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

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
If you hear the truth, by me articulating it, would you still accept that you're wrong?
Of course, I have no problem accepting and admitting to faults.

If you can articulate how a product which is such a market flop that it forces the company to immediately pivot to another product isn’t a “failure,” I'm happy to say I’m wrong.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
I’m providing feedback around important features I’m looking for. I want to buy Canon, but won’t if they don’t provide what I need. You obviously don't appear to care what people are looking for or helping Canon profits. I’m not a sheep.
You’re providing feedback to other users on features important to you, and you’re not providing it to anyone who can act on your feedback. In regard to the cameras supposedly being announced this month, your feedback is irrelevant since it’s far too late to change anything about them.

Canon doesn’t really care if you don’t buy Canon, you’re one person. Canon has a long history of making cameras that the majority of ILC buyers want to purchase. They’ve done so successfully for >16 years without your feedback.

I can’t speak for others, but I’m not especially concerned about Canon’s profit. It’s solid enough that there’s no worry about them exiting the ILC market. Regardless, as an individual you are essentially irrelevant to their profit.

It’s good to know you’re not ovine. Otherwise I’d be quite curious about a keyboard that works for hooves.
 

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,095
273
Aren't 10fps enough? I use my 7DII at 8 fps max in order to prolong continuous shooting time.
No for me not enough for sport. In fast moving sports it can be difference between capturing something and not
Yes the number of photos is a pain but worth it if you capture that moment.
The pro capture feature that Olympus have would be very useful on a mirrorless high FPS from Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

unfocused

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
5,040
1,425
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Which is precisely why Canon will not give you the option of a 90D that is an improvement over the 7D mark II for sports. We're already pretty sure the 90D will only have a marginally updated version of the 80D's 45-point AF system, rather than an update of the 7D Mark II's more configurable 65-point (all cross-type) AF system.

They want to sell R lenses now, not later.

Most shooters such as you already have plenty of EF lenses in your bag. Canon seems convinced that as soon as DSLR shooters buy an R body, they'll start replacing their EF glass with R glass en masse.
Wow! That’s a whole lot of speculation without any real knowledge. Canon is holding back on features for an APS-C DSLR because they think that will cause customers to rush out and buy a full frame mirror less camera and a slew of lenses all of which would require an investment of several multiples more than the DSLR.

Yeah I’m sure that’s canon’s strategy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Memirsbrunnr

masterpix

EOS 80D
Jun 29, 2016
145
100
For some of us that uses DSLR to shoot video more than photos, are you saying that we can't demand for mirrorless? I mean, after all, when shooting video, it's practically a mirrorless device to capture the video. So why not push it a bit further and demand for the removal of the mirror?
Well, that brings up the long dispute of "why shoot video with a DSLR when you have a special video canera" such as the C200? Which is, in more than once sense a mirrirless camera.

By the way, I had a differnt idea, why not a "selective" mirror on the DSLR, such mirroers are mede so when you put them in a specific charge, they become morror and when you don't they are blank. I think that this can be a good solution, though never tried it myfelf
 

LensFungus

EOS T7i
Apr 8, 2017
53
197
I'd like to point out that if the 90D for whatever reason becomes a flop at specs, Canon will do nothing because they don't care. I'd like to point out that if the 90D for whatever reason becomes a flop at sales, Canon will just lower the price a little bit faster than they intended to do. There is no reality where Canon will give us a mirrorless 90D sooner.
 

mpb001

EOS T7i
Sep 10, 2016
75
60
More robust than the SL1 does not necessarily mean as robust as the 7D Mark II.
Yes, that’s true, especially if the 90D is all polycarbonate. Maybe it will be something like a mix of some metal and some polycarbonate, like Nikon does with some models. I guess we will see shortly.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,139
567
What? Are you saying, that it is not technologically solvable to offer EOS-R with an APS-C chip? Any such idea has imo nothing to do with an M mount and its parameters. And that's what I understand wsmith96 was asking for - to break the compatibilty with an EOS-M and make it a history ....
No. I'm saying the geometry of both the EF-M mount and the R mount mean a 2mm thick adapter without optics is physically impossible.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,139
567
I can shoot at anything all the way up to iso 2000 and get keepers. I’ve read that is the case but one thing I’ve noticed is the quality of colours from the 80D sensor. Processed shots still look nicer to me from the 80D!

Here’s an example of an iso 2000 shot, the file size had to be reduced to upload it here too!
I'm pretty sure no one has said you can't get any keepers with an 80D. What we have been saying is that overall, the 7D Mark II is more optimized as a sports/action/wildlife camera than the 80D while also acknowledging that the 80D is also better at some other tasks.

Beyond that, anyone who uses a Canon DSLR at one of the "+1/3 stop" ISO settings (i.e 125, 250, 500, 1000, 2000) obviously doesn't understand how Canon artificially pull/pushes non full-stop ISOs. When using ISO 2000, for instance, the sensor is using analog amplification for ISO 1600, then digitally pushing exposure by 1/3 stop after ADC, which also pushes all of the noise by 1/3 stop. As a result, ISO 3200 is about as clean with Canon sensors as ISO 2000 is. In fact, under typical conditions ISO 1250 can be cleaner than ISO 125! Shooting at "+1/3 stop" ISO settings is the equivalent of shooting at the next lower full stop ISO and exposing to the left by 1/3 stop. Shooting at -1/3 stop ISO settings (e.g. 160, 320, 640, 1250, etc.) is the equivalent of shooting at the next highest full ISO setting and shooting 1/3 stop to the right.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,139
567
first off.. that's a shitty assumption "Please stop repeating what the youTube sensationalist spew in order to generate more clicks without actually doing your own homework." . Everything I said was 100% my experience, I have had this for a few years now. I also had a 7D mk1 for 6+ yrs. The comment was against a 7D mk1... as I indicated and you mis-read.





You have two very different posts near each other.. won't quote both.. but my premise was replying to 'EduPortas' who said "
This forum has documented lots of you guys are still using the original 7D every day, either for work or pleasure. My anecdotal experience confirms this.

Stepping down to a 90D does not seem like a wise choice."

going from a 7D mk1 to a 90D would not be stepping down, an 80D was a big improvement over the 7D Mk1.

this is 100% my experience. your comment is lazy/shitty "Please stop repeating what the youTube sensationalists spew in order to generate more clicks without actually doing your own homework.".. . I only rarely look at youtubes about cameras and only if I'm trying get a grasp of capabilities. I owned/own a D60 (6mpx!), several G series, 40D, 7D mk1 (over 6yrs of heavy use) and an 80D (3yrs or so). I speak from my experiences and I know it won't fit everyone's needs, but it's not re-hashed from others..

as for your comments about 7d Mk2 vs 80D.. yes the differences from a 7D mk2 vs an 80D are much less, but it doesn't negate the 80D from taking pretty decent wild life pics and having added capabilities. The advantages of a 80D over a 7D mk1 are huge!, over an 7D mk2.. it's a harder discussion, but 80D is much cheaper and is a good camera.. which is my premise. Will the 90D be 7D III level for some of the people that push it to the max? probably not, but it will be pretty good.

View attachment 185953


this was on my 80D.. it tracks fairly well, good DR etc. This image is even lower quality than it should be as it was re-processed from FB.
You can claim you were talking to another user here, but the (same) comment you quote (twice) above was in reply to a comment you made that was a direct reply to a comment I made comparing the 7D Mark II to the 80D. More than once in your reply you said that the 7D Mark II was not as much of an improvement over the 7D as the 80D was an improvement over the 7D.
 
Last edited:

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D + 100-400mm mkii
Feb 7, 2019
147
115
UK
I'm pretty sure no one has said you can't get any keepers with an 80D. What we have been saying is that overall, the 7D Mark II is more optimized as a sports/action/wildlife camera than the 80D while also acknowledging that the 80D is also better at some other tasks.
I completely agree on the sports/action front but I thought we were talking about ISO.
 

snappy604

EOS RP
Jan 25, 2017
259
121
You can claim you were talking to another user here, but the (same) comment you quote (twice) above was in reply to a comment you made that was a direct reply to a comment I made comparing the 7D Mark II to the 80D.
you really need to learn to read.
 

Durf

Picture Taker - Image Maker
I can shoot at anything all the way up to iso 2000 and get keepers. I’ve read that is the case but one thing I’ve noticed is the quality of colours from the 80D sensor. Processed shots still look nicer to me from the 80D!

Here’s an example of an iso 2000 shot, the file size had to be reduced to upload it here too!
With my 80D noise becomes a major issue at ISO's above 1250, and even at ISO 1250 there's quite a lot of noise in most of my shots. I can clean the images up quite well at ISO 1250 but anything over that becomes a major task in post. ISO 2000 on my 80D is basically unusable. (I'm shooting in the woods all the time and dealing with major highlights and shadows in each image also).
I've noticed if I'm shooting birds or airplanes in low light with the sky as a background, shots at ISO 2000 are sometimes usable/savable.
I've been heavily using my 80D since it was released in 2016, I pretty much know every trick/setting with it to get the most out of it.
Regardless, some of the best wildlife shots I've ever got has been with the 80D.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,413
859
The only place the 80D has better sensor performance (IQ/DR/etc.) is below ISO 400. That's not where most sports/action/wildlife photographers live. Above ISO 800 the 7D Mark II has better DR and, more importantly for low light/high ISO performance, significantly better S/N ratio.
Out of curiosity I used the DPReview comparison tool to compare high ISO RAWs from both, and I honestly can't find a meaningful difference. Perhaps there's a DxO graph that says there should be a difference, but it's not one I could pick out of randomly shuffled prints.

Then again, I don't see much difference between any of the latest APS-C sensors with the exception of Fuji. The real jump in high ISO comes from going to FF, with Fuji crop looking like it's in between a typical crop and typical FF sensor.

Sensors have been pretty efficient at capturing and counting photons for a while now. For a given format (given sensor size), I would not expect any major gains in high ISO. I don't think the coming 90D or M6 II will 'blow away' either the 7D2 or 80D in terms of high ISO. If you're pushing their limits now, then go FF.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
Out of curiosity I used the DPReview comparison tool to compare high ISO RAWs from both, and I honestly can't find a meaningful difference. Perhaps there's a DxO graph that says there should be a difference, but it's not one I could pick out of randomly shuffled prints.
Yah, there’s a significant difference between ‘measurable’ and ‘visible’.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene

Aussie shooter

@brett.guy.photography
Dec 6, 2016
496
500
Yah, there’s a significant difference between ‘measurable’ and ‘visible’.
Yup. Hence why the whole Sony fanboy arguments based around DR are so much tripe. You notice a meaningful difference between a mediocre crop sensor(such as the 7d2 has compared to newer generation sensors) and a top of the line new gen FF sensor because you are looking at 3 stops. Current gen FF sensors are within a stop or so and in the real world you see very little difference in the hands of a capable photographer
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark