Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think you have a different issue to the common shutter speed vs interval timing issue.I was out photographing the northern lights last night. Manual exposure. F4, iso3200, 13seconds. Everything was exposed perfectly. I then turned on the intervalometer to record a sequence of images for a timelapse, same exposure settings, but the images were all 3 or 4 stops underexposed.
Reviewing the images on the camera showed exactly the same settings from the metadata of the images, but they were underexposed.
I've done a very small experiment in the daylight this morning and everything seems to be.
Any ideas?
Exif is exactly the same, I see no "auto" anywhere. Adding nonsense to nonsense.A couple of JPG exports. Consecutive images. Same settings. Very different exposures. I hope the exif data remains intact after the uploads.Let me try and post 2 raw images, one taken with and one without the intervalometer to demonstrate the problem. Might be a challenge from my current location, but I'll try.I set the intervalometer to 2 sec and 10 shots, M mode, exposure 8 sec. It did two shots exposed 8 sec and then it stopped... Tried the same with 4sec exposure, it did 4 shots.After reading this I had to try it on my R3. Haven't done that before either.<edit> I just tried myself, never activated it before, and jeez did Canon make a mess with that option... I could not make it work :/
Piece of cake, though. Worked immediately. Took five pictures three seconds apart.
A strange cake, dare I say. Like first it computes the total time for the shooting (2 sec interval x 10 shots = 20 sec) and then it does all the shots it can at 8 sec + 1 sec pause from each other in that time window.
You read correctly, 1 sec, not 2. I set the interval to 5 sec and it didn't change one bit, still 1 sec. That's probably because the exposure time is longer than the interval time so it shortens to the minimum.
It's a total nonsensical mess. Nevertheless, the exposure was correct.
--
Luc
In my opinion it's the only sensible. And for all "normal" exposure times it doesn't matter, since they are significantly shorter than even one second, which is the shortest interval you can set.IMHO it's not a great implementation because it means that if you need to change your shutter speed between subsequent timelapse sequences, you also have to change the interval in the timelapse settings.
I just tested it yesterday and Canon couldn't have messed it up more (see my comment above). My conclusions:In my opinion it's the only sensible. And for all "normal" exposure times it doesn't matter, since they are significantly shorter than even one second, which is the shortest interval you can set.IMHO it's not a great implementation because it means that if you need to change your shutter speed between subsequent timelapse sequences, you also have to change the interval in the timelapse settings.
It's also the simplest, since you don't need to do any math. If you want 15 second intervals, just set that. The only thing you then need to think about is that the exposure should be shorter. And if you do miss that, it will simply skip that interval and pick the next.
It can't really be easier than that the interval is the time between shots. As it is now.So many cases. Canon, can you listen to the users, change the interval timer to anything else that easier to understand and use?
No nonsense there, except for setting an exposure time longer than the interval, of course.I set the intervalometer to 2 sec and 10 shots, M mode, exposure 8 sec. It did two shots exposed 8 sec and then it stopped... Tried the same with 4sec exposure, it did 4 shots.
A strange cake, dare I say. Like first it computes the total time for the shooting (2 sec interval x 10 shots = 20 sec) and then it does all the shots it can at 8 sec + 1 sec pause from each other in that time window.
You read correctly, 1 sec, not 2. I set the interval to 5 sec and it didn't change one bit, still 1 sec. That's probably because the exposure time is longer than the interval time so it shortens to the minimum.
It's a total nonsensical mess. Nevertheless, the exposure was correct.
Setting 10 shots and getting only one makes sense to you?No nonsense there, except for setting an exposure time longer than the interval, of course.I set the intervalometer to 2 sec and 10 shots, M mode, exposure 8 sec. It did two shots exposed 8 sec and then it stopped... Tried the same with 4sec exposure, it did 4 shots.
A strange cake, dare I say. Like first it computes the total time for the shooting (2 sec interval x 10 shots = 20 sec) and then it does all the shots it can at 8 sec + 1 sec pause from each other in that time window.
You read correctly, 1 sec, not 2. I set the interval to 5 sec and it didn't change one bit, still 1 sec. That's probably because the exposure time is longer than the interval time so it shortens to the minimum.
It's a total nonsensical mess. Nevertheless, the exposure was correct.
[/QUOTE]EmotionBlur, post: 66523657, member: 717079"]You read correctly, 1 sec, not 2. I set the interval to 5 sec and it didn't change one bit, still 1 sec. That's probably because the exposure time is longer than the interval time so it shortens to the minimum.
You wrote you got two, or four, depending on which unrealistic exposure you selected to go with it. Makes sense.Setting 10 shots and getting only one makes sense to you?No nonsense there, except for setting an exposure time longer than the interval, of course.I set the intervalometer to 2 sec and 10 shots, M mode, exposure 8 sec. It did two shots exposed 8 sec and then it stopped... Tried the same with 4sec exposure, it did 4 shots.
A strange cake, dare I say. Like first it computes the total time for the shooting (2 sec interval x 10 shots = 20 sec) and then it does all the shots it can at 8 sec + 1 sec pause from each other in that time window.
You read correctly, 1 sec, not 2. I set the interval to 5 sec and it didn't change one bit, still 1 sec. That's probably because the exposure time is longer than the interval time so it shortens to the minimum.
It's a total nonsensical mess. Nevertheless, the exposure was correct.
Thanks Andy. I agree, which is why I raised it here, although I've also learnt more about the interval. Historically, I've assumed it was the time between the end of the previous shot to the start of the next. Having only ever used it for northern lights, with long exposures and unlimited frames, I have not noticed missing frames.I think you have a different issue to the common shutter speed vs interval timing issue.I was out photographing the northern lights last night. Manual exposure. F4, iso3200, 13seconds. Everything was exposed perfectly. I then turned on the intervalometer to record a sequence of images for a timelapse, same exposure settings, but the images were all 3 or 4 stops underexposed.
Reviewing the images on the camera showed exactly the same settings from the metadata of the images, but they were underexposed.
I've done a very small experiment in the daylight this morning and everything seems to be.
Any ideas?
There are many threads in this forum, M forum and DSLR forums about this because it catches many people (me included).
AFAIK the mirrorless work exactly the same way as the DSLRs - the interval HAS to be a couple/few seconds longer than the shutter speed. This includes the 5D iv.
For a 13 second shutter speed the interval would need to be at least 15 seconds, 34 second interval for a 30 second shutter speed etc.
However, the usual symptom of making this mistake is simply skipped shots. Ask for 10 shots at 10 second shutter speed with interval set to 2 seconds and you will probably get 2, maybe 3 shots because the camera is trying to take a shot every 2 seconds but it is busy with an exposure for 10 seconds so it simply skips a few until it is ready.
I have never had it underexpose shots to achieve the required interval & selected number of shots. Maybe this is a new thing on the R5 ? Otherwise I have no idea what this under-exposure issue is as I have never seen it before.
Er... nope. Not at all.You wrote you got two, or four, depending on which unrealistic exposure you selected to go with it. Makes sense.Setting 10 shots and getting only one makes sense to you?No nonsense there, except for setting an exposure time longer than the interval, of course.I set the intervalometer to 2 sec and 10 shots, M mode, exposure 8 sec. It did two shots exposed 8 sec and then it stopped... Tried the same with 4sec exposure, it did 4 shots.
A strange cake, dare I say. Like first it computes the total time for the shooting (2 sec interval x 10 shots = 20 sec) and then it does all the shots it can at 8 sec + 1 sec pause from each other in that time window.
You read correctly, 1 sec, not 2. I set the interval to 5 sec and it didn't change one bit, still 1 sec. That's probably because the exposure time is longer than the interval time so it shortens to the minimum.
It's a total nonsensical mess. Nevertheless, the exposure was correct.
I didn't tell the camera to do "all in 20 seconds", I told it to take 10 shots. That's what's written in the menu. Dude come on, you're climbing on mirrors now.What doesn't make sense is of course to tell the camera that you want ten exposures within 20 seconds, and each should last eight seconds.

Well this is not very intuitive is it? If the camera is taking a shot, it should not "try" to take another while exposing, it should not do hidden multiplications like interval time x number of shots to get a total shooting time, and on top of that not even showing that. If I set 10 shots, I want 10 shots. Period. This is not an external timer, the camera knows what's going on.However, the usual symptom of making this mistake is simply skipped shots. Ask for 10 shots at 10 second shutter speed with interval set to 2 seconds and you will probably get 2, maybe 3 shots because the camera is trying to take a shot every 2 seconds but it is busy with an exposure for 10 seconds so it simply skips a few until it is ready.
I did not experience such an issue with my test on r6 yesterday, but hey... it took only 2 shots each time I triedI have never had it underexpose shots to achieve the required interval & selected number of shots. Maybe this is a new thing on the R5 ? Otherwise I have no idea what this under-exposure issue is as I have never seen it before.
Try take 10 and multiply by 2. The rest of us will get 20. I hope you get the same.
Yes, and if I tell you to go 200 km/h, I don't give you a regular bicycle for the task. Because common sense will tell me that's impossible.If I set 10 shots, I want 10 shots.
It's extremely intuitive, since it will give exactly the same result, regardless of which exposure time you use. As long as you do realise that you can't do a ten second long thing every two seconds. Which is reasonable to expect from people.Well this is not very intuitive is it?
Nope, my "orders" are not contradicting. Again, this is not an external timer, this is the camera itself. The system is confusing; there's no "20 seconds" written anywhere, and there shouldn't be. "No. of shots = 10" it means "10 shots", not "hey do the multiplication, divide by the maximum between the exposure time and interval time, you guess the actual number of shots."Try take 10 and multiply by 2. The rest of us will get 20. I hope you get the same.
So yes, you asked for one exposure every other second during 20 seconds. And then you asked for each such exposure to last for 8 seconds.
What the camera could have done was to display a message, like "Are you daft or something?", but it did the best it could from your contradicting orders.
No, that's entirely possible, do 10 shots as I set it.... overlap the interval, it'll be 10 shots 8 seconds long. What exactly is "impossible" with this? Where did I ever set the maximum time?Yes, and if I tell you to go 200 km/h, I don't give you a regular bicycle for the task. Because common sense will tell me that's impossible.If I set 10 shots, I want 10 shots.
Nope, the number of shots varies depending on exposure time, given a requirement limit (total shooting time) that's not written anywhere and you have to compute in your mind after you tried the first time and wondered what the hell is going on.It's extremely intuitive, since it will give exactly the same result, regardless of which exposure time you use. As long as you do realise that you can't do a ten second long thing every two seconds. Which is reasonable to expect from people.Well this is not very intuitive is it?
If. Otherwise, I don't.But if you set 10 second intervals, for example, then you get exactly the same result regardless of whether you shoot for 1/8000, 1/125, 1/2 or 4 seconds, to list a few options. Which is the only thing that makes sense.
Well I used the external timer with my 5D3, and I was expecting it to not have a clue about how the camera exposure is set, and guess what now. The camera has no clue on how its own exposure time is set, it pointlessly simulates an old system which was intrinsically more complicated. And how about someone who has never done timelapse before...Besides, it has the additional advantage of behaving exactly the same way as Canon's timing devices have done since the days of the Canon F-1. No need to re-learn some new strategy.