No 7D Mark II? [CR1]

[maxxevv]

Yes, most people still want a high density sensor for 'reach' applications. And partly also for cost.

But what if the 7D successor moved up the ladder and became a APS-H, with compatibility to EF-S lenses ? 
And kept the pixel density at about 12-16Mp instead for APS-C crop ?

Wouldn't that make for a very appealing camera if it kept all the bells and whistles of the orignal 7D and add a Digic V processor? In the process (mainly due to US$ to Yen exchange rates), price moves to about US$2200.

[dilbert]

I'm going to get smited into the ground for this one..... Why are people acting like it's the end of the world if Canon makes the 70D the new 7D? If the make that move, they'll likely make the 70D better than the current 7D, so what's the problem? Is it because then you wouldn't have bragging rights on owning a "pro body"? As long as it's better, then who cares what number it's badged with. Whether or not they make a 7DII, you'll still get an upgrade. Or just buy a Nikon.... Let the smiting begin.

No, it's because if it's a 70D it won't have pro features. The xxD line is gimped compared to the xD line. I want high end durability, AF, metering, 2 CF slots... everything that's in the 1D line but with a APS-C sensor. I'm not the only one.

What if it is the 70"DX", to try and distinguish it from the 60"D"?

There's no reason why Canon can't put more features into the xxD line if they also bump the price up.

If they can bring in micro-focus for the 50D and then take it away for the 60D, then there's no reason why they can't bring it back (for example.)

Think of this in another way...

A camera with the 7D's features would cost what a 7D does (or did) regardless of the name on the camera. It isn't the name on the camera that determines the cost.

Therefore consider the price as the indication of what features are in the camera and the name to just be "dressing."

As for the durability of the xxD series, search youtube for the video of someone that tries to destroy their xxxD and see what it withstands.

[D.Sim]

I'm going to get smited into the ground for this one..... Why are people acting like it's the end of the world if Canon makes the 70D the new 7D? If the make that move, they'll likely make the 70D better than the current 7D, so what's the problem? Is it because then you wouldn't have bragging rights on owning a "pro body"? As long as it's better, then who cares what number it's badged with. Whether or not they make a 7DII, you'll still get an upgrade. Or just buy a Nikon.... Let the smiting begin.

No, it's because if it's a 70D it won't have pro features. The xxD line is gimped compared to the xD line. I want high end durability, AF, metering, 2 CF slots... everything that's in the 1D line but with a APS-C sensor. I'm not the only one.

What if it is the 70"DX", to try and distinguish it from the 60"D"?

There's no reason why Canon can't put more features into the xxD line if they also bump the price up.

If they can bring in micro-focus for the 50D and then take it away for the 60D, then there's no reason why they can't bring it back (for example.)

Think of this in another way...

A camera with the 7D's features would cost what a 7D does (or did) regardless of the name on the camera. It isn't the name on the camera that determines the cost.

Therefore consider the price as the indication of what features are in the camera and the name to just be "dressing."

As for the durability of the xxD series, search youtube for the video of someone that tries to destroy their xxxD and see what it withstands.

Agreed - just because the 60D isn't the top of the line body doesn't mean the 70D can't be - the two digits were the top of the line before, no reason they shouldn't be now.

And if you're talking about the durability of the xxD, and watching the digitalrev video of them destroying the Canon/Nikon but still getting it work.... as someone whos just managed to break his 50D, its sorta a moot point - it CAN break, just depends on what you do with it...

[Gcon]

If other people are producing prints and even 100% crops that cannot be discerned from 5D2 shots, then perhaps you are doing something wrong.

In the conditions the most favor the 7D, with a bit of noise reduction and maybe some blur tool on the bokeh, I can produce prints that are very close to the 5DmarkII. It takes a fair bit of work though, and my time is valuable. Alas the conditions I need my 5D2 aren't very friendly to the poor old 7D, and no amount of work will save the 7D image under those conditions.

Can you pass a double blind test and tell us, with 100% accuracy, which prints or crops come from which camera when both are shot/processed to maximum potential? That's all that matters.

If the shot is straight from Camera with just basic levels adjustment and no noise reduction, I will pass this 100% of the time. If it's conditions that favor the 7D (i.e. don't expose its weaknesses) and someone works the files over a lot with Lightroom and photoshop, then it's anyone's guess (see above). If it's conditions that expose its weakensses, then even with a lot of 'shopping, I'd be able to tell the vast majority of the time. My eyes and grey matter have had daily exposure to the images produced by the 5D so I'm backing myself on this one.

For properly processed, low to mid ISO shots there are no significant differences. Yes, there is a difference out of camera with neutral settings, but nobody I know shoots or prints that way.

Even at base ISO, the 7D images require more work though to match the 5D2, but yes no 'significant' differences under the conditions that most favor the 7D....and they are properly processed.
{edit - actually even in bright light - I remember going around shooting with the 7D and the colors weren't as rich as the 5D and the dynamic range was notably less - not sure if this counts as 'significant' or not}

The 5D2 pulls ahead at high ISO, though the 7D does quite well through 3200 for normal print sizes. Oh yeah, I just had my yearly eye exam (20/10).

First part is true. My opinion is the 7D is pretty horrible at ISO3200. Everyone has different thresholds / standards of what they find acceptable. Funnily enough I am partially blind in one eye and require glasses, yet to me the differences are readily apparent. My good eye with glasses is pretty sharp   Better monitor?!

Rumors are rumors and this 7D rumor is probably rubbish. But...if Canon fails to answer the D800 and fails to continue their pro crop body, Nikon will eventually get my money. Will Canon still love me then?

Canon will correct their lineup with an updated 70D and leave the xD to the full frames. Notice how Nikon don't have a Dx model that's a crop? I'm sure Canon won't ignore this market segment - the crop zealots.  I'm not too keen on the D800 though. Canon will check the sales on that and react accordingly if they need to. The 22MP 5dx/III will be wildly popular though. I will be buying two.

[andreask@hughes.net]

I'm in the market for a DSLR and two lenses, willing to spend about $2500.  I'm thinking EOS 60D and canon ef-s 15-85 and 70-200 f/4L IS USM.  Any thoughts?  I'm mainly shooting family photos/outdoor activities/youth sports and travel shots.

[briansquibb]

This, and also because Nikon owns patents that related to offering in-camera crop modes, if I'm not mistaken.

I have a Canon EOS IX film camera that allows in camera cropping - so probably not

[wickidwombat]

I'm in the market for a DSLR and two lenses, willing to spend about $2500.  I'm thinking EOS 60D and canon ef-s 15-85 and 70-200 f/4L IS USM.  Any thoughts?  I'm mainly shooting family photos/outdoor activities/youth sports and travel shots.

Here you go

see if you can stretch another $500

and go 60D with 17-55 f2.8 IS and the 70-200 f2.8 non IS

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/U1821-Canon-60D-17-55mm-f2-8-77mm-CPL-16GB-Bat-Gft-Wty-/380410110627?pt=UK_CamerasPhoto_DigitalCameras_DigitalCameras_JN&hash=item589235a2a3
and
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/A0487-Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2-8-L-USM-Lens-Gift-5YrsWty-/390340094308?pt=AU_Lenses&hash=item5ae2152964

[Meh]

Yes, most people still want a high density sensor for 'reach' applications. And partly also for cost.

But what if the 7D successor moved up the ladder and became a APS-H, with compatibility to EF-S lenses ? 
And kept the pixel density at about 12-16Mp instead for APS-C crop ?

Wouldn't that make for a very appealing camera if it kept all the bells and whistles of the orignal 7D and add a Digic V processor? In the process (mainly due to US$ to Yen exchange rates), price moves to about US$2200.

Sorry but no, EF-S lenses are designed for APS-C sensors and can not be used for larger sensors.  EF-S lenses extend further into the body therefore the larger mirror on an APS-H or FF would hit the back of the lens.  EF-S lenses also produce a smaller image circle designed to cover an APS-C sensor only.

[maxxevv]

Sorry but no, EF-S lenses are designed for APS-C sensors and can not be used for larger sensors.  EF-S lenses extend further into the body therefore the larger mirror on an APS-H or FF would hit the back of the lens.  EF-S lenses also produce a smaller image circle designed to cover an APS-C sensor only.

Perhaps its not clear in what I wrote. Let me elaborate.

In-camera crop on an APS-H sensor to use an APS-C lens isn't too far of a stretch isn't it ? The mirror of the 1.3crop isn't that big compared really and with some tweaks, it may fit an EF-S lens.

There was a story / article of a guy  who did something of the sort with his 1D and mounted an EF-S lens, albeit with some minor modifications to his lens only. The height difference between an APS-C and APS-H is less than 5mm.

So, it might be possible to tweak the mirror in an APS-H camera to have sufficient clearance for an EF-S lens' rear protrusion.

Thus an APS-H camera with an APS-C crop mode by allowing it to accept EF-S lenses. Especially if the AF module was designed for APS-C in the first place.  Possible ?? 

[D.Sim]

Sorry but no, EF-S lenses are designed for APS-C sensors and can not be used for larger sensors.  EF-S lenses extend further into the body therefore the larger mirror on an APS-H or FF would hit the back of the lens.  EF-S lenses also produce a smaller image circle designed to cover an APS-C sensor only.

Perhaps its not clear in what I wrote. Let me elaborate.

In-camera crop on an APS-H sensor to use an APS-C lens isn't too far of a stretch isn't it ? The mirror of the 1.3crop isn't that big compared really and with some tweaks, it may fit an EF-S lens.

There was a story / article of a guy  who did something of the sort with his 1D and mounted an EF-S lens, albeit with some minor modifications to his lens only. The height difference between an APS-C and APS-H is less than 5mm.

So, it might be possible to tweak the mirror in an APS-H camera to have sufficient clearance for an EF-S lens' rear protrusion.

Thus an APS-H camera with an APS-C crop mode by allowing it to accept EF-S lenses. Especially if the AF module was designed for APS-C in the first place.  Possible ?? 

Again, no. the whole idea of the EF-S lens is that the rear element is *really really* close to the sensor. Just how you intend to tweak a mirror so that it becomes smaller but still covers the same area is beyond me.

[wickidwombat]

Sorry but no, EF-S lenses are designed for APS-C sensors and can not be used for larger sensors.  EF-S lenses extend further into the body therefore the larger mirror on an APS-H or FF would hit the back of the lens.  EF-S lenses also produce a smaller image circle designed to cover an APS-C sensor only.

Perhaps its not clear in what I wrote. Let me elaborate.

In-camera crop on an APS-H sensor to use an APS-C lens isn't too far of a stretch isn't it ? The mirror of the 1.3crop isn't that big compared really and with some tweaks, it may fit an EF-S lens.

There was a story / article of a guy  who did something of the sort with his 1D and mounted an EF-S lens, albeit with some minor modifications to his lens only. The height difference between an APS-C and APS-H is less than 5mm.

So, it might be possible to tweak the mirror in an APS-H camera to have sufficient clearance for an EF-S lens' rear protrusion.

Thus an APS-H camera with an APS-C crop mode by allowing it to accept EF-S lenses. Especially if the AF module was designed for APS-C in the first place.  Possible ?? 

I think its physically possible to do and then why not consider making it mirrorless! no problems with mirrors hitting lenses anymore.

also not sure how many here have used nikons but say you put a DX18-200 on a full frame FX film body you only get very severe corner vignetting not unlike what the tamron 18-270 delivers that people seem to put up with. on the FX digitals the electonics crop it to 1.5 for you so you dont get that.
Even using the APS-C EF-S lenses on the APS-H sensor would only result in some corner darkening anyway then let the user crop as desired

I think an APS-H with APS-C in camera crop that can use EF and EF-S lenses would be cool especially if you get boosted frame rate with the APS-C mode too. If that was canons entry to the mirrorless segment it would set the bar pretty high for the sonys and panasonics to chase and the nikon v1 and j1 would be outdated instantly

[AprilForever]

Cropping will never replace framing the image well in the first place.

Well, yes and no, right? The D800 has a DX Mode that turns it into a crop-sensor camera. The only reason it can do this is because it has a huge number to start out with and it pre-crops it for you down to a 16MP camera. I don't know how this looks in the viewfinder or how it works in practice. It will be interesting.

Think of all the arguments that would just vanish if they came out with an über 5D that had enough MPs to be able to put it into an 16MP crop mode. Also, if you put an EF-S lens on it, it automatically senses it and puts the camera into crop mode.

Yeah, this is pretty much what the D800 does. Cool, right?

Even if you could mount an ef-s lens, it would get caught by the mirror, which is much larger on a FF camera.

What I still can't get is why anyone wants a fullframe 7D. Get a 5d! You speak of autofocus. Get a 1Ds mk III. You speak of price. Get a D800. You say you still want it cheaper. Many have posted they want a 7D FF for not much more than a 7D. This totally makes no sense.

The 7D is a great camera because of it's APS-C sensor. Bloat the sensor, and destroy the camera.

[briansquibb]

What I still can't get is why anyone wants a fullframe 7D. Get a 5d! You speak of autofocus. Get a 1Ds mk III. You speak of price. Get a D800. You say you still want it cheaper. Many have posted they want a 7D FF for not much more than a 7D. This totally makes no sense.

The 7D is a great camera because of it's APS-C sensor. Bloat the sensor, and destroy the camera.

Not everyone wants a ff 7D - there have been at least a couple of us pushing for an APS-H 7D - borrowing a lot from the venerable 1D4

[aj1575]

My two cents on this. The 7D is really a little bit odd; if one digit (xD) canons are for the pros, then the 7D was a bit weak. On the other hand there are are 3 consumer bodies (xxxxD, xxxD, xxD). This lineup somehow makes sense, just that the 7D is not really pro-grade.

This is how I see the future lineup from Canon: The 1Dx is for sport and wildlife shooters (high speed with 12fps, high ISO up to 200k). Then there will be the 5DmkIII, it looks at the moment that it won't compete with the D800, but I can see where it could be placed. the 5D will be for photojournalists who also like to make movies. The 5D is smaller more mobile package then the 1D, emphasis will be on good high ISO (low light ability, and video)
But there is somethin missing in the pro sector, and this is the landscape shooters. And here could the often rumored 3D fit in, which will be aimed at the D800. A camera with high resolution (40+MP) but a slower speed.

With these 3 pro bodies, there is no room for a 7D, so the xxD will move up a little (to where the 50D was). The difference between a 600D and 60D is quite narrow at the moment, and I think it makes sense to widen this gap.

Conclusion: 3 consumer bodies (entry, standard, advanced) and 3 pro bodies (Action, Landscape, Photojournalist) from canon, this would be a nice and logic lineup.

[maxxevv]

Again, no. the whole idea of the EF-S lens is that the rear element is *really really* close to the sensor. Just how you intend to tweak a mirror so that it becomes smaller but still covers the same area is beyond me.

Take a look at the difference between the rear mounts of an EF-S lens and EF one. Compare.

Then look at the physical dimensions of APS-H and compare to that of the APS-C (Canon). They are a lot closer in size compared to the differences between them and FF.

In any case, its just a conjuncture which I think isn't too far fetched if Canon wants a premium for its 'sub-pro' and 'super advanced' camera.  It would not alienate EF-S users and at the same time provides a premium upgrade path too. 

But who knows...  Canon may have other ideas.