Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]

[RMC33]

They could have made this a FF!!!

No... that misses the point entirely.

+1 ... if it is made into a FF, it will cost a small fortune and will be out of reach for many people like me.

If they made this FF this would be a 1D

Copy all.

My point being, Nikon threw out a monster FF at a price point (D800) I would have stood in line for. I am more than happy with my 7D, but if they can make the follow-on 7D for $2100, then surely the tech know-how is out there to enlarge the sensor to FF and sell for $2,500-$2,600 with the same specs stated in the original post. It is not a far stretch to do it IMO.

Though if it is truely a simple issue of it being a 1D with a price of $6,000, they can keep it.

It is not a tech/know how thing. The 7D is what it is because of the crop factor that is SO very useful. I own a 7D and 5d3 + 200 f/2 and 400 f/2.8 II that I use for the majority of my shooting. I effectively have 4 focal lengths (200 320 400 and 640) that I find VERY useful with 2 bodies and 2 lenses. A FF 7D MkII would remove this from my stable and force me to buy TC's I don't want to own, swap up to a 1DIV (big consideration) or buy a gently used 7D (which canon does not want) to maintain that 1.6 factor. If you want a FF 7D, buy a 5DMk3. The specs (other then the FPS.. which I bet will be limited to 8 with AF) are very similar.

[jimjamesjimmy]

They could have made this a FF!!!

No... that misses the point entirely.

+1 ... if it is made into a FF, it will cost a small fortune and will be out of reach for many people like me.

If they made this FF this would be a 1D

Copy all.

My point being, Nikon threw out a monster FF at a price point (D800) I would have stood in line for. I am more than happy with my 7D, but if they can make the follow-on 7D for $2100, then surely the tech know-how is out there to enlarge the sensor to FF and sell for $2,500-$2,600 with the same specs stated in the original post. It is not a far stretch to do it IMO.

Though if it is truely a simple issue of it being a 1D with a price of $6,000, they can keep it.

It is not a tech/know how thing. The 7D is what it is because of the crop factor that is SO very useful. I own a 7D and 5d3 + 200 f/2 and 400 f/2.8 II that I use for the majority of my shooting. I effectively have 4 focal lengths (200 320 400 and 640) that I find VERY useful with 2 bodies and 2 lenses. A FF 7D MkII would remove this from my stable and force me to buy TC's I don't want to own, swap up to a 1DIV (big consideration) or buy a gently used 7D (which canon does not want) to maintain that 1.6 factor. If you want a FF 7D, buy a 5DMk3. The specs (other then the FPS.. which I bet will be limited to 8 with AF) are very similar.

maybe the ideal solution is to one day get rid of aps-c altogether and just have  more compact cheaper long lenses that mortals can afford. cuts out a whole industry lol  but would make things more focused.

[tortilla]

I really have to emphasize this: In no way, ever, can diffraction produce worse results on a higher resolution sensor than a lower resolution sensor. EVER.

I still doubt that 24 MPixel will deliver higher resolution at f/8 and smaller apertures than 18 MPixel. But I agree, it won't be worse either.

The biggest advantage of high MPixel sensors is IMO that they deliver more information that can be used for denoising and getting cleaner images at high ISO.

[Don Haines]

maybe the ideal solution is to one day get rid of aps-c altogether and just have  more compact cheaper long lenses that mortals can afford. cuts out a whole industry lol  but would make things more focused.

But that's the reason for APS-C in the first place....

[Dick]

maybe the ideal solution is to one day get rid of aps-c altogether

Doesn't sound too sound. Business is business. I bet that if Canon wanted to, it could sell FF bodies for less. Selling APS-C bodies as the cheap alternative is a great way to make additional money out of FF bodies. Focusing purely on larger sensors could actually lower profits. Most cash is surely made with the cheap stuff anyway.

[RMC33]

As Don stated:

maybe the ideal solution is to one day get rid of aps-c altogether and just have  more compact cheaper long lenses that mortals can afford. cuts out a whole industry lol  but would make things more focused.

But that's the reason for APS-C in the first place....

APS-C has saved me about $15000 in not having to buy a 300 f/2.8 and 600 f/4 to fill those gaps on FF, made my gear bag two lenses lighter while working and been a solid workhorse/survive all the stupid things I do on a daily basis.

Edit: Until last weak when my 7D died.

[jrista]

I really have to emphasize this: In no way, ever, can diffraction produce worse results on a higher resolution sensor than a lower resolution sensor. EVER.

I still doubt that 24 MPixel will deliver higher resolution at f/8 and smaller apertures than 18 MPixel. But I agree, it won't be worse either.

The biggest advantage of high MPixel sensors is IMO that they deliver more information that can be used for denoising and getting cleaner images at high ISO.

Once you are below the DLA of the lower-resolution sensor, you won't get any more "resolution", however the detail resolved should still look better on the higher resolution sensor, as it will be more finely delinted. Beyond the DLA, you experience diminishing returns...that means things could still look better, however as you approach the minimum aperture of the lens, the improvements of the higher resolution sensor over the lower resolution sensor will diminish (not disappear, just diminish).

All of the current APS-C sensors are diffraction-limited by f/8, however diffraction is still so low at that point that it rarely matters unless you really need to resolve something with obscenely fine detail (i.e. you want to resolve the individual barbules on each barb of a birds feathers at a distance of a few feet...you are going to need something closer to a PERFECT f/4 or wider lens along with the highest resolution sensor you can possibly get your hands on...24.1mp would be pretty excellent in that situation.)

[Sporgon]

GPS & Wifi + build like 5D Mark III... Is that even possible? Doesn't 7D also have a pop up flash? Would be weird to drop it from Mark II.

Yes, the 7D does have a pop up flash. Proved useful this past weekend.

If it has GPS and WiFi won't part of it have to be plastic - so surely build quality would be more like 6D ?

If it does and the plastic proportion is more subtle then the intent with the 6D becomes more clear 

Personally if it was an APS 5D mk3, all alloy with no Horrible cheap weak plastic pop up flash I'd be very tempted !

[jrista]

GPS & Wifi + build like 5D Mark III... Is that even possible? Doesn't 7D also have a pop up flash? Would be weird to drop it from Mark II.

Yes, the 7D does have a pop up flash. Proved useful this past weekend.

If it has GPS and WiFi won't part of it have to be plastic - so surely build quality would be more like 6D ?

If it does and the plastic proportion is more subtle then the intent with the 6D becomes more clear 

Personally if it was an APS 5D mk3, all alloy with no Horrible cheap weak plastic pop up flash I'd be very tempted !

It is also possible to just stick the antennas outside of the metal body, with the rest of the electronics that support GPS and WiFi inside the body. The build quality need not suffer to include GPS and WiFi.

[RMC33]

GPS & Wifi + build like 5D Mark III... Is that even possible? Doesn't 7D also have a pop up flash? Would be weird to drop it from Mark II.

Yes, the 7D does have a pop up flash. Proved useful this past weekend.

If it has GPS and WiFi won't part of it have to be plastic - so surely build quality would be more like 6D ?

If it does and the plastic proportion is more subtle then the intent with the 6D becomes more clear 

Personally if it was an APS 5D mk3, all alloy with no Horrible cheap weak plastic pop up flash I'd be very tempted !

It is also possible to just stick the antennas outside of the metal body, with the rest of the electronics that support GPS and WiFi inside the body. The build quality need not suffer to include GPS and WiFi.

Canon already does this with their GPS transmitters. GP-E1/2 sit outside the body and work just great.

[jrista]

I have read this thread with interest, I have use  Canon cameras  the  10 last years
My own feelings is that this is some kind of  a wish list.
Where can I find some hard  facts about  what is going on with Canon and  theirs new sensor technology or are the using the same old technology but improved as good as it get?

Salta bilar// 7d 5dmk2 5dmk3

CanonRumors is the best place, really. Anything with a CR2 is pretty good information. The only time you will get better information is when CR starts posting CR3 rated rumors, which are, for all intents and purposes, fact.

[Dick]

It is also possible to just stick the antennas outside of the metal body, with the rest of the electronics that support GPS and WiFi inside the body. The build quality need not suffer to include GPS and WiFi.

The build quality would definitely suffer if built that way. Having fragile parts that are not protected does not sound like something I'd personally want as it somewhat makes the durable body pointless. External transmitters are for that kind of purposes and if they break, you don't necessarily need to get your camera body fixed.

[tortilla]

Once you are below the DLA of the lower-resolution sensor, you won't get any more "resolution", however the detail resolved should still look better on the higher resolution sensor, as it will be more finely delinted. Beyond the DLA, you experience diminishing returns...that means things could still look better, however as you approach the minimum aperture of the lens, the improvements of the higher resolution sensor over the lower resolution sensor will diminish (not disappear, just diminish).

All of the current APS-C sensors are diffraction-limited by f/8, however diffraction is still so low at that point that it rarely matters unless you really need to resolve something with obscenely fine detail (i.e. you want to resolve the individual barbules on each barb of a birds feathers at a distance of a few feet...you are going to need something closer to a PERFECT f/4 or wider lens along with the highest resolution sensor you can possibly get your hands on...24.1mp would be pretty excellent in that situation.)

I'm still not quite convinced. So I took a image with a 7D and a 50 mm 1.8 II, aperture f/11. I scaled it down to 13.5 Mpixel and up again to 18 Mpixel. Then I compared it to the original image. Even with pixelpeeping I can't recognize that the original has better image quality.

[Don Haines]

GPS & Wifi + build like 5D Mark III... Is that even possible? Doesn't 7D also have a pop up flash? Would be weird to drop it from Mark II.

Yes, the 7D does have a pop up flash. Proved useful this past weekend.

If it has GPS and WiFi won't part of it have to be plastic - so surely build quality would be more like 6D ?

If it does and the plastic proportion is more subtle then the intent with the 6D becomes more clear 

Personally if it was an APS 5D mk3, all alloy with no Horrible cheap weak plastic pop up flash I'd be very tempted !

The body is made of magnesium.

Air has a permeability of 1.000 000 37
Magnesium has a permiability of 1.000 12
Steel and iron are around 100
Mu-Metal, used for electromagnet shielding, is around 20,000 to 50,000

Think of permeability as the materials ability to react to (attenuate) radio signals.

In other words, the magnesium body is  for all practical purposes, transparent to electromagnetic waves (radio)..... and even if it wasn't, there are dozens of holes through the metal shell.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

They could have made this a FF!!!

They did.... 1DX (sort of, granted that is a bulky beast and lacks the GPS/wifi and, perhaps, a new-process sensor).

Anyway the point of the 7D is to get huge reach, what would 24MP do vs 5D3 for reach?