DKW: As for the readers of DigiKame Watch, there are many who are waiting for the EOS 7D’s sucessor. Up through the release of last year’s major firmware update, there were many who felt that a new model with even better specs would be released shortly…
MM: Yes, they would be correct. For us, it’s about looking at what the camera has the potential to be and then adding that to what it can currently do. I do think the current model is still very attractive to buyers. And while we are, of course, developing its successor, it’ll be one that incorporates a certain number of innovative technologies. We will not be putting out a product with merely better specs, but one that has evolved into new territory. But then again, we’re not talking about something a long time from now either.
Maeda said the 7D successor would incorporate a certain number of innovative technologies. He said they would not be putting out a product "with merely better specs", but instead "one that has evolved into new territory."
Guess it depends on how you interpret that whether the product will be anticlimactic or not. It could be considered that 65pt AF, 20.2mp sensor, and DPAF is "incorporating a number of innovative technologies." It could also be considered that those new technologies are "merely better specs."
What is the definition of a product that has "evolved into new territory?" DPAF isn't new, and neither is 20.2mp. A 65pt AF might be new, although it does sound a lot like the 61pt AF system...it would be "evolution" rather than "revolution." Overall, none of the rumored improvements really seem to take the 7D II into a "new area" per-se...but, it's still all just rumors.
Whole thing is still exceptionally vague.
Revolutionary would imply that the new camera would allow us to do what we couldn't before (either the 7D or any other camera).
What is described in the rumored specs doesn't meet that test, so it isn't revolutionary. A camera like the GH4 is revolutionary. A camera like the a7s is revolutionary. A camera like the 7D was revolutionary. A camera like the 5D3 was revolutionary. Even the 70D was revolutionary. What is being described for the 7D2 so far is not. And therein lies the problem, but we shall see in a few days, hopefully
I wouldn't necessarily call the 70D revolutionary. The DPAF technology in the 70D wasn't really even revolutionary...it was an evolutionary improvement on previous PDAF technology. It is actually very difficult to create something that is truly revolutionary, when you get down into the details. Very few things are going to be "revolutionary" in the camera industry. The 5D III was a MAJOR improvement over the 5D II, however relative to the whole market...it wasn't necessarily revolutionary. It got many of the things it required to remain a competitive DSLR line, and it inherited most of those improvements from other cameras that were previously released. The 61pt AF system came from the 1D X. The iFCL metering came from the 7D. The sensor inherited improvements originally designed, not even for the 1D X, but I believe the 1D C.
I don't even know that I'd call the A7s revolutionary. It uses extensive in-camera processing to reduce noise. That was actually done by Canon with DIGIC 6, long before BionzX came out. Canon used the technology in pretty low-end devices, and therefor it did not really make many waves...but Canon started doing much of what BionzX is doing long before Sony did.
The only thing I would call truly revolutionary was the design of Exmor itself. It was a rather radical departure from conventional sensor design. The massive reduction in read noise it achieved (even in high-grade scientific CCD sensor design, read noise less than ~5e- is VERY rare, practically unheard of)...to have 3e- RN at ISO 100 is phenomenal!
Some would even argue that Exmor isn't even revolutionary, but that it was evolutionary, and cobbled together concepts and ideas from prior art. CP-ADC wasn't invented by Sony, it was actually described in papers years before. I think the amalgamation of CP-ADC and DCDS, along with moving the high-frequency clock to a remote die location, packaging the whole entire thing onto a single die with a purely digital readout system, was ultimately Sony's invention...but even the great Exmor could still be considered an evolution on top of previously devised concepts.
The 5D III (taken as a whole, the sum of all it's improvements), and Exmor, are probably the only two still photography camera improvements in recent years that I think legitimately qualify for the term "revolutionary."
I doubt the 7D II will be considered the same, if most of it's technology is not really new.