7D2 theory
- Thread starter Tugela
- Start date
Again with KISS, maybe he misspoke. Or maybe he is not a math wiz. Darn what is 200 x 1.6 if you do not have an iPhone? We are not in his head, therefore we just do not know. I could try to give you a "Googol" worth of other reasons. Nevertheless, some people would think I just misspelled that. Or maybe the 7DM2 24MP had other issues, other than not coming in under $2000 target MSRP.
Move along, these are not the "Mega Pixels" you are looking for.....
For the record; I have used Canon since the A1 manual focus film days.
My next camera will be a 7DM2.
Move along, these are not the "Mega Pixels" you are looking for.....
For the record; I have used Canon since the A1 manual focus film days.
My next camera will be a 7DM2.
Upvote
0
Larry for what it is worth, in the video, Scott Kelby asked Brad Moore to use his iPhone to do the math.
Upvote
0
A lot of people aren't fast with doing even simple math in their heads. I'm in a third term calculus class and I still use a calculator to do a lot of arithmetic. Meanwhile, the Indian guy in my class is taking vector cross products in his head because where he went to school calculators were too expensive for most students. Its more about reliance on technology than being a "math wiz" and people nowadays are very reliant on technology for answers.
The dude just misspoke in the video, I don't understand why this is such a huge thing.
The dude just misspoke in the video, I don't understand why this is such a huge thing.
Upvote
0
To produce stunning images, a professional doesn't need to understand the science of light, they just need to know what works for their images. Some photography educators are charismatic story-tellers, some are technically accurate, very few can be both at the same time.
And yes, people do make mistakes. I know in my previous job I used to offer technical training sessions and I would often find mistakes in my materials often while I was presenting something newly put together. I've heard a couple of pro photographers in seminars who claim to love using their Canon EF 24mm f/1.2 L or Canon EF 24-70 f/1.4 L or (2.8 IS)... I just let it slide because it's more important to get the gist of what they're really trying to convey rather than nitpick the little details and derail their communication process.
And yes, people do make mistakes. I know in my previous job I used to offer technical training sessions and I would often find mistakes in my materials often while I was presenting something newly put together. I've heard a couple of pro photographers in seminars who claim to love using their Canon EF 24mm f/1.2 L or Canon EF 24-70 f/1.4 L or (2.8 IS)... I just let it slide because it's more important to get the gist of what they're really trying to convey rather than nitpick the little details and derail their communication process.
Upvote
0
I've suspected that there were multiple configurations being tested as well. The "1DX top plate, 24MP and 12FPS" rumours were quite consistent for a very long time, and CR seemed to be getting those stats from sources they considered quite reliable. Moreover, for a long time the rumours stated that the camera would NOT be called 7D Mark II, which would fit if the product diverged so significantly in form from the original 7D. I suspect that two (or more) vastly different groups of prototypes were in the field, testing different types of technology and format.
As to the reason the existing form was chosen for production, there could be a host of reasons. It might be technical. It's possible the noise performance of the modified 20.2 MP sensor was better than the tested 24 MP. It's possible that a 12 FPS body didn't give the desired 200,000 shutter life, or it may have failed on other technical grounds. It's also possible that the 1 series design ethic didn't fit the expectations of the target market--enough people on here complained about the concept that similar complaints from focus groups may have resulted in Canon deciding to go with a more "5D" look and feel prototype.
It's also possible that the decision to go with the model chosen had something to do with target pricing. Many of the rumours associated with a "1DX" design ethic, 12 fps and a 24MP design also speculated on a $2000-$2500 retail price. That had a lot of people balking here in the forums, and also possibly in Canon's focus groups and market analysis. As a result, the winning design in the competition was one that could meet the requirements of the target market, yet still achieve a desirable sub two thousand dollar MRSP.
Pure speculation of course, but I think it makes a certain degree of sense. Not a conspiracy at all--just a pragmatic decision on what can be delivered for a given price point to the intended target market, without making that market too narrow to ensure success.
I don't concur though that the 7D II we are getting is in any way "obsolete" at all! I think it's going to be a phenomenal and well thought out wildlife/action/sports camera for the shooter who cannot afford a 1DX!
I also think the notion that they didn't go with a 24MP sensor to protect the 5D III is demonstrably fallacious. At the time the 7D introduced the 18MP crop frame sensor, the top of the line 1D III only had a 10MP sensor. And the 1DIV that followed in 2010 only had a 16MP sensor!
As to the reason the existing form was chosen for production, there could be a host of reasons. It might be technical. It's possible the noise performance of the modified 20.2 MP sensor was better than the tested 24 MP. It's possible that a 12 FPS body didn't give the desired 200,000 shutter life, or it may have failed on other technical grounds. It's also possible that the 1 series design ethic didn't fit the expectations of the target market--enough people on here complained about the concept that similar complaints from focus groups may have resulted in Canon deciding to go with a more "5D" look and feel prototype.
It's also possible that the decision to go with the model chosen had something to do with target pricing. Many of the rumours associated with a "1DX" design ethic, 12 fps and a 24MP design also speculated on a $2000-$2500 retail price. That had a lot of people balking here in the forums, and also possibly in Canon's focus groups and market analysis. As a result, the winning design in the competition was one that could meet the requirements of the target market, yet still achieve a desirable sub two thousand dollar MRSP.
Pure speculation of course, but I think it makes a certain degree of sense. Not a conspiracy at all--just a pragmatic decision on what can be delivered for a given price point to the intended target market, without making that market too narrow to ensure success.
I don't concur though that the 7D II we are getting is in any way "obsolete" at all! I think it's going to be a phenomenal and well thought out wildlife/action/sports camera for the shooter who cannot afford a 1DX!
I also think the notion that they didn't go with a 24MP sensor to protect the 5D III is demonstrably fallacious. At the time the 7D introduced the 18MP crop frame sensor, the top of the line 1D III only had a 10MP sensor. And the 1DIV that followed in 2010 only had a 16MP sensor!
Upvote
0
