December 03, 2016, 07:06:07 AM

Author Topic: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts  (Read 37520 times)

candc

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1231
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #90 on: December 16, 2013, 08:56:06 PM »
The article at ********* makes sense. I read the interview where a canon exec said there would be a 7dii but they want it to be revolutionary not just evolutionary. I took that to mean a new manufacturing process, maybe its something else.

Anyway, 7dii is an evolutionary name, not a revolutionary one so I think what this is really all about is "what will the 7dii be called?"

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #90 on: December 16, 2013, 08:56:06 PM »

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5428
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #91 on: December 16, 2013, 09:32:25 PM »

There has never been a large, vocal outcry for Canon to add dynamic cropping modes to their cameras. There are certainly some niche groups of photographers who want it, but they seem to be far from the majority of Canon's customers.

Strictly speaking.... changing the aspect ratio is in-camera cropping.... but I know what you mean.

Personally, I shoot RAW and worry about cropping later. A lot of my personal work gets shown in 16x9 but I like the ability to sit down later and adjust the crop/size to what works best. At work, my shots end up in reports and documentation, so size/format are all over the place.... including playing with levels/contrast/color to make cables or markings stand out.... I don't think I have taken a single picture that was not the full sensor area.
The best camera is the one in your hands

mkabi

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 486
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #92 on: December 17, 2013, 12:10:59 AM »
There is a possibility that they may call it a 7DC... in which case... I'm sold.

I do not think its going to be a mini 1Dx or 1DC, because if any consumer/prosumer/enthusiast/professional was to choose between a 1Dx or a 7D mark II... they would always choose a 7D mark ii, because of price. Especially, if the only difference between them is going to be FF vs APS-C. In which case, Canon's 1 series bodies lose...

So, I too believe that the 7D mark ii is going to have a modest upgrade, but a modest upgrade from the 70D.
Same sensor as the 70D, better low light capabilities, more fps but not 12 fps., slightly better AF.... etc.

However, I think they are going to push 4K, may be 1080/120p.
Because, they know people can't afford the 1DC (but want 4K, seeing all of Magic Lantern efforts going towards that) and they have modest sales with the C100 so video is not going to die.
 
But expect the price to be a little less than the C100, which would put it next to the price a 5D mark iii, when it came out.

If Sony can make camcorders with 4K for $4000, then Canon can do the same with their DSLRs.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2013, 02:35:31 PM by mkabi »
Sold my Canon DSLRs waiting on my RED Raven preorder. EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L, EF 85mm f/1.8, EF 100mm L f/2.8 Macro, Custom Cine 50mm & Custom Cine 35mm.

Zlyden

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #93 on: December 17, 2013, 12:14:46 AM »
Regardless of what their initial intentions might have been, the reality is that the APS-C market is now too big and too independent for either Canon or Nikon to risk alienating and losing customers by not meeting the consumers' demands.

But, if consumer demand for P&S cameras is on rapid decline, APS-C size sensor cameras becomes the primary competition arena for all camera makers where they should try to recover sales volumes that compacts lost to smartphones.

This should lead to Canon's APS-C camera prices going even lower than they are now (because it needs to compete with mirrorless offerings in $200-400 price range). The price decrease may also lead to difficulty with sales of APS-C cameras in '$1000 and up' segment.

In such situation FF DSLRS and EF lenses could be long term solution (or at least 'short term solution', until it's forced to create mirrorless FF) for Canon. It will not take a lot of marketing efforts to convince consumers that 'bigger means better'. And having only Nikon and Sony in this segment as competitors, Canon will be differentiated enough from the rest of the camera-maker crowd.

Another problem that Canon faces now and may solve by killing of 7D (in my opinion) are owners of older APS-C cameras (like 550D, 600D or 60D) who feel that may need to purchase new camera, but can not decide -- which one? "I own 550D (or 60D) what should I buy: 70D, 6D, 7D or wait for 7D II?" -- is probably frequent enough question on any photo forum. If Canon will remove 7D from the lineup (and drop official MSRP of 6D to $1500-1600 level), the answer to this question and customer's choice will be much simpler (and bring some more $$$ to company's quarter sales report).
G7 | EOS M | 400D | 6D
EF: 50/1.8 II | 17-40 | 24-105 | 70-300DO / EF-S: 10-22 | 18-55 | 18-55 IS | Sigma 30/1.4 (old one) / EF-M: 11-22 | 18-55 | 22
I also own few Canon flashes, remotes, blends, bags, cases (including waterproof one) and even batteries! :)

wsmith96

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 845
  • Advancing Amateur
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #94 on: December 17, 2013, 08:35:55 AM »
Regardless of what their initial intentions might have been, the reality is that the APS-C market is now too big and too independent for either Canon or Nikon to risk alienating and losing customers by not meeting the consumers' demands.

But, if consumer demand for P&S cameras is on rapid decline, APS-C size sensor cameras becomes the primary competition arena for all camera makers where they should try to recover sales volumes that compacts lost to smartphones.

This should lead to Canon's APS-C camera prices going even lower than they are now (because it needs to compete with mirrorless offerings in $200-400 price range). The price decrease may also lead to difficulty with sales of APS-C cameras in '$1000 and up' segment.

In such situation FF DSLRS and EF lenses could be long term solution (or at least 'short term solution', until it's forced to create mirrorless FF) for Canon. It will not take a lot of marketing efforts to convince consumers that 'bigger means better'. And having only Nikon and Sony in this segment as competitors, Canon will be differentiated enough from the rest of the camera-maker crowd.

Another problem that Canon faces now and may solve by killing of 7D (in my opinion) are owners of older APS-C cameras (like 550D, 600D or 60D) who feel that may need to purchase new camera, but can not decide -- which one? "I own 550D (or 60D) what should I buy: 70D, 6D, 7D or wait for 7D II?" -- is probably frequent enough question on any photo forum. If Canon will remove 7D from the lineup (and drop official MSRP of 6D to $1500-1600 level), the answer to this question and customer's choice will be much simpler (and bring some more $$$ to company's quarter sales report).

funny you mention this as that's the position I'm in right now.  So far, my answer to this would be to get both.  ;)
What I do today is important because I am exchanging a day of my life for it.
T1i | 60D | 6D | 10-22 | Rokinon 14 2.8 | 17-55 | 24-105L | 50 1.4 | 60 Macro | 85 1.8 | 100 2.8L Macro | 70-200 2.8 Mk II L | 70-300 IS USM | 100-400L mkii | 430EX II x 3 | ST-E2 | 270EX | 1.4 Extender III

Zlyden

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #95 on: December 17, 2013, 09:11:30 AM »
funny you mention this as that's the position I'm in right now.  So far, my answer to this would be to get both.  ;)

Well, then it just means that Canon marketing folk are much wiser again and do need any suggestions from various forums.

They just needed to spread out rumor that will terminate another rumor about '7D II to be released very soon'... :)
G7 | EOS M | 400D | 6D
EF: 50/1.8 II | 17-40 | 24-105 | 70-300DO / EF-S: 10-22 | 18-55 | 18-55 IS | Sigma 30/1.4 (old one) / EF-M: 11-22 | 18-55 | 22
I also own few Canon flashes, remotes, blends, bags, cases (including waterproof one) and even batteries! :)

drmikeinpdx

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 491
  • Celebrating 20 years of naughty photography!
    • Beyond Boudoir Photo
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #96 on: December 17, 2013, 01:01:38 PM »
My 7D doesn't get much use anymore, because of the noise level.  I'd only be interested in a 7D2 if Canon makes a substanially lower noise 1.6 sensor and from what I've seen, they are not making much progress on that front.
Current bodies:  5D3, 700D, S100
Favorite lenses: 24-70 L2, 135 f/2.0 L, 85 f/1.8, 200 f/2.8 L, 50 f/1.2L, 24-105 L, 70-200 f/4 L, 35 f/2 IS.
blog:   http://www.BeyondBoudoirPhoto.com

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #96 on: December 17, 2013, 01:01:38 PM »

Zlyden

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #97 on: December 17, 2013, 01:39:49 PM »
My 7D doesn't get much use anymore, because of the noise level.  I'd only be interested in a 7D2 if Canon makes a substanially lower noise 1.6 sensor and from what I've seen, they are not making much progress on that front.

Well, it is not only Canon -- no camera makers in APS-C or 4/3 segment did make much progress on 'noise level' during past 10 years (unless a great jump from ISO 1600 being 'just awful' to 'almost acceptable' counts as a progress).

I do not think that it's possible that '7D II' may be much better in this quality... unless they will use the same type of sensors as in current FF cameras (like 6D) and reduce 18 MPs back to 8-10 MPs.
G7 | EOS M | 400D | 6D
EF: 50/1.8 II | 17-40 | 24-105 | 70-300DO / EF-S: 10-22 | 18-55 | 18-55 IS | Sigma 30/1.4 (old one) / EF-M: 11-22 | 18-55 | 22
I also own few Canon flashes, remotes, blends, bags, cases (including waterproof one) and even batteries! :)

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #98 on: December 17, 2013, 05:17:47 PM »

There has never been a large, vocal outcry for Canon to add dynamic cropping modes to their cameras. There are certainly some niche groups of photographers who want it, but they seem to be far from the majority of Canon's customers.

Strictly speaking.... changing the aspect ratio is in-camera cropping.... but I know what you mean.

Personally, I shoot RAW and worry about cropping later. A lot of my personal work gets shown in 16x9 but I like the ability to sit down later and adjust the crop/size to what works best. At work, my shots end up in reports and documentation, so size/format are all over the place.... including playing with levels/contrast/color to make cables or markings stand out.... I don't think I have taken a single picture that was not the full sensor area.

I think your misunderstanding just a little bit. By in-camera cropping, I am referring to the ability of say a FF sensor to support different crops wherein ONLY the cropped area is read out and saved to a proper RAW image format. If Canon released a 46mp FF sensor, they might also provide an 18mp APS-C cropped read. By doing so, they could offer more than just crop, but ALSO offer higher frame rate, since reading 18 megapixles requires less time and overhead than reading 46 megapixels. You might have a 4fps rate at 46mp, and 10fps at 18mp. You could also have other crop factors as well, maybe a 1.3x APS-H crop at 8fps. And, since it is still a native sensor read, just a sensor read limited to a smaller central region of pixels, there is no reason whatsoever that the output couldn't and shouldn't be the same native RAW format as full frame reads.

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5428
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #99 on: December 17, 2013, 06:01:20 PM »

There has never been a large, vocal outcry for Canon to add dynamic cropping modes to their cameras. There are certainly some niche groups of photographers who want it, but they seem to be far from the majority of Canon's customers.

Strictly speaking.... changing the aspect ratio is in-camera cropping.... but I know what you mean.

Personally, I shoot RAW and worry about cropping later. A lot of my personal work gets shown in 16x9 but I like the ability to sit down later and adjust the crop/size to what works best. At work, my shots end up in reports and documentation, so size/format are all over the place.... including playing with levels/contrast/color to make cables or markings stand out.... I don't think I have taken a single picture that was not the full sensor area.

I think your misunderstanding just a little bit. By in-camera cropping, I am referring to the ability of say a FF sensor to support different crops wherein ONLY the cropped area is read out and saved to a proper RAW image format. If Canon released a 46mp FF sensor, they might also provide an 18mp APS-C cropped read. By doing so, they could offer more than just crop, but ALSO offer higher frame rate, since reading 18 megapixles requires less time and overhead than reading 46 megapixels. You might have a 4fps rate at 46mp, and 10fps at 18mp. You could also have other crop factors as well, maybe a 1.3x APS-H crop at 8fps. And, since it is still a native sensor read, just a sensor read limited to a smaller central region of pixels, there is no reason whatsoever that the output couldn't and shouldn't be the same native RAW format as full frame reads.

I knew exactly what you meant.... but I didn't consider the faster frame rate with the smaller files... Even a Rebel can read an 18M sensor at 60 times per second, and any "big megapixel" camera that supports video should have no problem with being able to read the sensor 60 times per second.

I think that what slows down frame rate is the shutter speed, the time needed to create the files, and mostly the ability to dump the files out to storage. I agree, smaller number of pixels to be used in the image gives faster processing and less time to write, and that gives you more frames/second.

As an interesting aside, I have a p/s with a 16M sensor, it can shoot video at 240 frames per second so that implies that time required to read the sensor is not important... As you shrink down the recorded size of the image the frame rate goes up...
 11.5fps/17 images (16M)
 60.3fps/60 images (3M)

If Canon put out a DSLR where you could put it into a 10Mpixel crop mode and fire off a burst at 30 or 40 frames per second there would be a lot of interested bird photographers :)
The best camera is the one in your hands

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #100 on: December 17, 2013, 06:55:39 PM »

There has never been a large, vocal outcry for Canon to add dynamic cropping modes to their cameras. There are certainly some niche groups of photographers who want it, but they seem to be far from the majority of Canon's customers.

Strictly speaking.... changing the aspect ratio is in-camera cropping.... but I know what you mean.

Personally, I shoot RAW and worry about cropping later. A lot of my personal work gets shown in 16x9 but I like the ability to sit down later and adjust the crop/size to what works best. At work, my shots end up in reports and documentation, so size/format are all over the place.... including playing with levels/contrast/color to make cables or markings stand out.... I don't think I have taken a single picture that was not the full sensor area.

I think your misunderstanding just a little bit. By in-camera cropping, I am referring to the ability of say a FF sensor to support different crops wherein ONLY the cropped area is read out and saved to a proper RAW image format. If Canon released a 46mp FF sensor, they might also provide an 18mp APS-C cropped read. By doing so, they could offer more than just crop, but ALSO offer higher frame rate, since reading 18 megapixles requires less time and overhead than reading 46 megapixels. You might have a 4fps rate at 46mp, and 10fps at 18mp. You could also have other crop factors as well, maybe a 1.3x APS-H crop at 8fps. And, since it is still a native sensor read, just a sensor read limited to a smaller central region of pixels, there is no reason whatsoever that the output couldn't and shouldn't be the same native RAW format as full frame reads.

I knew exactly what you meant.... but I didn't consider the faster frame rate with the smaller files... Even a Rebel can read an 18M sensor at 60 times per second, and any "big megapixel" camera that supports video should have no problem with being able to read the sensor 60 times per second.

I think that what slows down frame rate is the shutter speed, the time needed to create the files, and mostly the ability to dump the files out to storage. I agree, smaller number of pixels to be used in the image gives faster processing and less time to write, and that gives you more frames/second.

As an interesting aside, I have a p/s with a 16M sensor, it can shoot video at 240 frames per second so that implies that time required to read the sensor is not important... As you shrink down the recorded size of the image the frame rate goes up...
 11.5fps/17 images (16M)
 60.3fps/60 images (3M)

If Canon put out a DSLR where you could put it into a 10Mpixel crop mode and fire off a burst at 30 or 40 frames per second there would be a lot of interested bird photographers :)

I am talking about cropped stills, not cropped video. (Personally, I could really care less about video in my DSLR...it's convenient for some uses, but I really use my DSLR for photography.) Also, keep in mind, read occurs at the front end of the pipeline...compression, such as video compression or compression of photos into RAW files/JPEG, occurs at the back end of the pipeline. The readout rate requires that the front end speed, the data being pulled off the sensor and shipped into the DSP, support the full RAW data size of the full sensor at it's native bit depth, masked pixels and any error correcting or other intrinsic overhead included.

As for readout rate, they aren't reading the entire sensor at 60fps. Video reads are different than full frame stills reads. You only need to read two megapixels for full HD video. If they actually WERE reading the full frame at 60fps, that would mean the data throughput rate was TWO GIGABYTES PER SECOND. The DIGIC5+ is only capable of 250 MEGABYTES per second each (and the 1D X needs 480MB throughput to support 14fps, hence the use of dual digic.) Conversely, at 2 megapixels, the total throughput rate for 1080p readout at 60fps is 218MB/s, and is very likely achieved via some kind of basic hardware binning at best, and row skipping at worst.

Your little P&S is using binned readout or something like that to achieve 240fps, and even then, is it a progressive readout, or interleaved readout? If interleaved, the true readout rate would be 120fps, very likely for a mere 1mp worth of data. To actually read a full 16mp worth of data at 240fps (even at a mere 12 bit), you would need over 6BG/s throughput (that would be faster than SATA 3!)

What I think most people are referring to is a true native stills photography read, but with native cropping. Assuming we get DIGIC7+, capable of 7x DIGIC5+ performance. That would allow a 1750MB/s (1.75GB/s) raw data readout rate. That would allow around 19fps @ 46mp (assuming masked border pixels and some additional overhead). It would allow 37.7mp APS-H reads at ~33fps, and 18.1mp APS-C reads at ~51fps. For all that seven times more processing power than a single DIGIC5+, it still doesn't get you over the 60fps hump...even with hardware cropping.

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5428
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #101 on: December 17, 2013, 06:59:54 PM »

There has never been a large, vocal outcry for Canon to add dynamic cropping modes to their cameras. There are certainly some niche groups of photographers who want it, but they seem to be far from the majority of Canon's customers.

Strictly speaking.... changing the aspect ratio is in-camera cropping.... but I know what you mean.

Personally, I shoot RAW and worry about cropping later. A lot of my personal work gets shown in 16x9 but I like the ability to sit down later and adjust the crop/size to what works best. At work, my shots end up in reports and documentation, so size/format are all over the place.... including playing with levels/contrast/color to make cables or markings stand out.... I don't think I have taken a single picture that was not the full sensor area.

I think your misunderstanding just a little bit. By in-camera cropping, I am referring to the ability of say a FF sensor to support different crops wherein ONLY the cropped area is read out and saved to a proper RAW image format. If Canon released a 46mp FF sensor, they might also provide an 18mp APS-C cropped read. By doing so, they could offer more than just crop, but ALSO offer higher frame rate, since reading 18 megapixles requires less time and overhead than reading 46 megapixels. You might have a 4fps rate at 46mp, and 10fps at 18mp. You could also have other crop factors as well, maybe a 1.3x APS-H crop at 8fps. And, since it is still a native sensor read, just a sensor read limited to a smaller central region of pixels, there is no reason whatsoever that the output couldn't and shouldn't be the same native RAW format as full frame reads.

I knew exactly what you meant.... but I didn't consider the faster frame rate with the smaller files... Even a Rebel can read an 18M sensor at 60 times per second, and any "big megapixel" camera that supports video should have no problem with being able to read the sensor 60 times per second.

I think that what slows down frame rate is the shutter speed, the time needed to create the files, and mostly the ability to dump the files out to storage. I agree, smaller number of pixels to be used in the image gives faster processing and less time to write, and that gives you more frames/second.

As an interesting aside, I have a p/s with a 16M sensor, it can shoot video at 240 frames per second so that implies that time required to read the sensor is not important... As you shrink down the recorded size of the image the frame rate goes up...
 11.5fps/17 images (16M)
 60.3fps/60 images (3M)

If Canon put out a DSLR where you could put it into a 10Mpixel crop mode and fire off a burst at 30 or 40 frames per second there would be a lot of interested bird photographers :)

I am talking about cropped stills, not cropped video. (Personally, I could really care less about video in my DSLR...it's convenient for some uses, but I really use my DSLR for photography.) Also, keep in mind, read occurs at the front end of the pipeline...compression, such as video compression or compression of photos into RAW files/JPEG, occurs at the back end of the pipeline. The readout rate requires that the front end speed, the data being pulled off the sensor and shipped into the DSP, support the full RAW data size of the full sensor at it's native bit depth, masked pixels and any error correcting or other intrinsic overhead included.

As for readout rate, they aren't reading the entire sensor at 60fps. Video reads are different than full frame stills reads. You only need to read two megapixels for full HD video. If they actually WERE reading the full frame at 60fps, that would mean the data throughput rate was TWO GIGABYTES PER SECOND. The DIGIC5+ is only capable of 250 MEGABYTES per second each (and the 1D X needs 480MB throughput to support 14fps, hence the use of dual digic.) Conversely, at 2 megapixels, the total throughput rate for 1080p readout at 60fps is 218MB/s, and is very likely achieved via some kind of basic hardware binning at best, and row skipping at worst.

Your little P&S is using binned readout or something like that to achieve 240fps, and even then, is it a progressive readout, or interleaved readout? If interleaved, the true readout rate would be 120fps, very likely for a mere 1mp worth of data. To actually read a full 16mp worth of data at 240fps (even at a mere 12 bit), you would need over 6BG/s throughput (that would be faster than SATA 3!)

What I think most people are referring to is a true native stills photography read, but with native cropping. Assuming we get DIGIC7+, capable of 7x DIGIC5+ performance. That would allow a 1750MB/s (1.75GB/s) raw data readout rate. That would allow around 19fps @ 46mp (assuming masked border pixels and some additional overhead). It would allow 37.7mp APS-H reads at ~33fps, and 18.1mp APS-C reads at ~51fps. For all that seven times more processing power than a single DIGIC5+, it still doesn't get you over the 60fps hump...even with hardware cropping.
Interesting....
Every time I discuss something with you I learn things.  Thanks for the patience!
The best camera is the one in your hands

candc

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1231
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #102 on: December 17, 2013, 07:15:51 PM »
in camera cropping or digital zoom is great with an evf so you see what you see is what you get. it would be splendid with a high mp ff mirrorless body. when canon makes a big mp ff body like the d800 then it should have a crop mode also, its better than not having it but you just get a crop square in the viewfinder. i don't know if there is a good way to change the magnification of what you see in the finder when you switch to crop mode?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #102 on: December 17, 2013, 07:15:51 PM »

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #103 on: December 17, 2013, 07:33:23 PM »
I am talking about cropped stills, not cropped video. (Personally, I could really care less about video in my DSLR...it's convenient for some uses, but I really use my DSLR for photography.) Also, keep in mind, read occurs at the front end of the pipeline...compression, such as video compression or compression of photos into RAW files/JPEG, occurs at the back end of the pipeline. The readout rate requires that the front end speed, the data being pulled off the sensor and shipped into the DSP, support the full RAW data size of the full sensor at it's native bit depth, masked pixels and any error correcting or other intrinsic overhead included.

As for readout rate, they aren't reading the entire sensor at 60fps. Video reads are different than full frame stills reads. You only need to read two megapixels for full HD video. If they actually WERE reading the full frame at 60fps, that would mean the data throughput rate was TWO GIGABYTES PER SECOND. The DIGIC5+ is only capable of 250 MEGABYTES per second each (and the 1D X needs 480MB throughput to support 14fps, hence the use of dual digic.) Conversely, at 2 megapixels, the total throughput rate for 1080p readout at 60fps is 218MB/s, and is very likely achieved via some kind of basic hardware binning at best, and row skipping at worst.

Your little P&S is using binned readout or something like that to achieve 240fps, and even then, is it a progressive readout, or interleaved readout? If interleaved, the true readout rate would be 120fps, very likely for a mere 1mp worth of data. To actually read a full 16mp worth of data at 240fps (even at a mere 12 bit), you would need over 6BG/s throughput (that would be faster than SATA 3!)

What I think most people are referring to is a true native stills photography read, but with native cropping. Assuming we get DIGIC7+, capable of 7x DIGIC5+ performance. That would allow a 1750MB/s (1.75GB/s) raw data readout rate. That would allow around 19fps @ 46mp (assuming masked border pixels and some additional overhead). It would allow 37.7mp APS-H reads at ~33fps, and 18.1mp APS-C reads at ~51fps. For all that seven times more processing power than a single DIGIC5+, it still doesn't get you over the 60fps hump...even with hardware cropping.
Interesting....
Every time I discuss something with you I learn things.  Thanks for the patience!

No problem. :)

AvTvM

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2277
Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #104 on: December 18, 2013, 03:26:13 AM »
in camera cropping or digital zoom is great with an evf so you see what you see is what you get. it would be splendid with a high mp ff mirrorless body. when canon makes a big mp ff body like the d800 then it should have a crop mode also, its better than not having it but you just get a crop square in the viewfinder. i don't know if there is a good way to change the magnification of what you see in the finder when you switch to crop mode?

Yes! Perfectly implemented crop mode with EVF is available. Sony A7 = 10MP in 1.5x crop mode, A7R = 15.3MP.
Canon would not even have to innovate. Just imitate. :-)

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r
Quote
The two cameras are perfectly capable of using existing E-mount and A-mount lenses, and you have the choice as to whether the image is cropped. If you choose to crop, the resolution will drop to 15 megapixel on the α7R and 10 megapixel on the α7, and the equivalent focal length will increase by 1.5X. Sony also gives you the option not to crop and use the entire sensor, though this may lead to strong vignetting (and for most lenses, probably will).


Quote
The camera offers three options for its APS-C crop mode - Off, Auto and On. With it switched Off, you'll see Image 1 with a full-frame lens and Image 2 if you're using an APS-C lens. In the default, Auto, mode you'll get Image 1 or Image 3, depending on whether you're using a full-frame or an APS-C lens. And finally, with it On, you'll see Image 3, regardless of which lens type you put on the camera.

Image 1: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r/images/lensFF.jpg
full sensor area, uncropped frame (with FF lens)

Image 2 http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r/images/lensAPSCNoCrop.jpg
full sensor area, vignetted image (with APS-C lens)

Image 3: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r/images/lensAPSC.jpg
cropped viewfinder display, higher viewfinder magnification, cropped image [with APS-C lens]
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 03:48:42 AM by AvTvM »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Thinking Out Loud: EOS 7D Mark II Thoughts
« Reply #104 on: December 18, 2013, 03:26:13 AM »