Previous news story    Next news story

Reuters showcases EOS-1D X multiple exposure modes

By dpreview staff on Aug 6, 2012 at 18:43 GMT

The multi-exposure functions of the latest Canon cameras have been showcased in a series of images shot at the London Olympics. Reuters photographer Mike Blake has written about the possibilities of being able to capture and combine sequences of images conveying the action and movement of disciplines such as gymnastics. Specifically, this has been made possible by the EOS-1D X's ability to produce composite images that combine multiple shots in different ways. All the original shots can also be saved, so taking these images didn't come at the expense of capturing the traditional 'front page' shot.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark III and EOS-1D X are both able to combine up to nine separate frames, with four options for how the images are then combined (giving control over whether brightness is averaged, added or selectively combined). This control over the way the data is combined sets the camera apart from multi-exposure functions that appear in a variety of existing cameras. Both Canons retain the ability to save all the original files, or just the composite image, and will do so for Raw, as well as JPEG, files. (via MyModernMet)

Jonathan Horton of the U.S. attends a gymnastics training session at the O2 Arena before the start of the London 2012 Olympic Games in London July 25, 2012.
REUTERS/Mike Blake
Huang Qiushuang of China attends a gymnastics training session at the North Greenwich Arena before the start of the London 2012 Olympic Games July 26, 2012. REUTERS/Brian Snyder

Comments

Total comments: 226
12
Wildbegonia
By Wildbegonia (Aug 12, 2012)

Very interesting tool to get your imagination working for interesting compositions. I hope this feature (like HDR) will become a standard in cameras $700 and up.

0 upvotes
PeakAction
By PeakAction (Aug 11, 2012)

I'm always surprised to see how much time people will spend online arguing pointless technical crap for nothing. 80% of this (and many other) threads consists of back-and-forth flaming. It proves one thing: if you have that much time, you're definitely not out shooting. Maybe you should do some of that instead.

2 upvotes
RawDogg
By RawDogg (Aug 15, 2012)

I second that. It' like they have nothing else better to do but complain.

0 upvotes
Edelweys
By Edelweys (Aug 23, 2012)

Looks like you're not out shooting, but arguing pointless technical crap

0 upvotes
Jon Ragnarsson
By Jon Ragnarsson (Aug 9, 2012)

A bit gimmicky. Takes probably longer to fiddle with settings on the 1DX rather than do it by one command in ImageMagick.

/s

1 upvote
Beestripe
By Beestripe (Aug 9, 2012)

Not.
I'd really like to see you try and composite an authentic multiple exposure effect in ImageMagick, let alone Photoshop. And if you do, please let me know how long it takes.
Makes perfect sense to me, rather just pressing a few buttons in-camera for the effect.

3 upvotes
Beestripe
By Beestripe (Aug 10, 2012)

Plus if you dont like fiddling with camera settings, the 1Dx probably would be slight overkill for you...

1 upvote
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (Aug 8, 2012)

OK. But, my (almost) 1000 years old EOS 3 has more or less (actually less) the same feature. Nice to have, but... However, in this thread I've noticed a "Canon 1DX vs Sony SLT A77" perspective. You must be kidding me... It's like comparing a Lamborghini Aventador with a VW Golf R32... Those are both fast cars, both are (almost) German cars, but... can you compare these?! Cheers! :)

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
JordanAT
By JordanAT (Aug 8, 2012)

Or, you know, you could just shoot with this: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/08/01/8K-video-and-gigapan-images-bring-olympics-in-high-resolution and do a composite. But that 8k camera would have frames at less than 0.033 apart (or, perhaps, 0.0083 - 10X the speed of the Canon), so you could select the multiple images to more accurately reflect the linear travel of the motion instead of being limited to a simple linear time sequence.

I mean, if you're going to spend money for cool effects, lets not wallow in the sub-5 figure range. :-)

0 upvotes
Vitruvius
By Vitruvius (Aug 8, 2012)

sdyue - only your Rants Per Second exceeds the 1D X. The 1D X however has useful substance. You are the one that needs to be 'balanced'.
How many people are actually going to create MEs in-camera on the tiny back screen? Everyone who has moderate software and a computer has ME.
The battery isn't the only place that Lithium can be helpful.

0 upvotes
Ropo16
By Ropo16 (Aug 8, 2012)

SDYUE are you the worst marketeer ever employed by Canon, or just someone with a severe disorder?

2 upvotes
kaxi85
By kaxi85 (Aug 8, 2012)

she/he has been banned before, that´s enough information for me.

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 8, 2012)

lol

all i did was show up a day LATER and find a bunch of guys who can't make the distinction between what's new that was totally unavailable in the past versus what was offered in the past that NEVER could do what the 1Dx does NOW

and just 'balanced' those regurgitating whiners plastering garbage with a bit o' minor whine-garbage-rebuttals

if others don't care to keep it relevant or even TRUE, why not rebut it with TRUTH and FACTS?

you've not contributed anything valid of any significance here.

competitors put in the same situation simply haven't delivered at all. NONE

anyone employed by Canon would NOT be authorized to comment here... so your reasoning is illogical. i'm not here to 'market/support' Canon, just show the garbage others are spouting for what it is... just nonsense. i see for EVERY mfr, not just here. but noticed so many ignoramuses get so uptight about Canon it's incredible, literally

if the whiners cannot be serious here, any rebuttal will make them whine more

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
Ropo16
By Ropo16 (Aug 8, 2012)

So that confirms it. You are delusional.

0 upvotes
russbarnes
By russbarnes (Aug 8, 2012)

lol. Yep.

0 upvotes
Vitruvius
By Vitruvius (Aug 8, 2012)

Dear sdyue; why are you spamming this thread with claims that there is no other camera on earth that can come close to the 1D X FPS ??? Do you work for Canon? The 1D X is 18 MP and shoots 12 FPS with AF. The Sony SLT A77 is 24 MP and shoots 12 FPS with AF. And the Canon is more than 4 times the price. I know Canon is full frame and a better camera but stop acting like they invented the wheel. The Sony even shoots 1080 video at double the FPS than the 1D X. Casio Exilim EX-F1 shoots 6 MP at 60 FPS which is similar data band width as 18 MP at 20 FPS and that was 4 years ago and cost 1/7 the price.
What is your point??? Have you eaten too many 'time slices"?!?!

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
hanwee
By hanwee (Aug 8, 2012)

To know what makes the price diff, consider this:

A77 has some mediocre buffer, it can't continue to take 12 FPS while Canon 1D / Nikon D4 can keep going on and on.

A77 is a good camera, but it's classed differently, even Sony knows that. The closer comparison should've been Nikon D7000 or Canon 7D (and even them have higher continuous RAW buffer and 100% pentaprism viewfinder)...

0 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (Aug 8, 2012)

^^ See the A77 is a $1300 camera and the 1DX is a $7000 camera. Yet the burst rate is the same (if using AF) which is a HUGE plus point considering no other non Sony camera does anything more than 8 fps below the discontinued D3s.

The buffer isn't too big but lets give credit where credit is due. The D7000, 7D and others don't have 24 MPs like the A77, they don't have even the 12 fps that the A77 and 1DX can do so in burst rate. And lastly if you shoot RAW then you will see that the A77 shoots 14 RAW files, D7000 shoots 15 RAW files, 7D shoots 16 RAW files and the 1DX can shoot 38 RAW files.

So if anyone shoots RAW (not an uncommon thing at this level of camera) the A77s performance becomes more impressive once you realize that its files sizes are much bigger than either of the other 3 cameras and it shoots 12 fps while the D7000 maxes out at 6 fps and the 7D maxes out at 8 fps.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 8, 2012)

i'm not spamming it at all...

i am legitimately rebutting the spam/whiners spouting invalid garbage... a full day 'after their spamming' (there's a difference)

the SLT A77 may offer 24mp and 12fps (limited/restricted/delays/blackouts/lags in EVF/max aperture ONLY, and none beyon f/3.5)...and NO M.E. (that's all lot of crippling limitations IF you even bothered to READ up on the A77)

and that does NOT even include A77's IQ is even a match under the same shooting conditions shown for the 1Dx.

the A77 high shutter speed/hi-ISO/pathetic NR only NULLIFIES any advantage 24Mp SHOULD have, so it's useless in the same scenario.

the A77 is happier in brighter light, period. and definitely not good with fast action. panning/tracking using hi-fps will be ridiculous with it, especially in much lower light, and impossible at tighter aperture diameters. that's a lot of UNNECESSARY compromises and handicaps to bring to any 'fast action' under moderately low light event (or bright for indoors).

0 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (Aug 8, 2012)

Agree on the limitations but disagree on the high ISO part. In any case I am unsure why you have to use such harsh language. In any case I refuse to stoop to your level so I will attempt to reply with some civility.

A lot of friends use the A77 and have taken a lot of stunning images with it in many different scenarios.

Dpreview themselves said - "In the real world, with judicious use of post-capture noise reduction you can get much more from the A77's raw output than you might expect from the images and graphs on this page"

And why compare IQ between a $6800 camera and a $1300 camera ? In my above post I was only referring to the burst speed and nothing more. Compare it with its peers and the IQ is more or less on par with the D7000 and beats the 7D.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/734|0/%28brand%29/Sony/%28appareil2%29/680|0/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28appareil3%29/619|0/%28brand3%29/Canon

0 upvotes
Peter Mackey
By Peter Mackey (Aug 8, 2012)

To all the whiners, nobody loves a whiner, these shots are wonderful, Canon, Nikon blah.
Just bloody great front page mag photography.

(Wish we'd had this stuff in the 70's when I was a working stiff press photographer in Melbourne AUS).

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Aug 8, 2012)

Sweet! Canon leads the way in turning the Olympics into this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdqPXx38Ogw#t=01m52s

0 upvotes
Tom Caldwell
By Tom Caldwell (Aug 7, 2012)

Neat, might make one of these my "last" dslr body before a professional mirrorless is evolved.

Just a pity the combination of images doesn't fix up the static part of the image that becomes blurred by normal slight camera movement in the process.

As far as "you can do it in the computer" is concerned, news is news and if it becomes new straight from the camera it remains news. (Work that one out).

Any photographer making his living from newsworthy images knows what I am talking about.

0 upvotes
russbarnes
By russbarnes (Aug 7, 2012)

Wow. Who the hell does "sdyue" work for? Looks like the Canon marketing department is in overdrive trying to prove what an invaluable unique feature this is. Unfortunately the dated 5 year old sensor in the 1DX has so much banding that you'll barely be able to see the final image or it will have been crushed by the ultra heavy handed JPEG noise reduction.

4 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 8, 2012)

lol

no banding for the competent, who know the limitations of ooc hi contrast

banding only exist for those who fix hi contrast shots SET with a high contrast setting (why not lower?) in post for a LOW contrast effect (basically, resorting to identical HDR 'fix' techniques)...

if you must fix ANY image (contrast and DR limitations) via PP at alll... the 'original capture' is already FLAWED (ditto the sensor itself)!!!

no sensor advancements YET... if one still resorts to pp fixes, period. true sensor advancement would mean ZERO pp and getting hi-contrast shots to come out FULLY detailed in both shadows and highlights with NO 'unintended/undesireable' blown details.

if you EXPOSE a SINGLE shot for shadows... you get zero banding.

if you EXPOSE a SINGLE shot for highlights... you get blackened shadows (when it is bright and very contrasty)... and so far 100% of Nikon pp fixes for shadows MAY be free of 'banding' but at the price of CERTAIN BLOWN HIGHLIGHTS EVERY TIME WITHOUT EXCEPT.

1 upvote
JordanAT
By JordanAT (Aug 7, 2012)

This is neat..if a bit superfluous. I suspect, and I'm not a master PS user, that this could be done in a macro that would take, at most,ten seconds to composite on a modern laptop costing half of a 1DX body. Since it really only works with a static photographic point, the entire process of combination could be automated and be far less computationally intense than even a simple panorama.

14fps is impressive, and bests Nikon even with the RAW version being limited to 12fps.That's faster than a D4 which can "only" shoot at 11 FPS at full res RAW. If you want to correct the image later - and to me that means RAW - you're looking at at 0.006 second difference in the frame separation.

I put this in with all of the cool after-effects you can use in camera, like vivid color profiles, custom white balance, automatic red-eye, and the like. It's great if you can't be bothered to use a computer, but if image quality really matters you should use the right tool, and a camera isn't it.

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 8, 2012)

if you have to go offline onto a computer/laptop to fix your images... you will NOT have delivered ANY image to your clients in time, like '(nearly) now', rather than hours later, which is TOO late for events like the Olympics... or any other unique events.

0 upvotes
JordanAT
By JordanAT (Aug 8, 2012)

Do you typically select from in-camera and use the internal wifi to email the images straight to your client, or do you transfer them to a second device, pick the best shots, and then upload them? If it's the latter, do you even bother to do basic correction before sending? If you expect the receiver at the client end to do the post processing, why not send them all 10 frames and recommend they composite?

There are always use cases for these kinds of esoteric features, just as there are for in-camera profiles, red-eye reduction, and other image processing. Example- if there isn't time to select and throw on basic corrections, and you want this effect, and your transmitting the camera images directly without any other hardware. How's that built-in wifi working on the 1DX, anyway...oh, right.

0 upvotes
Mike Sandman
By Mike Sandman (Aug 7, 2012)

I agree that the high frame rate makes this capability interesting. Think about the shots from the early days of strobe that used stobe light to "freeze" a moving or falling object. Strobe is no longer required...

There will be other applications that become feasible because of the 14 fps rate. So the news is not about multiple exposure per se -- it's about how the speed enables new forms of M.E.

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

M.E @ 0.0833s time slices (RAW)... exactly

however, strobes would never be good nor allowed in a 'one chance' competition scenario

but only for 'demo' scenarios that are easily repeatable only non-competitively or for 'study'.

0 upvotes
Ulfric M Douglas
By Ulfric M Douglas (Aug 7, 2012)

What is this gimmick doing in the News section?
It's a tweaked version of a useless feature I've had in our Olympus for years.
Pointless, late, gimmick.
Do it on the computer instead! Doh.

0 upvotes
balios
By balios (Aug 7, 2012)

Not pointless if professional Reuters photographers are finding it useful at the Olympics.

The fact that similar features have been available in systems prior to the 1DX doesn't mean squat to Reuters if that system isn't usable to them.

The whole "this has been available before" argument is kind of idiotic. It's like saying AF has been available before, so why be amazed at the 1DX or D4's autofocus abilities. Professionals worry about the ACTUAL usefulness of a particular tool on a particular system, and not who invented it first.

3 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

you don't have 0.0833s time slice capability of any single event!

doh!

fail.

0 upvotes
jsis
By jsis (Aug 7, 2012)

Is this even news?

3 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

yup

nobody offers 0.08333s time slice M.E. at full res of ONE EVENT (one take, one moment)

so, it's NEW, thus news...

0 upvotes
jsis
By jsis (Aug 7, 2012)

oh please, all that can be done with post processing... do you think professionals are that lazy? The photos look terrible. This is a convenience feature.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
jsis
By jsis (Aug 7, 2012)

The Nikon and Canon fanboys are out in full force today, the latter claiming it's the greatest thing ever invented.

1 upvote
balios
By balios (Aug 7, 2012)

The former are upset that Reuters is showing some love at Canon rather than Nikon.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

there is nothing 'fanboy' about offering something unique that OTHERS have YET to offer

... 0.0833s time-slice M.E. at full-res... peerless

but of course, ANYTHING NEW OR UNIQUE, is NOT the 'greatest thing ever invented'... (you should know better, but are oblivious to such distinctions... or not?)

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Aug 7, 2012)

I like these. Not something I have use for but it's summer and it beats reading about Facebook and camera phones.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

i think hi-fps sports lovers would find this amazing since it was otherwise unavailable before with M.E.

this means tighter time slices of 0.0833s are available in sports M.E. rather than long separation shots missing critical moments in action shots.

1 upvote
Michael S.
By Michael S. (Aug 7, 2012)

CANON seems to be very nervous about their portfolio if they have to marketing THAT very, very, very old feature...

Just for the fanboys...

I would say CANON users would really more like to see this camera on the SHELF - so they could buy it!

;-)

0 upvotes
balios
By balios (Aug 7, 2012)

The blog was written by Reuters and not Canon, who thought the feature was useful and worth mentioning. Sport photographers working for the likes of Reuters are the intended market for the 1DX, so I think Canon was successful with this feature.

So no, this feature isn't "just for the fanboys". Its for the serious sports photographers currently shooting the Olympics. That's the point of the article.

2 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

it's NOT an OLD feature if it is the FIRST time ANY MFR offers it, is it?

M.E. 0.083s time slices... who else offers it.

you: silence... (nobody)

2 upvotes
Shivaess
By Shivaess (Aug 7, 2012)

Cool images, but every Pentax SLR I've had has had this function going back for years...

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

that wouldn't help at all... the 5-tight-combo images above, where pommel horse contact (0.29s) plus landing makes for 5 'moments' of 14 fps is about 0.35s total time

only one pentax is capable of 7fps... meaning, IF it has M.E.

it could capture 0.29 x 7 = 2 contact shots 'maybe' or 0.35 x 7 = 2.45 shots at best... which is still just 2 'moments' and none would exhibit the 4 moments of 'contact' plus 1 moment for 'landing'...

thus... with the fastest Pentax 7fps... you get only at best 2 of the 5 easily caught by the 1DX

push to other gymnastics images where 6 and 7-tight combos are involved, the slight longer time spans of 0.42s and 0.5 s will allow the fastest Pentax capture only 0.4 x 7 = 2.8 and 0.5 x 7 = 3.5 shots... any fraction doesn't count, so, again, you only get 2 to 3 shots off of the same tight time 'moments' of 'action.

M.E. is easy when action is relatively slow and spaced apart, but not when it comes to faster closer time sequenced sport moments w/ a mere 7fps

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
AndrewG NY
By AndrewG NY (Aug 7, 2012)

The other thing is that the M-E feature on Pentax is only going to combine exposures by adding them. On the 1DX it is able to use other methods such as averaging the shots.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

my correction...

RAW is 12fps, so 7 shots takes 7 x 0.083s = 0.58s

not JPEG 14fps (0.07s) [7 in 0.50s] which at the moment is not allowed M.E.

too bad.

either way, others don't offer even that anyway.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
kjeldsendk
By kjeldsendk (Aug 7, 2012)

It's an option, like EVERYTHING besides 100% manual.

It is up to the photographer if he wants to use it. And as the article says, the individual images are saved, so you can Photoshop to your hearts desire when you get home. But, you can look and see how your photo actually turns out, without photoshop on the spot, does it work?

And then there is the thing about speed, a D1X is the fast choice. Lets say you take one of these multi exposures at a wedding, a few minutes after you are done, the editors have your picture. And they can post it on the web as soon as they have the picture. Or they can fire up photoshop, and combine the images into a multiexposure. And if you did this with all who compete in this event it would be alot of work.

How fast a picture goes from a camera to the editors, perfect example here:
http://www.leonneal.com/blog/2011/05/03/this-just-might-be-a-one-shot-deal/

0 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Aug 7, 2012)

Why not just mention: Reuters showcases multi exposure images - it's already years on the market and integrated into digital camera's.

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

that's a big 'maybe'... because NONE can do 'tight time span' hi-speed M.E. like the 1Dx's 14fps.

if all you have is, say, a paltry 7fps, you might get 2 to 3 shots out of what the 1DX can do 5, 6, 7 in 0.5s 'max' with EASE, where it was impossible to do that many before as is showcased by the 1DX.

only Nikon D3/D offers 9 fps, and 11 fps at lower res,

so 0.5s x 9 = 4.5 shots... thus w/o fractions, you get at best 4-combo tight timespan 'moments' at best, of 7 easily done w/ 1Dx at full resolution. that's barely over half, and only 'double' a camera capable of only 7fps.

do the math... before making claims that cannot be supported at all.

1 upvote
kaxi85
By kaxi85 (Aug 7, 2012)

Are you working for canon or something?!

It´s still a single moment - even if you captured it in different pictures - and the photoshoped pictures look way better than this multi-exposure shots.
You always forget to mention that if you´re shooting in 14fps you have no c-af... so it´s pretty useless when the object moves out of the focus-area.
The D4 can do 11fps - with af - the canon 1dx 12fps with af, both in full resolution. No big advantage at all.
And not to mention that almost nobody has the desire for multi exposure shots.
Best regards :)

//edit: I forgot: The stitching done in the camera is far away from perfect, you see doubled details in the background etc...

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
YouDidntDidYou
By YouDidntDidYou (Aug 7, 2012)

this from 2008 http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/2964618067

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Tonio Loewald
By Tonio Loewald (Aug 7, 2012)

Double post.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 7, 2012)

There is photoshop for that.

And why the static background so blurry, did not they shoot from a tripod?

1 upvote
Tonio Loewald
By Tonio Loewald (Aug 7, 2012)

Long lens, shallow depth of field.

And it's a pro camera. So it's all about time to market.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

photo requires you actually captured closely time sequences in a fraction of a second... the 1DX exhibited above show several multi-combinations that can only be caught with 14fps on ONE camera, not two or three cameras then using PS... it won't work because the perspectives of 2 or 3 other cameras will be different.

thus:
4-combos (pommel-horse CONTACT alone) = 0.28s
5-combos (tumbling) = 0.35s
6-combos (tumbling) = 0.42s
7-combos (high bar) = 0.5 seconds long

and NOT spaced apart like the 'old film days'... (balance beam) could be taken by any camera doing just SLOW 1 frame shots for M.E. lasting 1 or more MINUTES.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

woops... that's for JPEG 14 fps (0.07s time slices) which is restricted in M.E.

so, to revise M.E. to the slower RAW 12 fps (0.0833s time slices)
so the above would be revised as follows:

4-combos (pommel-horse CONTACT alone) = 0.33s
5-combos (tumbling) = 0.42s
6-combos (tumbling) = 0.5s (instead of 7-combos)
7-combos (high bar) = 0.58s (instead of 0.50s)
8-combos = 0.67s
9-combos = 0.75s
10-combos = 0.83s
11-combos = 0.92s
12-combos = 1 second long

1Dx is still remarkable... and the only one to offer those rates with M.E.... at FULL RES

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Aug 7, 2012)

TLDR: Canon finally starts to catch up with Casio?

Casio has had "Multi-motion" images as a scene mode for years.

For example here it is described on page 78 of the FH100 manual:

http://support.casio.com/pdf/001/EXFH100_M29_FB_100311_E.pdf

"Multi-motion image can be used to isolate a moving subject within a series of multiple images and place them against a stationary background

I'm sure the canon implementation is a bit more advanced, but then they've had a few years to copy it and it's a bit more expensive than a $200 P&S....

Now if canon would only copy my EX-Z750's past move mode I'd be in heaven..... (hit the shutter and your move starts 5 seconds before you hit the shutter.)

1 upvote
zigwi
By zigwi (Aug 7, 2012)

yupe... Casio already have it years ago

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

unfortunately... any super hi-fps is super LOW RES

OR... are LOW FPS at high res... and the LOW FPS

don't worry... anyone can also appeal separately to even video, but that's NOT the same thing as M.E.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

making comparisons to motion pictures, movies, or videos is simply not the same thing.

worse, if even M.E. LOW fps rates at LOW RES thumbnails is nothing 'advanced' at any time, film or digital.

0 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Aug 8, 2012)

sdyue I can't understand 1/2 of what your write but the casio multi-image is not "super LOW RES"

Examples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rubbertoe/4816874611/
http://www.chromegaze.de/bike/mm1.jpg
http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/casio/ex-fc150/CIM204.JPG

Remember this is in P&S cameras selling for $100-$300. I should hope the zillion dollar latest and greatest canon DSLR does it better.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (Aug 7, 2012)

I think this is cool but having used multi-shot with film (via a Nikon in the 1980's) and via layers (etc) in Photoshop this is a great time saver. However I doubt that it will become main stream but I could see it as a fad for a few months until everyone gets bored of it.

I'm with Ken Rockwell - if I could magic one old idea up for my next Canon it would be Eye Control which was fantastic - NONE of the current DSLR range has this - dammed useful and much missed. You look, the camera focusing where you are looking - fantastic!

4 upvotes
Klipsen
By Klipsen (Aug 7, 2012)

Yes, it's one of those things. Like HDR. "Wow, impressive!", then "I'm bored". It will, of course, be used in the future, but soon it wont turn any heads.

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

1DX images shown above is not merely about M.E., but rather the rare combination of M.E. with very hi-fps (14) at full res caught for ONE event, not multiple events RETAKEN separately, and combined LATER as you suggest. if you do NOT have a camera capable of doing rapid fps of a single moment but divided into tight 0.07s intervals, you get NO image that matches it.

anyone can photoshop or layer DIFFERENT events together

but NONE can combine tiny fractions of ONE single event like ONLY the 1Dx is now doing with ease.

think about that; there's a big difference.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

... correction 12fps RAW... M.E.

(14fps is for JPEGs, at the moment JPEGs are restricted from M.E.)

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Aug 7, 2012)

It would be good if morons actually read articles before pooh-poohing what they think they are about and revealing exactly how clueless they are.

7 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Aug 7, 2012)

I think the 'morons' have read the article and can see what a gimmick this is when applied in camera. This yet another triumph of the marketing dept. over the engineering dept.

2 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

agree... the morons cannot DISTINGUISH that this is the ONLY camera in history to be able to capture a SINGLE MOMENT w/ M.E. with tightly spaced time intervals (0.07s apart).

all others FAIL, because in order to do that, they have to COMBINE SEPARATE EVENTS and 'fake' it with photoshop or layering DIFFERENT (not same) events taken at SEPARATE TIMES.

this is not a gimmick... but NONE can do this till NOW.

so... the original charge there are plenty of morons here... stands. (sad but true)

2 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

0.07s (jpeg) restricted from M.E. (too bad; firmware change pls?)
0.083s (RAW)... only allowed w/ M.E.

0 upvotes
Parsek
By Parsek (Aug 7, 2012)

Great, this was big in the early 80s.

3 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

great... the 80's capture M.E. of moments SPACED QUITE FAR APART with very SLOW fps... and all too often, separate events, and NOT ONE EVENT... divided by tiny 0.07s intervals 'full digital res' too...

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

sorry... 0.083s (=RAW for M.E.)... JPEGS not allowed M.E.

ditto everywhere else
lol

0 upvotes
Debankur Mukherjee
By Debankur Mukherjee (Aug 7, 2012)

Why do you require all these gimicks in Camera body when you have softwares with you including Photoshop......

0 upvotes
JamieTux
By JamieTux (Aug 7, 2012)

Because if you're reporting on an event you don't have time to photoshop the images and get them out in real time...

3 upvotes
zigwi
By zigwi (Aug 7, 2012)

yupe, i think that too.
take more time for editting...
but some compact camera already have this feature

0 upvotes
Cio Datan
By Cio Datan (Aug 7, 2012)

but not with the quality of lens available for the DSLR's and the image quality.

0 upvotes
Klipsen
By Klipsen (Aug 7, 2012)

Looking at the image quality, lens quality is hardly an issue for this feature.

0 upvotes
Cio Datan
By Cio Datan (Aug 7, 2012)

then try using a compact with this feature

0 upvotes
balios
By balios (Aug 7, 2012)

Some compact cameras have this feature, but:

"control over the way the data is combined sets the camera apart from multi-exposure functions that appear in a variety of existing cameras"

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

WRONG... you cannot photoshop what you DID NOT CAPTURE... and most M.E. cameras in existence can only capture moments spaced so far apart, they could only get 2 to 3 shots, or at best 3 to 4... NOT like the 1Dx's 5,6,7 shots in under 0.5s...

what are you going to do... cheat and combine (photoshop) several SEPARATE retakes of DIFFERENT events??? it's not the same thing as capturing ONE EVENT. duh.

even the D3/D4 can barely capture FOUR in the space of 0.5s

0 upvotes
FartIng
By FartIng (Aug 7, 2012)

my Konica Minolta 7d did this - (5MP and over 10 yrs old!)

3 upvotes
Klipsen
By Klipsen (Aug 7, 2012)

I had a Dynax 7D, but I don't recall this function. Maybe you're thinking of multiflash, but that probably wouldn't work very well in a lit arena at the distances involved.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

hahaha... yes... MAYBE... M.E. of SEPARATE moments... spaced ridiculously far apart...

even 7d's slow 3fps barely can capture 1.5 (just one really) in the space of 0.5s (which the 1DX can whip off SEVEN in 0.5s)

go ahead, come back and do RETAKES of an athlete trying SEVEN MORE TIMES, just so you can 'photoshop' separate events to look like one... that's totally not the same...

read... do the math... then you'll 'get it'.

fail.

0 upvotes
diarsi
By diarsi (Aug 7, 2012)

If those from Reuters landed just now from the Moon,You from dpreview where were You?

0 upvotes
love_them_all
By love_them_all (Aug 7, 2012)

Can it do content aware stacking making the althele with 100% opacity?

0 upvotes
MichaelEchos
By MichaelEchos (Aug 7, 2012)

Nikon D5100 can do this without the help of processing.

2 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Aug 7, 2012)

I seriously doubt you know what "processing" means. Of course the D5100 needs to do something with the multiple images too.

2 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

Nikon D5100 is only capable of 4 fps... meaning... in 0.5s, it will capture TWO 'moment's what the 1DX does easily with SEVEN (as shown) or even more (14).

if you have to come back, and ask the athlete to do a RETAKE, to get FIVE MORE, then, they're going to laugh at you... there's only ONCE CHANCE... and you better get it right in a fraction of a second of a SINGLE EVENT, not multiple events retaken separately and combined later.

0 upvotes
zigwi
By zigwi (Aug 7, 2012)

hmm i like multiple exposure... but i think it isn't new things.
I already shoot something like this with prosumer camera several years ago.
you can see my shoot in

http://www.fotografer.net/galeri/galerix.php?id=951307&tup=1

My camera is Casio

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Hey, great shot...............thats a classic use of multi exposure !
Yes, this cracks me up, how old was the camera? Was it a casio that you used ? Maybe you should have gone to the Olympics too.
I guess we know that its been around for years and its a surprise to see the function in a pro level camera, but that really does make a mockery of the headline article then.

0 upvotes
zigwi
By zigwi (Aug 7, 2012)

Thanks,

Yes, I'm using the Casio EX-F1. This good but not the best, good because can shoot 60fps and also have video shoot feature. But can't get best shoot in indoor. Only 6mp and much noise in high ISO.

0 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Just had a look at the Dpreview announcement.....they obviously didnt fully review it. The 60fps is insane and so is the constant buffering. I guess that was possible with smaller files. The sensor wont compete with modern ones, I had a fuji s7000 about the same time. We dont see much of casio downunder apart from some small point and shoot cameras.
That baseball multi exposure is a fabulous example....dont get rid of the camera even if you get a new one, you may regret it.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

unfortunately, your casio is only going to capture M.E. moments spaced to far apart to capture anything but 1 or 2, maybe 3 moments in a mere 0.5s that the 1DX can pull off 5, 6, 7... 14

you simply cannot ask an Olympian to redo his routine 5 times, just so you can combine several SEPARATE events into one M.E. image, as the others above are suggesting w/ photoshop, it won't work...

imagine trying that with ANY unique event... impossible really.

this is not 'old'... it is completely unheard of before for 'everyman' with a single device.

0 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 8, 2012)

Did you bother to look at his photo? I counted at least 15 movements of a baseballer at the moment of pitching.Thats impressive from years ago.

I appreciate this a tweaked version and maybe a step up from whats been used before, but if the others were really serious about this function, i'm sure it would have been developed further themselves.

1. The gymnastics shots are not quality,
2. Its just a take on some old technology, and
3. It comes across as a marketing excercise for Canon.

Zigwi's photo is very impressive indeed. Yes its an old camera from way back, so the IQ wont be anywhere near a 1Dx, but it shouldnt be at that price.

What everyone is saying here is......who cares !! It was done in the film days, several brands have had a version of it for years and now Canon get heralded as some techno genuises. I dont have any problem with Canon, but its like them coming out with a Rueters shot in cam HDR in 5 years time and saying ...LOOK!! WOW!!

0 upvotes
Wreck3r
By Wreck3r (Aug 7, 2012)

Caugh caugh, Magic lantern on low end dslr. Except the high speed shutter OFC.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

magic lantern... rather, is it just low-res video slices rather than hi-res stills???

all we know is... nobody has done what you have suggested with any level of impressiveness.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Aug 7, 2012)

Great idea! Let's all load some freeware on our SLRs and hope for the best.

0 upvotes
IrishhAndy
By IrishhAndy (Aug 7, 2012)

If only it had art filters.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

why?

M.E. of 0.07s slices in time is unique... no one else offers that

at least not at full res stills.

0 upvotes
mzillch
By mzillch (Aug 7, 2012)

Can anyone explain to me what advantage there would be, if any, in combining the images in the camera, as opposed to doing it in a computer in post? This is a gimmick!

0 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Aug 7, 2012)

So journalists and anyone else that need the images NOW can get them out the way they want them to without having to mess around in another program. And for being a gimmick the pros sure seem to be using it a bunch.

3 upvotes
mzillch
By mzillch (Aug 7, 2012)

I feel sorry for people who are forced to look at images that a journalist "didn't have time" to analyze, compose, correct, etc on a high resolution, color calibrated monitor and used the rinky-dink, low res display on the back of their camera instead, only.
I challenge you to link to evidence to support your claim the "pros" are doing this IN camera "a bunch". That's nonsense and you are gullibly eating this advertorial hook line and sinker and reading an anecdotal example as being representative of how multiple images are combined and used. What's next? In camera sharpening, also using a rinky dink lo res display? Sheesh.

0 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Aug 7, 2012)

Yeah, because newspapers are just sooo keen on being two days late in covering a sporting event so that the royal photographer can sit down with a cup of coffee and fire up Photoshop on the hotel room at the end of the day...

3 upvotes
Goreyo
By Goreyo (Aug 7, 2012)

mzillch, its quite clear Nishi was referring to the technique as opposed to the in camera processing. As in its not a gimmick because this technique has been used by journalist many times and for a long time.

2 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

i'll explain it to you SLOWLY...

if all your camera can do is take shots of DIFFERENT EVENTS... which is NOT going to happen in sports at all... or Olympics (as shown)... they will look at you like you are crazy, if you ask an olympian to REDO his routine, so you can capture 'similar' (but not same) moments SEPARATELY just so you can combine them to look like ONE EVENT.

all the REUTERS images shown specifically for the 'fast action' shots lasting at most 0.5s (never mind the slow ones... they're easy for anyone)... but who could capture 0.07s slices of time in a SINGLE MOMENT??? NONE.

at a blistering 'full res' still of 14fps
4 images last 0.28s
5 images last 0.35s
6 images last 0.42s
7 images last 0.49s
:
14 images (not shown) lasts 1 second

all tightly spaced for ONE SINGLE EVENT

thus ANY other camera, would be hard pressed to pull off only 2 to 3 shots in 0.5s OR LESS (5-7 shots for the 1DX)

even the D3/D4 (9fps) can barely get 3 to 4 in 0.5s
& 11fps = 5.5 = 5

hope that helps

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
mzillch
By mzillch (Aug 7, 2012)

No, what you need to explain is why the software to COMBINE the multiple exposures should reside IN the camera. The only logical explanation, besides the true one which is because it is a gimmick, is because the images we see in print and media have NEVER made it to a desktop computer for cropping/correction/adjustment etc. because it is "too time consuming; The photojournalist must have print ready photographs straight from the camera because the extra minutes needed before submitting for publication would be bad."

With only a few exceptions, every single image we see in major media distribution is NOT straight from the camera and has spent at least some time on a computer, be it for cropping, color correction, sharpening, levels, curves, etc and THAT's where composites of multiple exposures should be done, instead of through a rinky dink, little, uncalibrated, on camera LCD. You are conflating the multiple quick exposure capabilty of a camera with the location of the image combining

0 upvotes
Tap0
By Tap0 (Aug 7, 2012)

DPReview is doing some good advertorials for Canon these days...

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Aug 7, 2012)

Nope.

6 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Aug 7, 2012)

Are you saying the camera is not capable of producing this image?

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

not really

no other camera can do in 0.5s (7 shots with ease) of a SINGLE event... with M.E.

ALL the rest can barely do 2, 3, 4, 5 tops (5 for D4/D5 at 11fps)... a 'half' a shot is always a non-shot (rounded DOWN)

if one cannot capture those moments (slices of ONE EVENT)... one cannot combine 'more' later if the event NEVER happens again.

1 upvote
Vitruvius
By Vitruvius (Aug 7, 2012)

I do not own any high end camera so I am actually surprised that this has not been available till now. I remember using this on my EOS 600 film camera in 1988. I was not able to print the 9 pictures seperately after using the ME funcion :-) Still, I don't see why you wouldn't just do this in PS later with more control. I can't imagine doing this on the little screen on the back of a camera. Obviously the camera has the processing power so why not add the feature for those that want it I guess.

I wonder, if the camera was tripod mounted, and if so, why is the text on the horse blurred? Image Stabilizer shift between frames? Would this be better without IS on?

0 upvotes
tralalax
By tralalax (Aug 7, 2012)

...and very few people watching?

0 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Vitruvius, I read the article which stated they only received the cameras just before the Olympics and had not time to fully investigate the feature.
It did not mention wether tripod was used, but you would bet he has held it firm as possible somehow. Lots of those guys carry mono pods to hold those big lenses. I suspect a tripod and remote would bring about a slightly better result.
As an in cam special effects shot, he probably got it to their website or a newspaperASAP and they dont have time to do lots of PP. Its like in cam HDR.....good for people who just want to push the button and let the cam do it, but newer technology stuff takes a few more goes to develop properly and often PP is the way to go.
As many people are saying, other brands have had the beginnings of this tech in their digi cams for the last few years.

0 upvotes
Martin_E
By Martin_E (Aug 7, 2012)

Hi, Wow Canon EOS 600! That brings back memories of the old film days. I did try the multi exposure a few times but only 2 or 3 images on top of each other. I remember winning a competition with an image of a wine glass with an attractive eye superimposed on the bowl of the glass. I had an EOS RT at the same time, I used to keep colour film in one body and Black and White in the other.
Regards,
Marin,

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

i had the Canon T90... and it could do M.E. up to NINE images... HOWEVER... it would have been USELESS, because it's FPS was TOO SLOW (4.5 fps max (hi) and 2 fps (low)) to capture ANY 'FAST olympic sports' events

it would ONLY been able to capture TWO shots 'tops' in 0.5s (@ 4.5fps) which the 1DX can achieve SEVEN in 0.5s

what could your EOS 600 do years later? what was its fps?

no sense asking an athlete to repeat a 'one time event' over just so you could get a few more 'similar' shots, and 'trick' combine separate ones together to make the illusion of 'one'.

fact is... M.E. is available on several dSLRs, but having hi-fps as fast as 14fps 'full res' is unheard of. the Nikon D3/D4 only offers 9/11 fps... meaning it can only pull off 4-5 shots in a tight 0.5s (which the 1Dx is the only one to do 7 in 0.5s (14 fps)

0 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Um.....read all the previous posts. So many brands have been doing this for years, Pentax, Nikon, Olympus etc.
Maybe Canon have tweaked it, but my Pentax Kx can put 9 shots together, (possibly not in a single burst) and thats an entry level DSLR designed, what three years ago ??
This is a case of Canon just catching up with the rest. I am not a Canon basher, but a major article on what is effectively some old but tweaked technology seems to get people all excited and effectively some free advertising......probably some smart phone app can do it too.
I do like something different though and a good subject matter to work with.
The photographer and Canon will get the kudos now......bit of a chuckle !!

3 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Aug 7, 2012)

Read what R. Butler says:
"Grow up. We're fully aware that some cameras have already had this feature (though not with quite the same level of control). What's news is that one of the world's leading news agencies are using it and blogging about it.

Had Reuters been getting great shots with the E-30, we'd have posted about that."

When Pentax, Olympus or Sony gets heavily used by leading news agencies, let us know.

BTW, do you know that Minolta was a leader for autofocus cameras long time ago, way before Nikon and Canon had theirs? Guess where Minolta is now...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (Aug 7, 2012)

haha,, ba-zing!

0 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Yes, I did read what R Butler says............hence my reference to all previous posts, I didnt ignore that one on purpose.
Its all about marketing and Canon have put the effort into supplying pro gear for years and now its paid off. Most newbies look for a new camera and think Canon......good for sales and they have done their job right. They arent always going to be the best camera for the job or person.
This little article is a psuedo advert and as I stated, now Canon and the photographer are getting the kudos....good on them, but as I commented, "a bit of a chuckle".....its a statement of understanding.....if your a Canon fan dont get offended, but they arent leaders in technology, just leaders in marketing, sales and supplying good quality pro gear, because hardly anyone else wants to join an already small market and split the already small profit margins.
Give me a Canon and i'll take photo's, had quite a few of them, they just didnt suit my purpose right now.

1 upvote
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Wow Juck, you just made yourself sound really mature................

0 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Aug 7, 2012)

@robbo d:

"...but they arent leaders in technology, just leaders in marketing, sales and supplying good quality pro gear..."

Your statement needs to carefully considered. :)

Canon was the first to introduce CMOS detectors in cameras, lenses with diffractive elements, 1080p video capability in DSLRs, cameras based on pellicle mirrors (pre-cursor to Sony's Axx cameras now)... They don't necessarily lead in every area, but certainly lead in a number of important ones. :)

1 upvote
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Yes I shall clarify and agree that Canon have done a lot of the basic ground work very well and their pro gear , L lenses, video capability and others you mention.
Its now an interesting market because all this, shall I say 'additiona'l tech like the smart phones, HDR, Sony's multi shot layering etc is starting to push the traditional makers.
I do think Canons recent lower and mid level DSLR's arent exactly leading tech, but I think thats a well thought out plan. The others have to come up with stuff to compete with that big Canon name.
My 'chuckle' with the article was the heading and reading would and obviously does give many the impression that Canon have developed this technology and its only availbale with them and on the pro level cams.
Dpr are a major site that has a lot of influence, any heading is going to get attention and not always be understood. Cannot ask them to 2nd guess everything they put up. But if it gets hits and views, they got to love it.

1 upvote
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Aug 7, 2012)

Canon's inclusion of video in DSLRs was one of the greatest marketing stunts made by them. How many DSLRs were sold just because of the sub-par video capabilities? And now everyone has HD video in their once-still cameras

0 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Nishi, not sure what angle your coming from here in adding to this thread ?? But I think video in DSLR's has given many a photographer the choice of doing both stills and video.
Weddings are a classic. My son often asks me to video him skateboarding, then I can switch to stills for my preferred action shots. Its actually become a definitive market and Canon and Sony are market leaders in this area.
Canon are market leaders and video is an area they excel in, but it would seem that in the APSC cams, the leading video is not the leading stills....unsure if there is a correlation here and a compromise ??
My original comments here were about seeing Canon being vaunted as showcasing new technology, when its dubious as to wether its new or a catch up with a twist ???

0 upvotes
balios
By balios (Aug 7, 2012)

"seeing Canon being vaunted as showcasing new technology"

Nowhere does it say it's new technology. The article and both linked articles ALL explain that it's been done before. The issue is that Canon has implemented it in such a way that Reuters has actually taken notice. That is *it*. It's not saying its new, it's not saying Canon invented it, it's not saying this couldn't be done before.

If this upsets you, the question you should be asking is why Reuters hasn't taken notice of the Pentax cameras (for example) that had this feature before. I'm guessing that the it wasn't presented to them in manner that was useful, and/or in a camera system that they could actually make use of.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

agree... SO FAR

NO MFR has shown anything close. M.E.(0.7s time slices) is completely UNHEARD OF at FULL RES for a SINGLE 'MOMENT' captured like 'now', no retakes, no recombinations of separate retakes, etc. JUST ONE TAKE.

IMPOSSIBLE before, for anyone who could just pop into a regular pro camera store, and get a camera with $$$.

0 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (Aug 8, 2012)

>>Wow Juck, you just made yourself
>>sound really mature................

Really? My intention was to sound like a huge child, which is what I am,,,, so yey me! Did you intend to sound like a douchebag who was in way over his head? If so, yey you too!

0 upvotes
Blackfjord
By Blackfjord (Aug 7, 2012)

Hey Canon,

How about making these 'features' downloadable for a fee and thereby save your customers who don't like them some money? That would also let you know what they really want.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

you can't download a 14fps shutter camera with M.E.

anyone can offer M.E.(slow fps as hell ...4, 6, 7, 9, 11 fps)

but only the 1DX can offer M.E.(fast as 0.07s slices blistering 14 fps) at 'full res'

i hope you can 'comprehend' the difference between the two.

who can offer 7 shots in 0.5s M.E. full res?

no one, ever.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Cio Datan
By Cio Datan (Aug 7, 2012)

this could be another big thing like when canon introduced video capability to 5D mk2, everybody was harping that canon must be out of its mind putting video in a DSLR but now everyone is still trying to catch up. this feature in the hands of creative people can be interesting.

0 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Aug 7, 2012)

Well, Canon slacked with the video department, and now there's a D800 and D4 that makes Canon DSLR video making look like an amateurish attempt

0 upvotes
Abe Adew
By Abe Adew (Aug 7, 2012)

"Canon slacked with the video department,"

oh you got to be kidding me. D800 and D4 came out 5-6 years after Canon 5DMkII shot plenty of gorgeous videos

2 upvotes
alexdpx
By alexdpx (Aug 7, 2012)

...and just to add, the most widely used V-DSLR in the planet by amateurs and professionalsl alike - even by Hollywood big shots. I'm talking about the Canon 5DMkII of course.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Cio Datan
By Cio Datan (Aug 7, 2012)

maybe if there were more creative nikon users then their product would have been more widely used.

0 upvotes
alexdpx
By alexdpx (Aug 7, 2012)

Actually there are. But they switched system to the 5DMkII because none of the Nikons are at least as good. I know several celebrity photographers who did such, also a lot of my own friends.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

D90s... weak
lol

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

yes... it WILL be the next BIG THING... because its the ONLY dSLR capable of blistering micro-short time slices of 0.07s per image for any SINGLE EVENT... 7 shots in 0.5s is unheard of when capturing 'fast' short-lived sports moments. (especially at FULL RES... not some low-res thumbnail or video frame slices)

0 upvotes
Prairie Pal
By Prairie Pal (Aug 7, 2012)

For me personally the images look cluttered and really no one frame is really discernable from the others where ever they over lap. Maybe it's the poor gym lighting and the way the colors get washed when transparent. Perhaps if they were shot against a black background and solidly lit they would be more strking. I think I would rather see a series of smaller images in sequence. I'm not sure what Canon is doing there but they're not stupid so perhaps this is going to progress in it's applications? As for journalists using these images for print...well...I say....meh! It's one of those novelties that burn the brand into the consumers head for when they go to buy a P&S and low and behold it can do what a camera did at the OLYMPICS. Not trying to be negative, just wondering what it is all about :)

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

its only gonig to be 'cluttered' if the subject is caught in moment pivoting or located in 'one spot', but if the subject traverses across the frame... it is much less cluttered

at least only the 1Dx can do 0.07s time slices... with M.E.
no others can touch it.

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Neal Hood
By Neal Hood (Aug 7, 2012)

I also think its a special effect that's not so special. Other than maybe astro photography, multiple image capture just does't capture much except perhaps making the picture look busy. A single image should tell the story.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Aug 7, 2012)

But when the "story" is the sequence of movements, I can see how these blended images do more than just a single frame.

3 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

it is the only camera that can do M.E. (0.07s time slices)

and it is in any 'fast action' events where varied poses happen fast in a fraction of a second (say... 7 in 0.5s)

in the past, that was simply not possible nor readily available to the general public.

if you have a 'sluggish' fps M.E. camera, then you essentially capture 'chance' uninteresting 2 to 3 shots max (if you have 7fps) and 'okay' 3-4 shots (if you have 9-11 fps)... far less than SEVEN in 0.5s with 14fps

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
r10k
By r10k (Aug 6, 2012)

For those who ask why this would want to be done in camera, one reason is when using live view (on the Mk3, not sure about the 1dx) you can visually adjust your composition before taking the next shot to be combined. For arty types this opens up some interesting possibilities.

2 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Aug 6, 2012)

This was fun to see in the National Geographic 25 years ago or more.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Aug 7, 2012)

So just because something was done a quarter century ago (or more), it should never be done again? There are a lot of people today who weren't even alive back then, or were too young to consider it "interesting" or not. Furthermore, there are a lot of people who want to try this effect for themselves *today*, rather than just seeing it in a quarter-century-old magazine.

1 upvote
acidic
By acidic (Aug 7, 2012)

Digital photography. That was really cool back in 1998.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

never happened in NG 25 years ago... EXCEPT... shots spaced VERY FAR APART.

show us ONE athletic shot captured with M.E. in 0.5s (7 frames please...) and not a fraction of a second more.... FULL RES.

we're waiting...

0 upvotes
Blackfjord
By Blackfjord (Aug 6, 2012)

Boring. A special effect that's not that special. Canon, you try to impress with this? Just make a solid camera with a huge viewfinder, dead on focus accuracy and speed, and a supremely comfortable body, and IQ bordering on medium format. You're charging plenty for this already. Just do it or get out of the business. Geez.

0 upvotes
r10k
By r10k (Aug 6, 2012)

You realise that photography means different things to different people, right? Besides, until I got the Mk3 I didn't realise it had the feature. It's hardly as if Canon is harping on about it.

3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Aug 7, 2012)

An effect is just an effect. A feature is just a feature. It's really up to the photographer or the artist to make it compelling. Canon gives you the tools. It's up to you, the artist, to make something of it.

Besides, this may come as a surprise to you, but this blending feature isn't the ONLY capability of their 1DX camera! LOL! So chill out.

3 upvotes
Blackfjord
By Blackfjord (Aug 7, 2012)

@ T3

Thanks for the simplistic unneeded info. I found the effect boring and a waste of camera space and stated so. You see the effect as a possible tool. Both opinions are valid and THAT idea may come as a surprise to YOU.

0 upvotes
Blackfjord
By Blackfjord (Aug 7, 2012)

@r10k who said:

'You realise that photography means different things to different people, right?'

I do. Do you realize my opinion actualizes this? Putting your dollars down decides what features are eventually in a camera. What either of us thinks doesn't amount to a hill of beans to Canon. Do YOU realize this? It's called venting.

0 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (Aug 7, 2012)

@blockfjord

Read what R. Butler says:
"Grow up. We're fully aware that some cameras have already had this feature (though not with quite the same level of control). What's news is that one of the world's leading news agencies are using it and blogging about it.

Had Reuters been getting great shots with the E-30, we'd have posted about that."

When Pentax, Olympus or Sony gets heavily used by leading news agencies, let us know.

BTW, do you know that Minolta was a leader for autofocus cameras long time ago, way before Nikon and Canon had theirs? Guess where Minolta is now...

1 upvote
Juck
By Juck (Aug 7, 2012)

lol,, Bitchslapppp

0 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (Aug 7, 2012)

Wow, Juck again, this time you copied and pasted someone elses reply...........and using terms like Bitchslapppp and baz-ing.
Are you sure your in the right forum?
Try www.gofindsomethingintelligenttodo.com

0 upvotes
alexdpx
By alexdpx (Aug 7, 2012)

"Just make a solid camera with a huge viewfinder, dead on focus accuracy and speed, and a supremely comfortable body, and IQ bordering on medium format."

Yup, that sounds like the 1Dx and 5DMkII.

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

lol

it's the ONLY camera that can do M.E. (0.07s time slices)

anything else would have guaranteed to FAIL at the Olympics for such a shot... 2, 3, 4 or even tops 5 (D3/D4 at 11fps) couldn't compare. (for ONE TAKE, ONE MOMENT... no retakes, no do overs)

7 in 0.5s

it is special... because it's the only one capable of it.

you can't expect any athlete to redo a routine just so you can capture more time slices to combine it into one fake moment...

0 upvotes
km25
By km25 (Aug 6, 2012)

Sorry but, the technology is new in that one may do so easly. But the idea dates back to someone, I cannot recall his name. But he used multi cameras trip wires to prove how horses real ran, their gate. But to do so easly is real amazing. You also can do it with a low level room light and strobs, single fram, multi strob flashs. I did not read all the comments, if someone else has already stated this, sorry.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
KitHB
By KitHB (Aug 6, 2012)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eadweard_Muybridge

also filmed people running, may contain nudity and is possibly NSFW

0 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 7, 2012)

multiple cameras???
lol

yes, strobes help, but try without strobes or flash.

you want to blind an athlete... go ahead and use strobes...

anyone can do a 'demo' with strobes, but NONE would compete with strobes.

not.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Aug 6, 2012)

I love gazing at these images and learning more about the technology that is out there, thanks! Can you imagine what our forefathers of photography would think and say if they saw these shots, and just how many amazing things we can capture now? I think that THEY would flip!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Total comments: 226
12