Canon 5d Mark Ii Color Profiles
With the increasing affordability of digital full frame cameras, there's been speculation about the future of APS-C as an enthusiast format. But with the launch of the 7D Mark II, Canon has made it pretty clear it believes there's still a high-end market for crop-sensor formats. We spoke to Bettina Hansen, a photographer who regularly shoots Canon and has experience working with the original EOS 7D to see what she made of the new camera. Bettina Hansen. Usually shoots:, Bettina Hansen is a staff photographer at The Seattle Times. You can find her on Twitter @bettinahansen and at I didn't read a whole lot about the Canon 7D Mark II before I got my hands on it to test out. Being a newspaper photographer, I’m mostly concerned about a camera not getting in my way when I go to make a photograph.
Just running through all the profiles on the Canon 5D, as well as the superflat curve Used Canon 85mm f1.2 Canon 5D Mark II LED light source, YONGNUO YN-160 LED. More Canon 5d Mark Ii Color Profiles videos.
It should function as a fluid extension of my reflexes. I hated the original Canon EOS 7D for this reason. To me, it had a clunky, loud shutter, slow focus, and a color profile that reminded me of puke. Not to mention noise at high ISOs. I experienced no joy in using that camera.
Many of the 7Ds we had here at the paper malfunctioned when shooting video. That happened to me on multiple occasions. That being said, this camera feels nothing like the original 7D in my hands. Instead the body feels sturdy and comfortable to hold, much like a 5D Mark III, which I love using. The shutter clips and flutters lightly, rather than the slap of the old 7D.
Canon 5d Mark Ii Wikipedia
The focus felt fast enough for me to trust it while shooting the Seahawks overtime finale against the Broncos. Everyone who picked it up instinctively put their finger on the shutter and let out an “Ooooh” at the 10 frames per second. © Bettina Hansen / The Seattle Times One of the first things I noticed was a new lever surrounding the AF selection joystick on the back of the camera - it's primarily designed to quickly switch between AF selection area modes.
I immediately turned it off. I prefer one mode (expanded AF area) and I hate it when the mode accidentally changes. This button would be useless for me, and seemed easy to accidentally trigger if left on.
Unfortunately, the EOS 7D Mark II lacks a feature that I consider very important for true sports cameras - a voice recorder that lets you speak into the camera and record an audio caption with an image. This is something we use a lot, especially in sports, to remind ourselves which plays are which. For NFL games we often have a card-runner taking our memory cards to another editor to caption and tone throughout the game, or we're on tight deadlines to edit them ourselves. Being able to tag select photographs and record a quick caption on the photo makes editing so much easier. © Bettina Hansen / The Seattle Times For example, I often have many photos of Marshawn Lynch running what look, in photos, like identical plays. Voice tagging allows me to say into the back of the camera something like “Lynch for 4 and a first down, holding called on the play, five minutes remaining in the second,” while reviewing the image.
This way, when editing, I quickly know what to write in the caption. The alternative is to shoot pictures of the scoreboard between plays to match-up with the play-by-play, which I also do, but the voice tag allows for so much more. 'Everyone who picked it up instinctively put their finger on the shutter and let out an “Ooooh” at the 10 frames per second.'
The other two things I always immediately change are to deactivate the beep, and to turn off AF activation on the shutter half press. I like to only activate the AF with both the AF-ON and star buttons: that way I can set the AF and recompose easily. During sports action, I usually keep my thumb jammed on the AF-ON button and let it track the subject as it moves towards or away from me. I left the 7D II set to “Case 1” mode of the AF cases that allow you to adjust tracking and other sensitivities. It's the one I use most often. I've been shooting with a Canon EOS 5D Mark III and EOS-1 DX, so the other first thing I noticed was the cropped sensor.
I like the look of full-frame sensors, and I like knowing that my lenses are true to their focal length. For this test, I shot large JPEGs since the 7D II's raw files aren't yet compatible with Photoshop CC or Lightroom 5. 'Hated' the 7D? Color profile like 'puke'? 'No joy'.Wow. Color profiles are easily modified using Canon software or even third-party tweeks.
The original Canon 7D is still a great camera offering a metal chassis, weather-sealing and bullet-proof performance and reliability. Professionals have selected it specifically to use it for video here in California without a problem. Wildlife photographers (like me) enjoy it's fast frame rate which is only a little less than the Mark II. I suggest using faster premium cards like Lexar, and a little more time loving what you have. As an owner of both the 7D and 7DM2, I can say the 7DM2 is far superior to the 7D. I agree with the reviewer that the 7D had some low quality features like poor auto-focus algorithms, poor color reproduction quality, and really poor high ISO performance.
It does have a loud, aggressive shutter. However, it's 7fps was very useful for me. I can do a lot of things with software and RAW files, so I'll give up a little to gain higher fps. The 7DM2 is way better with AF and high ISO.
Color reproduction is only slightly better. The shutter is way better and faster - 10fps. For high school sports where a 1DX is way overkill as the customer doesn't demand shots that are publish quality, the 7DM2 is a great compromise. You can get very good results even in poorly lit stadiums and indoor courts. I disagree with many of her opinions, but she is entitled to them.
Some things stuck out to me about her review. She mentions the AF selection lever is easy to hit.
I don't know how she's holding her camera, but that just seems very odd to me. I get mine tomorrow, so I'll have to see for myself, but I don't even see how this is possible. She mentions the AF beep as if her other cameras didn't beep on AF lock.also, she's using AI Focus to shoot sports?
Throw it in servo and let the incredible tracking system do its job. Her comments about the original 7D allude to her lack of actual experience with the camera, or maybe confusion with the 70D? The 7D is built like a tank and feels very solid. Loud shutter?
I would describe it as 'crisp' not loud.it's fairly quiet. It's very snappy, but not a 5D3 and 1DX with their much more advanced AF. Color profile? I don't shoot JPEG, so color profile has never been a factor. Also, it's adjustable. 'I like the look of full-frame sensors, and I like knowing that my lenses are true to their focal length.' Kind of a strange statement - MF lenses are true to their focal length, as are 8x10 lenses and Pentax Q lenses.
This reveals a certain mentality - that Canon FF DSLRs are normal, and anything else is a deviation. Also, 'the look of full-frame?' I understand what she means, more or less, but much of this 'look' is simply her responsibility in properly adjusting the settings for a different sized sensor with the same lenses. Otherwise this is a good opinion piece, although docking points because an APS-C camera has an APS-C sensor makes little sense. I enjoyed her review. I shoot sports also, from local poorly lit high school fields to PAC 12 games. Bodies are 5D3 and original 7D, with OEM grips on both.
For PAC 12 night games (good lighting obviously) I use the 5D3 with 70-200 2.8L IS II with 1.4 teleconverter, which gives me almost a 300 f/4. The 7D wears the 17-55 f/2.8 for close ups/ wide angles.
For PAC 12 day games (got one coming up on Nov. 8 at Oregon State), I reverse the bodies, slapping the 7D on the 70-200/1.4x and the 24-105 on the 5D3. The 7D's problems with high ISO at night, even in good light. The 7D remains an excellent day time sports shooter. If the 7DII can deliver decent night shots at 1/500 or faster at ISO 5000 or so, it will be worth the upgrade.
If not, I'l continue to make my current system work a while longer. Interesting review.I agree on noise level especially at higher ISO and in my case against blue skies.I use L lens. Some of my pics are tac sharp, some aren't. From what I researched you have to know what ISO's to shoot. I usually go for 160, 320, 640. I had read those are native ISO's. I don't agree with build comments.
The 7d is like a tank.I've unfortunately had mine drop onto concrete from about waist hight and aside from a little ding on the mode dial, no issues at all. I love the controls and it feels natural in my hands.I do a lot of hiking with it and shoot out of my kayak.birds, landscapes etc. Looking to move up to a 5dmk3 for image quality but was wondering if a 7dmk2 had improved in this area.
Pricing is a big issue. She nailed it on the head. APS-C sensor is the worst feature of the 7DII and its Achilles Heel. 10fps is no use if you get a noisy image and the crop sensor means something may get accidental left out of the frame because of the narrower field of view. As for price, it may be cheaper than the 1D-X, but it isn't much cheaper than the 5DIII. I predict the 7DII will go the way of the Dodo and the 1.3x crop sensor.
That means only Digital Rebels will get the APS-C sensor and the 7DII will not have a successor. If the issue is the problem with a crop sensor, then she was the wrong person to do the review. This camera is a crop sensor and the point was to evaluate it within its category. No one thinks crop sensor cameras have the same noise profile as a 5D3 or 1Dx, but there is a huge advantage to extra reach until they start making affordable 800mm and 1200mm lenses.
Besides, if you shoot for a newspaper at ISO 3200 with a 2.8 lens in a well-lit stadium, I'm at a loss to see how that noise is going to be an issue once it's printed on newsprint or put on a web page at 900 pixels wide. And if noise is really the end-all issue, dump the 5D3 and 1Dx and get a D4s.
So you say that she doesn't use an APSC camera, then why would she comment and compare 7DMarkII to 1Dx? I haven't said 'crop', said 'shrink to 1-4MP'. 18-4MP reduction would result in huge reduction of noise. DR is important at high ISO but in most cases at stadiums 7DMarkII's DR would be enough. Whatever lens you use (300-400-800mm), 7DMarkII's crop sensor would have crop advantage. But the fact is, sports photographers have access to exotic lenses and best cameras, that's why 7DMarkII can only be a secondary body. If sports photography agencies cut budgets today, you can be sure that you'd see more 7D bodies (and shorter lenses).
No-one says 7DMarkII is the best, it's just that it's really good enough for most and does not deserve to be bashed by a 'pro' photographer who does not know how to play with color profiles and thinks that no WiFi on 7DMarkII is a con though there is no WiFi on 1Dx and 5DMarkIII either:). I'm still not sure how such low noise is a necessary requirement in a camera for a sports event in which 1) there is already outstanding lighting within the stadium and 2) photos will be printed on newsprint and put on web sites at 900 pixels or less.
Don't get me wrong - I get that the 7D2 has worse noise than the 5D3, which has worse noise than the 1Dx, which has worse noise than the D4s. I'm just not sure how it's so relevant for sports photography. If I wanted to make a case for FF for newspaper sports, it would be for DOF considerations, not noise. Wow, I have to comment on this to sort of put you in your place, Anastigmat. You scream to me that you're a gear snob with no experience.
'They use their legs to get closer to the action.' This is entirely untrue and proves to me that you have never shot sports.
Want to know how I know? Because you can't move your legs to get closer - you'll be on the field or the track. You position yourself for the shot, then use the focal length to achieve it. Also.WE ALL CROP. I don't know a single colleague that doesn't crop their images.but what do I know I shoot APS-C sensors and make my living selling images to magazine and race teams.
Canon 5d Mark Iii Settings
I'm a professional photographer that makes a very comfortably living only shooting APS-C cameras.I actually had a 5D and sold it. Before you come on and blast your opinion, check yourself at the door.
You're not a sports shooter and clearly know nothing about what we do to earn a living and feed our family. 'the crop sensor means something may get accidental left out of the frame because of the narrower field of view' Precisely! Because there is no reason why the photographer should be expected to zoom out or back up or use a shorter lens to compensate for the narrower FOV. That's the problem with viewfinders, too - they show you what's visible, not what's off the edges. Thank God we have full-frame cameras which see beyond the edges of the viewfinder to ensure photos have plenty of extra area to capture those things crop sensors miss. I guess my point was that the story should not have been about APS-C vs. It's an APS-C camera and should have been evaluated against other APS-C peers.
DPReview should have found someone who uses and embraces APS-C in their work for an opinion. Second, I've never been in a stadium that wasn't very well lit, so you should never have to go above 3200 at 2.8 anyway. And the reality is that no one can discern any noise in a 3200 photo printed in a paper after it has been line screened, or on the web where they are 900 pixels wide at best.
So the noise issue, while real and valid in comparing APS-C vs. FF, is a complete non-issue for anything shot for a newspaper. And besides, if noise is really the biggest issue, dump the 5D3 and 1Dx and get a D4s. This whole thread kind of sickened me with its bitterness and invective. Having done a lot of sports at the high school level and having shot four day 500 person swim meets, a voice recorder tied to the frame I am shooting would be great.
I think belittling comments about the poster are offensive. It was clear to me that several posters were attempting to make themselves feet better about themselves or important by denigrating her efforts. She is shooting at a professional level that most of us will never attain. No doubt she has earned her place with the paper and I respect her for it. The 7D is an inanimate object. I just sold mine after a few thousand pictures when I shot both with the 7D and 70d. They are both very good cameras in my humble opinion but I liked the 70D better.
You can insult my camera all you want. Anthrapopathy is defined as imbuing life to inanimate objects. The 7D is just a camera. I like my cats a lot more than my cameras. I enjoyed this opinion for several reasons: 1) It was honest and blunt.
I get tired of reviews written by people who always call every new camera great, amazing, fantastic, and groundbreaking no matter what it is. In this review, she wasn't afraid to tell us what she really thought about the camera - both positive and negative.
2) It was based on real life professional use. Personally, I also get tired of reading reviews from reviewers who sit in an office and write reviews based on spec sheets and test charts (DPreview write some of the most balanced 'real world' reviews on the web. This comment is not necessarily aimed at them).
In this review, she took the camera to work with her for a couple weeks and formed opinions based on actual use. 3) She compared an $1800 USD camera to a $6800 camera and her biggest complaint was 'no voice recording feature.' Is this the best review I've ever read?
No, it's more of an opinion. Is it helpful? Put the stupid camera video settings at their lowest and use that for voice recording.
I use this method when shooting landscapes to note filters, tides, set number, etc. And taking the type of landscapes I do is far more intense than shooting a football game. I don't get time between plays or a halftime. I'm out there working every second for several hours straight taking hundreds or thousands or shots and often standing in water with nowhere to put anything. This article reads like 'my daddy bought me a Mercedes and I can't be bothered to see why a Lexus would work just as well if I have to change my pampered life'. I believe this young lady might have (most likely unintentionally) offended many people with her words particularly with her remarks about the 7D.
This is a very sensitive area and cameras to many are very personal. A more balanced approach like presenting not just one working photographer's views but several might have been a better choice. True, this lady has taken some good shots so have thousands of other sport photographers worldwide. So one has to be careful not to give an entire platform to one person especially on a very hot, 'emotionally charged' camera. Le Kilt: There's no evidence that the 7D has a color profile that reminds one of the color of puke, assuming standard picture styles are being used. My guess is she picked up the camera after someone was playing with the picture styles and didn't know how to switch them back.
Yes, I understand there are people who don't fully understand the gear they use. Maybe an engineer in the gear department presets cameras before the 'Professionals' head out on assignment?
I've heard of cameras with buttons taped over in the past to prevent accidentally changing settings. It's nothing exceptional anymore. Samsung NX1: 15.0 fps Sony's 77mk2: 12.0 fps Panasonic GH4: 12.0 fps Sony's A6000: 11.0 fps Olympus E-M1: 10.0 fps Canon 7dmk2: 10.0 fps Pentax K-3: 8.3 fps Fuji X-T1: 8.0 fps Nikon D7100: 6.0 fps None of these are poor, they're just about the same and hardly a standout feature in this class. Nobody with a brain who looks at the 7Dmk2 and says, 'Gee, maybe I should consider one of it's competitors' is going to be put off by the max frame rates they'll find except against maybe the Nikon. I don't think crop sensors will ever overtake FF for sports, but just because FF is superior in many aspects doesn't mean every FF camera is sports-capable. The 6D wouldn't get past the security gate. The D800 is too slow.
Only the top-o-the-line FF bodies are good enough for fast sports. At the same time, I don't think the crop factor will make a camera less of a good sports cam. It will take some getting used to to overcome the different reach, but in the end if the AF is spot on and the fps helps nail the perfect moment, does it matter if you're 1.0x or 1.6x? IMO only when the crop factor goes up to 2.0x and beyond does it really generate a serious problem.
I agree that it's baffling why crop sensors even exist. Cost is the only reason that makes sense to me.
Samsung NX1: 15.0 fps Sony's 77mk2: 12.0 fps Panasonic GH4: 12.0 fps Sony's A6000: 11.0 fps Olympus E-M1: 10.0 fps Canon 7dmk2: 10.0 fps Pentax K-3: 8.3 fps Fuji X-T1: 8.0 fps Nikon D7100: 6.0 fps The problem is that many of the faster cameras come with caveats. For instance, the Samsung (from what I've read) will not shoot 15fps in RAW, and the guess is that it won't autofocus at 15fps either (which is kinda useless). In fact, same goes for the 1DX, for 14fps you need to have mirror locked up, otherwise it's 12fps.
@dash2k8 - I agree with the cost factor. APS-C sensors was the result of extremely high cost for FF at one point. However, the cost to produce FF is no long an issue. Today, entry level FF are about the same price as high-end crop sensors if not cheaper in the case of Canon 6D vs 7D II.
I think the issue has do with the fact that the creation of crop sensors created a new breed of photographers who are used to APS-C or still have the perception that FF is beyond their reach in terms of $$ or the glass they had invested in APS-C bodies would render useless if APS-C becomes the thing of the past. Pros: Low cost - Cropped sensor cam?
Feels sturdy - It will weigh about 1 kilogram. The shutter is good through 200,000 actuations - Same as $900 K3. AF fast and responsive - The only real pro AFAIK. Cropped sensor when you need more reach on lenses - Think Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 Shutter feels fast and light - As good as 6D – hope hope. Video is improved - Who cares? Lighter weight than the EOS-1D X - But it is still heavy as a rock compared to its real competition. Cons: No voice recorder - Don't care.
The cropped sensor is a negative point - Positive for what I use them for. High ISO noise is still an issue, albeit not as bad as the original 7D - Hmmm.
No built-in Wi-Fi - Competitors have this. Default color still a little warm and over-saturated - PP issue not a problem Take away - I like the idea of the 7DII and am on the fence about it. IMO the body is still fairly pricey compared to the competition.
I have been shooting the original 7D for 5 years, estimate some 40,000 shutter actuations without problem. Relative to noise at high ISOs, I have been forced to use ISO 3200 recently to capture pictures of deer in very low light conditions, with the deer 300' away, making it necessary to use a 300mm f/4 lens with 1.4X extender, and resultant shutter speeds as low as 1/30 second. I am amazed at the quality of the ISO 3200 images, and will resort to this ISO without quality concerns whenever necessary. I have to agree with some comments here that comparing a 7D MK2 (a mortal though not puny) to a god (1DX) and a demigod (5D MK3) by comparison of technical prowess is not realistically constructive. Though we can say that she has the PRO right to bash what a 7D MK2 lacks as how she sees it as it is definitely a grade with authority. But is it with a common sense to do so? Knowing, that she is a Pro that her insight have to be in-line and knowledge of performance expectation as what the 7D MK2 performance is for its price.
Which certainly a Pro within her caliber and privilege to expensive equipment should at least know that. So what's the point of emphasising the lack of feature which to her job is at most important? Isn't that supposedly moot when she's given the right equipment to get those money shots?
Surely, this site is more usefull to the 9 out of 10 photographers who buy their own equipment and need to balance quality within practical expenditure. Sports Photograhers' job is to GET THE SHOT. They shoot RAW have their assistants send their jpegs to the editors to get a choice of pictures. Once they have their choice, their assistants send the raw files for editing/publication. The sports photographer's job is to get the SHOT. It's the Super Bowl, the time is in the evening with bright stadium lights.
It's 4th and 10 with 40 seconds left to go. You're gambling that this will be an endzone pass from 50 yards out. The team's uniform colors are dark and purple with the fans in the stand also wearing purple. You're locking your focus on the receiver you think will catch this pass and you're hoping that the darken area of the stadium where the lights don't hit fullly, the color and contrast of the player's uniform, fans does not cause your camera to loose focus. The play happens and your gamble is right.the question in your mind is.DID YOU GET A NON BLURRY SHOT?!? Not dynamic range or +5 EV.
Did you get the cover photo!? And knowing can you pull without quality loss photo from -3EV or from -5EV is important. Seeing the photo trough EVF how it will look at that moment is more crucial than using OVF and guessing did you get the shot or did the scenery change too much and fool camera.
Having always a IBIS even for roll axis is even more important if not having a monopod. Getting 1-2 stops faster shutter speed is a miracle. Seeing a focusing points in EVF even removes all fears you didn't get the shot.
For sports photography, it is blessing to not experience fear, doubt and any worries did you get the shot like DSLR does cause. You know did you get it, or did you fail.
Edge. A white bar will appear at the bottom of your browser window which will contain your download.
Once the download is complete click 'Run' to begin the installation or click ‘View downloads’ to view the list of all recently downloaded files. If the white bar is not visible you can also access the list of recently downloaded files by clicking the 3 small horizontal lines located in the top right of the browser. Click the down arrow icon to access the Downloads menu, from this list you can install the download by clicking on the file name.
Alternatively, click 'Open folder' to open the folder on your computer that contains your downloaded files. You can then begin the installation of your download by double clicking your downloaded file. Chrome.
A grey bar will appear at the bottom of your browser window which will contain your download. To install your download click on the name of the downloaded file.
DISCLAIMER CANON U.S.A.,Inc. MAKES NO GUARANTEES OF ANY KIND WITH REGARD TO ANY PROGRAMS, FILES, DRIVERS OR ANY OTHER MATERIALS CONTAINED ON OR DOWNLOADED FROM THIS, OR ANY OTHER, CANON SOFTWARE SITE. ALL SUCH PROGRAMS, FILES, DRIVERS AND OTHER MATERIALS ARE SUPPLIED 'AS IS.' CANON DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. CANON U.S.A.,Inc.
SHALL NOT BE HELD LIABLE FOR ERRORS CONTAINED HEREIN, OR FOR LOST PROFITS, LOST OPPORTUNITIES, CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES INCURRED AS A RESULT OF ACTING ON INFORMATION, OR THE OPERATION OF ANY SOFTWARE, INCLUDED IN THIS SOFTWARE SITE. I have read and understand the information above, and wish to download the designated software. EOS DIGITAL CAMERA LIMITED WARRANTY For The U.S.A. And Canada Only The limited warranty set forth below is given by Canon U.S.A., Inc. (Canon U.S.A.) in the United States or Canon Canada Inc., (Canon Canada) in Canada with respect to the Canon brand EOS Digital Camera (the “Product”)., when purchased and used in the United States or Canada. The Product purchased with this limited warranty is the only EOS Digital Camera to which this limited warranty applies.
Canon U.S.A., Inc. And Canon Canada Inc.
(collectively 'Canon') warrant to the original end-user purchaser, when delivered in new condition in its original container, that the Product will be free from defects in materials and workmanship under normal use and service for a period of one (1) year from the date of original purchase. Product returned to a Canon repair facility and proven to be defective upon inspection will, at Canon’s sole discretion and without charge, be (a) repaired utilizing new, remanufactured, repaired and/or recycled parts; (b) exchanged for a new Product or; (c) exchanged for a refurbished Product, as determined by the Canon repair facility. Warranty exchange or replacement does not extend the original warranty period of the Product. THIS WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER ANY ACCESSORIES. This limited warranty shall only apply if the Product is used in conjunction with compatible computer equipment and compatible software, as to which items Canon U.S.A. Or Canon Canada, shall have no responsibility. Non-Canon brand equipment and software that may be distributed with the Product are sold 'as is' and without warranty of any kind by Canon U.S.A.
Or Canon Canada, including any implied warranty regarding merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, and all such warranties are disclaimed. The sole warranty, if any, with the respect to such non-Canon brand items is given by the manufacturer or producer thereof.
This limited warranty covers all defects encountered in normal use of the Product, and does not apply in the following cases:. Loss of or damage to the Product due to abuse, mishandling, improper packaging by you, alteration, accident, electrical current fluctuations, failure to follow operating, maintenance or environmental instructions prescribed in Canon U.S.A.' S or Canon Canada's user's manual or services performed by someone other than Canon U.S.A. Or Canon Canada, or a Canon authorized service provider for the Product. Without limiting the foregoing, water damage, sand/corrosion damage, battery leakage, dropping the Product, scratches, abrasions or damage to the body, lenses or LCD display or damage to the any of the accessories mentioned in the first paragraph above will be presumed to have resulted from misuse, abuse or failure to operate the Product as set forth in the operating instructions. Use of parts or supplies (other than those sold by Canon U.S.A.
Or Canon Canada) that cause damage to the Product or cause abnormally frequent service calls or service problems. If the Product has had its serial number or dating altered or removed. NO IMPLIED WARRANTY, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, APPLIES TO THE PRODUCT AFTER THE APPLICABLE PERIOD OF THE EXPRESS LIMITED WARRANTY STATED ABOVE, AND NO OTHER EXPRESS WARRANTY OR GUARANTY, EXCEPT AS MENTIONED ABOVE, GIVEN BY ANY PERSON OR ENTITY WITH RESPECT TO THE PRODUCT SHALL BIND CANON U.S.A. OR CANON CANADA (SOME STATES AND PROVINCES DO NOT ALLOW LIMITATIONS ON HOW LONG AN IMPLIED WARRANTY LASTS, SO THE ABOVE LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU).NEITHER CANON U.S.A.
NOR CANON CANADA SHALL BE LIABLE FOR LOSS OF REVENUES OR PROFITS, INCONVENIENCE, EXPENSE FOR SUBSTITUTE EQUIPMENT OR SERVICE, STORAGE CHARGES, LOSS OR CORRUPTION OF DATA, OR ANY OTHER SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES CAUSED BY THE USE OR MISUSE OF, OR INABILITY TO USE, THE EOS DIGITAL CAMERA, REGARDLESS OF THE LEGAL THEORY ON WHICH THE CLAIM IS BASED, AND EVEN IF CANON U.S.A. OR CANON CANADA HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. IN NO EVENT SHALL RECOVERY OF ANY KIND AGAINST CANON USA OR CANON CANADA BE GREATER IN AMOUNT THAN THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE PRODUCT SOLD BY CANON USA OR CANON CANADA AND CAUSING THE ALLEGED DAMAGE. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, YOU ASSUME ALL RISK AND LIABILITY FOR LOSS, DAMAGE OR INJURY TO YOU AND YOUR PROPERTY AND TO OTHERS AND THEIR PROPERTY ARISING OUT OF USE OR MISUSE OF, OR INABILITY TO USE, THE PRODUCT NOT CAUSED DIRECTLY BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF CANON USA OR CANON CANADA (SOME STATES AND PROVINCES DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, SO THE ABOVE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU). THIS LIMITED WARRANTY SHALL NOT EXTEND TO ANYONE OTHER THAN THE ORIGINAL PURCHASER OF THE PRODUCT, OR THE PERSON FOR WHOM IT WAS PURCHASED AS A GIFT, AND STATES YOUR EXCLUSIVE REMEDY. You may obtain technical support.
for your Product as follows: E-mail support via our Web site at Telephone assistance from a Canon U.S.A. Customer Care representative free of charge during regular business hours at 1-800-OK-CANON (1-800-652-2666) Canon Canada You may obtain technical support. for your Product as follows: Telephone assistance from a Canon Canada Customer Care representative free of charge during regular business hours at 1-800-OK-CANON (1-800-652-2666) When you call, have your Product serial number and your date of purchase available to expedite service. A Canon Customer Care representative will attempt to diagnose the nature of the problem and correct it over the telephone. If the problem cannot be corrected over the telephone, you will be asked to follow the applicable procedures for MAIL-IN SERVICE.
Note that a dated proof of purchase is required at the time of service. This requirement will be satisfied by providing a copy of your dated bill of sale. Technical support program specifics subject to change without notice. MAIL-IN SERVICE is a program under which your Product is repaired by a Canon U.S.A. Or a Canon Canada authorized service center for the Product. Authorized service center information can be obtained by visiting (US customers only) or by contacting the Canon U.S.A., Customer Care Center or Canon Canada Customer Information Centre at 1-800-OK-CANON (1-800-652-2666).
You will be given the name, address and phone number of an authorized service center. It is your responsibility to properly package and send the defective Product, together with a copy of your dated proof of purchase, a complete explanation of the problem and a return address to the authorized service center at your expense. Do not include any other items with the defective Product. The Product covered by this limited warranty and proven to be defective upon inspection will be repaired and returned to you without charge by the authorized service center. Any Product received by the authorized service center that is not covered by the limited warranty will be returned unrepaired, or at the discretion of the authorized service provider, you may receive a written estimate of repair at such cost as the service center may establish from time to time. This limited warranty gives you specific legal rights, and you may also have other rights, which vary from state to state (or province to province in Canada).The battery pack packaged with the Product carries a separate ninety (90) day limited warranty.
(1) Large/Fine: Approx. 6.1MB (5616 x 3744 pixels) (2) Large/Nomal: Approx. 3.0MB (5616 x 3744 pixels) (3) Medium/Fine: Approx.
3.6MB (4080 x 2720 pixels) (4) Medium/Normal: Approx. 1.9MB (4080 x 2720 pixels) (5) Small/Fine: Approx.
2.1MB (2784 x 1856 pixels) (6) Small/Normal: Approx. 1.0MB (2784 x 1856 pixels) (7) RAW: Approx. 25.8MB (5616 x 3744 pixels) (8) sRAW 1: Approx. 14.8MB (3861 x 2574 pixels) (9) sRAW 2: Approx. 10.8MB (2784 x 1856 pixels) Exact file sizes depend on the subject, ISO speed, Picture Style, etc. The Canon EOS Digital Camera Software Development Kit (EDSDK) enables developers to integrate select Canon DSLR’s directly into their existing software solution, giving them precise control of major functions of the camera, while delivering superior image quality professionals expect from Canon.
It provides the functions required to control cameras connected to a host PC, images located in the cameras, and images downloaded to the PC. EDSDK provides a C language interface for accessing select Canon EOS digital cameras and images created in these cameras. EDSDK is designed to provide a standard method of accessing different camera models and their data. There are two versions of EDSDK, Windows and Macintosh. The Software Developer Kit is provided free of charge and can be found. Please visit this site to apply and gain access to the Canon SDKs, find SDK compatibility information with current and past Canon EOS and PowerShot models, and read FAQ's regarding Canon's SDKs. This is to make Misc appear on the page when needed.