Canon 7D "cannot communicate with battery"

I recently received the shock of turning on the body and seeing the message "cannot communicate with battery." This was right after I got the body back from Canon services. I called, asked what could be done, and they said (paraphrasing here) "the batteries do go bad sir."

I basically hung up on Canon I was so mad.

Thats when research mode kicked in. Some places said put the unit in to your freezer over night. Some said some sort of cleaning solution will fix it. However, I found the following video:



It worked! PRAISE JEBUS!

The only difference for me was the offending screw was in the cavity of the body. Thankfully I had a magnetic screwdriver left over from an iPhone repair. I 'fished' around in the space and found the screw further down.

For the record, all the screws that came out of the body also fit the missing screw hole. (just say'n)

Two more U2 concerts, two more sets of amazing photos

I brought my gear with me to Boston, my 7D, 50mm 1.8, 17-40 4.0, and 70-200 2.8 IS.

First night I only brought the 7D taped up to cover like Canon, and 7D. I had removed my vertical grip to make it small as possible. It only had the 50mm. 

I had done research on security at different venues, and it very much varied. From lax to SUPER restrict. I gambled that Boston would be old school east coast, don't give a crap. Turns out my gamble paid off.

When I went through GA first night, I could have brought a rocket launcher through... no one cared. 

On my way out from the first night, I talked with a guy about why he didn't bring his gear in. (he was photographing for a U2 tattoo project) He did say a woman in the first row of seats had a 300mm and shot the entire show. Nearly bumped the security guy in the head a couple times. 

Here are all the results from night 1 with only the 50mm.

That sealed it for me... I was bringing the entire family in. I had a strap bag... wrapped my 70-200 in a shirt... put my 17-40 on my camera and I was off. (even had my 50mm, but never used it)

The only problem I might have had was that I was going through the Ride entrance... security guy checked my bag, asked what that big thing was... and I was honest, I told him it was a camera lens. He said go... and I was in.

I was second person on the rail for the first five songs next to another U2 fan photographer. (he went back to his hotel to get his better gear after I told him what I was doing... paid off for him as well)

Then I wandered away, and was towards the back of the floor... and I thought, "Screw it... worst case, I can tell security I wasn't aware of the policy."

I put the 70-200mm lens on, being sure never to bug people or to get in the way. Being 6'4" also helped. I knew to move towards the B-stage at a certain time. I didn't have rail, but with a 70-200, I was good as there.  :)

I shot so much at a U2 show, I felt complete. It was a great feeling... I did the same for the Pittsburgh 360 show. I had the 70-200 in there as well. This time I got so many super sharp amazing photos... 

Worst problem- going through, editing, and posting. Gads... 1400 photos is no joke

Here are all the results from night 2 with the 17-40mm at first, but then using the 70-200mm 2.8 IS.

Also, the blue and red lights they use this tour, pain in the ass. 

Re-do

I was going through some archived U2 photos for a donation to the African Well Fund. Needed to dig up the originals for print. No biggie. A couple of them were from the U2 Pittsburgh show, which I took about 1700+ photos. I was going through, and realized I may have missed a couple. So I rushed through in Lightroom, and starred about 25 images I thought I may have missed. (that alone took 15 minutes) Turned out, I had about 10 of them already. Dang... however, for the other 15, I culled out 8 others that I just wasn't happy with the images.

The other 7 I posted on to my Flickr account. The best of those 7 is this, not too shabby.

Partial wedding photo shoot- a review

Two weeks ago, I helped a family friend out by shooting parts of their child’s wedding. 

The first request was to think about shooting the entire wedding. Quickly I decided against that- just too much responsibility and I wasn’t confident enough in my skills to pull off weddings. As a compromise, I was only going to do the reception for “candid” photos. Which was fine by me, I wouldn’t know anyone there, and I could ‘hide’ behind my camera. The music would be playing, I could ignore the detail shots of things like the cake, or such. I just worried about the live music and people’ reactions to it. (i.e. dancing)

Then a week before the wedding they asked my wife and I to come by the house for the preparations for the bride. The traditional makeup, dress, vial, and dad seeing daughter for the first time sorts of shots. Alrighty- works for me. I knew the family, I had done an engagement photo session for them a year ago. However, I didn’t know anyone else. Plus, just about everyone in the family was speaking Spanish- which I don’t even understand. I might as well be paint drying on the walls at points. One other thing I need to figure out, a better personality while shooting. Being commanding, thinking about the shot and technical camera stuff, and personable at the same time.

The prep photos were my best, as the reception hall was a huge light sucking hall. I had two remote strobes with me, but even at half power, was just enough to get the dance floor with some nice light. My favorite 14-40mm f/4 was barely good enough to work. Thank goodness for the f/2.8 on the 70-200 and f/1.8 on the 50mm. Life might have hurt otherwise.  I got some decent action shots, but I did not have the gear for decent super low light people shots on the go.

For the actual wedding, I did not snap a single shot. The family had another person hired for the staged shots, and for a set time for the reception. As far as I could tell, she had only two camera bodies- a Canon 70D (maybe, looked like a X series) and a 6D. The 70D had a kit zoom on it... and the 6D had a 50mm f/1.2 prime. Thats it. (I was jealous of the 6D!) I think she broke out an on camera strobe at one point, but don’t recall it being used.  So I was not too surprised to see some of her samples which were mainly filter happy. (i.e. lots of post processing)

Tell me I am not crazy to think people like this seem to get work because they of the love of filters.

I like black and white images if they are done well. I also know that they are great for hiding problems in color images- mostly low light problems. It can mask some graininess from high ISO settings, or post production of pushing exposures up. So it was not shocking to see many recipetion hall shots from the hired help being converted or over filtered.

Maybe it is a style thing, I like a very much “what I see is what you get” sort of style. I don’t want super altered interpretation of the scene. It is one thing to have bokeh, it is another to apply “wedding filter #3” to half the images to make them stylish.

In the end however, my taste and view of things only matters if the person who wants them is happy. I equate it to the value of something- “the value of something is whatever someone is willing to pay.” In this case, the willing to pay is if they are happy with the results.

I think the family was happy- they want to take us out to dinner as a thank you.