September 20, 2014, 12:03:40 AM

Author Topic: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?  (Read 65101 times)

Lee Jay

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 947
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #435 on: August 24, 2014, 09:30:51 PM »
The key point is: this camera was promised to be revolutionary, the biggest evolution since the start of DSLR.

wait.. where was this promise by canon? I missed this.

We (the fanatical users) promised it in their name.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #435 on: August 24, 2014, 09:30:51 PM »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3700
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #436 on: August 24, 2014, 09:32:03 PM »
Total DR? The 70D is 1/3 stop behind Exmor.

Utter lie and fabrication, even your favorite site, flat out says that the 70D feels like it has an old sensor in regards to low ISO performance and that it acts like it's more than 2 stops behind Exmor.



Lee Jay

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 947
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #437 on: August 24, 2014, 09:33:31 PM »
It's amusing that a 2-3 stop difference means nothing and yet when Canon does better for SNR and it's like 1/3 stop better than it's all wow Canon rules!!!!!

A 2-3 stop difference in base ISO DR actually does mean less to me than a 1/3 stop difference in high ISO performance.  This is because I virtually never run into base ISO DR problems (even with the 18MP 1.6-crop sensor), but I'm always struggling against high ISO limits.

MichaelHodges

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 342
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #438 on: August 24, 2014, 09:33:46 PM »
The 70D has a vastly superior lens selection.  Telephoto lenses >200mm, including primes.  Fast tele primes.  Long macro lenses.  Etc.
The 70D has a 1-stop faster max shutter speed
The 70D has a 2/3-stop faster X-sync
The 70D has over double the shots per battery charge
If your 70D breaks, Canon will fix it with fast turnaround
The 70D has a robust ecosystem of flashes, accessories, etc., an ecosystem that Canon has a track record of developing vs. Sony's track record of abandonment

If I was in the market, I wouldn't buy into this watered down sales-speak.

It sounds like you're selling Tupperware.

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3700
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #439 on: August 24, 2014, 09:39:35 PM »
Shoot a transmission step wedge with a 70D, 5D3, or 1DX. (7D value actually looks about right.) When you see with your own two eyes that more then 11 stops worth of steps are gray, you will know that your theories are false. Then we can continue and discuss why.

Yeah maybe because IR uses NR!!!! of unknown and random amounts while the other measuring company does not.


LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3700
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #440 on: August 24, 2014, 09:44:15 PM »
Side rant: you may be someone who just needs to get an Exmor camera for whatever you're doing with astro. I don't know. 99% of people who complain about this are complaining because they don't have bragging rights and that's all. Too much pixel peeping and not enough viewing/printing real photos.

Dude, the whole reason people started looking into banding and DR and figuring out what was going on was because they noticed things when out shooting, they didn't start out in the lab.

It's the little fanboys who can't handle it when anything they spend money on is not declared 100% the best in every single possible regard. The so-called DRoners actually can handle the truth when not every last aspect of the camera they bought doesn't end up being the best.

And the DR guys made such a huge deal because they know it takes time to fix that so you need to complain way ahead of your breaking point and you need to complain loudly if there is a prayer to get Canon to feel like bothering to spend money to fix things up.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14422
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #441 on: August 24, 2014, 09:44:38 PM »
If I was in the market, I wouldn't buy into this watered down sales-speak.
It sounds like you're selling Tupperware.

Yeah. I mean...long lenses?  Who needs 'em?  200mm is plenty, just get closer.  Good flashes and high Xsync speeds?  Useless.  Servo tracking for moving subjects?  Phth – real men use manual focus, and the a6000 has peaking so that's even better!
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #441 on: August 24, 2014, 09:44:38 PM »

unfocused

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2107
    • View Profile
    • Unfocused: A photo website
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #442 on: August 24, 2014, 09:50:23 PM »
Perhaps you can answer the question the DRones you're echoing have been unable to address – if Canon has been behind in low ISO DR for 4-5 years, and their market share hasn't eroded, then why does having less low ISO DR matter and why is it that Canon 'must respond'?...

Perhaps you should answer how you can take pictures with Canon stock or sale numbers?

And many a company weather the lazy storm for a while, before sales finally started taking a hit.

That wasn't my quote. It was Neuro.

Amazing to me how people who claim to have such superior knowledge and interest in technical matters can not master this site's basic HTML.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2014, 09:56:10 PM by unfocused »
pictures sharp. life not so much. www.unfocusedmg.com

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3700
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #443 on: August 24, 2014, 09:53:13 PM »
Go take a long, hard look at jrista's processing of the infamous 5D3 vs. D800 online test.

Ker-ching! The correct answer. And it's possible to do a much better job than he did of the Canon files.

But of course were you to push the D800 another 2-3 stops it would, of course, be impossible to apply the same sort of NR techniques.

And of course the NR not only removes the noise but adds back in 2-3 stops of detail, of course.

 ::)


LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3700
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #444 on: August 24, 2014, 09:54:14 PM »

I'm debating your definition of DR. You cannot simply shut that down at will. Your definition is flat out wrong.

Nope, you're completely wrong. DR is not synonymous with noise, or we'd also be talking about highlight DR (where Canon sensors perform very well, incidentally - funny how quiet the DR whiners are about that) in terms of losing detail to noise, and we do not. In fact, it would be an impossible argument to have.

QED.

It's a blatantly biased subversion and reinvention of the term by an irrelevantly small but very vocal subset of the user base, in order to support their tedious agenda.

Well from someone who actually knows QED the physics theory, I'm with jrista on this one.

MichaelHodges

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 342
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #445 on: August 24, 2014, 09:55:29 PM »
If I was in the market, I wouldn't buy into this watered down sales-speak.
It sounds like you're selling Tupperware.

Yeah. I mean...long lenses?  Who needs 'em?  200mm is plenty, just get closer.  Good flashes and high Xsync speeds?  Useless.  Servo tracking for moving subjects?  Phth – real men use manual focus, and the a6000 has peaking so that's even better!

You don't have to convince me.  I stay with Canon because I believe the lens system is superior in quality and variety (as well as out-of-camera color).

However, I'm not sure that talking about an "ecosystem" is going to lure new shooters over. It sounds more like the camera isn't good enough to stand alone, so priority is placed on peripheral aspects.

racebit

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #446 on: August 24, 2014, 09:55:47 PM »
The key point is: this camera was promised to be revolutionary, the biggest evolution since the start of DSLR.

wait.. where was this promise by canon? I missed this.

We (the fanatical users) promised it in their name.

The term revolutionary comes from rumors here at CR, but I remember about one year ago, an interview posted here at CR (news, not forum), where the Canon manager (camera division) stated that 7D successor would be something special, a milestone, not just an iteration, don't remember the words exactly.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2014, 09:58:33 PM by racebit »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3700
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #447 on: August 24, 2014, 09:57:18 PM »
Are there really that many indie movie makers that are shooting in 4K nowadays or is this just all baloney?

4K is the future-proof format. That's why it's important even now, when 4K TVs are still not the norm.
+1

Ever shoot a picture and crop it? Same thing.... only with movies...

It also allows post processing image stabilization.

+1

plus DIGIC (or Canon marketing, not sure which) makes internal Canon video so soft that you'd almost need inernal 4k to get true high quality 1080p detail (witness how radically much more detail ML pulls out of a 5D3 compared to stock 5D3 video)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #447 on: August 24, 2014, 09:57:18 PM »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3700
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #448 on: August 24, 2014, 09:59:41 PM »
You misunderstand, we are saying the opposite.  I was arguing with people who are against including Wifi in cameras for some reason.

Oh. Well in that case, I agree...that's strange. :P

Only reasons I can think of is they are total brand fanboys so if their brand doesn't do something, that something can't matter for anyone. Or they are paid to astroturf the forums. Or they are the sort who can't handle spending money on something that doesn't happen to be the best in every single regard. Or are overly fearful about costs and don't have a good sense of what costs what and tech.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2014, 10:02:28 PM by LetTheRightLensIn »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3700
    • View Profile
Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #449 on: August 24, 2014, 10:02:13 PM »
Or, maybe canon did target the 7 series towards sports and wildlife shooters.  If the 7 series is targeted in such a manner, what would they have to take away from these proposed specs to give it 4k video?  Or, how ginormous would the price tag be if it did?  Would it need a third digic 6 in there to handle video output?  Would they have had to back off on the AF for it?  Or, if you look at the A7s, then would we see a 7d2 with a 12MP sensor?

Why would it take a third digic 6 to handle 4k video when the 1DC shows that TWO digic FIVE can already drive 4k video off of non-line skipped sensor reads?

Why would they have to back off of AF?


canon rumors FORUM

Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« Reply #449 on: August 24, 2014, 10:02:13 PM »