Canon R7 R7 RAW bursts

[tunewitsch]

Any alternative to DPP-4 (or in body) method for disentangling R7 burst files? Both methods are a real pain in the neck, and you need to train the workflow of your fingers in order to develop some efficiency in extracting the shots you wish to keep. First time that I have used DPP, and I cannot belive, how a manufacturer who produces so outstanding bodies and lenses and user-friendly in-body menus is able to deliver a so badly performing software (in particular with respect to speed) as DPP. If at least some reasonable use of the GPU could be implemented....

 

[Glen]

I was looking forward to using the pre burst mode in the R7, till I found out I would have to use the Canon software. Too slow and too cumbersome.
Fuji has been doing this pre burst mode for a while, and they import as individual raw files. No special software needed. Just open in photoshop, or whatever you use.
Hopefully Canon will revisit this in a future update.
Other than this I think the R7 is a great value.

 

[tunewitsch]

I agree that the R7 is a great value. I had enjoyed the pre-shoot capability of the Sony RX 10 IV before and was so pleased seeing announced for the R7. It actually works great (except for the discussed processing pain), and 15 frames in 0.5 sec works ok for bird take-off, although there might be situations in which one may wish to have a 1 sec buffer

 

[dougsmit]

I feel sorry for all those people on earth who believe that their language is the only way to communicate so they visit, for example, Japan and are confused by all those people speaking Japanese. I use DPP. It is a language I have been studying since I first shot Canon RAW. Haters don't like it because they measure success in terms of how many poor photos they can produce in a short time rather than how they can produce one 'best I can do' image. For many, this is driven by the desire to sell a few hundred photos to brides and their mothers not to mention average looking would-be models. I have tested the 30fps thing on my R7 but have not yet found a reason to use it (only had the camera two weeks and shot under 1000 frames - singly). I'm in no hurry to force my ugly photos into becoming uglier just so I can feed an addiction to Adobe language. I admit that DPP4 is slow and it is a lot slower with my R7 than with my RP and the four other Canon DSLR's I used before. I assume it is even worse with R5 megafiles. The idea of shooting bursts is not to process all those images but to scan through them and find the one/few that show the exact moment where we wish we had pushed that button. I do look forward to trying that 'shooting before I shoot' feature but, first, I am trying to learn other features that mean more to me. I did not buy the R7 for 30fps but am very happy with the other features including the free (unimportant to the rich pros who will just raise their prices) software that does everything I want to do albeit in its own time. I see this a lot like the difference between Ninja Warrior (which I watch on TV but do not do) and Tai Chi (which does not have a professional league with cash prizes for the best). Each has its reason for being so we have free choice whether we want to learn the language or not. For those who would rather not learn Canon, I suggest buying Nikon or Sony and complaining about their faults over on their venues.

Who remembers a feature I had on my first digital camera (Nikon 990) that took a series of photos in rapid succession and only save the one with the largest file size (which would be the one with the most sharp detail)? I thought that was a good idea then but IS accomplished a lot of the same thing so I don't miss it so much. The idea is to take sharp photos. I like sharp photos.

 

[Kwazy]

I feel

Well, that's a bit harsh, don't you think?
No need to feel sorry for people who want their software to work at a level comparable to other available programs and expect better from a well-established multi-billion dollar corporation. If we just roll over and accept what they give us, there's no reason for them to improve, is there?

There's also no minimum required standard of subjects or quality of work before using Adobe products is permissible. I personally find it easier to learn and progress when my software doesn't crash and works at a reasonable speed.

 

[tunewitsch]

I feel sorry for all those people on earth who believe that their language is the only way to communicate so they visit, for example, Japan and are confused by all those people speaking Japanese. I use DPP. It is a language I have been studying since I first shot Canon RAW. Haters don't like it because they measure success in terms of how many poor photos they can produce in a short time rather than how they can produce one 'best I can do' image. For many, this is driven by the desire to sell a few hundred photos to brides and their mothers not to mention average looking would-be models. I have tested the 30fps thing on my R7 but have not yet found a reason to use it (only had the camera two weeks and shot under 1000 frames - singly). I'm in no hurry to force my ugly photos into becoming uglier just so I can feed an addiction to Adobe language. I admit that DPP4 is slow and it is a lot slower with my R7 than with my RP and the four other Canon DSLR's I used before. I assume it is even worse with R5 megafiles. The idea of shooting bursts is not to process all those images but to scan through them and find the one/few that show the exact moment where we wish we had pushed that button. I do look forward to trying that 'shooting before I shoot' feature but, first, I am trying to learn other features that mean more to me. I did not buy the R7 for 30fps but am very happy with the other features including the free (unimportant to the rich pros who will just raise their prices) software that does everything I want to do albeit in its own time. I see this a lot like the difference between Ninja Warrior (which I watch on TV but do not do) and Tai Chi (which does not have a professional league with cash prizes for the best). Each has its reason for being so we have free choice whether we want to learn the language or not. For those who would rather not learn Canon, I suggest buying Nikon or Sony and complaining about their faults over on their venues.

Who remembers a feature I had on my first digital camera (Nikon 990) that took a series of photos in rapid succession and only save the one with the largest file size (which would be the one with the most sharp detail)? I thought that was a good idea then but IS accomplished a lot of the same thing so I don't miss it so much. The idea is to take sharp photos. I like sharp photos.

Dear dougsmit,
This thread is about R7 RAW bursts. Since you "have not yet found a reason to use"..."the 30fps thing", I kindly ask you to refrain from posting to this thread, ... and ... please do not refer to serious-minded critics as "haters".

 

[tunewitsch]

I finally got around to work on a RAW burst. Here is my takeoff composite sequence of a kingfisher, scaled down to 1500 pix long side.

• Canon EOS R7
• RF100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 1000

This DEFINITELY a fun feature, although the disentanglement with DPP-4 is a real pain in the ****.

 

[Kwazy]

Here is my takeoff composite sequence of a kingfisher

Really cool!
I could really use this feature... Not enough to justify getting another R camera though

 

[tunewitsch]

... btw, the shots in the sequence above are hand-picked, the full burst looks like this

• Canon EOS R7
• RF100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 1000

 

[tunewitsch]

Really cool!
I could really use this feature... Not enough to justify getting another R camera though

Well, here is another argument. My personal history goes like this: After surgery I can no longer lift/hold heavy gear. As a consequence I got rid of all of my EF gear (including a 5DSR, 7DII, 500mmF/4 II, 100-400, etc) purchasing the R5+RF100-500+1.4xTC+RF800 f/11. The 100-500 is still quite heavy (for my tase), and I use it when I do not walk/hike for a long distance. I have almost exclusively been shooting (mainly birds) with the R5+800, mostly also doing in-body cropping. Recently I got the R7, which has more pixels on the APSC surface than the cropped R5. In the past week I have used it with the RF100-400+1.4xTC. This is an unbeatable combo with respect to quality&versatility versus weight (ideal for travel and long walks). Although at 400(x1.4)mm it is f/11, as the 800mm, its MFD is much shorter than the 6 meters of the 800mm, allowing you to also shoot butter- or dragon-flies , ... and, since it is a zoom lens you have the possibility of a 4 times focal length change.

 

[Kwazy]

The merits of the APSc sensor and telephoto lenses for macro photography is definitely something I plan on examining at some point. However, currently the most popular approach is to use extension tubes/close-up attachments in conjunction with flash+diffuser to get the best macro. My current plan is to wait and see what the deal with the 100+MP camera will be, and then upgrade to either that or one of the currently-available higher-res cameras. Could really use more pixels! Getting a bit farther away and then cropping in would do wonders for depth of field.