7D Mk2 ..... APS-H

[foobar]

In my opinion, there is no way that the 7D Mark II will be APS-H.
And if there will ever be another APS-H camera by Canon, it will not replace an existing APS-C camera line.

The only way that Canon will ''beat'' the new Nikon D400 (with in my opinion will be a better camera than 7D) is to use an APS-H sensor with say 21MP and the ability to use EF-s lenses on the camera at a 14-15 MP final resolution.

How do you come to the conclusion that Nikon's new camera for which we don't have any specs will beat Canon's new camera for which we don't have any specs?
And while we're at it: What's your definition of "beating"? Being better in any conceivable way? Selling more units? Having the better image quality? The better AF? What's a better AF? More points overall or more cross-type points? IMHO the discussion is pointless at this point. We don't even have rumors to discuss, just wishlists.

 

[nicku]

In my opinion, there is no way that the 7D Mark II will be APS-H.
And if there will ever be another APS-H camera by Canon, it will not replace an existing APS-C camera line.

The only way that Canon will ''beat'' the new Nikon D400 (with in my opinion will be a better camera than 7D) is to use an APS-H sensor with say 21MP and the ability to use EF-s lenses on the camera at a 14-15 MP final resolution.

How do you come to the conclusion that Nikon's new camera for which we don't have any specs will beat Canon's new camera for which we don't have any specs?
And while we're at it: What's your definition of "beating"? Being better in any conceivable way? Selling more units? Having the better image quality? The better AF? What's a better AF? More points overall or more cross-type points? IMHO the discussion is pointless at this point. We don't even have rumors to discuss, just wishlists.

I REFER ONLY TO THE CURRENT 7D ( not 7Dmk2). it has happened before.

 

[foobar]

I REFER ONLY TO THE CURRENT 7D ( not 7Dmk2). it has happened before.

The current 7D? Okay... I think it's safe to assume that Nikon will be able to beat a 2,5 years old camera.

 

[Loswr]

The only way that Canon will ''beat'' the new Nikon D400 ( with in my opinion will be a better camera than 7D) is to use an APS-H sensor with say 21MP and the ability to use EF-s lenses on the camera at a 14-15 MP final resolution.

14-15 MP final resolution and a broken reflex mirror after you mount the EF-S 10-22mm and take a shot at 10mm. Sounds like a plan...

 

[briansquibb]

14-15 MP final resolution and a broken reflex mirror after you mount the EF-S 10-22mm and take a shot at 10mm. Sounds like a plan...

hehehe ;D ;D ;D

 

[nicku]

The only way that Canon will ''beat'' the new Nikon D400 ( with in my opinion will be a better camera than 7D) is to use an APS-H sensor with say 21MP and the ability to use EF-s lenses on the camera at a 14-15 MP final resolution.

14-15 MP final resolution and a broken reflex mirror after you mount the EF-S 10-22mm and take a shot at 10mm. Sounds like a plan...

who knows, this days technology...

 

[moreorless]

This seems like the most likely way ASPH could be used to me, it would give a Canon mirrorless a boost in IQ/DOF over its ASPC rivals and seperate it from the G1X without pushing the price too high. The main probablem with ASPH on SLR's would also be gotten round(no lenses with focal lenghts/image circles aimed specifically towards it) since any mirrorless system would have a new range of lenses created for it.

Does it matter that EF lens are slightly too big?? I dont see that as a problen - anymore than using L lens on APS-C

Make TSE lens work better is the plus side.

I like the idea of a mirrorless APS-H - it will be fun to see it outperform a 'proper' camera

If you mean that there bigger than they need to be for ASPH on the 1D no I wouldnt say it matters but he obviously would on a mirrorless system. Whatever form a Canon mirrorless system takes I'd guess its likely to have a range of new lenses optimized for it and the potential to adapt EF lenses.

One advanatge I see with Canon holding off on an EVIL is that if/when they do deside to release one they'll be able to trump there rivals for sensor size.
T

 

[briansquibb]

This seems like the most likely way ASPH could be used to me, it would give a Canon mirrorless a boost in IQ/DOF over its ASPC rivals and seperate it from the G1X without pushing the price too high. The main probablem with ASPH on SLR's would also be gotten round(no lenses with focal lenghts/image circles aimed specifically towards it) since any mirrorless system would have a new range of lenses created for it.

Does it matter that EF lens are slightly too big?? I dont see that as a problen - anymore than using L lens on APS-C

Make TSE lens work better is the plus side.

I like the idea of a mirrorless APS-H - it will be fun to see it outperform a 'proper' camera

If you mean that there bigger than they need to be for ASPH on the 1D no I wouldnt say it matters but he obviously would on a mirrorless system. Whatever form a Canon mirrorless system takes I'd guess its likely to have a range of new lenses optimized for it and the potential to adapt EF lenses.

One advanatge I see with Canon holding off on an EVIL is that if/when they do deside to release one they'll be able to trump there rivals for sensor size.
T

For a mirrorless system with APS-H sensor not to use EF lens would be a total folly on Canon's behalf. With the EF-S mount there are only a few good lens (3 or 4?) whereas to have to redesign all the good EF lens for a new mount does not make commercial sense

 

[kubelik]

I think that at this time last year, I would have bought off on the "7D Mark II can't be APS-H because it would screw up naming convention" argument, but I think Canon has shown they're thinking way beyond that already. as a long-time participant on the forums, I feel we often give Canon too little credit for thinking aggressively outside of the box. which is actually unwarranted, because Canon have become the industry leader by taking some major risks and creating genuine innovation.

for starters, Canon are the folks that came up with the APS-H in the first place and continued to use it well after everyone said they'd abandon the format. secondly, Canon (at least claims to have) merged the 1D line, against everyone's cries of 'preposterous' and 'what will we do for high resolution? the nikon d4x will be 38 gajillion pixels'. third, Canon did stick a near-APS-C sensor into the G-series camera, while still calling it the G-series. this broke two rules that everyone assumed that they would adhere to: a. that we can't change sensor size without changing the lineup name, and b. that canon's large-sensor compact would HAVE to be interchangeable lens because that's what everyone else was doing.

I don't see why Canon's next surprise won't be an APS-H 7D Mark II. sure, people will bitch for a while about not being able to use their 10-22 ... until they buy their 16-35. in reality, everyone with a 7D is probably already rolling with a few L lenses (even if it's the 70-200mm f/4 L), which will work just fine on an APS-H sensor. raise your hands if you really bought a 7D so you could shoot wide format shots. that's what I thought.

we always give Canon crud over being too stodgy and conservative but I feel as though WE, the consumer base, are actually the ones that are stodgy and conservative. Canon is bringing some very cool product to the table this year and I think awesome things are in the future for the 5D and 7D lines.

 

[nicku]

I think that at this time last year, I would have bought off on the "7D Mark II can't be APS-H because it would screw up naming convention" argument, but I think Canon has shown they're thinking way beyond that already. as a long-time participant on the forums, I feel we often give Canon too little credit for thinking aggressively outside of the box. which is actually unwarranted, because Canon have become the industry leader by taking some major risks and creating genuine innovation.

for starters, Canon are the folks that came up with the APS-H in the first place and continued to use it well after everyone said they'd abandon the format. secondly, Canon (at least claims to have) merged the 1D line, against everyone's cries of 'preposterous' and 'what will we do for high resolution? the nikon d4x will be 38 gajillion pixels'. third, Canon did stick a near-APS-C sensor into the G-series camera, while still calling it the G-series. this broke two rules that everyone assumed that they would adhere to: a. that we can't change sensor size without changing the lineup name, and b. that canon's large-sensor compact would HAVE to be interchangeable lens because that's what everyone else was doing.

I don't see why Canon's next surprise won't be an APS-H 7D Mark II. sure, people will bitch for a while about not being able to use their 10-22 ... until they buy their 16-35. in reality, everyone with a 7D is probably already rolling with a few L lenses (even if it's the 70-200mm f/4 L), which will work just fine on an APS-H sensor. raise your hands if you really bought a 7D so you could shoot wide format shots. that's what I thought.

we always give Canon crud over being too stodgy and conservative but I feel as though WE, the consumer base, are actually the ones that are stodgy and conservative. Canon is bringing some very cool product to the table this year and I think awesome things are in the future for the 5D and 7D lines.

kubelik - You read my thoughts.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Canon did stick a near-APS-C sensor into the G-series camera, while still calling it the G-series. this broke two rules that everyone assumed that they would adhere to: a. that we can't change sensor size without changing the lineup name, and b. that canon's large-sensor compact would HAVE to be interchangeable lens because that's what everyone else was doing.

As the G series does not have interchangeable lenses, owners don't lose any of their investment upgrading to a G series camera with a bigger sensor.

I don't see why Canon's next surprise won't be an APS-H 7D Mark II. sure, people will bitch for a while about not being able to use their 10-22 ... until they buy their 16-35.

Except the 16-35mm on APS-H isn't as wide as 10-22mm on APS-C. I assume Canon would check how many owners of 7D are interested in ultra wide lenses and are unwilling to buy an APS-C body (say a 60D) to keep the ability.

 

[briansquibb]

Except the 16-35mm on APS-H isn't as wide as 10-22mm on APS-C. I assume Canon would check how many owners of 7D are interested in ultra wide lenses and are unwilling to buy an APS-C body (say a 60D) to keep the ability.

.... but the excellent 14mm is wider. So Canon would sell you the 16-35 and a 14mm or maybe the 8-15. Sounds like a good business plan.

The 7D has always been sold as a sports camera and certainly most of the complaints have been about the lack of reach of the 1.3 crop/ff. So not to move because of one uw lens is something that will not stop them - look a what has happened to the 1.3 wildlife shooters losing the 1.3 crop where there is REALLY no alternative lens solution

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Except the 16-35mm on APS-H isn't as wide as 10-22mm on APS-C. I assume Canon would check how many owners of 7D are interested in ultra wide lenses and are unwilling to buy an APS-C body (say a 60D) to keep the ability.

.... but the excellent 14mm is wider.

The EF 14mm would be a bit narrower than 18mm on FF. B&H lists the 16-35mm at ~U.S.$1,450, and the 14mm at ~U.S.$2,000. This is good money.

So Canon would sell you the 16-35 and a 14mm or maybe the 8-15. Sounds like a good business plan.

The EF 8-15mm is not rectilinear and is a stop slower. Canon might be happy to sell three lenses in place of one, the buyers, well, not so much.

The 7D has always been sold as a sports camera and certainly most of the complaints have been about the lack of reach of the 1.3 crop/ff. So not to move because of one uw lens is something that will not stop them

In this case, owners of 7D might be unhappy about downgrading from 1.6x crop to 1.3x crop. At best, this would require buying a 1.4x teleconverter ($300 for the mark II, $470 for the mark III). At worst this might require buying new telephoto lenses, and that's really big money.

 

[briansquibb]

In this case, owners of 7D might be unhappy about downgrading from 1.6x crop to 1.3x crop. At best, this would require buying a 1.4x teleconverter ($300 for the mark II, $470 for the mark III). At worst this might require buying new telephoto lenses, and that's really big money.

They have already done this to the 1.3 owners by moving to the ff 1DX - of which a lot were already using the 800 f/5.6. By taking away the f/8 capability there is no way of getting back the extra reach. The longest they can get now is the 600 f/4 + 1.4 to give 840.

The only way to get the extra reach would be by going to a 1.6 - which then hits the noise issues when trying to get the shutter speeds to 1/1500.

A lose/lose situation

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

In this case, owners of 7D might be unhappy about downgrading from 1.6x crop to 1.3x crop. At best, this would require buying a 1.4x teleconverter ($300 for the mark II, $470 for the mark III). At worst this might require buying new telephoto lenses, and that's really big money.

They have already done this to the 1.3 owners by moving to the ff 1DX - of which a lot were already using the 800 f/5.6. By taking away the f/8 capability there is no way of getting back the extra reach. The longest they can get now is the 600 f/4 + 1.4 to give 840.

The only way to get the extra reach would be by going to a 1.6 - which then hits the noise issues when trying to get the shutter speeds to 1/1500.

A lose/lose situation

The only way I see to resolve the issue is to continue making both both APS-C and APS-H body (whether those are called 7D and 1D or not), anything else taking something away from current owners.

[OK, Canon might be bought by santa, who would offer 1D owners to replace their telephotos with 1.3x longer lenses, but that's not a likely scenario.]

 

[briansquibb]

In this case, owners of 7D might be unhappy about downgrading from 1.6x crop to 1.3x crop. At best, this would require buying a 1.4x teleconverter ($300 for the mark II, $470 for the mark III). At worst this might require buying new telephoto lenses, and that's really big money.

They have already done this to the 1.3 owners by moving to the ff 1DX - of which a lot were already using the 800 f/5.6. By taking away the f/8 capability there is no way of getting back the extra reach. The longest they can get now is the 600 f/4 + 1.4 to give 840.

The only way to get the extra reach would be by going to a 1.6 - which then hits the noise issues when trying to get the shutter speeds to 1/1500.

A lose/lose situation

The only way I see to resolve the issue is to continue making both both APS-C and APS-H body (whether those are called 7D and 1D or not), anything else taking something away from current owners.

[OK, Canon might be bought by santa, who would offer 1D owners to replace their telephotos with 1.3x longer lenses, but that's not a likely scenario.]

Perhaps we might copy Nikon and have compatibility modes? I dont know if it would be possible to mount ef-s and ef lens on a ff body

 

[EYEONE]

In this case, owners of 7D might be unhappy about downgrading from 1.6x crop to 1.3x crop. At best, this would require buying a 1.4x teleconverter ($300 for the mark II, $470 for the mark III). At worst this might require buying new telephoto lenses, and that's really big money.

They have already done this to the 1.3 owners by moving to the ff 1DX - of which a lot were already using the 800 f/5.6. By taking away the f/8 capability there is no way of getting back the extra reach. The longest they can get now is the 600 f/4 + 1.4 to give 840.

The only way to get the extra reach would be by going to a 1.6 - which then hits the noise issues when trying to get the shutter speeds to 1/1500.

A lose/lose situation

The only way I see to resolve the issue is to continue making both both APS-C and APS-H body (whether those are called 7D and 1D or not), anything else taking something away from current owners.

[OK, Canon might be bought by santa, who would offer 1D owners to replace their telephotos with 1.3x longer lenses, but that's not a likely scenario.]

Perhaps we might copy Nikon and have compatibility modes? I dont know if it would be possible to mount ef-s and ef lens on a ff body

It's not. EF-S lenses go too deep into the mount and the FF mirror would hit the back of the lens.

 

[briansquibb]

In this case, owners of 7D might be unhappy about downgrading from 1.6x crop to 1.3x crop. At best, this would require buying a 1.4x teleconverter ($300 for the mark II, $470 for the mark III). At worst this might require buying new telephoto lenses, and that's really big money.

They have already done this to the 1.3 owners by moving to the ff 1DX - of which a lot were already using the 800 f/5.6. By taking away the f/8 capability there is no way of getting back the extra reach. The longest they can get now is the 600 f/4 + 1.4 to give 840.

The only way to get the extra reach would be by going to a 1.6 - which then hits the noise issues when trying to get the shutter speeds to 1/1500.

A lose/lose situation

The only way I see to resolve the issue is to continue making both both APS-C and APS-H body (whether those are called 7D and 1D or not), anything else taking something away from current owners.

[OK, Canon might be bought by santa, who would offer 1D owners to replace their telephotos with 1.3x longer lenses, but that's not a likely scenario.]

Perhaps we might copy Nikon and have compatibility modes? I dont know if it would be possible to mount ef-s and ef lens on a ff body

It's not. EF-S lenses go too deep into the mount and the FF mirror would hit the back of the lens.

I appreciate that it cant be done at the moment but there maybe a way of moving the mirror?

 

[EYEONE]

In this case, owners of 7D might be unhappy about downgrading from 1.6x crop to 1.3x crop. At best, this would require buying a 1.4x teleconverter ($300 for the mark II, $470 for the mark III). At worst this might require buying new telephoto lenses, and that's really big money.

They have already done this to the 1.3 owners by moving to the ff 1DX - of which a lot were already using the 800 f/5.6. By taking away the f/8 capability there is no way of getting back the extra reach. The longest they can get now is the 600 f/4 + 1.4 to give 840.

The only way to get the extra reach would be by going to a 1.6 - which then hits the noise issues when trying to get the shutter speeds to 1/1500.

A lose/lose situation

The only way I see to resolve the issue is to continue making both both APS-C and APS-H body (whether those are called 7D and 1D or not), anything else taking something away from current owners.

[OK, Canon might be bought by santa, who would offer 1D owners to replace their telephotos with 1.3x longer lenses, but that's not a likely scenario.]

Perhaps we might copy Nikon and have compatibility modes? I dont know if it would be possible to mount ef-s and ef lens on a ff body

It's not. EF-S lenses go too deep into the mount and the FF mirror would hit the back of the lens.

I appreciate that it cant be done at the moment but there maybe a way of moving the mirror?

Well, I've said it before but I think it could be done if Canon used a mirror motion similar to the Sony A900. The mirror in the A900 is pushed up more than it is swung up. It moves forward very little during the operation. I doubt Canon would employ a new shutter design just to allow people to use EF-S lenses on FF cameras however.

 

[briansquibb]

I appreciate that it cant be done at the moment but there maybe a way of moving the mirror?

Well, I've said it before but I think it could be done if Canon used a mirror motion similar to the Sony A900. The mirror in the A900 is pushed up more than it is swung up. It moves forward very little during the operation. I doubt Canon would employ a new shutter design just to allow people to use EF-S lenses on FF cameras however.

Was thinking that top of the range could be a full frame sensor that allowed 1.6 users a seemless and painless migration path upwards. That would mean that xD and xxD could move to ff and improve the IQ all round. It would also get round the issues with the EF-S and truly allow the APS-H to wither away as there would be no need for compromise.

However it would need more mps on the ff sensor. I suspect new mirror costs would be more than recouped by large scale economics