7D Mark iii or 90D?

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
greger said:
If the 90D comes in February 2018 then we will have to wait till September or October 2018 for the 7 D Mark 3. I don’t think Canon would release them at the same time.
100% agree.

- A
 

nostrovia

EOS M50
May 6, 2014
33
15
ajfotofilmagem said:
Don Haines said:
Realistically, what can you do to improve the 7D2?

You could add in the touchscreen and WiFi of the 6D2..... I think that’s a given......
You can’t really add to many more AF points, but you could make them all F8 and allow metering to the selected AF point.... I think this will happen.....
You could add UHS-2 storage and effectively get an infinite buffer. I expected this on the 7D2, it is long overdue on the 7D3......
Burst speed? Possibly bump it up, but I really doubt you would get to more than 12......
4K video? Probably.......
Intervalometer? Time lapse mode? Probably.....
Bump the pixel count? Probably..... I can’t see more than 24.....

Other than that, is there really anywhere to go?
I like your list, but there's something missing:

Low noise in ISO6400.
I just hope the touchscreen from the 6d2 includes the tilty/flippy part.
 

zim

EOR R
Oct 18, 2011
1,863
53
greger said:
If the 90D comes in February 2018 then we will have to wait till September or October 2018 for the 7 D Mark 3. I don’t think Canon would release them at the same time.
I can pretty much guarantee that's what will happen as I have a big holiday coming up in august and was thinking to upgrade to 7d3 for that. :)
 

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,116
309
A 7D3 will have to sort out the poor high ISO performance of the 7D2 which really lets it down.
I'm a floppy screen fan but I d have requirements for one for a camera I use for sports.
No doubt the the 7D3 will have one.
I'm not a fan of touch screen.
I think they should add a switch to turn on /off back button focussing or set it as a default setting.
 

OSOK

EOS M50
Jul 30, 2017
41
0
ajfotofilmagem said:
Although Canonrumors members always state that "Canon is conservative," it was Nikon decided to lower the resolution of the D7500 over the previous model.

If Canon lowered the resolution to please those who need high ISO (and annoy others), how many people would shout that "Canon is doomed."

Nikon not only lowered the resolution, but they also removed a card slot. This was a big step backward on that particular line. Although it does make sense in the following ways -

They need to ensure there's good separation between it and the D500. A strong D7500 makes the D500 questionable, build quality aside.

It's the same story on the Canon side. If the 80D or 90D is too good, why bother with a 7D3? Other than the build quality for pro use, the real features that truly matters is the high FPS and the dual card slots. Canon though is more generous offering the fully articulating screen and DPAF. Making their enthusiast crop cameras really super well rounded do-all bodies for people not making a living off of it (yet many actually do).

The D7200 is a hell of a camera. Incredible IQ for a crop, amazing DR. It's fast. Dual SD. Great AF system. There's almost nothing at all to dislike about it. It's one of the best APS-C cameras ever made, especially at that price.

Figure also that Nikon is getting their sensors from this TowerJizz company. 24MP was the Sony sensor. They're ordering up a 20MP from TJ to use in both bodies to save money and simplify manufacturing.

Will it work out for them? Who knows....In one way, they are copying the Canon business model of product segmentation. On the other hand, they are offering up a worse value because their customers are used to different approach (more feature rich bodies) and their cameras are monsters for stills and awful for video.

The 80D might not have the greatest AF, dual slots or best crop sensor - but it gives back in terms of screen, touch, DPAF. Which matters to that $900 range buyer. The D7500 gave up some very important stills shooter qualities...making it less appealing to stills shooters, and gave nothing in return on the video side.

I think this approach is a loser for Nikon. They can't get away with it like Canon does.


The 7D3 is going to probably feature the following -

11 or 12 fps
On chip ADC with the higher DR.
Anywhere from 22 to 28 MP.
Illuminated buttons.
4K of some kind, whether it is useful codec or not remains to be seen.
Same AF points, but improved AF processing, metering....
Bigger buffer.
Wireless Connectivity

I do not expect:

Different storage card arrangement. Maybe, UHS-II on the SD...big maybe.
No tilt screen.
No USB-C
No removal of the OLPF
No hybrid view finder
No IBIS
No AF Spot Linked Metering


I'm thinking it will break down this way -


If Canon gives 24-26mp, they might offer 11fps.

If they up to 22mp, they'll give 12 fps.

If they make it 28mp, it will stay 10fps.


This has nothing to do with actual processing power or the ability to move the data. This is for product segmentation purposes.

12fps is quite fast and even at 20mp, starts to become more and more a substitute for a 1D for some. For this reason, I think they can appease people with a modest increase of 1fps (heck, they might even keep it at 10fps) and offer up instead a big resolution increase.

Figure, the wildlife folks this was targeted toward the most are probably pretty happy with 10FPS. If I had to guess as to what they prefer to have more - I would bet they would want more detail and resolution over FPS at this point. At 10FPS, they are likely capturing plenty of great shots and aren't upset wishing they had more frame rate. They'd like those to be more detailed shots though. No doubt about that. Canon isn't going to offer up more detail via removal of the AA filter, so it's going to be more MP to make it up.

I'm guessing 26 to 28 MP, 10 fps, maybe 11 if they are generous. And a much bigger buffer so the bird in flight shooters can machine gun almost non-stop.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,276
474
OSOK said:
This has nothing to do with actual processing power or the ability to move the data. This is for product segmentation purposes.

12fps is quite fast and even at 20mp, starts to become more and more a substitute for a 1D for some. For this reason, I think they can appease people with a modest increase of 1fps (heck, they might even keep it at 10fps) and offer up instead a big resolution increase.

Figure, the wildlife folks this was targeted toward the most are probably pretty happy with 10FPS. If I had to guess as to what they prefer to have more - I would bet they would want more detail and resolution over FPS at this point. At 10FPS, they are likely capturing plenty of great shots and aren't upset wishing they had more frame rate. They'd like those to be more detailed shots though. No doubt about that. Canon isn't going to offer up more detail via removal of the AA filter, so it's going to be more MP to make it up.

I'm guessing 26 to 28 MP, 10 fps, maybe 11 if they are generous. And a much bigger buffer so the bird in flight shooters can machine gun almost non-stop.
My guess is different to yours - the 10fps is is not about /segmentation' but is about capacity of the processor. You can drive AF, or you can move data, not both - if you think this is different can you explain why.

As a wildlife shooter I can tell you 10 fps is perfectly fine and 12 will not get you any more keepers than 10 so in that respect I agree with you in that I would prefer they spent the money on pixels (number and quality if possible). As for the buffer, I find absolutely no problem with it when using the fastest cards - I can shoot 50+ shots before it starts to slow down. I have not yet met a wildlife photographer who shoots full burst for 5 seconds at a stretch: for birds in flight you rarely get that much time with the bird in a decent position (maybe something like a big cat on the chase, but even then not sure how long they are a decent distance away).
 

tomscott

Photographer & Graphic Designer
I love my 7DMKII I think its so underrated and people instantly dismiss it.

It has saved my ass in so many situations and has been in some of the worst conditions on the earth and always performs. Love the body, frame rate etc etc.

Couple of issues I have had. The focus inconsistency is a pain, its a well known issue and it is really sporadic and doesn't really make a lot of sense to work back why. Ive shot static wildlife shooting a 3 frame burst and the first frame is out second frame in third frame very slightly out. Changing the release/focus settings doesn't really make a lot of difference. Other times is hits all the time and the images are tack others times not. I always get a usable shot but it seems to lock and then be ever so slightly out. I have combated this by shooting 2 busts usually. TBH its at its worst if a subject is backlit but at the same time had lots of front light and been out too.

I havent had this issue with any other camera ive ever owned and I have had most modern Canon DSLRS so would be nice for this to be ironed out. The 5DMKIII rarely missed, the 70D isnt brilliant at acquisition but when it locks its tack and 6DMKII with the same AF (supposedly) very rarely misses I find the 6DMKII to be the most consistent out of these cameras in the 30-40k ive shot with it I would say less than 2% have been out. Really enjoy that camera theres been no disappointment at all, it seems the budget camera that can do it all.

My other issue which isnt really an issue, I really like the IQ generally, I have shot plenty of 6400 in jungle/rainforrest conditions and have not found it to be a problem. Saying that there are weaknesses of this generation, muddy shadows when pulling back detail which seem to have been greatly improved on the newer generation sensor. A little less noise would be nice too. Last point put a touch screen on it. There is literally 0 point in having DPAF without a touch screen IMO seriously hampers the camera.

So basically stick the new sensor, sort the AF inconsistencies and add a touch screen and that would be enough for me to buy a new one. Like the 5DMKIV its a very robust polished machine with little improvement needed.

Other than that the body is super stellar.
 

Sabaki

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 4, 2012
800
0
45
Cape Town, South Africa
The one thing I'd love is for the AF consistency to be sorted out

Once the announcements get made, we will start to hear comments like 'Baby 1DX' and '7DX' or similar but the fact of the matter is that the actual AF performance vs the marketed/implied/assumed performance was just not amazing.

I'm no engineer and can't throw my 2c into the hat regarding battery size, algorithms or such like things but Canon needs to make a statement and deliver a D500 killer
 

Orangutan

EOR R
Sep 25, 2010
2,140
3
tomscott said:
the 70D isnt brilliant at acquisition but when it locks its tack and 6DMKII with the same AF (supposedly) very rarely misses I find the 6DMKII to be the most consistent out of these cameras in the 30-40k ive shot with it I would say less than 2% have been out. Really enjoy that camera theres been no disappointment at all, it seems the budget camera that can do it all.
I've been thinking of taking advantage of the current 6D2 deal to replace my 70D. The 70D was a great upgrade from my 60D, especially for birds, and I'm generally happy with it. The major reason I'm considering the upgrade is for better low-light and shadow detail, especially for birds. It sounds like you've shot both quite a bit; can you tell me how the 6D2 compares for low-light/high ISO (1600-3200) for birds? One concern is that for reach-limited situations I don't have enough zoom to get the same number of pixels on the subject. Of course, it's still the same sensor area, but it's not clear whether there's enough per-unit-area IQ improvement to warrant the purchase. Before this sale I was thinking I'd keep saving, and maybe buy a refurb 5D4 in a year or so.

Thanks.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,276
474
Orangutan said:
tomscott said:
the 70D isnt brilliant at acquisition but when it locks its tack and 6DMKII with the same AF (supposedly) very rarely misses I find the 6DMKII to be the most consistent out of these cameras in the 30-40k ive shot with it I would say less than 2% have been out. Really enjoy that camera theres been no disappointment at all, it seems the budget camera that can do it all.
I've been thinking of taking advantage of the current 6D2 deal to replace my 70D. The 70D was a great upgrade from my 60D, especially for birds, and I'm generally happy with it. The major reason I'm considering the upgrade is for better low-light and shadow detail, especially for birds. It sounds like you've shot both quite a bit; can you tell me how the 6D2 compares for low-light/high ISO (1600-3200) for birds? One concern is that for reach-limited situations I don't have enough zoom to get the same number of pixels on the subject. Of course, it's still the same sensor area, but it's not clear whether there's enough per-unit-area IQ improvement to warrant the purchase. Before this sale I was thinking I'd keep saving, and maybe buy a refurb 5D4 in a year or so.

Thanks.
I can't compare your camera but I can compare the 6D, 7D2 and 5DIV. In general I would say that at ISO 2500 and above the 'pixel reach' of the 7D2 starts to be negated by the better pixel quality of the FF models. I would expect the 70D to be slightly more so. Having said that the difference is there but not 'night and day' on casual viewing of an image but it becomes more pronounced if you crop or recover shadows.
To be honest, even in half-decent light, and image where you would use a FF sensor and say 'nah! it is starting to fall apart', the APS-C image is not gong to be a miraculous award-winner because it will have more pixels but be noisier. It all depends on what compromises you are willing to accept.

I upgraded to the 1Dx2 and 5DIV not for mage quality because I think the 7D2 for all its faults is still a very good performer. I upgraded for focus accuracy.
 

Orangutan

EOR R
Sep 25, 2010
2,140
3
Mikehit said:
Orangutan said:
tomscott said:
<snip>
I can't compare your camera but I can compare the 6D, 7D2 and 5DIV. In general I would say that at ISO 2500 and above the 'pixel reach' of the 7D2 starts to be negated by the better pixel quality of the FF models. I would expect the 70D to be slightly more so. Having said that the difference is there but not 'night and day' on casual viewing of an image but it becomes more pronounced if you crop or recover shadows.
To be honest, even in half-decent light, and image where you would use a FF sensor and say 'nah! it is starting to fall apart', the APS-C image is not gong to be a miraculous award-winner because it will have more pixels but be noisier. It all depends on what compromises you are willing to accept.
That's what I'm trying to figure out: will the "better" pixels of the 6D2 make up for ~40% higher linear pixel density of the 70D for low-light/noise performance.
I upgraded to the 1Dx2 and 5DIV not for mage quality because I think the 7D2 for all its faults is still a very good performer. I upgraded for focus accuracy.
1DX2 would break my budget, unfortunately.
 

jeffa4444

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 28, 2013
1,461
108
66
We have a rental business that specialises in fashion photographers on the one hand and travel photographers on the other.
The Nikon D500 is knocking spots off of the 7D MKII in the travel market whereas in fashion we struggle with anything Nikon (too early to say with the D850) and the 5D MKIV is the best rented Canon.

Canon need to upgrade the 7D MKII when it launched it was underwhelming and its even more underwhelming since the arrival of the D500.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,441
1,266
jeffa4444 said:
We have a rental business that specialises in fashion photographers on the one hand and travel photographers on the other.
The Nikon D500 is knocking spots off of the 7D MKII in the travel market whereas in fashion we struggle with anything Nikon (too early to say with the D850) and the 5D MKIV is the best rented Canon.

Canon need to upgrade the 7D MKII when it launched it was underwhelming and its even more underwhelming since the arrival of the D500.
Curious to hear your take on the D500 doing better than the 7D2 -- what's the principal driver?

4K?
Sensor?
That inexpensive 200-500 Nikkor?

Just curious. We'll never see hard data on 7D2 vs. D500 sales, so I'll take an anecdotal read if I can get one.

- A
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
6,215
4,091
I had been very happy with my 7DII for a couple of years but sold it after I bought the 5DSR for 3 reasons: the IQ of the 5DSR, which lacks the AA filter, is significantly better; the AF is much better; and the FF gives a better field of view. The Nikon d500 , according to reports, has the first two of those advantages, as well as others.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,636
826
I am wondering if the 90D may not happen, but a mirrorless version might replace it. Of course, it is not likely, but Canon may be piling resources into mirrorless.

New Rebel versions are on the way for early next year, so that frees up a development team to work on the next new model. What will it be? Mirrorless or DSLR?