Canon 7Dmk2 any rumors??

[dlleno]

Any chance that the APS-H format sensor resurfaces in the 7D Mark II? That would be badass

true dat, but if Canon produces a new 1.3 it probably won't have a 7 in the name;  it will be a 1D4 successor, imho.  like others I can't figure out why there is a 7D AND a xxD

[x-vision]

The 5D Mark III is $3,500 - that creates plenty of pricing room for a lesser, but still great, model at a fair price with a smaller sensor.

Room - yes. Market - maybe not. Of course the 5d3 will drop some (Nikon D800 anyone?), so let's assume $3000. I don't think Canon marketing divides the price scale into equal pieces and puts out a model for each of them, but they'll look for customer groups like "entry level dslr" xxxd, "amateur/pro on a budget" xxd, "full frame entry" 5d2/successor, "rich amateur or pro that doesn't need the 1dx" 5d3. Where's the 7d2 in this?

+1000.

[DrPizza]

I would be disappointed if there were no 7D2.

I have a 50D. I don't regard the 60D as a worthwhile upgrade (and I can't imagine I'm alone in this!) because of e.g. no AF microadjust, no joystick (!), slower firing rate, and concerns over how well it will take rough handling. The 7D is a decent upgrade, but not a big enough upgrade to be justified (which is no real surprise, the 7D came out half way through the 50D's life, they're more or less the same generation).

Unless Canon reverts to a single prosumer line (bring the x0D spec back up, and get rid of the 7D), I want a hypothetical 7D2: I don't really care about video, but more pixels and more low-light performance are both obviously desirable.

I have crop sensor lenses which I like, and would prefer to keep; full-frame approximate equivalents to the 17-55 EF-S and Tokina 11-16 would cost more than I'm willing to spend, and crop ultrawides are arguably better than full-frame. For someone like me (and I suspect the majority of crop owners) with no 35mm legacy, there's nothing particularly desirable about full frame _per se_. It's not like I have any intuition about how a 50mm lens "should" look. Full frame just means more expense. The idea that the 5D3 is somehow the logical upgrade, at more than double the cost of the 7D, and with no lens compatibility, is absurd.

There is room for a $1500 prosumer crop camera, and it's a market that surely makes sense.

[D_Rochat]

Any chance that the APS-H format sensor resurfaces in the 7D Mark II? That would be badass

true dat, but if Canon produces a new 1.3 it probably won't have a 7 in the name; it will be a 1D4 successor, imho.  like others I can't figure out why there is a 7D AND a xxD

The 1d4 has a successor and it's called the 1Dx. So IF they were to use the APS-H again, it would likely be in a 7D or a new xD model.

I've also seen people compare the D7000 to the 7D, which is fine. But the 60D is actually suppose to be in the same league as the D7000, not the 7D. Nikon just happened to make a stellar camera that stomped the 60D (IMO). I guess my point is that Canon needs to step it up with the xxD line and like I've said many times before, I won't be surprised to see the 70D take over for the 7D and actually compete with the D7000 or inevitable D7100. Especially since a new low cost FF is rumored to join the xD line. I know it's not a popular opinion, but I think the 7D name is getting the axe and the xxD will carry on as the prosumer option.

[briansquibb]

aps-h
22mps
1dx style AF
10fps
1 series body and function (ie weatherproofing and f/8)
twin CF cards

$5000

would sit between the 5D3 and the 1DX

[JR]

aps-h
22mps
1dx style AF
10fps
1 series body and function (ie weatherproofing and f/8)
twin CF cards

$5000

would sit between the 5D3 and the 1DX

Where can i pre-order?  I like the spec you suggest!

[unfocused]

I don't think Canon marketing divides the price scale into equal pieces and puts out a model for each of them,

Umm...have you ever bought a television...a computer...any appliances...cars? Every manufacturer divides the market into price points. "You can get this TV for $500, but for $600 you get this. For $1,000 you can have this model..."

Camera manufacturers are no different. They want models in as many price points as possible so they don't leave any customers on the table for the other guys.

There's increasing chatter in the Nikon camp that the D400 will be full-frame, not DX.

Nikon campers are as prone to fantasies as Canon campers.

I agree with the theory of making less model in the lineup and making each one of them richer in features to cater to a larger base of customer.

The beauty of modern manufacturing processes is that companies can afford to divide the marketplace into smaller, more focused segments. Instead of a Model T that comes only in black, you can customize your car right down to the sound system that it has in it. Plus, you can pick from multiple models with small variations. That's what makes it possible for Canon to offer astro-photographers their very own 60D.

Any chance that the APS-H format sensor resurfaces in the 7D Mark II?

I'm trying to turn over a new leaf and not pick on the APS-H fans.

My perspective though: it is the Beta-Max of sensors. Makes perfect sense from a quality standpoint, but the market didn't support it. Canon officially said that the 1Dx was replacing both 1D models, so many assume that means APS-H is dead. Canon spokespersons have backtracked a bit with comments like: "keeping our options open." 

I don't think we'll see it again. Others want to keep the hope alive. I'd be willing to place a pretty large wager though, that if it ever shows up again, it won't be in a 7DII.

Finally, I've been trying to think of a good analogy. I'm no car person (forgive me V8 Beast) but I look at it this way. Some people want to buy the best possible small car available (the 7D) Others want the lowest-priced full-size sedan (5D II).  Now Canon has come out with a mid-priced sedan (5D III). For the time-being they are still selling the full-size budget sedan, but we don't know yet if they will continue to meet that market segment.

Regardless of whether or not they produce a new version of the full-size budget sedan, it's not likely to have much impact on the market for those who prefer the best quality small car because those customers (me being one of them) are simply not interested in the budget sedan.

[Chuck Alaimo]

I still think theres plenty of room for a pro or close to pro level crop body, which is what I see the niche of the 7D.  the xxD series never was nor is a close to pro level series body.  The current 7D is as close to pro level as we've seen in a crop body (unless you count the 1d4).  The 2 factors that make it the good close to pro option - it does have good weather sealing, it does have AF micro-adjustments and its does boast a pretty high fps.  The 60D messed up the potential for the xxd line if you ask me - that flip out screen is so gimmicky, but, it's real nice if your a smart phone photog person, makes ya feel like you are shooting on your smart phone and I don't have to look through that little viewfinder....To me, its just a silly add on that will break after more than average use.  Let the xxd line be what it is, a nice uber rebel for the hobbyists and amatures with money to burn.  But keep the 7D line running and step it up a notch.

I like my 7D and feel that it can produce great images.  By mid-summer I should also have a 5dmkiii as well.  Not selling the 7D though, it will stay in my bag as the backup, or as the go to body for situations I don't want to risk  the mkiii, or, for times i need a little extra reach out of my 70-200mm.   The only reason I'd sell my 7D off is if I were to find myself in some sort of financial collapse, or ----if they were to release a 7d2.  And in my mind, it wouldn't have to be a mind blowing revolutionary upgrade.   All that really needs to be done is improve the noise in the 3200-6400 range, maybe bump the native ISO to 12800, not a deal breaker though if it stays at max of 6400 as long as 6400 becomes more usable, which if it had dual digic 5's i think that would cover any noise issues.  fps, no change, its fast enough.  Af doesn't need too much step it up to 41 points though if canon wants to grant the xxd line the old 7d AF.  Do that and canon has a solid $1800-2000 body - which i do believe many people would jump on - not because its the omg gotta have this camera camera ---it will draw in the wow i want a 5d3 but can't shell out $3000+ on a body crowd.  It would be a fine choose as a backup body for many who do have FF bodies.

I personally think the only reason canon would phase out the 7D line is if they were to come out with an entry level FF body at around 2K (basically a slightly improved 5dmk2).  the current jump in price from the xxd line to the 5d3 is just too steep.  Something will need to fill that void (i am sure nikon and sony are looking at that void and wondering how many sales they can steal from canon with bodies between $1500-2500)...I don't see the xxd line filling that void - before the 60D maybe, but I really doubt many will jump at a $1700 70D with flip out screen....

[Marsu42]

the xxD series never was nor is a close to pro level series body.

Many people still using a 40d for their profession would disagree with you here.

The 60D messed up the potential for the xxd line if you ask me - that flip out screen is so gimmicky, but, it's real nice if your a smart phone photog person, makes ya feel like you are shooting on your smart phone and I don't have to look through that little viewfinder....To me, its just a silly add on that will break after more than average use.

You didn't use a 60d for an extended period of time, did you? Because what you wrote is exactly what I thought when I bought it - "pro bodies use a fixed screen, it has to be a gimmick". But I was wrong - actually, the screen is quite handy not only for video, but for some odd angle shots and tripod work with magic lantern's focus peaking (but you wouldn't know about magic lantern on a 7d...). And if it is not flipped at an angle it is as unlikely to break as your 7d screen, actually it's the other way around: If flipped back, the screen is protected.

[!Xabbu]

The 5D Mark III is $3,500 - that creates plenty of pricing room for a lesser, but still great, model at a fair price with a smaller sensor.

Room - yes. Market - maybe not. Of course the 5d3 will drop some (Nikon D800 anyone?), so let's assume $3000. I don't think Canon marketing divides the price scale into equal pieces and puts out a model for each of them, but they'll look for customer groups like "entry level dslr" xxxd, "amateur/pro on a budget" xxd, "full frame entry" 5d2/successor, "rich amateur or pro that doesn't need the 1dx" 5d3. Where's the 7d2 in this?

But of course that's all pure speculation, that's the great thing about threads like these - it's hard to take them seriously. So: If there's already a super rebel xxd, why would there be the need for a giga rebel 7d2 :-p ?

In my view, the  market is for a "better than the xxd" upper-end 1.6 with high fps and BIF abilities, high shutter count, etc.  with IQ improvements over the 7D.  maybe in the $2K region.   That's where the 7D series should be.   Discontinue the xxd series. keep the rebels

I agree - there should be lots of room for a high fps camera in the $2K-$2.5K region. $3.5K is quite a bit away from that and a significant hole in the purse for most people. On top of that there might be quite a lot of people who like the extra reach of a crop body with cheaper (i.e. shorter lenses).

[V8Beast]

My perspective though: it is the Beta-Max of sensors. Makes perfect sense from a quality standpoint, but the market didn't support it. Canon officially said that the 1Dx was replacing both 1D models, so many assume that means APS-H is dead. Canon spokespersons have backtracked a bit with comments like: "keeping our options open.

I don't what care body Canon puts it in, but I'd just hate to see the APS-H sensor go away. Both full-frame and APS-C have tradeoffs, and often they're at extreme ends of the spectrum. The APS-H is just such a great balance between the two extremes.

I'm curious why people imply that the market didn't like the APS-H sensor. My guess would be that Canon sold more 1D-series bodies than 1Ds-series bodies, but that's just a guess, since I'm not privy to the actual sales data. To me, the merging of the 1D and 1Ds into the 1Dx seems like Canon's response to the D3s.

Did sports shooters and photo journalists using 1D-series bodies really ask for a FF body? Canon seems to be implying "yes" by forcing them into the 1Dx. I'd venture to say many of the were perfectly happy with crop bodies like the 1DIV and 7D.

[unfocused]

I'm curious why people imply that the market didn't like the APS-H sensor.

You could be right there. I don't have access to their sales figures, and I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that it was not a big seller with Canon. Also, the lack of any comparable product from Nikon led me to believe that Nikon didn't feel the market justified the investment.

And, the fact that Canon never produced any wide angle lenses targeted to the APS-H sensor gave me the feeling that it was a lower priority for them.

Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against the APS-H sensor. I just don't see it as a replacement for the APS-C.

I'm just reading tea leaves and speculating like everyone else here. And my speculation is that when Canon did a cost-benefit analysis for the APS-H sensor they determined the benefits didn't justify the costs. I think it's probably expensive to design and develop a sensor and its component technologies for only one body. I suspect that as technology advances, the marginal benefits of the APS-H sensor shrink (squeezed between the APS-C on one end and the Full Frame Sensor at the other).

Keep in mind that "good enough" technology almost always triumphs over great technology. That's why most people listen to compressed music files that are inferior to past recordings, why Betamax lost out to VHS, why the internal combustion engine triumphed over other technologies in the early 20th century, etc. etc.

[D_Rochat]

I apologize for going off topic, but this has me reminiscing over failed formats. Who out there remembers the Laser Disc? Ha! good times.

[V8Beast]

Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against the APS-H sensor. I just don't see it as a replacement for the APS-C.

Either do I. It's just that for selfish reasons, I'd love to see an APS-H sensor in a 7D2 If that ever happened, Canon would still sell tons of APS-C bodies in the xxD and Rebel lines. 

Considering that Nikon didn't even come out with an FF body until 2008, they were probably too embarrassed about to even think about developing a 1.3:1 sensor

Keep in mind that "good enough" technology almost always triumphs over great technology. That's why most people listen to compressed music files that are inferior to past recordings, why Betamax lost out to VHS, why the internal combustion engine triumphed over other technologies in the early 20th century, etc. etc.

That makes sense. I'm not a sports shooter so I can't speak on their behalf. Maybe they'll love the 1Dx, and won't mind spending an extra $1,800 over a 1D4, losing some reach, or having to buy longer lenses. However, if enough of them really don't want an FF body, and Canon busted out an APS-H 7D2, I presume that there'd be a lot of sales potential there. I see a lot more 1D2s, 3s, and 4s out in the wild than 1Ds 2s and 3s. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places.

Even though I have full-frame bodies, IMHO the benefits of FF over APS-C are questionable for many shooters. An APS-H sensor makes those benefits even more questionable, but you still get some extra reach

[dlleno]

Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing against the APS-H sensor. I just don't see it as a replacement for the APS-C.

Either do I. It's just that for selfish reasons, I'd love to see an APS-H sensor in a 7D2 If that ever happened, Canon would still sell tons of APS-C bodies in the xxD and Rebel lines. 

I'm sensing two distinct rumors, both based on the fact that Canon announced the fusion of 1D and 1Ds bodies.  Some think this means they are abandoning the 1D4 (but not necessarily the 1.3) and some think this means they are abandoning the 1.3.  If they are only abandoning the idea of a crop body with a "1" in the name (reserving that for FF pro) then we have an argument to put the 1.3 into the 7D, which then becomes the successor to the 1D4, not an elevated xxD.  This would be BIG shift because it would mean serious BIFers would have to re-condition themselves to accept a body with a name larger than "1", the 7D price would be double or more, and the market would still be without the capability that the 7D was proven successful in (an upper tier 1.6x prosumer wildlife body).

Thing is,  xxD series is running out of names, and I can't see Canon producing both a 7D and a 70D at the same time.  If the 7D remains in the line-up as a sports/BIF body, regardless of the sensor size, Canon will have to re-think the xxD marketing and call the 60D successor something besides 70D.

 

Keep in mind that "good enough" technology almost always triumphs over great technology. That's why most people listen to compressed music files that are inferior to past recordings, why Betamax lost out to VHS, why the internal combustion engine triumphed over other technologies in the early 20th century, etc. etc.

maybe -- for recreational art content consumption that is certainly true. but for professional content creation, the stakes are higher, and the competition stiffer.  MP3 and VHS triumphed because they appealed to the consumer masses and the price was right.   For a pro BIFer who wants to sell a prize shot to the discriminating aficionado , I'm not so sure the principle applies....

That makes sense. I'm not a sports shooter so I can't speak on their behalf. Maybe they'll love the 1Dx, and won't mind spending an extra $1,800 over a 1D4, losing some reach, or having to buy longer lenses. However, if enough of them really don't want an FF body, and Canon busted out an APS-H 7D2, I presume that there'd be a lot of sales potential there. I see a lot more 1D2s, 3s, and 4s out in the wild than 1Ds 2s and 3s. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places.

Even though I have full-frame bodies, IMHO the benefits of FF over APS-C are questionable for many shooters. An APS-H sensor makes those benefits even more questionable, but you still get some extra reach

I'm not a pro BIFer either so I can't speak from any experience here,  but I sense the important decision point for Canon is not whether or not to abandon the BIF body, it is what sensor to use.  Maybe the benefits of H over C are also questionable, and the next high-performance wildlife pro body will be a 1.6!  blasphemous I do realize:  Can you imagine the pro BIFers accepting a body that could be mounted to an APS-C lens?  That would take some serious marketing and messaging, not to mention a very clear technology statement of unprecedented pixel density.  but I have to say that a 10fps, dual digic-5, 30-frame buffer,  1.6x sensor of the highest possible IQ/ISO/noise performance, weather sealed, dual card slots, etc.  would be attractive.  I just don't know if the 1.6 technology is up to it yet.  Maybe Canon will pull a rabbit out of their hat, and give the pro wildlifer extra reach without compromising IQ.  well, its amusing to consider anyway!