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
Upvote
0
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.
ajfotofilmagem said:I like your list, but there's something missing: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?
Low noise in ISO6400.
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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.Mikehit said:Orangutan said:<snip>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.
1DX2 would break my budget, unfortunately.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.
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.