Rest well Canon EOS 7D series [CR2]

[BillB]

It is probably true - but in terms of high margin lens sales (for high performance lenses) - it’s the prosumers and pros that I suspect disproportionally fork out - and they probably have 7Ds, 5Ds and 1Dx’s. As a 7Dii and 5Diii owner (and 5 L series lenses) - I am pretty confused by the next options. Hopefully all will come clear soon.

I don’t envy the job of the Canon product managers right now.

Anything that helps keep my GAS under control can't be all bad.

 

[SecureGSM]

Those figures are for an image that occupies the full-frame. If the image on the FF does not fill the frame and is small enough to fill the same area on an APS-C, both will have similar similar S/N. Go to photonstophotos.net, and you will see that Nikons where you can use just the APS-C part of full frame (DX) have DR for the DX appropriately less than that for FF, and similar to an APS-C: e.g. the D850 vs D850 DX vs D500 http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon D500,Nikon D850,Nikon D850(DX)

All valid points but that was not what was aiming at. Let’s try again: I do not like files coming out of 7DII beyond iso 1800. Sure, when downsampled they look better.
I do not like vanilla 5D III files past iso 3200-3600.... I do not like 5D IV vanilla files past Iso 5000-6000.
My personal Non authoritative opinion only.

 

[neuroanatomist]

That's not to say that battery capacity equals current as you are pretending I said.

It does not and that is not what I said above. Battery capacity (mAh) includes an additional time component of how long a particular flow of electrical current at a specific rate may be maintained. It is similar to acceleration that also includes a time component multiplied by another time component: how many feet per second per second a body is accelerating.

You stated that a lower battery capacity results in slower AF. That's factually incorrect. Period.

You don't lose anything the EF lens can do on an EF body when it is used on an R body, except perhaps slower AF due to lower battery capacity.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Keep pretending I said something else I did not if you think that somehow makes you look more intelligent. It actually makes your reading comprehension appear suspect.

Your contention is that if Canon sensors had a faster readout speed, they'd have sold more of them. You could just as easily speculate that if they all came in the color blue, they'd have sold more of them. Neither speculation has a shred of data to support it. I'd recommend you just stick to the facts, but you've shown a poor aptitude for doing so already, so that would be a pointless suggestion.

 

[AlanF]

All valid points but that was not what was aiming at. Let’s try again: I do not like files coming out of 7DII beyond iso 1800. Sure, when downsampled they look better.
I do not like vanilla 5D III files past iso 3200-3600.... I do not like 5D IV vanilla files past Iso 5000-6000.
My personal Non authoritative opinion only.

Fair enough. The choice of RAW converter and noise reduction can make a huge difference. I found that DxO PL was particularly good on the 7DII and now the 5DSR.

 

[AlanF]

Electrical power is current times voltage and always includes a time component because power/work is measured in terms of how much work is done over time. Horsepower, for example, is a unit of power equal to 550 foot-pounds per second (745.7 watts). Likewise, an ampere (Amp) is a unit of measure of the rate of electron flow or current in an electrical conductor. One ampere of current is one coulomb of electrical charge (6.24 x 10^18 charge carriers) moving past a specific point in one second.

It is true that constant current with higher voltage means more power. It is equally true that constant voltage with higher current means more power.

That's not to say that battery capacity equals current as you are pretending I said.

It does not and that is not what I said above. Battery capacity (mAh) includes an additional time component of how long a particular flow of electrical current at a specific rate may be maintained. It is similar to acceleration that also includes a time component multiplied by another time component: how many feet per second per second a body is accelerating.

You are confusing work and power. They are quite different. Power is defined as work per unit time. Work is power x time.
A sufficiently charged camera battery has enough capacity to power a lens through 100s of cycles. Power is given by amps x volts. But, by Ohm's law, the current I is related to the voltage V and the resistance of the circuit by V = IR. Accordingly, the power is given by V^2/R, and it is the voltage that determines the power in that way.

 

[SecureGSM]

Fair enough. The choice of RAW converter and noise reduction can make a huge difference. I found that DxO PL was particularly good on the 7DII and now the 5DSR.

that is the one I am using and almost exclusively (highly recommend..) for number of years... and still.. 1DX II is the king

 

[bichex]

A few pictures of my recent trip to Ecuador. The 7D II with the 100-400 II is still a great tool for those who can not spend a fortune. In times of contraction of the market I think it's a bad idea not to take care of what works and to disappoint the customers having a lot of competition can be dangerous.

 

[AlanF]

A few pictures of my recent trip to Ecuador. The 7D II with the 100-400 II is still a great tool for those who can not spend a fortune. In times of contraction of the market I think it's a bad idea not to take care of what works and to disappoint the customers having a lot of competition can be dangerous.

Superb shots! We are off to Ecuador in August and hope to do as well as that.

 

[bichex]

Superb shots! We are off to Ecuador in August and hope to do as well as that.

Thank you. Ecuador is a great place to photograph birds. Good luck

 

[StoicalEtcher]

A few pictures of my recent trip to Ecuador. The 7D II with the 100-400 II is still a great tool for those who can not spend a fortune. In times of contraction of the market I think it's a bad idea not to take care of what works and to disappoint the customers having a lot of competition can be dangerous.

Fantastic shots Bichex - looks like you had a great tour!

Out of interest, what len/lens were your go-to's for most shots?

Stoical.

 

[bichex]

[QUOTE = "StoicalEtcher, post: 778548, miembro: 380158"]
Fotos fantásticas de Bichex. ¡Parece que tuviste una gran gira!

Fuera de interés, ¿qué len / lens fueron para la mayoría de los disparos?

Estoico.
[/ CITAR]
Al aire libre
100-400 II.

 

[Michael Clark]

You mentioned "the Sony A9, Nikon 850 and the like". I can believe the 7D2 lags the newer cameras (but is it fair to compare different generations?) but your post that I was replying to didn't mention that camera.

If those competitors' cameras better suit your needs, you should buy one of them.

Well, the α9 and D850 are 36x24 mm FF cameras, while the 7D Mark II is a 1.6X APS-C 22.5x14.9 mm cameras...

 

[Michael Clark]

I think you are pretty safe to click that buy button. These changes take years and the equipment you have today doesn’t stop working when a new product comes out. If the concern is over supportability, look at what canon covers on their cps page for repairs. They still have the 5d Mark II there and many old lenses.

In general, Canon Service supports discontinued products for about seven years from the time they were officially discontinued. The EOS 5D Mark II was replaced by the EOS 5D Mark III in March 2012, but the 5D Mark II was not officially discontinued until December 2012. I would be very surprised if the 5D Mark II is still supported after the beginning of 2020.

Look at the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L series. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS was replaced by the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II in March of 2010. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L (non-IS) hasn't been on the CPS service list since 2017. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L (non-IS), introduced in 1995 but sold new until a few years ago is no longer on the CPS repair list, and it does not seem to have ever been officially announced as discontinued. As early as 2013 some owners of the older lens reported Canon said they were out of certain needed spare parts to repair that particular lens. At that time, many authorized Canon dealers still had new copies of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L (non-IS) in stock and for sale. (When Canon officially discontinues a product, they only allow dealers a short time period to sell remaining stock or return it to Canon.)

My assessment is based on my own experience using the two side by side in real world shooting. I was able to get publishable images for indoor sports using the 7DII at 6400. When compared side by side with the 5DIII, the two were very similar, with the very slightly better noise of the 5DIII offset by the many sports-oriented feature advantages of the 7DII.

In addition, the quality of the noise from the 7DII was much more pleasing and filmlike, than previous generation of the APS-C sensors. I didn't like shooting the original 7D at anything above 800 because of the noise, which in my opinion, had a very electronic look to it, while the 7DII noise looks to me more like the grain of 35mm film.

Ultimately, I moved to the 1DX II, which has all the usage advantages of the 7DII and better high ISO performance than either body. I find the high ISO performance of the 5DIV to be comparable to the 1Dx II. The files coming from both are much easier to post-process than earlier generations.

Different people get different results. Shooting style and post processing can have a lot to do with that. I have seen some high ISO images shot with the 7DII posted to this site that are stunning.

There are a couple of small newspapers whose photogs I know that use 7D Mark IIs as their primary "long" body when shooting high school sports. The advantages of "flicker reduction" make it a no brainer compared to the 5D Mark III, which does not have the feature and which some of them use for other assignments and as a "wide" body for sports. Buying the 7D2 instead of a 5D4 or 1D X Mark II (which do offer 'flicker reduction') also allows 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses to have the same reach as 300mm f/2.8 lenses do on FF bodies with similar total MP. The price difference between a 1D X (even used) plus a 300/2.8 (even used) and a 7D2 plus 70-200/2.8 is enough for a small paper to pay a freelancer to shoot an entire high school football season and keep the (yes, "the" as in "the only") full time staff photog out of overtime for 10-12 consecutive weeks. Maybe the economics are different in larger/different markets.

Since the shutter release is timed at the peak of the lights' cycle, not only do you get more consistent color and exposure from shot-to-shot, you also get brighter exposure than if you set the camera for the average between the peak and the trough of the lights. In stadiums where I was shooting ISO 3200, f/2.8, 1/500-1/640 with the 7D or 5D3, the 7D2 allows me to use ISO 3200, f/2.8, 1/800 or 1/1000 and get the same brightness. That's 2/3 of a stop faster without the photos getting any darker! No more "brown out" frames! No more frames with jerseys from the same team two different colors on opposite sides of the frame (not to mention the grass)!

Mid-level and above colleges and most pro venues have lights that don't flicker or are set up with each bank containing equal numbers of lights on each phase of the AC supplying the power. But at smaller colleges and high schools, the difference between the darkest and brightest frames due to the effect of flicker from AC lights is greater than the difference between FF and APS-C in non-flickering light. It's often about two stops from peak to trough, and the peak is also much fuller spectrum than the trough.

You stated that a lower battery capacity results in slower AF. That's factually incorrect. Period.

Chuck Westfall went on record a number of times stating that cameras that could supply higher power will AF faster with the same lens. The models he specifically mentioned included both 1-series bodies with higher voltage batteries and other models (such as the 7D and 7D2) with 7.4V LP-E6 batteries.

Apparently Canon uses power control technology which allows some cameras to supply more power (i.e. work over time) momentarily when needed for fast AF than they allow other cameras that use smaller capacity 7.4V batteries. Based on Canon's emphasis on the overall user experience and consistency in performance over varying conditions, one might guess that they limit the cameras using lower capacity 7.4V batteries to preserve battery life performance.

Fair enough. The choice of RAW converter and noise reduction can make a huge difference. I found that DxO PL was particularly good on the 7DII and now the 5DSR.

Many of those I know who shoot high school sports are going straight to JPEG in camera, because their deadline for the next day's edition is usually only a few minutes after the game will be expected to end. Most newspaper folks I know only shoot the first half of Friday night football games and have already submitted their photos and are home by the end of the game. If they're covering two different games in the same area they'll shoot the first 8-10 minutes of the first quarter at one (high school football has four 12 minute quarters) and then go to the other game and shoot until halftime. Those shooting for yearbook/sports stock agencies tend to stay the whole game, but the sheer number of frames they shoot (they're generally covering different teams each week and need as many shots per game as they can get of any specific team) means most of those guys also shoot straight to JPEG.

Power is defined as work per unit time. Work is power x time.

If:
power = work/time

and

work = power * time

Then:

power = (power * time)/time

which can be reduced to:

power = power

That seems like a fairly circular argument to me.

 

[neuroanatomist]

You stated that a lower battery capacity results in slower AF. That's factually incorrect. Period.

Chuck Westfall went on record a number of times stating that cameras that could supply higher power will AF faster with the same lens. The models he specifically mentioned included both 1-series bodies with higher voltage batteries and other models (such as the 7D and 7D2) with 7.4V LP-E6 batteries.

Apparently you are unable to simply admit that you were wrong. Quite frankly, that's pathetic.

Apparently Canon uses power control technology which allows some cameras to supply more power (i.e. work over time) momentarily when needed for fast AF than they allow other cameras that use smaller capacity 7.4V batteries. Based on Canon's emphasis on the overall user experience and consistency in performance over varying conditions, one might guess that they limit the cameras using lower capacity 7.4V batteries to preserve battery life performance.

One might guess that, but if you guess that, you would again be wrong. The 7D and 7DII both use the LP-E6/LP-E6N battery. Those exact same battery models are used by the 60D, 70D, 80D, 6D, 6DII, 5DII, 5DIII, 5Ds/R, 5DIV...and the EOS R. Of those, you indicate that Chuck Westfall had stated specifically the 7-series was capable of faster AF (as was earlier stated by @Graphic.Artifacts).

Back at the start of this discussion, your claim was that the AF on the EOS R was slower than the 1-series and the 7DII due to a lower battery capacity. Since the 7DII and the EOS R use the exact same battery models, your claim is clearly absurd.

 

[unfocused]

There are a couple of small newspapers whose photogs I know that use 7D Mark IIs as their primary "long" body when shooting high school sports... Buying the 7D2 instead of a 5D4 or 1D X Mark II (which do offer 'flicker reduction') also allows 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses to have the same reach as 300mm f/2.8 lenses do on FF bodies with similar total MP. The price difference between a 1D X (even used) plus a 300/2.8 (even used) and a 7D2 plus 70-200/2.8 is enough for a small paper to pay a freelancer to shoot an entire high school football season and keep the (yes, "the" as in "the only") full time staff photog out of overtime for 10-12 consecutive weeks. Maybe the economics are different in larger/different markets.

Off topic, but it is also worth noting that at those smaller newspapers that still employ a photographer it is usually the photographer's responsibility to supply his or her own equipment if he or she wants to use anything more sophisticated than a T3i that the paper bought seven years ago. And, at the near minimum wage rates that most newspapers pay, the cost and reach advantages of a 7DII far outweigh the disadvantages.

 

[scyrene]

Well, the α9 and D850 are 36x24 mm FF cameras, while the 7D Mark II is a 1.6X APS-C 22.5x14.9 mm cameras...

I know...

 

[AlanF]

If:
power = work/time

and

work = power * time

Then:

power = (power * time)/time

which can be reduced to:

power = power

That seems like a fairly circular argument to me.

The crucial point of my post is that as simply derived from Ohm's law, power is given by V^2/R where V is the voltage of the battery and R is the resistance of the circuit. That is, it is the voltage of the battery that determines the power it produces to focus a lens, not the capacity of the battery.

As an aside, you were confusing the work done to charge a battery, which is related to its capacity, with its power. Nothing circular about that.

 

[tron]

The crucial point of my post is that as simply derived from Ohm's law, power is given by V^2/R where V is the voltage of the battery and R is the resistance of the circuit. That is, it is the voltage of the battery that determines the power it produces to focus a lens, not the capacity of the battery.

As an aside, you were confusing the work done to charge a battery, which is related to its capacity, with its power. Nothing circular about that.

I have a question: Since there is no power derived from nothing if Canon introduced a circuit to boost voltage then shouldn't this be done at the expense of maximum current allowed?

Otherwise they could lower the resistance of internal circuitry that drives the lens - assuming it does have a significant resistance of course - since the total resistance that determines the current is the internal resistance of the battery plus the driving circuitry's resistance plus the lens' motor resistance.

 

[Michael Clark]

Apparently you are unable to simply admit that you were wrong. Quite frankly, that's pathetic.


One might guess that, but if you guess that, you would again be wrong. The 7D and 7DII both use the LP-E6/LP-E6N battery. Those exact same battery models are used by the 60D, 70D, 80D, 6D, 6DII, 5DII, 5DIII, 5Ds/R, 5DIV...and the EOS R. Of those, you indicate that Chuck Westfall had stated specifically the 7-series was capable of faster AF (as was earlier stated by @Graphic.Artifacts).

Back at the start of this discussion, your claim was that the AF on the EOS R was slower than the 1-series and the 7DII due to a lower battery capacity. Since the 7DII and the EOS R use the exact same battery models, your claim is clearly absurd.

Has the possibility ever crossed your mind that none of Canon's cameras allow voltage to move directly from the batteries to the lens? They all have voltage regulators in the camera. The 'VBAT' pin in the EF camera/lens interface carries 6.0 volts, regardless of the battery involved. That's the pin that supplies power to AF motors in the lens. Each camera model can control the power from the same batteries differently. Please re-read my comment above again. I've never said the actual battery capacity in terms of mAh is the determining factor in AF speed. What I've said is that Canon allows some cameras with larger battery capacity to supply more power to the AF motor in the lens.