7D full frame

[Marsu42]

Thanks for this evenings laugh

) This is the great thing about the internet - just understand what you want, and you'll have plenty to laugh forever! Also, it saves you plenty of calories because there's no need to think anymore, and why would you given the current style in this forum. Right on, commander!

If you read my post again, I didn't write the *1d4* was phased out because of not working with ultrawides, but *aps-h* will be because it won't appear in a 7d2 (see the thread title?) for this reason. Just because the 7d is very well received by people who want the built-in 1.6x tc, it's still positioned for general use and thus will either have to work with ef or ef-s ultrawides. And at the same time the 1dx replaces the 1d4 for completely other reasons that have nothing to do with this thread, so aps-h is gone. 1+1 = 2, see?

 

[briansquibb]

Thanks for this evenings laugh

) This is the great thing about the internet - just understand what you want, and you'll have plenty to laugh forever! Also, it saves you plenty of calories because there's no need to think anymore, and why would you given the current style in this forum. Right on, commander!

If you read my post again, I didn't write the *1d4* was phased out because of not working with ultrawides, but *aps-h* will be because it won't appear in a 7d2 (see the thread title?) for this reason. Just because the 7d is very well received by people who want the built-in 1.6x tc, it's still positioned for general use and thus will either have to work with ef or ef-s ultrawides. And at the same time the 1dx replaces the 1d4 for completely other reasons that have nothing to do with this thread, so aps-h is gone. 1+1 = 2, see?

The reason for APS-H is as for a sports camera. You might believe the 1DX replaced the 1D4 because that was the story Canon told us. Personally I believe the 1DX is not a functional replacement for the 1D4 - ask any wildlife/BIF shooter. The 7D is also a sports camera - so I would guess an APS-H version would also be a sports camera. Probably explains why the APS-C is still here because they dont do ultra wide like the FF.

 

[Marsu42]

The 7D is also a sports camera - so I would guess an APS-H version would also be a sports camera.

It is a sports camera to *you*. But go in a shop and ask "What's the 7d good for?". They'll say it's an excellent camera for everything. And it is, well, if it would run magic lantern. And "everything" simply contains a lens offer below ff-20mm that isn't a fisheye. The many bird shooters with a 7d here in this forum produce a shifted view where the 7d is really positioned by Canon.

I don't say a 7d2 with aps-h wouldn't make sense or that I wouldn't want to use it, but I am saying that this is the reason why I am rather sure it won't happen, even if the ef-s compatibility problem wasn't there.

 

[briansquibb]

The 7D is also a sports camera - so I would guess an APS-H version would also be a sports camera.

It is a sports camera to *you*. But go in a shop and ask "What's the 7d good for?". They'll say it's an excellent camera for everything. And it is, well, if it would run magic lantern. And "everything" simply contains a lens offer below ff-20mm that isn't a fisheye. The many bird shooters with a 7d here in this forum produce a shifted view where the 7d is really positioned by Canon.

I don't say a 7d2 with aps-h wouldn't make sense or that I wouldn't want to use it, but I am saying that this is the reason why I am rather sure it won't happen, even if the ef-s compatibility problem wasn't there.

First time I have heard the 7D described as a general purpose camera - sure any camera will take any picture - like I often use the 'studio' 1DS3 for sports.

From Canon Europe on the 7D product page

18 Megapixel APS-C CMOS sensor
The EOS 7D offers superb resolution thanks to its 18MP CMOS sensor. Offering the photographer the choice of flexibility and creativity.

Up to 8 frames per second
Shoot 18MP 14-bit images at up to 8 fps as standard, in a burst of up to 126 large JPEGs; photographers can capture both detail and action.

FF have the superb 14mm wide angle lens to use - shorter than anything possible on APS-C.

 

[lol]

Sigma 8-16 is not a fisheye and is equivalent to around 13mm. No, it isn't as fast but be realistic you're not using this class lens for shallow DoF short of the subject sitting on the lens filter, so ignoring DoF you could argue it has a bit more low light potential. With ignored DoF equivalence, full frame has that anyway.

Of course you can at this point suggest using one of the 12mm zooms on full frame and trump that again...

 

[briansquibb]

Sigma 8-16 is not a fisheye and is equivalent to around 13mm. No, it isn't as fast but be realistic you're not using this class lens for shallow DoF short of the subject sitting on the lens filter, so ignoring DoF you could argue it has a bit more low light potential. With ignored DoF equivalence, full frame has that anyway.

Of course you can at this point suggest using one of the 12mm zooms on full frame and trump that again...

The point I was trying to make is that using the ultra wide capabilty to phase out a sensor is totally baseless. APS-C, FF and even APS-H all have their merits and should be used for their strengths. APS-H is a compromise sized sensor that performs very well in a variety of situations with no real weak points. APS-C and FF will trump it in various extreme situations but as a general pupose sensor it is excellent. APS-H may die - but simmilar sized sensors may appear as a replacement (for example as a 16:9)

 

[Positron]

I'm genuinely curious about one thing which I've never understood.

Assuming the same pixel count, aside from the higher pixel density (which we know is not always a good thing), what is it that you gain with an APS-H sensor versus FF and cropping? It seems with FF you get more control over DoF, the ability to go wide if you need to, better low-light performance, and so on; whereas if you crop the final image back to an APS-H equivalent field of view, you're back where you started, just having had more options along the way. The only obvious benefits that jump out at me are the price, and the ability to discard the corners of the frame, which are generally not problematic on the long lenses favored by most APS-H aficionados. Is there something I'm missing?

Thanks in advance for clarifying.

 

[briansquibb]

I'm genuinely curious about one thing which I've never understood.

Assuming the same pixel count, aside from the higher pixel density (which we know is not always a good thing), what is it that you gain with an APS-H sensor versus FF and cropping? It seems with FF you get more control over DoF, the ability to go wide if you need to, better low-light performance, and so on; whereas if you crop the final image back to an APS-H equivalent field of view, you're back where you started, just having had more options along the way. The only obvious benefits that jump out at me are the price, and the ability to discard the corners of the frame, which are generally not problematic on the long lenses favored by most APS-H aficionados. Is there something I'm missing?

Thanks in advance for clarifying.

The APS-H means you take pictures with less pixels which means faster frame rate

The low light is a lot closer than most people realise - the 1D4 is near enough the same IQ at high iso as the 5DIII

The cropping factor means that cheaper L lens work better as they avoid the soft edges

DOF is not an issue

You will find that the 1DX cropped puts less pixels over the subject than the 1D4.

 

[wickidwombat]

I'm genuinely curious about one thing which I've never understood.

Assuming the same pixel count, aside from the higher pixel density (which we know is not always a good thing), what is it that you gain with an APS-H sensor versus FF and cropping? It seems with FF you get more control over DoF, the ability to go wide if you need to, better low-light performance, and so on; whereas if you crop the final image back to an APS-H equivalent field of view, you're back where you started, just having had more options along the way. The only obvious benefits that jump out at me are the price, and the ability to discard the corners of the frame, which are generally not problematic on the long lenses favored by most APS-H aficionados. Is there something I'm missing?

Thanks in advance for clarifying.

a 16-35 f2.8L on an APS-H body is an awesome walk around combo
effective focal range is about 20mm to 48mm
on APS-H its sharp corner to corner even wide open
no extending like the 24-70.
I really hope a 7D size camera comes out with aps-h
forget the long lenses my 16-35 would live on that camera and my 85mm on the 5Dmk3

 

[AvTvM]

APS-H is as dead as can be. It will never come back. It was a stop gap measure at a time when FF sensors were too expensive.

There will be a successor to the Canon 7D in due course and it will be APS-C without the slightest doubt. Only area of uncertainty is, whether there will be a 70D AND a 7D II or whether the 2 lines will be merged.

 

[tnargs]

I would like to see 7D2 have a switchable viewfinder OVF/EVF. On EVF mode you can have better nighttime vision, super-fast shutter operation, and better hand-held videoing.

 

[briansquibb]

APS-H is as dead as can be. It will never come back. It was a stop gap measure at a time when FF sensors were too expensive.

There will be a successor to the Canon 7D in due course and it will be APS-C without the slightest doubt. Only area of uncertainty is, whether there will be a 70D AND a 7D II or whether the 2 lines will be merged.

I do wish people would stop stating 'facts' which are just to prove a point

The original 1D was realeased in 2001 with APS-H and the APS-H sensored 1Dx has continued to date - 11 years without a break.

The EF-S mounts on APS-C cameras on the other hand were not introduced until 2003.

Perhaps it is the APS-C that is the stop gap measure at a time when APS-H sensors were too expensive?

 

[Ronnie]

The reason - greedy marketing. They just want to sell a tiny bit better camera each year


Have you evidence it is greedy marketing? The 7D has been on the market for 3 years so perhaps not.


Ok, but what about the 60D. There's you proof. Plastic house, 3,5fps and so on and so on.

 

[AvTvM]

I do wish people would stop stating 'facts' which are just to prove a point
The original 1D was realeased in 2001 with APS-H and the APS-H sensored 1Dx has continued to date - 11 years without a break.

well, it seems necessary to establish the facts here: the last and final APS-H camera (Canon EOS 1D Mk. IV) was introduced in October 2009. So the APS-H line of digital cameras has ended a mere 8 years after its introduction in September 2011 (Canon EOS 1D).

Speculation: APS-C will most likely be around for another 20 years or so.

Reason: Both APS-C and APS-H sesnor formats were originally introduced because 135 format ("FF") imaging sensors were "too expensive" and or technically to challenging to produce in mass-market quantities. By now, "FF"-sensors can be manufcatered rather cheap, although Canon tries to still charge huge premiums for that sensor format. APS-H has turned out to be too close to "FF" to be continued on its own merit. This was clear from the start and therefore Canon has never even bothered to develop APS-H specific lenses. After 8 years Canon finally pulled the plug on APS-H and decided to move to only 2 sensor sizes in its DSLRs like all its competitors in the market. Better synergies of scale=more profit.

AS opposed to APS-H, APS-C does bring large enough photograhic advantages compared to both "FF" and smaller sensor formats as well. Super Teles are expensive and there are quit a number of reach-limited photographic applications. Furthermore, "walk-around" and wide-angle lenses can be built significantly more compact, lighter and at significantly lower cost compared to FF-lenses. Part of these savings are passed on to attract lower-budget customers while the larger part of these savings is pocketed by the Canon (and the other makers) = more sales AND more profit. This is why APS-C is going to stay around for a while. This will continue with mirrorless digital interchangeable lens cameras: mFT ... too small, advantage in lens size not convincing vs. APS-C ... so APS-C will win. FF will be reserved for the "top segment". History repeats itself.

 

[briansquibb]

I do wish people would stop stating 'facts' which are just to prove a point
The original 1D was realeased in 2001 with APS-H and the APS-H sensored 1Dx has continued to date - 11 years without a break.

well, it seems necessary to establish the facts here: the last and final APS-H camera (Canon EOS 1D Mk. IV) was introduced in October 2009. So the APS-H line of digital cameras has ended a mere 8 years after its introduction in September 2011 (Canon EOS 1D).

Speculation: APS-C will most likely be around for another 20 years or so.

Reason: Both APS-C and APS-H sesnor formats were originally introduced because 135 format ("FF") imaging sensors were "too expensive" and or technically to challenging to produce in mass-market quantities. By now, "FF"-sensors can be manufcatered rather cheap, although Canon tries to still charge huge premiums for that sensor format. APS-H has turned out to be too close to "FF" to be continued on its own merit. This was clear from the start and therefore Canon has never even bothered to develop APS-H specific lenses. After 8 years Canon finally pulled the plug on APS-H and decided to move to only 2 sensor sizes in its DSLRs like all its competitors in the market. Better synergies of scale=more profit.

AS opposed to APS-H, APS-C does bring large enough photograhic advantages compared to both "FF" and smaller sensor formats as well. Super Teles are expensive and there are quit a number of reach-limited photographic applications. Furthermore, "walk-around" and wide-angle lenses can be built significantly more compact, lighter and at significantly lower cost compared to FF-lenses. Part of these savings are passed on to attract lower-budget customers while the larger part of these savings is pocketed by the Canon (and the other makers) = more sales AND more profit. This is why APS-C is going to stay around for a while. This will continue with mirrorless digital interchangeable lens cameras: mFT ... too small, advantage in lens size not convincing vs. APS-C ... so APS-C will win. FF will be reserved for the "top segment". History repeats itself.

You are just manipulating the facts to suit your argument. It is absolute nonsense to say the APS-H died in 2009 anymore than APS-C died in 2009 when the last APS-C sensor was released.

 

[AvTvM]

You are just manipulating the facts to suit your argument. It is absolute nonsense to say the APS-H died in 2009 anymore than APS-C died in 2009 when the last APS-C sensor was released.

I don't think so. The final APS-H DSLR camera was announced on October 20, 2009 http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/slrs/canon_eos1dmkiv
Canon has made it very clear, that the 1D X (with "FF" sensor) is the successor to its former APS-H line of DSLR cameras.

The latest APS-C DSLR camera however, was announced just days ago on May 21, 2012 http://www.dpreview.com/products/pentax/slrs/pentax_k30

ah yes ... my world and my imagination stretches way beyond the very limited Canon "fan-iverse" and it very much includes good photographic gear from other manufacturers too.

 

[briansquibb]

You are just manipulating the facts to suit your argument. It is absolute nonsense to say the APS-H died in 2009 anymore than APS-C died in 2009 when the last APS-C sensor was released.

I don't think so. The final APS-H DSLR camera was announced on October 20, 2009 http://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/slrs/canon_eos1dmkiv
Canon has made it very clear, that the 1D X (with "FF" sensor) is the successor to its former APS-H line of DSLR cameras.

No so - Canon said it was replacing the 1D4 and the 1DS3 with the 1DX - cant you get the facts right??

 

[AvTvM]

You are just manipulating the facts to suit your argument. It is absolute nonsense to say the APS-H died in 2009 anymore than APS-C died in 2009 when the last APS-C sensor was released.

Canon has made it very clear, that the 1D X (with "FF" sensor) is the successor to its former APS-H line of DSLR cameras.

No so - Canon said it was replacing the 1D4 and the 1DS3 with the 1DX - cant you get the facts right??

that is another way of stating the obvious, yes.

But of course you are free to devotedly await the next APS-H DSLR from Canon ... until kingdom come ... whichever comes first. I would just advise to not hold your breath though!

 

[briansquibb]

that is another way of stating the obvious, yes.

But of course you are free to devotedly await the next APS-H DSLR from Canon ... until kingdom come ... whichever comes first. I would just advise to not hold your breath though!

That is your interpretation about the demise of a camera body linked to the demise of a sensor technology

If you look at my eqipment line you might notice that I am not fixated on any technology - but that would spoil your argument that I have all 3 sensor type

 

[wickidwombat]

APS-H is awesome
- noticably better IQ than APS-C
- benefits for cropping the edges of the image circle so still get the sweet spot effect
- extra reach
- makes certain lenses exceptionally good focal range
- Dof hits a nice middle ground between FF and APS-C

I'd love a nice APS-H sensor in say a 7D body