Does anyone know if the 7D does continuous recording till memory full and spans 4GB clips? Or does it do the 5DII thing and need to be manually restarted after each 4GB clip?

I am also wondering what people think about the possible indoor/low light ability of the 7D when set to F8 so as to get a maximum DOF shot. Will the low light ability be good at apertures suitable for general large DOF work?

Im hoping the 7D may be suitable for a tripod mounted stationary B-camera for video shoots. It's going to need to shoot for an hour unattended to be suitable. I know the 5DII wouldn't fit the bill for long form recording, but is the 7D closer?

Thanks

No. You get 12 minutes at a shot. Better stick with tape on a regular video camera for what you're after. Shooting at f8 is gonna take a lot of light for any camera; you'd have to probably crank the gain up.

the gh1 is a better option for long recording.

No. You get 12 minutes at a shot. Better stick with tape on a regular video camera for what you're after. Shooting at f8 is gonna take a lot of light for any camera; you'd have to probably crank the gain up.

I think you get 4GB. That works out to be about 12 minutes, but it will change depending on what you are shooting.

It's not a hard and fast time limit, but a memory size limitation; that's why you get almost twice as much if you shoot in SD.

I know the 5DII wouldn't fit the bill for long form recording, but is the 7D closer? There won't be any difference between them in this regard. The 4GB cap in both cameras is a file-size limitation and not a time-based limitation (although the reason it is there is supposedly due to an imposed time-based limitation; it still operates as a file-size limitation). In SD recording, you'll get a maximum of 29 minutes 59 seconds per clip. In HD recording, you'll get *approximately* twelve minutes per clip. Might be a tad longer or shorter based on what the camera is pointed at and what kind of motion is going on, due to the way the AVC-based encoding works.

Thanks all.

It's a bummer that they are still imposing the arbitrary cutoff at the (FAT32) max file size. Since tapeless video cameras all continue recording past 4GB and spanning clips, maybe there is some other technical reason. Or maybe Canon just dosen't believe DSLR video is intended for that type of use.

Phil - I thought about the GH1 and GF1 and the specs seem pretty good. Even the 720P GF1 would be great for me on B-cam. I mainly wanted Canon because I already have Canon DSLRs and a ton of L-glass.

At this point Canon DSLR video is still way too specialized use for me.

This is related to an european law that impose an additionnal tax on video camera. This law define a video camera as a device that can record over 30 minutes of video. (about what the 5D can do in SD)

This is related to an european law that impose an additionnal tax on video camera. This law define a video camera as a device that can record over 30 minutes of video. (about what the 5D can do in SD)

What I'm wondering is if Canon can come out with an OPTIONAL firmware upgrade that would allow more than 4GB of recording, but charge for it, to cover the increase in tax.

What I'm wondering is if Canon can come out with an OPTIONAL firmware upgrade that would allow more than 4GB of recording, but charge for it, to cover the increase in tax.

Since the 7D is not made in Europe and is being sold in the USA, Im not sure what European taxes would have to do with it.

This is related to an european law that impose an additionnal tax on video camera. This law define a video camera as a device that can record over 30 minutes of video. (about what the 5D can do in SD)

I don't understand why this idea keeps getting posted for a reason. It makes no sense. A company isn't going to care if you have to pay more taxes or not for their product because they know if you want it bad enough, you'll still buy it. Plus what is the incentive for them by this restriction?

I get really miffed at how on the internet people believe if something is posted enough, it becomes a fact.

I'm afraid it is fact (http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKL1777271820070717), and that's why it continues to be posted.

European Tax law applies 4.9% import duty on camcorders made outside of the EU, and they classify a camcorder as any digital camera that records 30 minutes or more of video at 800x600 pixels or higher and a frame rate of 23 or higher. The end consumer is not directly paying these duties as they are applied during import, but the cost is passed on to the consumer via the retail price. That would mean the SRP on the 7D would be about 66 Euros more (about $93USD) if this camera recorded even one second more of video. This may not seem like much but in this highly competitive market an extra 4.9% is a consideration for camera manufacturers.

However, Canon could have done what JVC did and release a long-recording-time variant for a higher price to cover the duty.
A European duty on digital recording devices that have an "external digital input port" caused JVC to release almost identical variant "01" models of it HD100, 110, 200 and 250 camcorders. For example the HD100E and HD101E are identical in all respects except that the HD100E cannot record signals input into the firewire port. The HD100E was released at a price comparable to North America's HD100U and the HD101E was priced higher to cover the import duty.

Where is it "fact" that this is what Canon did? You right about the article, but again it's taking something and then turning it in to "fact" as a reason for the actions of a company. That is called a false argument actually.

Canon is a worldwide company and do you really think it would make what will be hundreds of millions of dollars over the lifespan of this product decision based on a EU tax? Really?

The 4G is a hardware limitation and not an arbitrary one. Canon was not thinking of this as a video camera, it is a still camera in their mindset with video option.

Though I agree with your first sentence, you're doing the same thing with your counter argument about the size of the company and total sales.

The real questions:

1) In HD does it stop at 4GB?
If yes:
2) In SD resolution, does it stop at 4GB, or at 29 minutes and 59 seconds (as Chris suggests above.)?

If in SD it stops at 4GB, then I think you're right; it's just a file size limitation. But if it stops at 29 minutes 59 seconds, then I think we can possibly infer that the tax issue did play a part in the time limitation.

Where is it "fact" that this is what Canon did? It's been confirmed for me verbally by Canon USA.

I wonder if the current 4 gig limit will go away when the replacement for SDHC chips, the SDXC, arrives early next year. They supposedly bust out of the 4 gig internal and 32 gig external limit and allow for chips that will start with 64 gigs and eventually go to 2 TB! I've read that the next chips are backwards compatible but who knows what that means?

BTW, on the 5DMkII what happens when you get to 12 minutes? Can you hit stop and immediately start filming again or do you have to wait until the sensor "cools off?" it makes a BIG difference for event videographers as events don't necessarily limit themselves to 12 minutes.

Hi Jim:

The 5D MKII doesn't arbitrarily stop recording at 12 minutes, it stops recording at 4GB. Since the H.264 codec is a variable bit rate, this could conceivably happen at 11 minutes or 16 minutes, depending on the subject, lighting, camera movement, etc.

I have shot interviews with the 5D MKII and had it shut down before at 15 minutes. It just stops recording, the red recording light just stops flashing.

You can immediately begin recording again, but some feel that as the CMOS imager heats up, that the signal becomes noisier, others disagree with this assertion. I need to really eyeball some of my hour long interviews and compare noise levels at minute two versus minute fifty-two.

Dan

Oops, I had forgotten the 5DMk II uses the CompactFlash chip, not the SDHC one that my Vixia AVCHD video cameras use. What I said applies to the SDHC chip; I don't know if there is a similar 4 gig limit on the CompactFlash file system. I assume there's more difference between the two classes of chips than just physical size.

Re: Stopping at 4 gigs. I wonder why Canon didn't just allow longer video clips to be recorded continuously in 4 gig chunks, like they do with their SDHC based video cameras like the Vixia HF S 100. It's a minor annoyance in post but completely workable. As you said, it may be an overheating issue.

I would have thought FAT32 (4GB file limit) was chosen to service Mac users.

If Macs didn't exist, then the current PC industry standard NTFS file format would be used - ie there would be no file size limit.

Yes, blame the Macs.

We don't blame the Macs on this site. Or to be more accurate, we don't do platform wars here.

The 4GB cap is not related to the camera's file system.

The 4GB cap is not related to the camera's file system.

The file size is limited to 4GB by the file system. And, yes, FAT32 is used on flash cards for broad compatibility. It's not just Macs. Consumer electronics devices with embedded processors (including cameras) access flash cards these days.

But Canon could have automatically created new files and stuffed them with data so there would be no gaps. The decision to stop when 4GB is reached is entirely Canon's.

Could it be because the CMOS is damaged from prolongated use??

Dear Jim,

The media itself, such as SDHC and CompactFlash do not have a 4 GB limit. Neither will SDXC.

Fat32 is typically choosen as it allows the widest compatability among computer platforms.

You can immediately begin recording again, but some feel that as the CMOS imager heats up, that the signal becomes noisier, others disagree with this assertion. I need to really eyeball some of my hour long interviews and compare noise levels at minute two versus minute fifty-two.

Dan

Well this would be a good thing to find out. Afterall, interviews are considered this cam's killer app. If this camera doesn't have strong legs, dealbreaker!

If there is a thermal design issue, most likely it is marginal and only shows up when the camera is at the limits of its environmental operating range. I would not expect it to overheat in an airconditioned room, because then it would not have been able to pass product testing.

Richard

I'll take FCP with a 4gig limit. Blame capitalism, free market, and anti-trust laws.

Anyway...when BetaSP was king we only shot 10 or 30 minute tapes anyway, so meh...

I'm not sure what people are talking about with Macs and a 4GB limit or if it is a joke among some Mac users (as I am one). Modern Macs use HFS+ and there is no such file size limitation (it's basically unlimited, bigger than any hard drive will be 10 years in the future), nor is there one in Final Cut Pro. Even 10-year old Mac OS had a 2TB file size limit (not sure about FCP). I've captured whole MiniDV and HDV tapes at 12GB and used those files in Final Cut Pro. Most camcorder manufacturers use the Fat32 file system to format the flash cards. Also Macs can read NTFS drives, they just can't write to them. Not something you'd necessarily want to do to your flash drive anyway.

The common technique is for the camcorder to stop writing before 4GB and begin writing a new file and then the files are butted together in your NLE. Unless there is some technical limitation buffer or processor power on the 7D while it is finishing closing the file and opening a new one simultaneously, it should be able to do this easily.

The 12 minute limit is quite annoying to think about, since one of the main reasons for me to get a 7D would be for for interviews for the shallower depth of field in tight situations. However, as long as stopping and starting recording again happens fairly instantaneously, I guess I can remember it.

I hope the come out with a firmware update to address this, or perhaps we can pay extra for this feature. I think it would be worth $100 or more.

I just tested out my new 32GB CF card in mine. I noticed the remaining record time when I put it in was 29:59, even though the card should be capable of much longer than that. Is that due to the EU restrictions or is my camera doing something funky?

Craig; what video mode are you in? In standard def the limit for a segment is 29:59. Canon's manual says a 16G card should hold 49 minutes in HD or 1hr39min in standard def, so 32GB should be twice that!

In all video modes. Could it be the card I'm using? I'm using a Kingston Elite Pro 32GB. BTW, for anyone who might be interested, I ran 1080P 24 for 17:24 in a single clip. It doesn't cut off right at 12 minutes. This was a locked down shot though with nothing moving in it just to drain the battery down so I could charge it again for a shoot tomorrow.

30min's is the EU limit. Otherwise it's a video camera, and the taxes go up.

Hmm, not sure who is right on this one. I thought the length of the recording time was limited to cool the sensors.

Hmm, not sure who is right on this one. I thought the length of the recording time was limited to cool the sensors.

If that were the only reason then I would think 1080 720 and 480 would all have the same limitation.

the gh1 is a better option for long recording.

In what way? :-
- unlimited recording length? (only restricted by size of card?)
- 1920x1080p at 24p for easier compatibility for archiving to blu-ray?
- better quality?

Link to Panasonic GH1 micro-DSLR camera here:
http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_GB/Products/LUMIX+Digital+Cameras/G+Micro+System/DMC-GH1/Specification/2146697/index.html

Why would the recording limit be due to FAT32 maximum file size?

DVD players, Blu-ray players, Personal Video recorders all cope with material that, in total, is larger than the FAT32 limit. Either by using a suitable file system that can cope with >FAT32 file size limit or by breaking the material up into several files but being able to play them contiguously, seamlessly, back-to-back flawlessly.

Why would the recording limit be due to FAT32 maximum file size?
It's important to understand that the recording limit is not due to FAT32 maximum file size.

Chris, everything I have seen both from my own experiences and what I've read of others indicates that it is in fact the FAT32 limitation working here. Could you perhaps elaborate on why you disagree with that?

It's important to understand that the recording limit is not due to FAT32 maximum file size.

Well, what is it precisely, then?

Tell you what, I would go to a trade/consumer fair and go to the Canon stand and ask them direct or call or email - to get a definitive answer... rather than speculating here! Oh (I know you might not have) my recommendation is don't ask a newbie junior salesperson, ask someone more senior with them who really knows.

Again, to re-iterate, if the limit was FAT32 4Gb then why can Television Program Personal Video Recorders and Blu-ray players handle longer lengths e.g. 25Gb? Either because they use another file system or break the recordings up into several files BUT employ a system to provide seamless, back-to-back flawless recording/playback of these files, perhaps enabled by some sort of playlist table file.

If it is a futile EU/EC ruling about it being a camcorder of it records longer, incurring an extra duty/tax then the EU/EC people need to campaigned against because the convergence between moving and still technologies is inevitable. they both use CMOS or whatever sensors, lenses, memory cards. If you can take beautiful stills then why not be able to take beautiful quality moving pictures with the same camera?

Canon was not thinking of this as a video camera, it is a still camera in their mindset with video option.

Faulty thinking on Canon's part: Again to repeat, the convergence between moving and still technologies is inevitable. they both use CMOS or whatever sensors, lenses, memory cards. If you can take beautiful stills then why not be able to take beautiful quality moving pictures with the same camera?

Cameras such as these will cannibalise the camcorder market. And so what? Why make an artificial divide: a camera is a camera is a camera! Let market disruption proceed. In this digital multimedia age people are doing both moving and still and don't want to carry both around.

What a shame about this limit. If only it wasn't there then this camera would be a fantastic all-rounder and a contender for making proper decent film footage with the flexibility of SLR lenses providing all manner of filmic nuances and quality.

Length should only be limited by size of memory card.

4th reason added to my three mentioned above: this 7d camera is a disruptive breakthrough technology and impacts existing established systems in the market.

There is perhaps *absolutely* NO reason why the 7d dslr camera could not record continuously, back-to-back, seamlessly footage beyond the 1080p 12mins FAT32/4gb limit.

As stated before, it could split the files and apply a separate playlist table file to enable seamless back-to-back recording/playback to overcome the FAT32 limitation and therefore enable a continuous uninterrupted recording way beyond the approx fat32 4gb/12min 1080p limit.

The real reason might be that if Canon enabled unlimited recording, then this would impact sales of higher-end professional broadcast cameras that don't offer much more quality than the 7d.

Chris, everything I have seen both from my own experiences and what I've read of others indicates that it is in fact the FAT32 limitation working here. Could you perhaps elaborate on why you disagree with that?

I'm not Chris, but I can answer -- because P2 uses the FAT32 file format, and you can record continuously for hours or even days with it. And AVCHD uses the FAT32 file format, and it can record for 12 continuous hours on a single card.

It's true that FAT32 has a 4GB file limit, and it's true that the Canons stop recording at 4GB. But why don't they just span clips, like AVCHD and P2 do? It's not the file system that's causing the limitation. It's the fact that they don't span clips to get past the file system's maximum size.

Either a) they just didn't want to bother, or b) perhaps the Quicktime file format they record into, doesn't allow for chaining clips and pointing to previous and next clips.

Either way, the limitation isn't because of FAT32, because other manufacturers and systems have successfully gotten around that.

My camera has never overheated *just* taking stills.
Canon would have to spend more in R&D to address the overheating issues. The file size limitations cool the camera. This problem seems to be linked to shooting HD video (never had issues with SD heat warning).

This all seems like conjecture though (my thought included)...

Why do Toyotas accelerate without driver intervention?
Is it the floor mats or the electrical system?

-C

I'm not Chris, but I can answer -- because P2 uses the FAT32 file format, and you can record continuously for hours or even days with it. And AVCHD uses the FAT32 file format, and it can record for 12 continuous hours on a single card.

It's true that FAT32 has a 4GB file limit, and it's true that the Canons stop recording at 4GB. But why don't they just span clips, like AVCHD and P2 do? It's not the file system that's causing the limitation. It's the fact that they don't span clips to get past the file system's maximum size.

Either a) they just didn't want to bother, or b) perhaps the Quicktime file format they record into, doesn't allow for chaining clips and pointing to previous and next clips.

Either way, the limitation isn't because of FAT32, because other manufacturers and systems have successfully gotten around that.

In other words, yes, it is because of the fact that it's FAT32. All that other stuff about Canon not bothering to get past that limitation doesn't matter, because it's still FAT32 which created the limitation. So yes, it is because of FAT32.

Jesse,

You are right that FAT32 limits the size of each file, but some cameras start a new file automatically without any gap between clips. Stitch them together and you can get a long take.

Presumably, the reason that Canon doesn't do that is that any device that records more than 30 minutes of video is considered a video camera, and in some regions that increases the tariff.

So, FAT32 explains the 4GB per file limit, but not the overall recording limit.

In other words, yes, it is because of the fact that it's FAT32. All that other stuff about Canon not bothering to get past that limitation doesn't matter, because it's still FAT32 which created the limitation. So yes, it is because of FAT32.

You can place the blame wherever you want, but the fact remains that other camera systems use FAT32 and have unlimited recording times. Ergo, de facto, obviously, it is possible to have unlimited recording times on a FAT32 system. Therefore, the limitation is not and cannot be laid solely at the feet of FAT32.

it is fat !! Why Windows is not longer using it, that is the reason as the Canon has this limit ALLL over the world.
Reformated the 4 gb card in my Blackberry with a win format on my linux machine, it works fine but I do get ...mediacard formated with errors. There are no. It is not a proper fat 32.....genuine windows, came out as fat from Debian, but it is not a real win 32 fat....haha.
that I do think is an asnwer.
why a D7 bought in Bangkok has a 4 gig limitation, why a D7 from California has it ?
nothing to to with Europe as they don't realize a customs yet this can do film, it is a stil camara from tax definition, dead easy like the Nikon 3Ds

The 4gig limit exists because of using 32bit pointers - it actually exists in many places independent of FAT32. FAT32 just happens to be one very well used standard with 32bit pointers and limitations.

Apparently, Quicktime itself has some 4gig limitations as well. Regardless of the file system, exporting a greater than 4gig Mpeg4 QT movie will cause the file to be corrupted.

The Quicktime Mpeg2 decoder also cannot handle > 4gig files. Apple has acknowledge it as a bug.

U got it
nothing to do with Europen customs regulations,
Great

U got it
nothing to do with Europen customs regulations,
Great

Nope... it's got lots to do with the EU. Canon already has the solution - it's already in use in millions of camcorders and other products, the EU tax situation is one of the reasons why it won't implement them for the DSLRs.

It's a very easy software solution - if there's a 4gig file size problem not just in fat32 but also quicktime, then you simply start spanning files.

I don't think there's just _one_ reason, there are _many_ reasons, the EU tax situation is just one of them, and a fairly big one judging by the response of all the DSLR manufacturers like Nikon and Pentax don't have a video division to protect, not just Canon.

Chris and Kin are right, as usual... :)

why the hell do u have a Win 64 bit to have use of more than 4GB memory
name it !!!!!!
it is not Brussels..


why the hell, even if I'm blonde and my D7 I'm playing with
I got way outside EU, 12 hours flight, it is bought there !!!
Beside I'm holding it in my hands it has never been in Europe before.

Don't blame Europe,
for tax regulation the D7 is not a cam corder, custonms would go crazy if u ask them.
In all shops it is not sitting next to cam corders but to Sony alpha, Pentax and the rest.

Even if u buy a car in Uk and bring it to France they can not read a single document !!!
same with cars goin to Germany from US.

The D7 is in no custom document listed as a cam corder, it is not !!!!!!!!
A cam corder doing photo is never listed as such a thing.

go for it
telecoms tell u here if u use skype on a blackberry or i phone with g3+ the
they will put an end to ur contract with them....
how the hell they should know, as skype is sending data,
that is voip.... there is so mutch rubbish going round

Europe who know about
quite nobody

......

and if it works in a camcorder look to data rate
and chip size
ther is never ever a chip something like from a D5 in a prosumer cam corder !!!!!!