Canon EOS 7D Successors [CR1]

[briansquibb]

APS-H was designed and made by Kodak first. The Kodak sensor was then bought by Canon for the first 'Canon' APS-H cameras such as the D6000. Canon then designed their own and put it in the 1D in 2001. The rest of the camera was based on the IV film camera - so it got the 45 point AF system

- 8 fps continuous shooting
- Continuous shooting burst up to a maximum of 21 shots

Kodak also designed the first APS-C 1.6 crop sensor for Canon (such as the D2000)

Perhaps we can now stop propegating the myths about why Canon 'designed' APS-H for maximum profit - it just bought them off the shelf like Nikon do with Sony sensors.

dude nice history.  so Kodak is out of the picture now entirely since 2001, and Canon fully owns and produces their own sensors?

Yes

It is also worth noting that the Sony and Nikon APS-C are 1.5 crop so are larger than the Canon sensors

[neuroanatomist]

PROSUMER is just a cynical marketing ploy to sell slightly upgraded Rebels for more money. By calling these cameras prosumer they make the buyers feel special.

Nikon doesn't sell prosumer cameras, just consumer and pro. The Nikon D300S DX (APS-C)  has the same focusing and metering as the FX (Full Frame) D3s. While neither the POS 60D or the EOS 7D have pro level focusing or metering. WTF is wrong with Canon

Canon has a much larger (and growing) dSLR market share, compared to Nikon. So...WTF is wrong with Canon???  Nothing.  Rather, WTF is wrong with Nikon?!?

Just giving you the shareholder perspective, which for a publicly-held company is the most important consideration.

[maxxevv]

PROSUMER is just a cynical marketing ploy to sell slightly upgraded Rebels for more money. By calling these cameras prosumer they make the buyers feel special.

Nikon doesn't sell prosumer cameras, just consumer and pro. The Nikon D300S DX (APS-C)  has the same focusing and metering as the FX (Full Frame) D3s. While neither the POS 60D or the EOS 7D have pro level focusing or metering. WTF is wrong with Canon

You read these specs from Nikon too literally.

Have you ever actually compared these Nikon cameras side by side for their so called 'pro grade' AF and metering??  Go do that with the same glass side by side ... You will be "amazed" by the differences... 

[Gcon]

There's no way the 7D replacement will not accept APS-C lenses. So no sensor bloat - that's just silly.

APS-H is D.E.A.D. It was only there for faster frame rates compared to FF. It was a compromise. Canon solved this with the 1DX. The whole point of a crop-sensor lens in a semi-pro body like 7D is just that - the crop factor! Otherwise you'd just get the 5DIII. My left nut to say that APS-H will never ever see the light of day ever again in a new body - it makes absolutely zero sense.

I was initially thinking that 60D and 7D would merge. I've changed my mind. The price gap would be too great going from Rebel/650D to 7D. That middle ground needs to be filled to stave off competition from the impressive Nikon D7000. Canon won't give up that fight.

There will be a 70D and 7DII. Both will be 24MP. There will be enough feature differences to justify the price diff - weather sealing, frame rate (dual digic vs single), AF points, magnesium body.

The Canon no-frills full frame camera - this one is hard to predict! They need to be competitive with Nikon yet not Canibalise 5DIII sales the way the 5DII cannibalised 1Ds sales several years ago. I definitely think is coming though - the 5DII is dated and won't work with new accessories. It needs a direct replacement at that price point. Will it be a megapixel monster? I doubt it but we shall see.

[maxxevv]

There's no way the 7D replacement will not accept APS-C lenses. So no sensor bloat - that's just silly.

What if it could and was 1.3X crop as well ??

[briansquibb]

There's no way the 7D replacement will not accept APS-C lenses. So no sensor bloat - that's just silly.

What if it could and was 1.3X crop as well ??

or even the APS-C update, the 70D, will of course take the EF-S lens

To ease the update path into FF a cheap 1.3 crop option will be provided complete with a series of cheaper lens such as the 40 f/2.8.

[c.d.embrey]

You read these specs from Nikon too literally.

Have you ever actually compared these Nikon cameras side by side for their so called 'pro grade' AF and metering??  Go do that with the same glass side by side ... You will be "amazed" by the differences...

Yes I have. I know fellow pros who use Nikon DSLRs, and I've played with them. I now own a Nikon F100 FFFilm (Full-Frame-Film) camera, and I prefer the metering and focus to my Canon cameras. I've used a 5D3, and it's a great camera, but I think that I've already bought my last Canon DSLR. I'll be replacing my DSLRs at the end of the year. What is announced at Photokina will help me make my decision, stick with Canon or go with Nikon or maybe Sony. Or perhaps buying Mu43, and renting MFD when I need the higher pixel count. Decisions, decisions ...

[c.d.embrey]

Just giving you the shareholder perspective, which for a publicly-held company is the most important consideration.

Let me re-word it. Prosumer is just a cynical marketing ploy to enrich Canon shareholders. This cynical ploy isn't used by Nikon, another publicly traded company. Maybe Nikon shareholders are already rich enough  

[Eimajm]

More megapixels for the 70D.... why do you need more megapixels on a prosumer camera?

Useful for cropping when I'm focal-length or magnification limited.

If more pixels weren't useful for this, teleconverters would also be useless, and they are not.  Even our old optics can do well with a 2x TC on an 18MP 1.6-crop sensor, thus indicating that sensor could go to 72MP and still provide benefit even to an old zoom lens (100-400L).

100-400L + 2x on T2i:
http://photos.imageevent.com/sipphoto/samplepictures/T2i__3574%20edited.jpg

That's like saying I'm shooting birds with a wide angle and need the extra pixels for cropping. Not really the right tools for the job.

[KarstenReis]

The whole FF, APS-H, APS-C formats seems to be quite a polarizing topic.  As someone who has only shot with APS-C cameras (450D &7D) and only been able to compare IQ from each format, it seems like there are advantages to each.  FF for studio and landscapes, APS-C for the extra "reach" and APS-H is a compromise between the two that gives some additional reach for sports and wildlife while still delivering very good high ISO IQ (almost as good as the 5D Mark III).  I understand that it was a solution for Canon when FF sensors were too expensive to produce and NOT so that they could deliver faster frame rates, as some people seem to think on here.  I'd like to put in my thought sometimes but it seems like everyone gets their panties in a wad and can't keep even the most basic level of objectivity when it comes to discussing a possible return of APS-H sensors.  Instantly people flame anyone who even mentions that APS-H might actually be good. Gasp!
With that said, unless Canon can improve exponentially on the sensor technology of APS-C, APS-H delivers a lot of advantages with minimal investment in R&D.  I would definitely welcome a new 7D replacement with an APS-H sensor, whatever it's called.  There is definitely a market for Canon to have a "prosumer" body with all the bells and whistles it currently has.  The most common complaint I've heard about the 7D is IQ at both low and high ISO.  What could solve this problem is a move to APS-H! It would deliver better IQ while still providing some of the reach that APS-C delivers.  Yes it is a compromise but I'd see it as a very good one.  A move to FF for the 7D, as some people have wanted, would require the purchase of additional glass that is way out of the budget of most serious amateurs (myself included).  I have to 400 5.6.  A jump up to 500 would cost an additional ~5k for a used Mk I or ~9 for a MkII.  Unless someone wants to give me that money or I win the lottery, I don't see a 500 in my future any time soon.
Wow, that got long quickly.  I just think people need to tone down the rhetoric a little and try to come in with a little more of an open mind. Have a good weekend.

[Lee Jay]

More megapixels for the 70D.... why do you need more megapixels on a prosumer camera?

Useful for cropping when I'm focal-length or magnification limited.

If more pixels weren't useful for this, teleconverters would also be useless, and they are not.  Even our old optics can do well with a 2x TC on an 18MP 1.6-crop sensor, thus indicating that sensor could go to 72MP and still provide benefit even to an old zoom lens (100-400L).

100-400L + 2x on T2i:
http://photos.imageevent.com/sipphoto/samplepictures/T2i__3574%20edited.jpg

That's like saying I'm shooting birds with a wide angle and need the extra pixels for cropping. Not really the right tools for the job.

I routinely need a zoom lens for shooting at long focal lengths because I'm shooting aircraft and they move quickly.  They move so quickly that handholding is required.  How many handholdable fast autofocus zoom lenses does Canon make longer than 400mm?  It's common for me to crop to 800-1200mm equivalent focal length, and those extra pixels are a big help.

Now, if Canon wants to make a nice, affordable, handholdable 100-1200 f/4-f/5.6, I'm all for it but I don't think that will happen any time in the foreseeable future as we don't even have materials that could meet those specs.

[TTMartin]

I'm still seeing Canon's best move is to make the 70D their full frame entry level camera.

Full frame doesn't make a camera a Pro camera, and it's not the sensor that determines the numbering with Canon it's features and build. The 1D, 1D Mk II, 1D Mk III, 1D Mk IV, and 7D are all proof of this.

I'm guessing it would be possible for Canon to build an APS-H 7D Mk II with a modified mirror box, to allow the use of EF-S lenses (with reduced image are like Nikon DX lenses on their FX cameras). Either that or a 7D Mk II with a true APS-H spec sensor which would make it a 16X9 and it also could be designed to accommodate EF-S lenses as the true APS-C and APS-H spec actually have the same sensor height, so they could have the same mirror height, thus accommodating EF-S lenses. The only thing that doesn't make sense with this is that the 7D is more of a sports oriented camera, and a 16X9 sensor would be more in line with video oriented camera. 

[Lee Jay]

The latest I have heard, and spoken about before, is that we’ll see the 70D move up the line. It’ll be specced close to the current 7D, however with a new higher megapixel APS-C sensor.

It seems to me that this could be the cause of the new 7D firmware.  If the 70D comes out before a new 7D does, and it's spec'd higher than the 7D is without the new firmware, that would be embarrassing for Canon.  So they upgraded the 7D firmware to keep the 70D below it in some ways (raw buffer, probably) so they can keep the 7D on the market longer.

[Razor2012]

Just giving you the shareholder perspective, which for a publicly-held company is the most important consideration.

Let me re-word it. Prosumer is just a cynical marketing ploy to enrich Canon shareholders. This cynical ploy isn't used by Nikon, another publicly traded company. Maybe Nikon shareholders are already rich enough  

Whatever kind of ploy it is, it must be working...just look at who's got the biggest market share.   

[BXL]

The latest I have heard, and spoken about before, is that we’ll see the 70D move up the line. It’ll be specced close to the current 7D, however with a new higher megapixel APS-C sensor.

It seems to me that this could be the cause of the new 7D firmware.  If the 70D comes out before a new 7D does, and it's spec'd higher than the 7D is without the new firmware, that would be embarrassing for Canon.  So they upgraded the 7D firmware to keep the 70D below it in some ways (raw buffer, probably) so they can keep the 7D on the market longer.

IMO the 70D will be cheaper than the 7D (v2). Even if the 70D gets the 19-point AF of the 7D and a better 2X MP Sensor, there are still a few differences to differentiate those two cameras:

1. Speed: The 70D is rumored to have a frame rate of 6 fps, the 7D has 8 fps -> Advantage 7D
2. Buffer: The 70D will most likely keep the max buffer of  ~16 RAW files (58 JPEGs), the 7D maximum RAW buffer is extended to 25 RAW files (130 JPEGs) -> Advantage 7D
3. Memory Cards: SD versus CF -> IMO Advantage 7D, however, some people prefer cheaper and slower SD-Cards.
4. Viewfinder: 70D will most likely keep the viewfinder of the 60D. Thus 96% versus 100% (7D) -> Advantage 7D
5. Body: 70D will most likely keep the polycarbonate resin with glass fibre body on aluminum chassis, the 7D has a magnesium alloy body -> Advantage? Depends on personal preference.

IMO the score is 0:4 in favor of the 7D...

The regular price of the 7D is $1.699 and its currently sold for $1.549. The regular price of the 60D is $1.399 and it's sold for $1.299. IMO the 70D will be most likely a bit more expensive than the 60D without costing as much as the 7D... maybe around $1.499?

Don't forget that the 650D/T4i moved up the line as well, got the AF and the fps of the 60D. However, the price increase was only (at least in Germany) 50,- Euro (about $63).