EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]

[neuroanatomist]

The Nikon D4 delivered 12 of 12 images in-focus. 100%.
The Canon 1Dx gave us 9 images in focus, 1 on the nose, and two on the ears.

So, where’s the confusion? Well, when we describe what is “in-focus”, it looks like the Canon 1Dx has a different definition of the term. Those 9 images that the 1Dx delivered in-focus absolutely destroyed the Nikon D4 in terms of detail and accuracy. In fact, that one that hit the nose seemed to be a bit more like what we saw from the D4 in every shot.

Speed is not all

Definitely not cut and dried.  Do you want 9/12 shots that deliver much better detail and accuracy, or 12/12 'okay' shots that are similar in level of detail to one of the slightly OOF 3/12 shots?

Given that choice, I'd take the 9/12 @ 12 fps from the 1D X that 'absolutely destroy the Nikon D4 in terms of detail and accuracy'.

Was that your point?

[bdunbar79]

The Nikon D4 delivered 12 of 12 images in-focus. 100%.
The Canon 1Dx gave us 9 images in focus, 1 on the nose, and two on the ears.

So, where’s the confusion? Well, when we describe what is “in-focus”, it looks like the Canon 1Dx has a different definition of the term. Those 9 images that the 1Dx delivered in-focus absolutely destroyed the Nikon D4 in terms of detail and accuracy. In fact, that one that hit the nose seemed to be a bit more like what we saw from the D4 in every shot.

Speed is not all

Definitely not cut and dried.  Do you want 9/12 shots that deliver much better detail and accuracy, or 12/12 'okay' shots that are similar in level of detail to one of the slightly OOF 3/12 shots?

Given that choice, I'd take the 9/12 @ 12 fps from the 1D X that 'absolutely destroy the Nikon D4 in terms of detail and accuracy'.

Was that your point?

This neuro, is why I'm taking handfuls of antacid tablets right now...

[neuroanatomist]

This neuro, is why I'm taking handfuls of antacid tablets right now...

If you let the trolls give you indigestion, you're going to need something stronger than an antacid tablet around here. 

[Jan van Holten]

Canon has nothing to respond to Nikon in terms of sensors today.
And about  AF you're wrong, 1DX  for example has a greater speed but the accuracy is lower than D4 in a series of shots/time.

It helps in other words not to have a higher speed / second if the outcome is not  good as with the Nikon.

Ergonomics is a highly subjective view of equipments

Are you trying to compensate for something?

[Don Haines]

There seems to be a lack of knowledge about the size of the individual pixels and resolution/noise .
Take for example D800 and if the image file is presented in the same size as the 5dmk3 , the D800 has better resolution up to 12800iso. Resolution , details is whats matter.

Ummmmm......
We are talking about an APSC test camera. What do full frame nikons and canons have to do with this topic? It's a bit like saying I'm going to buy a 7d2 because canon photo printers are superior......

[bseitz234]

Are you trying to compensate for something?

sounds like buyer's remorse to me... 

This neuro, is why I'm taking handfuls of antacid tablets right now...

If you let the trolls give you indigestion, you're going to need something stronger than an antacid tablet around here. 

Dare I ask your medication of choice? As a neuroanatomist you must have access to something stronger... ;-)

[sagittariansrock]

The Nikon D4 delivered 12 of 12 images in-focus. 100%.
The Canon 1Dx gave us 9 images in focus, 1 on the nose, and two on the ears.

So, where’s the confusion? Well, when we describe what is “in-focus”, it looks like the Canon 1Dx has a different definition of the term. Those 9 images that the 1Dx delivered in-focus absolutely destroyed the Nikon D4 in terms of detail and accuracy. In fact, that one that hit the nose seemed to be a bit more like what we saw from the D4 in every shot.

Speed is not all

Definitely not cut and dried.  Do you want 9/12 shots that deliver much better detail and accuracy, or 12/12 'okay' shots that are similar in level of detail to one of the slightly OOF 3/12 shots?

Given that choice, I'd take the 9/12 @ 12 fps from the 1D X that 'absolutely destroy the Nikon D4 in terms of detail and accuracy'.

Was that your point?

The point is that we  are discussing the AF reliability. 12of 12 or 9 of 12.

If I were you, I'd read more carefully before quoting. The lines in red sort of crush your argument... it seems to say D4 "reliable" is about as good as 1Dx "unreliable" 
In any case- wasn't this a 7DII thread! Why are people who haven't even used both (or probably either) of D4 and 1Dx comparing them on a 7DII thread!!!
I am more than happy with the specs. As long as the sensor is about 2 stops higher in sensitivity- give me everything else same as the 7D, and I'd still buy it. Call it 70D, 7DII, 100k, "the eye of the tiger", I don't care- just get it out into the stores...

[Don Haines]

In any case- wasn't this a 7DII thread! Why are people who haven't even used both (or probably either) of D4 and 1Dx comparing them on a 7DII thread!!!

then we are discussing something else, resolution and the lenses.

If you are discussing something else, please start a new thread and have a proper discussion....

[neuroanatomist]

then we are discussing something else, resolution and the lenses.

So, the lens has nothing to do with AF performance?  Really?!?

Regardless, you are the one talking about resolution and lenses.  I was talking about pictures, you know, those things that are the actual, relevant result of a shutter button press.  In the review you quoted, the scenario was the top pro body with the top 85mm prime from each manufacturer. The verdict was 12/12 shots from Nikon that were about as good as a slightly OOF shot from the Canon, vs. 9/12 far better shots from the Canon.

We can dissect and discuss individual components of each imaging system, and argue their relative merits in isolation, and sometimes that's useful. But ultimately, we're talking about imaging systems that take pictures. If you'd prefer 100% mediocre images to 75% outstanding images, that's certainly your choice.  It wouldn't be mine.

[timmy_650]

When I watched that video. They still liked canon pictures over the Nikon with the nose and ears.

[Larry]

But ultimately, we're talking about imaging systems that take pictures. If you'd prefer 100% mediocre images to 75% outstanding images, that's certainly your choice.  It wouldn't be mine.

Gotta agree. Lets do numbers:

Would you rate an "eyes out of focus" portrait 800 out of 1000? I don't think I would rate it that high, but anyway-

Nikon gets 12 of those, for a score of 8400.

Canon gets 3 (2400), plus 9 perfect shots (9000) for a score of 11,400.

And the (Canon) crowd goes wild! 

[greger]

Very Interesting! I've just read 10 pages about a maybe 7Dll test camera or maybe the 70D as some people have posted
as their response. I think if this does make it to Market it will be a nice camera. I should have read posts on technique
and not this.

[mkabi]

Lets be real you all...

Lets look at price points.

If this camera is better than 6D, it will cost more than the 6D.

If this camera is better than the 5D Mk3, then it will cost more than the 5D Mk3.

By the way, why would Canon create a camera thats a huge leap from the 5D Mk3, when the 5D Mk3 was released last year?

Also, back to pricing... why would they create a cheaper APS-C camera with better specs than the 5D Mk3? If you were a business man... and this is your business, would you think that this is a smart maneuver? Losing potential customers of FF?

Y'all want amazing specs but don't want to spend an arm and a leg to get it, otherwise you would have gotten a FF camera in the first place.

[M.ST]

The mentioned specs hit to 100 percent one prototype that is out for testing.

But there are two different prototypes out for testing.

The AF system is totally new and amazing compared to the 6D AF system.

[Don Haines]

By the way, why would Canon create a camera thats a huge leap from the 5D Mk3, when the 5D Mk3 was released last year?

Also, back to pricing... why would they create a cheaper APS-C camera with better specs than the 5D Mk3? If you were a business man... and this is your business, would you think that this is a smart maneuver? Losing potential customers of FF?

When new technology is introduced, it is seldom a case of introducing it at the top of the line.... Canon is a conservative company and one of the halmarks of it's top cameras is stable, tried, and true.

When new sensor technology and/or focus systems are introduced, it will probably be much lower in the lineup... the 7D2 is a perfect candidate for this with it's position in the lineup and the timing. It will be what it will be.... the top APS-C camera. It does not compete with FF cameras (much). People who want FF want FF and very few are going to be tempted by APS-C. Even if it comes out with fantastic specs that beat the 5D3 ( rumour was ALMOST as good), what this will tell all the FF users is that the next upgrade of a FF camera will be substantially ahead of what they have now, and most will probably start saving thier pennies for the 5D4 or 6D2