20D: Where Do You Read The Shutter Count?

I just noticed a number displayed in the EOS Utility program a week ago, at the upper right corner of the screen. Whether this number is linked to the automatic file number, or is an independent shutter actuation counter is not know.

I can't see that number on my EOS Viewer Utility. Mine is 'Version 1, 2, 1, 14'.

I wonder why Canon have found it necessary to have such a complicated and confusing shutter actuation counter. Would it be too difficult for them to design a counter that starts at zero and then increases by one every time the shutter is actuated?

Mike

You mean aside from computers working in hex, rather than decimal? Well, the folder/file naming convention (general form) is defined in the JEIDA Design rule for Camera Format standard.

I just mean humans working in decimal!

Mike

Sorry guys but if you are trying to decode the actual shutter actuations on anything Canon (except the 1 series cameras before the MkIIIs) then it is all smoke and mirrors. It can't be done as the EXIF just doesn't store the information in any way that can be accessed except by Canon themselves.
I tried the hex. method and it doesn't give consistent readings, or gives all zeros, depending on what you use it on.
Try searching this and other forums about the problem.

wonderferret wrote in post #5250419
You could try this
http://zecoj.com …on-eos-20d-shutter-count/

I've found it accurate with my 20d.

Doesn't work with the 30D. At the specified address I get 64520, which doesn't change with subsequent shots.

-js

Not working for me.

I put this samples of two hexadecimal conversion , same camera, different cards. different and non correlative number of shutters.

http://imgur.com/aik5M​J0
http://imgur.com/zNpC2​2B

where you see "XX as word 28927 ........ you should see, in the next RAW file, ...28928, logic, but... it appears

28673 (this raw decoding belong to other CF, but same camera)

uf, and the next raw I shoot, it shows a couple of digits less than the consecutive. Not working, really. Or me not understanding.


I have followed the instructions of your link:

http://zecoj.com …tter-count/#comment-11074

but ... this is my outcome.


thanks anyway.

I am sure this all worked 6 years ago when that member posted that, and they haven't been back on since. Good luck in your search.