EOS 7D Mark II, EOS 70D & 700D in 2013? [CR1]

[Marsu42]

If DOF and resolution are the only discernible differences between APS-C and full frame, then they will redefine APS-C as a choice based on use-case rather than as an entry into DSLR photography.

Absolutely, in an ideal world aps-c would be sufficient for everyone, ff (which is only defined by the legacy analog film) is mainly a fix for bad iso capability atm, at least unless a high mp camera is here. And ff has disadvantages like the slower x-sync.

But in the real world there are a couple of disadvantages to aps-c: if you use ef lenses you carry and pay for glass you partly don't use, and there are no sealed standard-range lenses for ef-s - Canon nails down aps-c to the amateur or birding sector with these non-offers.

[Richard8971]

Absolutely, in an ideal world aps-c would be sufficient for everyone, ff (which is only defined by the legacy analog film) is mainly a fix for bad iso capability atm, at least unless a high mp camera is here. And ff has disadvantages like the slower x-sync.

But in the real world there are a couple of disadvantages to aps-c: if you use ef lenses you carry and pay for glass you partly don't use, and there are no sealed standard-range lenses for ef-s - Canon nails down aps-c to the amateur or birding sector with these non-offers.

APS-C sensors only came about as a "cheap"-er way to produce sensors even though Canon knew a sensor the size of a 35mm negative was better.

APS-C was a common film size so film users considering a switch to digital would already be aware of the "crop" factor and the smaller "negative" limitations with regards to film grain. Yes, smaller film negatives showed more grain than larger negatives. Sometimes we forget that... Don't believe me? Look at a 4x6 photos from the old "Disc" camera. Best sand painting you will ever see!

Seems to me that production costs for sensors will go down as time continues on, so larger sensors will become more common place over crop sensors. Until then, APS-C will be available and I love my 7D. It is an extremely well thought out camera that is fast and responsive. I love the images I get.

FF has advantages and so does APS-C. Unless one has deep pockets, there will always be budget minded alternitves for the rest of us.

D

[Marsu42]

Seems to me that production costs for sensors will go down as time continues on, so larger sensors will become more common place over crop sensors.

I think the two worlds will grow apart further because there's an *absolute* "good enough" for everyday shooting, and the 18mp sensor is nearly there given maybe 1-2 added iso steps (usable iso1600) and fixing the shadow noise problem.

There's even an *absolute* "good enough" for pro shooting (print size), but Pros will always buy a sensor that has a *relative* edge (ff, medium format) for the simple fact that they have the money to get that edge over the competition and amateur shots. And some users with special requirements (moonlight af'ing like on the 6d) might too.

Since Canon supports pros wanting an edge, they price their pro line as it is - and pros (and well-off amateurs) buy it even if it's less value for the money. That's why I doubt the ff/aps-c *ratio* will shift much in the future, even if *absolutely* both segments will grew because the prices are lower than a decade ago and more people get into digital photography.

[moreorless]

If DOF and resolution are the only discernible differences between APS-C and full frame, then they will redefine APS-C as a choice based on use-case rather than as an entry into DSLR photography.

Absolutely, in an ideal world aps-c would be sufficient for everyone, ff (which is only defined by the legacy analog film) is mainly a fix for bad iso capability atm, at least unless a high mp camera is here. And ff has disadvantages like the slower x-sync.

But in the real world there are a couple of disadvantages to aps-c: if you use ef lenses you carry and pay for glass you partly don't use, and there are no sealed standard-range lenses for ef-s - Canon nails down aps-c to the amateur or birding sector with these non-offers.

Resolution wise I'm guessing ASPC is already near to the limates of optics for boarder to boarder sharpness though and thats an area were technology isnt advancing nearly as quickly and where any advances come at great expense.

If Canon did release a higher end 7D2 though I don't see the lens issue as being that difficult to fix, just release an updated version of the 17-55mm with improved build.

[whatta]

I went to photokina to see the 70d (as it was expected to be announced earlier) 

I tried to get out info from the canon guys with absulitelly no success
but at least one from UK asked me what I expected from the 70d..

I hope it is coming soon (with a less noisy sensor etc).

[that1guyy]

I went to photokina to see the 70d (as it was expected to be announced earlier) 

I tried to get out info from the canon guys with absulitelly no success
but at least one from UK asked me what I expected from the 70d..

I hope it is coming soon (with a less noisy sensor etc).

Haha awesome!

Did you mention any video features you wanted? Like 1080p 60p??
I also want better dynamic range, less noise, a headphone jack, and no aliasing and moire. I hate how I get my hopes up though. Canon will obviously fail like usual.

[Marsu42]

Canon will obviously fail like usual.

I'm always happy to bash Canon I think it's appropriate ($2099 6d vs d600...) but let's see what they'll do about aps-c next year. The market is more mobile since users didn't invest thousands of $$$ into L glass, so Canon cannot get away with its high-price policy like in the ff sector. If they improve the sensor some and then don't cut back on the features we might see a Canon comeback - maybe after the dslr execs got fired for the 6d.