... but it seems that the 5fps RAW limit is CAPPED at 6 frames :(

[KennyG]

Sorry, but I think all this bitching about a camera that nobody here has even seen in real life is just hilarious.

Because the mirror box is smaller the viewfinder is darker. Hmm, that was part of the EFS lens modification. All the WA fanatics are bowing to Canon HQ in appreciation for this change. No-win, no-win situation.

People complained about the weight/size of the 10D so they took the opportunity to slim it down which they could do with the smaller mirror box, which has lead to a darker..... well you get the point.

I am sure their marketing department has some pretty clever girls/boys working in it who know what the average consumer wants and what will sell the most cameras. People here are not average users, trust me on this one.

Buffer size probably means diddly squat to 90% of people who will buy the 20D. So, why should they add cost for the other 10%, most of who will probably buy it anyway. On the other hand, buffer size IS important to 90% of people who buy a MK-II and cost isn't the biggest issue.

It is all down to marketing folks and you get what you pay for. Just look at other industries that have model ranges to see where they put all the extras and best bits. Not in the mass-market models that's for sure.

Hopefully the biggest complaint about the 10D, focus problems, has been nailed once and for all, as well as issues with exposure (blown skies for example). Image quality remains to be seen, but the glass half empty brigade are already doing it down and they have not even seen an image yet.

I don't know what people were expecting, maybe a mini MK-II and what they have got is a much better 10D. It certainly isn't a reason to throw everything in the trash can and jump off the nearest overpass. Reserve your judgement until you can hold one in your hand and take pictures with it.

[Tom W]

I just re-read Rob Galbraiths preveiw.. it seems that his test model would only shoot 6 frames raw consecutively no matter what speed CF card or joeg embeded or not :(

Now.. he did not mention what happens at 3 fps... but it seems that the 5fps RAW limit is CAPPED at 6 frames :(

If its Capped, it can be "hacked"! Where's our Russian friends? :)

[Cadenza]

Problem is, 6 frames at 5fps means you'll reach
buffer limit at 1.2 sec. You just KNOW that the
critical frame will come in at 1.3 sec....

[Tom W]

Hey, if you were shooting film, that shot would be the 25th or the 37th frame. There's no winning. :)

[drisley]

I'd like to see reviews showing the number of shots in RAW at different fps speeds. I suspect that a 1 fps you could shoot RAW till the CF card is full, completely blowing away the 10D. At 2 fps the 20D might still beat the 10D.
At 3 fps I would think that 7 or 8 frames might be realistically acheivable.

When you really need speed there is always the option of shooting JPG, mmmm 5 fps for over 20 shots.

If the buffer just isn't up to your requirements then the obvious solution is to buy the 1D MkII, which is also 8MPix.

Yes, that would be great! It would suit my shooting perfectly.
I almost never use the burst on my 300D. I was just worried about the buffer filling during regular shooting. But since the 20D allows shooting while it writes to the CF card, and since it's even faster at CF writing than the MKii, it should make me very happy. :D

With the 300D, even if you just shoot single shots every couple of seconds, in about 10 seconds the buffer is full and you have to wait, and wait and wait...

[Webster]

Well, I'm so mad at Canon about this 6 shot buffer, that I'm just going to go ahead and get me a Mark II instead. That'll teach 'em!

[CyberDyneSystems]

Webster! Where you been man!? I've missed that quick wit!

[defordphoto]

Removed by RFMSports

[CyberDyneSystems]

I know I'm ready to trade in the 10D...

...gee,... I wonder what the 10D will be worth in a month :(

[blinking8s]

I know I'm ready to trade in the 10D...

...gee,... I wonder what the 10D will be worth in a month :(

sell it quick! lol

kiss my 300d bye bye...i think it should go quick on ebay

problems though...WHEN will the damn 20d be in stores...and CAN i live without my a camera for that long!!! its the start of the school year too...I am going to miss out on so many drunken photo ops...BAH

[defordphoto]

Removed by RFMSports

[Longwatcher]

I am still trying to find out where Canon says the 20D will write 3.5x faster to the CFcard (Help would be appreciated)

If I can take 1 FPS until the CF card is full, then it may have a place in my pocket book in conjunction with the 10-22mm lens (that would be cheaper then a 1Ds) Still wouldn't be able to shoot fisheye, but I caculate that I am likely to only use that for rare shots after the initial fun wears off (much like my IR filter).

With the 10-22mm lens it should give the artistic wide angle look I want (if the lens is good enough - I am kind of jaded with "L" glass at this point).

I will continue to wait until Photokina for futher announcements, although I suspect there is the possibility that, like the XL-2 video cam, Canon might not feel the need to time the announcement of the 1Ds upgrade to the show.

So if I had to buy a camera right now with my current money it looks like:

1st choice - Kodak SLR/c (reason FF and pixels (FPS fast enough for when I would use it, with good buffer)

2nd - Canon 20D w/10-22mm lens (reason low cost, but still doesn't give me the full range I want - close second though)

3rd - Canon 1Ds (reason cost) (if money no object, ignoring for a moment me getting my own recon sat, the 1Ds wins hands down)

Just my opinion,

[theoldmoose]

Buffer too small?

Where's y'alls hacking spirit?

Why, I remember back when, when there weren't enough memory on those Altair computer cards, why we just up and piggy-back soldered an additional layer of RAM chips right on top of the originals, leaving the chip select (CS) pin flying out, so's we could bus them all together with wire-wrap wire...

Seems I have an old photo of the lashup around here somewhere....

[rodbunn]

It's my opinion that Canon is going after the wedding and portrait
photographers with the 20D. They HAVE fast digital cameras for sports,
now go after another market with the 20D. Canon isn't out to "outdo"
each camera with faster, bigger, stronger cameras, they are after
SALES $$$$ . . .

JMHO, Rod

[CyberDyneSystems]

I am still trying to find out where Canon says the 20D will write 3.5x faster to the CFcard (Help would be appreciated)


It wasn't Canon.. (well actually they might have) but it is the tests with various high speed cards that Rob Galbraith did that matters!

Not only is the 20D much faster with high speed CF cards then the 10D .. it's faster than the MkII with some cards :? :shock:

In some cases it looks like the performance from certain cards is FASTER than 3.5 ! Yowzaa!

From 10D
Sandisk Extreme 1GB 1.369MB/sec 1.334MB/sec

From 20D:
Sandisk Extreme 1GB 4.796MB/sec 5.651MB/sec

1.334Mb/sec Vs. 5.651MB/sec

That's 4.2 TIMES FASTER!

[CyberDyneSystems]

And the Microdrive!

10D:
Hitachi Microdrive 4GB = 746K/sec


20D
Hitachi Microdrive 4GB = 4.243MB/sec

Thats more than 5.6 times faster!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

it seems
The speed bump can be attributed in part to the EOS 20D's ability to both shoot and write photos at the same time.

[Cadwell]

it seems
The speed bump can be attributed in part to the EOS 20D's ability to both shoot and write photos at the same time.

I thought the 10D was supposed to do that as well?

[CyberDyneSystems]

Honestly... so did I :?

[MarkH]

it seems
The speed bump can be attributed in part to the EOS 20D's ability to both shoot and write photos at the same time.

I thought the 10D was supposed to do that as well?

No, when you take your finger off the trigger the 10D will write to the CF, when you depress the shutter the writing is paused.

I always thought that this was a shame since the competition did it differently, but the 9 frame buffer has served me well so I am not too worried.

[drisley]

Yes, so I think that improvement alone will more than make up for the buffer size.
I notice that too on the 300D that the CF writing led would stop as soon as I half pressed the shutter button to start taking more pictures. What a pain in the arse.
I'm so excited... that I just can't hide it... I'm about to sell my 300D and I think I like it! :D

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'm so excited... that I just can't hide it... I'm about to sell my 300D and I think I like it! :D

:lol: :lol: :lol:

And I know, I know, I know, I know, I know I want one!

[HJMinard]

I'm so excited... that I just can't hide it... I'm about to sell my 300D and I think I like it! :D

:lol: :lol: :lol:

And I know, I know, I know, I know, I know I want one!

So it's come to this ... Pointer Sisters resets ... the apocolypse is upon us

:D :D :D

[Hatem Eldoronki]

I'm so excited... that I just can't hide it... I'm about to sell my 300D and I think I like it! :D

:lol: :lol: :lol:

And I know, I know, I know, I know, I know I want one!


Puh-hahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: