Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]

[RGF]

Doubt that they will be able to hit 24 MP and 10 FPS.

Maybe 18 MP and 10 FPS or 24 MP and 6-8 FPS.

[jrista]

Doubt that they will be able to hit 24 MP and 10 FPS.

Maybe 18 MP and 10 FPS or 24 MP and 6-8 FPS.

I think people have made certain assumptions about the 1D X's dual DIGIC 5+ DSP's processing speed based on incorrect calculations. Most of the numbers I've seen seem to be based on a 12fps frame rate...but remember that the 1D X has a mirror-lockup 14fps rate as well. Additionally, most people forget that Canon RAW images include a bunch of masked off pixels around the border of the sensor. The actual pixel count is 19.3mp, rather than 18mp, when it comes to computing the data processing throughput rate. Given that:

The 1D X has at at least 33.8MB per RAW image assuming 19.3mp real pixel count. At 14 frames per second, the processing rate of each DIGIC chip would have to be at least 236MB/s (~473MB/s total, vs. the 144MB/s or 165MB/s per DIGIC I've seen calculated by others.) Accounting for some additional overhead, metadata included in the images, etc. I would say the processing rate of each DIGIC 5+ chip to be at least 250MB/s. That is 500MB/s total processing power.

If the 7D II has a 24.1mp sensor, its real pixel count is probably around 25.8mp. At 10fps, that is 225MB/s per DIGIC chip. That is actually LOWER than the data rate of the 1D X at its full 14fps speed. I see absolutely no problem for the 7D II, assuming it continues to use the same Dual-DIGIC approach as the 1D line, and the same generation and version of the DIGIC chips. Actually, a higher frame rate would probably be possible. Assuming an 11fps frame rate, the maximum throughput is still less than 500mb/s (although, with any additional overhead like metadata, dual DIGIC5+ might not actually be fast enough.)

[Krob78]

I'll be rushing out immediately to pick up a new 7D MK II.  What all the hub-bub is about regarding the original 7D is that the complete lack of any high ISO usage, renders images useless and totally unusable for any purpose, as this sample taken at ISO 3200 on my original 7D, clearly shows...  7D MK II please get here soon! 

EOS 7D
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6mm L IS USM
1/1000 sec
F/6.3
ISO 3200
400mm

[K-amps]

Great quote comes to mind: "The best time to buy a new digital camera is when it's NEW."

I wouldn't buy a 60D, T4i, or 7D today. They will all be replaced soon.
Wait or buy a 6D, 5DIII, 1Dx etc.

I would consider buying a 7D if the price on new units falls well below $1000.  It might, it might not.  I'll probably just buy a 6D by late summer, and keep my 50D (its noise isn't that much worse than the 7D, and the AF is way more usable than all the unfairly negative criticism would appear).  But I want the 6D/24-105 combo for the "nice price", which hasn't quite happened yet.  It's been close once, supposedly.  However, if I start seeing used 6D's going for $1150 and below, then I think I'll just spend more and get a new 5D3/24-105 instead.  The only used 6D's on amazon so far, are listed the same as the new price...or else within $100 of the new price (~1700-$1850).  Of course it's only been out three months.  I am more price conscious than many on here, mostly because I don't make $10k a week from doing photography.

If I made $10k a week... I'd own that Chess Set you have been drooling over...

[Krob78]

And with all due respect to my previous post & photo, I've found the 7D quite challenging to use over ISO 400 in any portraiture work... The 5D3 has been great in that respect for me, I'm interested in what the new 7D2 will actually spec out at, I'm positive I won't be a first adapter, if it's formidable however, I'd consider it, down the road a little... be crazy not too! 

[RS2021]

I'll be rushing out immediately to pick up a new 7D MK II.  What all the hub-bub is about regarding the original 7D is that the complete lack of any high ISO usage, renders images useless and totally unusable for any purpose, as this sample taken at ISO 3200 on my original 7D, clearly shows...  7D MK II please get here soon! 

EOS 7D
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6mm L IS USM
1/1000 sec
F/6.3
ISO 3200
400mm

Not to mention the fact that you are using that completely useless, worthless, good for nothing, sub-standard, totally blah, chuck-it-in-the-dustbin-already old clunker of a 100-400L zoom...barf, barf!!! No picture of any use whatsoever could be taken untill that day the new 7D2 and 100-400 version II arive. Then, and only then, will all be well and good in the world.

[jrista]

I'll be rushing out immediately to pick up a new 7D MK II.  What all the hub-bub is about regarding the original 7D is that the complete lack of any high ISO usage, renders images useless and totally unusable for any purpose, as this sample taken at ISO 3200 on my original 7D, clearly shows...  7D MK II please get here soon! 

EOS 7D
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6mm L IS USM
1/1000 sec
F/6.3
ISO 3200
400mm

Good photo (love the colors), but I would say there are some issues with it that are definitely due to the camera and lens combination. There is also no embedded metadata, so there really isn't any way for any of us to verify that it really was shot at ISO 3200.

I've taken a lot of bird photos at ISO 3200 on the 7D (mostly with the 100-400mm lens), and the noise is usually a lot worse than that. Assuming you have not applied any NR, there is definitely a loss of fidelity. There is also a loss of detail. The 100-400mm lens imposes increased softness at f/6.3, and even more at f/5.6...usually, f/7.1 is the sharpest aperture (as f/8 is beyond the DLA of the 7D sensor and just barely a touch softer).  Having used both the 100-400 as well as the 300 & 500 Mark II lenses on my 7D recently, I can attest to the fact that at that magnification/crop, even at ISO 3200, the lens is definitely costing you some sharpness and detail definition there...even though they are noisy, a shot taken the 300 or 500 w/ 1.4x TC at f/6.3 usually has much sharper detail.

I'd also point out that the full-size download shows a fair amount of posterization in the background, which is another one of the issues you encounter when using higher ISO settings with small pixels. Gain is so high for such a low full well capacity that you get a lot more quantization error than with something like the 5D III or 1D X and their significantly higher full well capacities.

[Krob78]

I'll be rushing out immediately to pick up a new 7D MK II.  What all the hub-bub is about regarding the original 7D is that the complete lack of any high ISO usage, renders images useless and totally unusable for any purpose, as this sample taken at ISO 3200 on my original 7D, clearly shows...  7D MK II please get here soon! 

EOS 7D
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6mm L IS USM
1/1000 sec
F/6.3
ISO 3200
400mm

Good photo (love the colors), but I would say there are some issues with it that are definitely due to the camera and lens combination. There is also no embedded metadata, so there really isn't any way for any of us to verify that it really was shot at ISO 3200.

I've taken a lot of bird photos at ISO 3200 on the 7D (mostly with the 100-400mm lens), and the noise is usually a lot worse than that. Assuming you have not applied any NR, there is definitely a loss of fidelity. There is also a loss of detail. The 100-400mm lens imposes increased softness at f/6.3, and even more at f/5.6...usually, f/7.1 is the sharpest aperture (as f/8 is beyond the DLA of the 7D sensor and just barely a touch softer).  Having used both the 100-400 as well as the 300 & 500 Mark II lenses on my 7D recently, I can attest to the fact that at that magnification/crop, even at ISO 3200, the lens is definitely costing you some sharpness and detail definition there...even though they are noisy, a shot taken the 300 or 500 w/ 1.4x TC at f/6.3 usually has much sharper detail.

I'd also point out that the full-size download shows a fair amount of posterization in the background, which is another one of the issues you encounter when using higher ISO settings with small pixels. Gain is so high for such a low full well capacity that you get a lot more quantization error than with something like the 5D III or 1D X and their significantly higher full well capacities.

Thank you.  In the interest of keeping things above board, I've re-uploaded the file with the metadata embedded as you desired sir! 

I agree that there is certainly some posteriztion in the background and it is certainly far from perfect, I would edit exposure and some other things as well.  That being said, it is not a crop, it's the actual size of that particular image.  I have other bird and wildlife images at high iso's with my 7d as well and some that are really quite usable.  Most with my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.  It is much more challenging with the 100-400 as you pointed out. 

I'm certainly not cheering the 7D and it's high ISO capabilities, just that for all the complaints about it, decent, usable images can be had at what is considered a high iso for that camera.  My complaint with it is with regard to high iso and portrait work, there it has given me some challenges...

I love my 7d, I love my 5D MK III even more, not at first though... I will be a candidate for the 7D MK II, most likely within the year after it is available...  My 7D will be passed down or sold sometime in that future... I must say, it's served me well for the over 50,000 images I've taken with it so far! 

[East Wind Photography]

You can also "help" the 7D noise at high ISO by overexposing and pulling it back down in post...try to get as much noise as possible down into the lower DR.  Easier to process out as well.  I never got anything like this at ISO 3200 but considering it's full frame and formatted for the web.  It is quite good.

I'll be rushing out immediately to pick up a new 7D MK II.  What all the hub-bub is about regarding the original 7D is that the complete lack of any high ISO usage, renders images useless and totally unusable for any purpose, as this sample taken at ISO 3200 on my original 7D, clearly shows...  7D MK II please get here soon! 

EOS 7D
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6mm L IS USM
1/1000 sec
F/6.3
ISO 3200
400mm

Good photo (love the colors), but I would say there are some issues with it that are definitely due to the camera and lens combination. There is also no embedded metadata, so there really isn't any way for any of us to verify that it really was shot at ISO 3200.

I've taken a lot of bird photos at ISO 3200 on the 7D (mostly with the 100-400mm lens), and the noise is usually a lot worse than that. Assuming you have not applied any NR, there is definitely a loss of fidelity. There is also a loss of detail. The 100-400mm lens imposes increased softness at f/6.3, and even more at f/5.6...usually, f/7.1 is the sharpest aperture (as f/8 is beyond the DLA of the 7D sensor and just barely a touch softer).  Having used both the 100-400 as well as the 300 & 500 Mark II lenses on my 7D recently, I can attest to the fact that at that magnification/crop, even at ISO 3200, the lens is definitely costing you some sharpness and detail definition there...even though they are noisy, a shot taken the 300 or 500 w/ 1.4x TC at f/6.3 usually has much sharper detail.

I'd also point out that the full-size download shows a fair amount of posterization in the background, which is another one of the issues you encounter when using higher ISO settings with small pixels. Gain is so high for such a low full well capacity that you get a lot more quantization error than with something like the 5D III or 1D X and their significantly higher full well capacities.

Thank you.  In the interest of keeping things above board, I've re-uploaded the file with the metadata embedded as you desired sir! 

I agree that there is certainly some posteriztion in the background and it is certainly far from perfect, I would edit exposure and some other things as well.  That being said, it is not a crop, it's the actual size of that particular image.  I have other bird and wildlife images at high iso's with my 7d as well and some that are really quite usable.  Most with my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.  It is much more challenging with the 100-400 as you pointed out. 

I'm certainly not cheering the 7D and it's high ISO capabilities, just that for all the complaints about it, decent, usable images can be had at what is considered a high iso for that camera.  My complaint with it is with regard to high iso and portrait work, there it has given me some challenges...

I love my 7d, I love my 5D MK III even more, not at first though... I will be a candidate for the 7D MK II, most likely within the year after it is available...  My 7D will be passed down or sold sometime in that future... I must say, it's served me well for the over 50,000 images I've taken with it so far!

[Rienzphotoz]

I'm certainly not cheering the 7D and it's high ISO capabilities, just that for all the complaints about it, decent, usable images can be had at what is considered a high iso for that camera.  My complaint with it is with regard to high iso and portrait work, there it has given me some challenges...

I agree. I liked your photo,  I think there is nothing wrong in that photo that a decent PP could not fix ... I would desaturate the background a bit so the bird would stand out more. But just curious about your comment on high ISO and portrait work ... why would you do portrait work in high ISO, any decent portrait work is usually (if not always) done in good light or studio lighting etc ... I thought most photographers consider it a sacrilege to use high ISO for portrait work.

I will be a candidate for the 7D MK II, most likely within the year after it is available... 

I'll get it when there is a good rebate ... maybe Christmas time

[jimmy kamballur]

Specification list
http://camerarumors.blogspot.in/2013/03/7d-mark-ii-will-have-32mp-sensor.html

[RS2021]

Specification list
http://camerarumors.blogspot.in/2013/03/7d-mark-ii-will-have-32mp-sensor.html

Bwahahahahahaha! 32 MP ....thanks for starting my saturday right with a laugh   

[westcoaster]

With all the sensor upgrades and talk of faster autofocus (different battery for that purpose), silly question - Do you think this will crack the restriction on using 2X teleconverters on f4 lenses? I always understood the smaller sensor and inability to autofocus to be the reason for Canon not officially sanctioning the use of 2x on anything smaller than f2.8 on cropped sensors.  You have to think these advancements could pave the way to cracking the 2X teleconverter. Thoughts? I would love to use a 2X on some of the bigger telephotos.

[jrista]

With all the sensor upgrades and talk of faster autofocus (different battery for that purpose), silly question - Do you think this will crack the restriction on using 2X teleconverters on f4 lenses? I always understood the smaller sensor and inability to autofocus to be the reason for Canon not officially sanctioning the use of 2x on anything smaller than f2.8 on cropped sensors.  You have to think these advancements could pave the way to cracking the 2X teleconverter. Thoughts? I would love to use a 2X on some of the bigger telephotos.

Most of the time, AF is limited to at least f/5.6 max apertures or wider. The ability to AF at f/8 max aperture (i.e. f/4 w/ 2x TC, f/5.6 w/ 1.4x TC) is really determined by the capabilities of the dedicated AF unit, not the size of the image sensor. The image sensor does not handle AF in a DSLR...a special AF sensor housed in the AF unit underneath the mirror box handles Phase Detection AF.

Historically, the 1D line of cameras has had AF sensors with DEDICATED f/8 sensitive strips, along with AF drive firmware in the body to actually handle the instructions to the lens to AF when the maximum aperture is f/8. Special care has to be taken when performing AF in such low light...it has to be done more slowly to allow enough light to reach the AF sensor such that an accurate read can be taken and the appropriate phase shift detected.

If all of Canon's new pro/semi-pro bodies (xD lines) get either the 61pt AF system, or AF systems that support very low light (i.e. -3 EV in the 6D), then f/8 AF should be possible. Since the 7D II is rumored to be getting the 61pt AF system, it sounds like it will also be inheriting that AF unit's f/8 AF ability and the necessary firmware (and power requirements).

[bdunbar79]

Specification list
http://camerarumors.blogspot.in/2013/03/7d-mark-ii-will-have-32mp-sensor.html

Bwahahahahahaha! 32 MP ....thanks for starting my saturday right with a laugh   

I spit up some coffee.  This is great, I haven't been watching any funny movies lately.  Thanks I needed that.