What would it take to get a FW update with EC in M+Auto ISO?

[rrccad]

There is no technical reason right?

Highly unlikely. I certainly can't think of any. As for it being a differentiating feature, I doubt someone would upgrade their body (and possibly lenses) just to get it. In other words, it protects nothing. On the other hand, it would increase the perceived value of existing bodies for those who need it (not to mention their goodwill) at what I suspect is very little cost to Canon. I think the ROI is quite good for adding such minor features via firmware updates. Fuji is a great example of a company doing just that and they are actually adding some substantial features.

I'd say the features that canon rolled into cameras over the past years greatly exceeds Fuji's. 1Dx, 5D3, 5D2, 7D all had significant updates via firmware.

as far as this feature? I doubt it .. they'll probably keep it as a differentiator for now.

 

[riknash]

Let's not debate the merit or lack thereof of this feature. I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII? Is there someone who has Canon's ear we can get to pester them?

Canon will never let you have your cake and eat it, too They want you to buy the 1DX.

The thing is nobody will go for the 1DX because of autoiso and even if one or two people do, who cares, that's insignificant.

I doubt Canon will add it to any other existing cameras. New models, yes, but old models no.

 

[rrccad]

Let's not debate the merit or lack thereof of this feature. I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII? Is there someone who has Canon's ear we can get to pester them?

Canon will never let you have your cake and eat it, too They want you to buy the 1DX.

The thing is nobody will go for the 1DX because of autoiso and even if one or two people do, who cares, that's insignificant.

I doubt Canon will add it to any other existing cameras. New models, yes, but old models no.

wouldn't make much sense especially to the 70D when the 5D3 I don't think got it.

 

[johnsmith404]

Let's not debate the merit or lack thereof of this feature. I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII? Is there someone who has Canon's ear we can get to pester them?

 

[sgking]

Let's not debate the merit or lack thereof of this feature. I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII? Is there someone who has Canon's ear we can get to pester them?

Canon will never let you have your cake and eat it, too They want you to buy the 1DX.

The thing is nobody will go for the 1DX because of autoiso and even if one or two people do, who cares, that's insignificant.

I doubt Canon will add it to any other existing cameras. New models, yes, but old models no.

wouldn't make much sense especially to the 70D when the 5D3 I don't think got it.

Sadly the 5D3 doesn't have this but I wish it did. I can't see why it couldn't be added as a firmware update though like they did with the 1DX! Also would be good if there options for shutter speed in auto iso were wider so in Av mode for example I could set Auto ISO F2.8 and shutter speed min at 1/1000 for sports. This you can do on the 7D2 according to Scott Kelby.

 

[Karl Gnter Wnsch]

I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII?

If the new models are to be released within a certain time period (I would guess within a year or a bit more) then Canon probably won't do such a development as the missing feature won't impact the sales during the period leading up to the new camera release too much.

The big firmware updates to date were all released as measures to keep (or make) cameras competitive that still had ample time to make that endeavor financially viable through continued sales...

 

[John Sheehy]

ML is certainly an option but I haven't seen much progress with ports to newer bodies.

As for Canon needing new management, I think a change in perception within their management is more likely, sufficient and, arguably already evidenced. Namely, like most manufacturers, they may already be starting to realize that they are no longer selling just static mechanical instruments. Cameras, like many other goods, are so stuffed with software now that they have to be viewed in that context where continued improvement beyond the point of sale is not just expected but also a good marketing strategy and point of differentiation.

And I say this is evident because more recent firmware updates from Canon are no longer exclusively bug fixes. They just need to extend that philosophy beyond their exclusive high end products. Any potential loss of upgrade sales in my opinion would be easily out-weighed by the brand loyalty/satisfaction such "free" upgrades.

In short, I remain optimistic.

I can't be too optimistic, because even the 7DmarkII still has an auto-ISO range of 400 to 400 with flash enabled, which is beyond absurdity. Canon doesn't even seem to acknowledge the existence of fill flash. I stopped using fill flash because it is hopeless in M with auto-ISO on Canons. The newer cameras have "ISO safety shift" which works with flash enabled, but that is an unwieldy workaround and makes aperture uncontrollable.

 

[TTMartin]

there are several already available settings that emulate closely the feature

Please clarify. While I would not use it often, there have certainly been times when it would have been useful to have Auto ISO with EC in manual mode on my 7D.

For those who don't understand the issue: Auto ISO in manual mode lets you fix the aperture and shutter and have the camera vary the ISO to get the correct exposure, but because the dial normally used for EC is used to change the aperture in manual mode there is no way (that I know of) to use exposure compensation in manual mode. (Manual mode isn't a true manual exposure mode when Auto ISO is set because the camera will set the exposure.)

In my opinion the ability of the 7D Mk II to set the minimum shutter speed as high as 1/8000 when using auto ISO in AV mode ends up creating a double fix.

The 6D and 70D offers minimum shutter speed either Auto (1/focal length) or 1/250 max. Not enough for sports or BIF.

If this feature were modified on the 6D and 70D to allow higher minimum shutter speeds like the 7D Mk II that would make exposure compensation with Auto ISO in manual mode an unnecessary duplication. It would also seem to be an easier fix, since the feature is already partially implemented.

 

[Karl Gnter Wnsch]

In my opinion the ability of the 7D Mk II to set the minimum shutter speed as high as 1/8000 when using auto ISO in AV mode ends up creating a double fix.

It doesn't solve the EC problem, in fact it makes it's lack even more painful to those that may want to use it... I was lucky because the only time I ever found a use of auto ISO the subjects of my photography were F1 cars and all of them (except for the Williams F1) are on average mid toned in color and the asphalt around the cars helped the metering as well - so it wasn't too far off.

If this feature were modified on the 6D and 70D to allow higher minimum shutter speeds like the 7D Mk II that would make exposure compensation with Auto ISO in manual mode an unnecessary duplication.

How? If I want to photograph all my pictures at f/13 and 1/100th (to get a nice background blur and have enough DOF) I want to use ISO as the only variable reacting to the changing lighting in the pan (from sunlit areas to areas shadowed by trees alongside the track). Had I had more challenging subjects or bright sunlight throughout I might have been forced to dial down the exposure to stop ISO from rising too early. It's not always about the minimum shutter speed.

 

[riknash]

I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII?

If the new models are to be released within a certain time period (I would guess within a year or a bit more) then Canon probably won't do such a development as the missing feature won't impact the sales during the period leading up to the new camera release too much.

The big firmware updates to date were all released as measures to keep (or make) cameras competitive that still had ample time to make that endeavor financially viable through continued sales...

That explanation sounds like typical mumbo-jumbo corporate-speak.

Canon contradicted their own tendency to not add features via firmware to a camera. Seasoned "experts" on this forum stated emphatically that a firmware update which added features would never happen. What we saw with the 7D was Canon to introduce a feature-rich firmware update. What we didn't know at the time was that Canon wouldn't introduce a new model for a couple more years, contrary to the established practice of most other models Canon produced. Many on this and other forums vigorously debated the simplicity, ease and very low development costs of how many firmware only based features could have been added to the various DSLR models. The position on the other side of this debate argued that if they were in it for optimal profit, Canon wouldn't do such a thing and never had (expect for a few minor exceptions). It's not clear that Canon had a careful strategy mapped out of keeping the camera competitive until a late 2014 introduction of a replacement model, since their direct competitor, Nikon had also yet to introduce a replacement for their aging D300s. It's more likely that Canon marketing had decided on a strategic shift in the pro DSLR space and had shifted their product efforts to it, just as Nikon had done, that being the full-frame trend where better profits could be had. We observed new full-frame models in both Canon and Nikon camps. Both were and are well aware that there remained a demand for a replacement 7D/D300s, but neither saw enough incentive to replace their current models as their internal soothsayers were busy chanting "full-frame, full-frame is the answer", along with refocusing their efforts on better, improved video and cinema cameras. Both were convinced that more optimal profits could be had in the full-frame space. For Canon, instead of simply ignoring the serious amateur/low budget professional, APS-C user base, hedging their bets, they permitted the development of a firmware only update to the 7D to stall defections of users elsewhere. The full-frame strategy paid off quite well as many APS-C 7D and D300s users purchased a full-frame camera.The Nikon, Sony, Pentax and others folks saw more full-frame innovation, but that's a different topic.

Now during the twilight months of the 7D (and very likely the D300s), a new model is poised to replace this very long-in-the-tooth model. One must consider the feature-rich firmware update of the 7D as an aberration of Canon's marketing style. Older models such as the 70D would only receive a feature addition via firmware if either there was a strategic advantage or Canon's leaders of the camera division decided that the camera division was to become a benevolent society. For the former, I don't see where Canon would have any strategic advantage to introduce new features in an older model 70D.

 

[Lemming51]

Let's not debate the merit or lack thereof of this feature. I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII? Is there someone who has Canon's ear we can get to pester them?

The 7D got new features via firmware v2.0.- after being on the market 2 1/2 years. Speculation is that it got the firmware enhancement in place of the expected 7D II, which came after 5 years.

70D was intro'd 1 year ago. Expectation for the next x0D is 3 years or 2016. Maybe get firmware v2.-.- in 2016 in place of an 80D.

 

[Karl Gnter Wnsch]

I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII?

If the new models are to be released within a certain time period (I would guess within a year or a bit more) then Canon probably won't do such a development as the missing feature won't impact the sales during the period leading up to the new camera release too much.

The big firmware updates to date were all released as measures to keep (or make) cameras competitive that still had ample time to make that endeavor financially viable through continued sales...

That explanation sounds like typical mumbo-jumbo corporate-speak.

Sorry to have to break it to you, the reason why there probably won't be a feature upgrade for the 70D or the 5DIII is exactly a corporate business decision.

What we saw with the 7D was Canon to introduce a feature-rich firmware update. What we didn't know at the time was that Canon wouldn't introduce a new model for a couple more years, contrary to the established practice of most other models Canon produced.

Which is exactly why it was a one off. They knew that the 7DII wouldn't happen for quite some time and the 1Dx firmware development had come up with decent benefits that they could backport to the 7D with ease - so they did just that.

There were other big firmware upgrades: One for the 5DII for the same reason as the 7D upgrade, one for the 1Dx and one for the 5DIII - the latter two because the AF module algorithm for the module introduced with the 1Dx wasn't quite ready and Canon probably underestimated the relevance of the f/8 focusing ability for that camera class).

The position on the other side of this debate argued that if they were in it for optimal profit,

Which big company isn't. It's a simple matter of economics. Decisions like this are completely driven by the cost vs. benefit evaluations.

For the former, I don't see where Canon would have any strategic advantage to introduce new features in an older model 70D.

Which is exactly what I reasoned...

 

[TTMartin]

In my opinion the ability of the 7D Mk II to set the minimum shutter speed as high as 1/8000 when using auto ISO in AV mode ends up creating a double fix.

It doesn't solve the EC problem, in fact it makes it's lack even more painful to those that may want to use it... I was lucky because the only time I ever found a use of auto ISO the subjects of my photography were F1 cars and all of them (except for the Williams F1) are on average mid toned in color and the asphalt around the cars helped the metering as well - so it wasn't too far off.

Actually it does, because you can use exposure compensation in Av mode, with Auto ISO and minimum shutter speed combined.

If this feature were modified on the 6D and 70D to allow higher minimum shutter speeds like the 7D Mk II that would make exposure compensation with Auto ISO in manual mode an unnecessary duplication.

How? If I want to photograph all my pictures at f/13 and 1/100th (to get a nice background blur and have enough DOF) I want to use ISO as the only variable reacting to the changing lighting in the pan (from sunlit areas to areas shadowed by trees alongside the track). Had I had more challenging subjects or bright sunlight throughout I might have been forced to dial down the exposure to stop ISO from rising too early. It's not always about the minimum shutter speed.

It would also seem to be an easier fix, since the feature is already partially implemented.

 

[rrccad]

I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII?

If the new models are to be released within a certain time period (I would guess within a year or a bit more) then Canon probably won't do such a development as the missing feature won't impact the sales during the period leading up to the new camera release too much.

The big firmware updates to date were all released as measures to keep (or make) cameras competitive that still had ample time to make that endeavor financially viable through continued sales...

That explanation sounds like typical mumbo-jumbo corporate-speak.

Canon contradicted their own tendency to not add features via firmware to a camera. Seasoned "experts" on this forum stated emphatically that a firmware update which added features would never happen. What we saw with the 7D was Canon to introduce a feature-rich firmware update. What we didn't know at the time was that Canon wouldn't introduce a new model for a couple more years,

I don't know .. but anyone with a mind could have guessed that with the 2.0 firmware, canon wasn't going to replace the body any time soon - I sure took it as such.

odds are the 70D isn't going to get it when the 6D and the 5D mark III haven't gotten it yet and the 70D is a very prosumer body.

 

[Karl Gnter Wnsch]

70D was intro'd 1 year ago. Expectation for the next x0D is 3 years or 2016.

There is no indication that Canon will not keep a rather normal time scale for xxD releases. My bet is that by summer 2015 we will have an 80D with 4K video and a more primitive version of the Auto ISO EC...

 

[rrccad]

Let's not debate the merit or lack thereof of this feature. I'm just wondering what is the possibility of this happening to other cameras in the Canon line-up like the 70D now that they've been added to the 1DX and 7D mkII? Is there someone who has Canon's ear we can get to pester them?

The 7D got new features via firmware v2.0.- after being on the market 2 1/2 years. Speculation is that it got the firmware enhancement in place of the expected 7D II, which came after 5 years.

70D was intro'd 1 year ago. Expectation for the next x0D is 3 years or 2016. Maybe get firmware v2.-.- in 2016 in place of an 80D.

or the xxD goes back to 18 month refreshes. was the 70D pushed out of schedule (and all other cameras behind it) because of sensor development? Utsunomiya I do believe also held canon's R&D labs which was hit by the tsunami. it's hard to say if that affected critical timelines and pushed out schedules. let's see that was 3.5 years ago? you'd have to think that the critical R&D and trials where occurring around that time frame.

it's going to be interesting to see the schedules coming up I think over the next 18 months.

 

[Karl Gnter Wnsch]

Actually it does, because you can use exposure compensation in Av mode, with Auto ISO and minimum shutter speed combined.

Hm, so I want f/13 (check, can do that in Av mode) but I must have a shutter speed of 1/100 fixed (I don't want a minimum shutter speed of 1/100, I want to have a maximum shutter speed of 1/100) and ISO balance out the exposure - so no, it doesn't.

 

[TTMartin]

Actually it does, because you can use exposure compensation in Av mode, with Auto ISO and minimum shutter speed combined.

Hm, so I want f/13 (check, can do that in Av mode) but I must have a shutter speed of 1/100 fixed (I don't want a minimum shutter speed of 1/100, I want to have a maximum shutter speed of 1/100) and ISO balance out the exposure - so no, it doesn't.

It's a matter of realistic expectations. The 6D and 70D already have the feature partially implemented. Changing that feature to allow higher minimum shutter speeds would be a lot easier for Canon to implement, and a more realistic change to implement than exposure compensation with Auto ISO in manual mode.

Even the 7D Mk II's method of implementation of exposure compensation with Auto ISO in manual mode is far from ideal.

Given that you'd never purchase a 70D or a 6D I'm not sure why you'd be concerned about how Canon addressed the concerns of those of us who do own one of those cameras.

 

[Karl Gnter Wnsch]

It's a matter of realistic expectations.

I agree...

The 6D and 70D already have the feature partially implemented. Changing that feature to allow higher minimum shutter speeds would be a lot easier for Canon to implement, and a more realistic change to implement than exposure compensation with Auto ISO in manual mode.

Yet the question was EC in manual mode and makeing the minimum shutter speed more flexible doesn't solve the issue at hand - because no matter which minimum shutter speed you enter, when EC is needed you can't apply it.

Even the 7D Mk II's method of implementation of exposure compensation with Auto ISO in manual mode is far from ideal.

Why?

--

regards
Karl Günter Wünsch

 

[TTMartin]

Even the 7D Mk II's method of implementation of exposure compensation with Auto ISO in manual mode is far from ideal.

Why?

Actually I was basing that on statements I had read that said you needed to go into the menu system to set it. Reviewing the manual it is obvious that it can be configured to be set a number of different ways without entering the menu system. I retract my statement that the implementation in the 7D Mk II is less than ideal.

I really wish reviewers would RTFM!!! (Read The Full Manual)