Canon EOS 90D and Canon EOS M6 Mark II announcements coming at the end of August

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D + 100-400mm mkii
Feb 7, 2019
147
114
UK
Everybody seems to be forgetting that the 90D is rumoured to have 2 digics. Doesn’t sound like a normal 80D upgrade to me. We’ll see soon enough..
 
  • Like
Reactions: criscokkat

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,413
859
I wrote "You cannot realistically expect that Canon will deliver a camera named xxD and priced at around USD 1400.00 to be as good an action camera as a camera from the xD-series..." and then you replied with a comparison about a landscapeing/studio camera (5D), derived from an action camera (1D).
Don't be obtuse. You know I was talking about the s variant of the 1D series.

Apparently you also missed that I explicitly wrote about action photography, not the landscaping/studio that you introduced and based your wrong conclusion on.
The question is whether or not Canon would make a lower tier/price point body an equal or better replacement for a once upper tier/price point function. The answer is yes, they have.

I really do not see why you want to argue that statement by introducing irrelevant comparisons and misrepresenting the specifics of what I wrote.
You're the one introducing misrepresentations.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
Funny at the reaction from wanting clean hdmi out is. I guess I’m the only one that wants it and anyone else that does is just one person that Canon doesn’t care about. If that is the mentality that you allegedly have insight to, I really don’t feel good about that hubris mentality which has led to the decline of major corporations over time.
Wanting a feature is perfectly reasonable. Threatening consequences if you don’t get that feature is silly. Unless you happen to own a few million shares of CAJ, your threat is meaningless. Neither Canon nor anyone on this forum care if you buy the 90D, buy a Nikon D500, or buy a soggy piece of toast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jprusa

digigal

Traveling the world one step at a time.
Aug 26, 2014
143
172
This is spot on. It's very difficult to actually explain why the 7D series is so beloved to someone who has never handled one.

There's a very distinct difference between the 80D and the 7DM2. It's not just specs. It feels better and respondes quicker. Everything is exactly where you need it to be. No fluff. It just shoots and makes your job easier (two card slots helps a lot).

One often overlooked fact about the 7Dm2: it has a special shutter mechanism shared only with the 1D series, according to Imaging Resource. This results in less vibration and a longer shutter life.
I just retired my 7DMKII to back up status, not because there was anything wrong with it, but because it has over 380,000 clicks on a shutter rated for 200,000! That camera has been to seven continents, the Arctic and Antarctic, and Africa multiple times and only had routine sensor cleaning. Best, most reliable piece of equipment I've ever owned. Bought another one a couple of months ago because I can't keep waiting forever waiting for Canon to come out with a better camera to replace it.
Catherine
 

trounds

I'm New Here
Jul 29, 2019
11
12
It is very interesting reading all the coments, mostly disliking what the rumored specs of the 90D are going to be. Personally, I have multiple caneras and use the one that fits the work I'm going to do. I'm sure that Canon has done its homework and the 90D will end up being a success, even if it isn't what everyone is looking for. Reguardless of the end resulting specs, I am very excited to give this camera a try with and open mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rixy

scyrene

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 4, 2013
2,510
395
UK
www.flickr.com
Wanting a feature is perfectly reasonable. Threatening consequences if you don’t get that feature is silly. Unless you happen to own a few million shares of CAJ, your threat is meaningless. Neither Canon nor anyone on this forum care if you buy the 90D, buy a Nikon D500, or buy a soggy piece of toast.
Now I want toast :confused:
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,120
549
N


The difference in DR between the two models isn’t really noticeable in real world photographs. Like I said, the quality of the colours from the 80D files when you have to increase the exposure or push the shadows is better. I prefer the files from the 80D.
So is there no difference "noticeable in real world photographs" or is the 80D better "when you have to increase the exposure or push the shadows"?

Please make up your mind.

Or is that you want to deny any measurable difference that shows the 7D Mark II is slightly better than the 80D at ISOs above 400 while still maintaining that the 80D is noticeably better in processing?


Which looks better in processing is as much about the different algorithms being used for each sensor by the specific raw conversion application as it is about the sensor itself. When using Canon's DPP 4, I find the capabilities of the 7D Mark II every bit as good as the 80D at high ISO settings. YMMV.

Here are some "real world photographs" shot under pretty crappy lighting.

Image taken under extremely poor limited spectrum flickering lighting at a high school football stadium. ISO 3200, f/2.8, 1/800, 200mm. Shot with an EOS 7D Mark II + EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II. Processed with Canon's DPP 4. (Brightness +0.67; CT set at 3700, WB set at -1B, -2M; Standard PS; gamma adjusted +3, 0, 0 to crush the shadows in the background outside the stadium; Contrast -1, Shadows +1, Highlight -2 (to preserve details in white jerseys), color saturation -2; NR 8 (Lum), 10 (Chr); extensive HSL adjustments in blue and purple bands to reduce color casts on white nylon jerseys created by the limited spectrum lighting.) Cropped from 5472x3648 (3:2) to 3270x2453 (4:3)(62% diagonal linear, 40% areal).
201811099009QPHR.JPG


Same stadium and camera/lens, but shot at a slightly brighter spot near the 50 yard line. ISO 3200, f/3.2, 1/500 at 200mm. Processed with Canon's DPP 4. (Brightness +0.33; CT set at 3700, WB set at -1B, -2M; Standard PS; gamma adjusted +3, 0, 0; Contrast -1, Shadows +1, Highlight -2 (to preserve details in white jerseys), color saturation -2; NR 8 (Lum), 10 (Chr); extensive HSL adjustments in blue and purple bands to reduce color casts on white uniform created by the limited spectrum lighting.) Cropped from 3648x5472 (2:3) to 3483x4644 (3:4)(81% areal) .
201811099004QPHR.JPG


But then again, even the 7D can do pretty well at ISO 3200 with enough light. EOS 7D + 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II at 200mm. ISO 3200, f/2.8, 1/1600. Processed with Canon's DPP 3. I'm too lazy to reinstall DPP 3 just to look up the processing settings I used back in 2013, but I seem to remember having to pull, not push, on this one. The singer was illuminated by a bright spotlight, the rest of the stage was not and I was using slower Tv on the other members of the band. (The full sized uncropped image was too large for the limits here on CR. This is an uncropped version downsized from 3456x5184 to 1536x1024.

201305180042LR.JPG
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,120
549
Yah, there’s a significant difference between ‘measurable’ and ‘visible’.
Agreed. But when someone claims one sensor is "noticeably better" than another and the measurable data shows otherwise...
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,120
549
I had both at the same time, till the 80D died as I described earlier, still have the 7D2. Predominantly stills, but like the all rounder aspect of video as well.

Your step down isnt everyones, it depends on what you liked about it.
Which kind of proves the point about which is more robust than the other.

The 80D has a shutter rating of 100,000
The 7D Mark II has a shutter rating of 200,000

Additionally, the 7D Mark II has a superior AF system and a superior light meter (150,000 RGB+IR pixels in 252 zones vs. 7560 RGB+IR in 63 segments). These things are important when shooting sports/action in dim light. The color metering is critical when shooting straight to JPEG to meet tight publishing deadlines.
 

Otara

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2012
287
68
Which kind of proves the point about which is more robust than the other.

The 80D has a shutter rating of 100,000
The 7D Mark II has a shutter rating of 200,000

Additionally, the 7D Mark II has a superior AF system and a superior light meter (150,000 RGB+IR pixels in 252 zones vs. 7560 RGB+IR in 63 segments). These things are important when shooting sports/action in dim light. The color metering is critical when shooting straight to JPEG to meet tight publishing deadlines.
It was just luck it wasnt the 7D2 instead, you might have missed how it happened and the general point I was making. Many of the things you're listing are claimed specs vs reality. In my view they often arent so meaningful in practise. I still have to watch for the same situations with metering but overall its very reliable for either. Shutter counts are still ultimately a matter of trust and luckily are generally vast underestimates. Durability is still extremely good even with the so called flimsy 80D, but the same issues with be lethal for either.

Much of it is more about piece of mind in my view.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,120
549
It was just luck it wasnt the 7D2 instead, you might have missed how it happened and the general point I was making. Many of the things you're listing are claimed specs vs reality. In my view they often arent so meaningful in practise. I still have to watch for the same situations with metering but overall its very reliable for either. Shutter counts are still ultimately a matter of trust and luckily are generally vast underestimates. Durability is still extremely good even with the so called flimsy 80D, but the same issues with be lethal for either.

Much of it is more about piece of mind in my view.
You can claim it is just a spec, but here's the reality of the 80D shutter life versus the reality of the 7D Mark II shutter life. A 7D Mark II has a better chance of making it to 500,000 actuations than an 80D has of making it to 150,000.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,120
549
Unless the three samples of 7D2 which made it over 500,000 made it to exactly 1,000,000, I’m not convinced the evidence supports that claim.

I missed there were no data on the right for the bottom line.

So let's change it to a 7D Mark II has a better chance of making it to 500,000 actuations than an 80D has of making it to 150,000.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3kramd5

Otara

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2012
287
68
I think that might be confusing absence of data with a finding. Theres very different sample sizes.

If you take a look at the 60D or 70D with larger samples, you see a much closer match in overall patterns to the 7D2, with the majority of failures at 10-35k, and a fair chance of some very good numbers afterwards. Still not a completely fair comparison given lots of caveats (user base, age rates, selection bias etc) but interesting.

Using that data I have a 44% chance of getting 250k-500k with a 70D and a 58% chance with a 7D2. I mean sure its measurable, but they're both pretty awesome in my view.
 

Lee Jay

EOR R
Sep 22, 2011
2,084
59
nope. no viewfinder. What "we" (some of us) are waiting for is a KILLER EOS M5 II, every bit as good as a (not coming) EOS 7D III should have been. But priced at 999. ;-)
I would only be interested in that if the viewfinder were about a million times better than the ones in the R and RP. Those are just awful, compared side-by-side with my 7D Mark II. Blurry when panning, low-res, brightness doesn't match the scene, crushed blacks, blown whites - close to unusable in difficult conditions.

Oh, and I'd need at least 1,000 shots + 3 hours of viewfinder on time per battery charge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

dcm

Good or bad - it's not the gear.
Apr 18, 2013
742
79
M6 II could be an interesting upgrade for my M3 which usually carries the 11-22. Passed on the M50 and was going to wait for the M5 II to complement my M5. May have to seriously consider this once when we know a bit more about it.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,413
859
I would only be interested in that if the viewfinder were about a million times better than the ones in the R and RP. Those are just awful, compared side-by-side with my 7D Mark II. Blurry when panning, low-res, brightness doesn't match the scene, crushed blacks, blown whites - close to unusable in difficult conditions.

Oh, and I'd need at least 1,000 shots + 3 hours of viewfinder on time per battery charge.
This is my problem with mirrorless and why I wish Canon would put their up coming high resolution sensor in a 5Ds/5DsR mark II. I can shoot through an EVF, and in some situations even appreciate the exposure preview. But I generally prefer an OVF.

Every year EVFs are "as good as an OVF!" and then the next year there are improvements, and we hear again how "this time it really is as good!" I guess one year they might finally be right :p