October 20, 2014, 10:19:10 PM

Author Topic: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]  (Read 44407 times)

kaihp

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #75 on: July 10, 2013, 09:05:18 AM »
I figure the last minute stuff they might do is not in the hardware but in the firmware.  And it may be putting in limitations, not adding features.  Say Canon has created a 7DII that has 14 fps.  Before Canon announces the camera, Nikon announces a comparable camera that has 10 fps.  Canon can now change the firmware to support only 12 fps, still top Nikon, and save some performance for an easy update (new body or new firmware) later if they need it.

Obviously, changing firmware can go either way, but simple things like reducing fps or buffer size are very easy - much easier than improving them if you've already created the "best" firmware you can write at the time.  I used fps in the example because the numbers are easy to work with and the change could be minimal.

And this works if you switch "Canon" and "Nikon" above or change them to any other manufacturer.  You can make your product as good as it needs to be to compete but not better.

Of course, I am looking forward to what Canon has come up with for the 7DII although  I'm still very happy with my 7D (preordered when they announced it (I wanted 8 fps :) ) and just passed 100k images).

Even if it was as simple as changing one variable in one line of code in the firmware, they could not do it in a month,
even if everything else was ready to "pull the trigger"

Nikon releases product....
Canon executives discuss Nikon release.....
Decision is made to change from 14 to 12 frames per second....
30 seconds later, line of code is changed....
manual is edited.... order goes out to print new ones
box graphics are edited, order goes out to print new ones
new boxes and manuals are printed and arrive back at factory.
cameras and manuals are packed into new boxes....
stock is shipped worldwide.....
product is released.....

No way could that be done in a month....

I agree with Don here, but that may be because I have a similar background of Electronics. I designed integrated circuits for 16 years.

V&V will very quickly also take more than a month. Software is quite tricky and sometimes "dead simple things" just trip up stuff. But I work in the medical device industry (hearing aids), and there V&V is required.

As for doing plastic injection molding, design can take 3-9 months, then tooling is designed (the big metal box that contains the cavity that makes the actual part), tooling manufacture and then V&V on the samples - did the snaps turn out OK, are the dimensions within spec, is Marketing happy. It all takes time. Lots of time.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #75 on: July 10, 2013, 09:05:18 AM »

schill

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 114
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #76 on: July 10, 2013, 09:14:50 AM »
I figure the last minute stuff they might do is not in the hardware but in the firmware.  And it may be putting in limitations, not adding features.  Say Canon has created a 7DII that has 14 fps.  Before Canon announces the camera, Nikon announces a comparable camera that has 10 fps.  Canon can now change the firmware to support only 12 fps, still top Nikon, and save some performance for an easy update (new body or new firmware) later if they need it.

Obviously, changing firmware can go either way, but simple things like reducing fps or buffer size are very easy - much easier than improving them if you've already created the "best" firmware you can write at the time.  I used fps in the example because the numbers are easy to work with and the change could be minimal.

And this works if you switch "Canon" and "Nikon" above or change them to any other manufacturer.  You can make your product as good as it needs to be to compete but not better.

Of course, I am looking forward to what Canon has come up with for the 7DII although  I'm still very happy with my 7D (preordered when they announced it (I wanted 8 fps :) ) and just passed 100k images).

Even if it was as simple as changing one variable in one line of code in the firmware, they could not do it in a month,
even if everything else was ready to "pull the trigger"

Nikon releases product....
Canon executives discuss Nikon release.....
Decision is made to change from 14 to 12 frames per second....
30 seconds later, line of code is changed....
manual is edited.... order goes out to print new ones
box graphics are edited, order goes out to print new ones
new boxes and manuals are printed and arrive back at factory.
cameras and manuals are packed into new boxes....
stock is shipped worldwide.....
product is released.....

No way could that be done in a month....

I agree with Don here, but that may be because I have a similar background of Electronics. I designed integrated circuits for 16 years.

V&V will very quickly also take more than a month. Software is quite tricky and sometimes "dead simple things" just trip up stuff. But I work in the medical device industry (hearing aids), and there V&V is required.

As for doing plastic injection molding, design can take 3-9 months, then tooling is designed (the big metal box that contains the cavity that makes the actual part), tooling manufacture and then V&V on the samples - did the snaps turn out OK, are the dimensions within spec, is Marketing happy. It all takes time. Lots of time.

I think people are missing my point.  All I was saying is that there are some things that can be changed much closer to the release of the product than others.  I never said anything about changing hardware (electronic or otherwise).

I don't believe reducing the fps of the camera will typically require retooling the molds (increasing it, maybe, but not reducing it). :)

If they have any freedom in modifying the design when they get close to release (again, before printing manuals, boxes, etc.) it is in the firmware.  And I still believe it is easier to dial back some functionality (like fps) than it is to improve it.

I do not have a problem with management saying "reduce the fps from 14 to 12 and get it tested in the next month while we print the manuals and boxes."  That may not be ideal, but I can certainly see it happening.

In fact, I will not be surprised if they already built some of this into the coding and testing process, just to give them the flexibility to change closer to the "last minute."

And since we are specifying backgrounds, while I have never developed firmware for a commercial product, I have been involved professionally in software development for 18+ years, as a hobby for a lot longer, and I've written plenty of low-level code and firmware for microcontrollers as a hobby (while nothing close to a camera's firmware, I know the effects small changes can have).

[Edit] And regarding manuals, with the move to PDF manuals instead of printed ones, who's to say that the manual can't be changed the night before I walk into B&H to buy my camera.  They have the potential to update them whenever they want - that can easily be extended to controlling the initial release of the manual until they want to, even if they've already shipped the product.

Companies have been moving away from print manuals and just including CDs with PDFs.  Now, some are starting to include only a quick-start sheet or PDF on CD.  To get the full manual you need to download it.

There's less and less of a need to include a print manual in the box.

Also, as far as printing boxes goes, does Canon include that much of a description of the camera features on the box?  I don't have a clue what's on my 7D box (and I don't keep it with me at all times :) ).  I don't remember the EOS-M box having too much written on it.  These are not boxes that are typically sitting on retail shelves for potential buyers to pick up and read.  They don't have all of the information that other retail products have.  I don't think I've ever seen store where I could walk in and pick up a 7D box and start reading it - you usually don't see the boxes at all.  The only place I might expect this would be Costco, maybe, for some cameras.  But Canon definitely doesn't design boxes that are screaming out the features of the contents to consumers.

You could probably change something like fps even after the boxes were printed and nobody would know the difference.  You just couldn't change a 7D mkII to a 3D without reprinting - I'd be wary of buying a camera in a box with a sticker over the camera name.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2013, 09:24:44 AM by schill »

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3086
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #77 on: July 10, 2013, 09:56:27 AM »
...
I think people are missing my point.  All I was saying is that there are some things that can be changed much closer to the release of the product than others.  I never said anything about changing hardware (electronic or otherwise).

Like what, exactly?

Quote
If they have any freedom in modifying the design when they get close to release (again, before printing manuals, boxes, etc.) it is in the firmware.  And I still believe it is easier to dial back some functionality (like fps) than it is to improve it.

I'm pretty sure that all of the primary features are agreed upon and nailed down well in advance.

About the only thing that I could see them adding "late" would be "more high ISO" that is really noisy.

If someone thought that adding in a 14fps mode to top the 12fps mode with a few months left until announce and did so, I'm pretty sure they'd be kicked out the door.

Consider that it was 3 years from the release of the 7D in 2009 to firmware version 2.0 in 2012.

There are lots of people that think they know what it means to write software and/or build electronics hardware. Few indeed that understand what it takes to deliver such a product that is of a high enough quality standard to command the price of DSLRs.

JohanCruyff

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #78 on: July 10, 2013, 10:08:32 AM »
3. As I've said for YEARS: APS-H is dead. Please don't keep resurrecting it.   ::) APS-H is now an unnecessary 'half way house' between APS-C and FF.  The 6D particularly demonstrates that.  Leave it to RIP, please!
 - APS-C for budget sensor, on camera flash, 'reach' (ie pixel density for certain applications - eg birding, some sports), and to make use of the wonderful array of EF-S lenses (many of which are L class in terms of image quality.
 - FF for more depth of field (DOF) control and per pixel sharpness, lower noise, and possibly in the (near) future, an overall much higher resolution photo - already competing with Medium Format.

Maybe you're right, APS-H is an unnecessary compromise between FF and APS-C.
If you're right, we can consider G15 is an unnecessary compromise between standard point&shoot cameras and EOS M.
And maybe APS-C sensor is an unnecessary compromise between P&Ss and FF.
And maybe P&Ss are unnecessary compromises between smartphones and FF.
And ...
 
 
Well, I think that a few compromises deserve to survive.
Italian amateur. Gear: i) 5d Classic, 17-40 F/4 L, 24-105mm F/4 IS L, 100mm F/2.8 IS L, 70-200 F/4 IS L. & EOS M, 22 F/2, 18-55 + Mount Adapter, 55-250 F/4-5.6 IS STM
ii) Wife: Canon G12
iii) First Daughter: Canon 1100D, 18-55 IS iv) Son: Canon A1000IS v) Second Daughter: Nikon L21

schill

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 114
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #79 on: July 10, 2013, 10:20:40 AM »
...
I think people are missing my point.  All I was saying is that there are some things that can be changed much closer to the release of the product than others.  I never said anything about changing hardware (electronic or otherwise).

Like what, exactly?

Quote
If they have any freedom in modifying the design when they get close to release (again, before printing manuals, boxes, etc.) it is in the firmware.  And I still believe it is easier to dial back some functionality (like fps) than it is to improve it.

I'm pretty sure that all of the primary features are agreed upon and nailed down well in advance.

About the only thing that I could see them adding "late" would be "more high ISO" that is really noisy.

If someone thought that adding in a 14fps mode to top the 12fps mode with a few months left until announce and did so, I'm pretty sure they'd be kicked out the door.

Consider that it was 3 years from the release of the 7D in 2009 to firmware version 2.0 in 2012.

There are lots of people that think they know what it means to write software and/or build electronics hardware. Few indeed that understand what it takes to deliver such a product that is of a high enough quality standard to command the price of DSLRs.

If you actually read my post, my example was dropping down from 14 to 12 fps - not increasing it.  And if you think it "might" be possible to add "more high ISO" why "might" it not be possible to reduce fps from 14 to 12?

The whole point of my post, which I think is completely lost by now, was that if anything can be done at "the last minute" - and I did not define when that was - it is to remove or reduce features that are enabled/controlled in the firmware as opposed to in hardware.  It is typically (although not always) easier to remove functionality rather than add it.  In fact, you can leave functionality in place and just remove the menu option that turns it on and off in some cases.

In other words, while at some point the hardware design may be fixed you can still change the firmware to adapt at least to some extent to the market.  If Canon decides after seeing Nikon's latest release that the 7DII is better than it needs to be, they could reduce functionality.  It is easier to say "we don't need 14fps, drop it down to 12" than it is to say "we need to up the 12fps to 14."  By the way, I also never said that I think this actually happens.

unfocused

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2177
    • View Profile
    • Unfocused: A photo website
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #80 on: July 10, 2013, 10:37:14 AM »
While it is unrealistic to suggest that Canon (or Nikon) can completely and quickly revise a product based on what their competitor does, it is also unrealistic to suggest that the companies don't react and respond to each others' releases.

As I stated before, these two companies have been competing for nearly a century. They know their competitors' businesses inside and out. They are not sitting around waiting for the press release announcing a new product. Honestly, the development cycle is kind of irrelevant. It doesn't matter if it takes six months or six years to develop a product. The critical factor is how long it takes for the competition to find out what the other company is doing.

Let's say Nikon decides to put a new sensor in the D400. The development time isn't the critical factor here, it is the lag time between when Nikon makes decisions and when Canon finds out what those decisions are. For argument's sake, let's say that on average there is a one-month lag time. Doesn't matter if the development time is six years, Canon's intelligence is on a one-month lag time and that's the operative number.

Of course, this is a gross oversimplification. Some decisions may be known within minutes of the company making them. Some may not be known until the product is unveiled. Some are just common sense things that even people here on Canon Rumors can figure out (Pretty much everyone with a brain knew the 5DIII would have better autofocus than the 5DII).

You can be sure that both Nikon and Canon have people whose sole responsibility is to know what the other company is doing at all times. This isn't necessarily nefarious or underhanded. These are publicly traded companies with divisions around the world. Much of the information is readily available to anyone who takes the time to look for it and knows what they are looking for.

Additionally, they both serve the same market and so their market research is likely to run parallel to one another. There is a reason why the D4 and 1D-X are basically twins – their customers are drawn from the same pool of professional photographers.

None of us knows exactly how much consideration of the competitor's product goes into the final release decision, but to suggest that they act independently of one another is a bit naive.
pictures sharp. life not so much. www.unfocusedmg.com

kaihp

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #81 on: July 10, 2013, 10:40:27 AM »
If you actually read my post, my example was dropping down from 14 to 12 fps - not increasing it.  And if you think it "might" be possible to add "more high ISO" why "might" it not be possible to reduce fps from 14 to 12?

The whole point of my post, which I think is completely lost by now, was that if anything can be done at "the last minute" - and I did not define when that was - it is to remove or reduce features that are enabled/controlled in the firmware as opposed to in hardware.  It is typically (although not always) easier to remove functionality rather than add it.  In fact, you can leave functionality in place and just remove the menu option that turns it on and off in some cases.

Please see Don's point about printing manuals. Menu spelling errors (like in the Info boxes) could be changed without having to change manuals. Depending on how paranoid you are, you could/could not do without V&V on the changed firmware.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #81 on: July 10, 2013, 10:40:27 AM »

garyknrd

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 156
  • Birding
    • View Profile
    • Bird photography
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #82 on: July 10, 2013, 10:42:18 AM »
Looks like a few different company's are going to market pretty soon. Pentax is suppose to have a new one, Nikon I am sure will. Sony might. I am looking forward to the coming year. I will be in crop heaven. I will probably never have a FF camera. Not in the plans what so ever.
Live between Thailand and Texas, USA

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #83 on: July 10, 2013, 01:35:30 PM »
I like the specs.  I just pre ordered my EOS 7D Mk II.  Can't wait to get it out in the field with my 5D Mk III and get back to enjoying the good life, 5d in one hand, 7d in the other...  Should be a great combination and the Fastest canon in the west...    ;)

I like the September/October announcement and Spring 2014 release date...  8)
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400L, 70-200 2.8L II, 24-105L, 16-35L IS, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, Samy 14mm 2.8,  600 EX-RT, 580EX II, 430EX II, 1.4X III, 2.0X III

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4811
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #84 on: July 10, 2013, 01:55:31 PM »
Is the 5D pro? Canon officially classifies it as prosumer, and while a lot of pros do use it, I am not sure if it fits into that category.

You can see what's pro and what's not by looking at the European CPS program that qualifies products into 3
categories. 1d/5d2/5d3 = platinum (pro), 6d = silver (consumer): https://cps.canon-europe.com/Public/QualifyingProducts

While it is unrealistic to suggest that Canon (or Nikon) can completely and quickly revise a product based on what their competitor does, it is also unrealistic to suggest that the companies don't react and respond to each others' releases.

It would be really interesting to have more insight into their development process:

My guess that Canon has lots of patents (see all the lens [cr] here] and semi-finished products, but all w/o final optimization stages and production streamlining. If so, they can react fairly quickly, they just take parts from other products or open the drawer, pull out the blueprints and take some month to produce them. Proof seems to be the 6d, they conjured that up out of thin air just to sidestep Nikon's d600 while not endangering the 5d3.

Cory

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #85 on: July 10, 2013, 02:04:29 PM »
Do you think that there might be a Rebel to follow that'll have the 7DII sensor?  If so I wonder if that might be my upgrade from a T1i.
70D, 10-18, 35 2.0 IS, Sigma 50 1.4 Art, 100 2.0 and 200 2.8II
EOS M/22 2.0
430EXII

pedro

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 780
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #86 on: July 10, 2013, 02:06:45 PM »



About the only thing that I could see them adding "late" would be "more high ISO" that is really noisy.


As I am not involved in software programming, how does that work, if a camera manufacturer sees the necestiy to crank up the ISO? Sorry for my ignorance in so many tech related things...
30D, EF-S 10-22/ 5DIII, 16-35 F/2.8 L USM II, 28 F/2.8, 50 F/1.4, 85 F/1.8, 70-200 F/2.8 classic,
join me at http://www.flickr.com/groups/insane_isos/

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4460
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #87 on: July 10, 2013, 02:17:48 PM »



About the only thing that I could see them adding "late" would be "more high ISO" that is really noisy.


As I am not involved in software programming, how does that work, if a camera manufacturer sees the necestiy to crank up the ISO? Sorry for my ignorance in so many tech related things...

I am not sure that is just purely a software thing. There is firmware involved, but that firmware is really instructing the hardware to do something, and if the hardware is incapable, then I don't think just a firmware update will do it. When it comes to ISO, the firmware is really instructing the hardware to use a different gain. I don't really know enough about electronics at that scale to know definitively if the hardware explicitly needs to support a specific analog gain, but I am willing to bet that it is more complicated than a "simple" firmware update to, say, add a native ISO 25600 to a camera that previously only supported ISO 12800. I bet the hardware needs to support it first.

I am not sure if a digital sensor would be the same. Exmor, which does pretty much everything except the initial pixel read digitally (bits, rather than charge)...so it might be easier to simply add a higher ISO setting with Exmor via just a firmware update than it would be for any other sensor.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #87 on: July 10, 2013, 02:17:48 PM »

hmmm

  • Guest
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #88 on: July 10, 2013, 02:20:03 PM »
Do you think that there might be a Rebel to follow that'll have the 7DII sensor?  If so I wonder if that might be my upgrade from a T1i.

My guess is that the next Rebel will have the sensor from the 70D.    Sometime in mid-2014.

If the 7D mkII has a next-gen sensor architecture, it would not make it to the Rebels until two generations from now, is my guess.   That would make it 2015.   That would give Canon time to deploy next-gen sensor architecture to pro models and perhaps even the 80D before it trickles down to the Rebel level.


pedro

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 780
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #89 on: July 10, 2013, 02:23:16 PM »
@jrista: Thank you for the explanation!
30D, EF-S 10-22/ 5DIII, 16-35 F/2.8 L USM II, 28 F/2.8, 50 F/1.4, 85 F/1.8, 70-200 F/2.8 classic,
join me at http://www.flickr.com/groups/insane_isos/

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]
« Reply #89 on: July 10, 2013, 02:23:16 PM »