A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]

[privatebydesign]

Grips have always induced derision, however their practical benefits can't be ignored.

So we shall ignore them and concentrate on digital cameras with built in grips. There are two main reasons for built in grips, the first is battery power, ever compare a 1Dx battery to a 5D MkIII battery? There is nowhere to put the kind of battery a top end camera with framerate and data throughput that you all seem to want needs, well not if you want any kind of battery life. If it has the specs you want and doesn't have a built in grip look at a very mediocre battery life. The second reason, and it is a distant second, is weather sealing, now they could make a truthfully weathersealed grip, but they don't, ever read the article about the failed 5D MkIII's in Antarctica? They all failed because of the grip to body seal.

My guess is that the 7D MkII will not have a built in grip, the reason is money, grips are cash cows and almost everybody who buys a 7D MkII (apart from Tugela) will buy one, that makes a $2,200 camera actually earn over $2,500 for Canon. The other thing is grip options, whilst the MkII might have GPS built in I believe if it has WiFi it will be the crippled 6D type, that won't work for many so the fully capable WiFi grip, a dedicated WFT grip, becomes another, more modest seller.

 

[Lee Jay]

Almost everyone will buy a grip? I doubt it. I know several people with 7Ds, and I have seen many more in the wild, and I have yet to see one with a grip. Of all the people I know who have non-1-series bodies, only one has a grip, and that one is on a 40D.

 

[Random Orbits]

I've never been a fan of a separate battery grip either. The vertical controls weren't exactly the same as the original set, but the thing that bothered me the most was the flex at the BG/body joint. If it came with an integrated grip, then I'd be more interested. That and I'd rather not buy 2 L-plates or fiddle with taking the grip on/off so that I can use it on a pod.

An integrated design is lighter, stronger and more water resistant. That is an idea that I can get behind. And as for the size difference and being less discrete... how discrete is any DSLR with a 70-200 lens on it amongst Rebels with kit lenses, iPads/iPhones?

 

[sanj]

Given the potential customer base of those moving from other APS-C models I reckon
It will have

... the interesting question and imho more worth speculating about: What will it *not* have other than no ff sensor?

Knowing Canon, they will take great care not to deliver a "mini 1dx" at 1/3 of the price that even works better for wildlife in good light because of the gain in reach. Will they cripple the fw? Will the video have moire? Way less sealing? Will it have touch-amateur usability?

Your guess: (insert here)

They won't have to nerf it much as it is a different class of camera. Compared to the 1DX, the 7D2 won't have:

• As high a burst rate
• As good low-light performance
• As good build quailty and weather sealing
• An integral grip
• Spot metering at any AF point

Marsu, the first one is probably the only deliberate nerfing they will do, and the second is an APS-C reality that can't be too critical of. The rest is par for the course for a non-1-series body -- and I don't think 7D users should have expected to get something 1DX-like for those items anyway.

But that's like comparing a Corvette to a Ferrari. Both are pretty fun to drive, I'd wager. The 7D2 should be a state of the art APS-C rig and offer the great new sensor that will be blown down the XXD and Rebel lines for the next few years.

I think a crop 5D3 (or 'action-oriented' 5D3) is far more likely than a crop-sized 1DX. Other than on the video side of things (which I never use), I'd expect the 7D2 and 5D3 size/build/menus/ergonomics/etc. to be very very very very very similar. That's a great thing -- as a 5D3 owner, if I got more into shooting sports and wildlife, I'd pick up a 7D2 for more reach, framerate, etc. in a heartbeat if I had the confidence it was similarly well built and as intuitively designed as my 5D3.

- A

One of the possible specs from last year indicated the 7D II (or whatever it's called) might have a 12fps burst rate. It would be cool if true, but 10 fps would also be cool.

As to form factor, it might be a hybrid. It might be like a EOS 3-- 1 series controls but with a removable grip..or it might be like a mini-1DX or it might be like a 5D3. Any of those options are fine with me.

Why would it be called anything but 7d2??

 

[pedro]

Given the potential customer base of those moving from other APS-C models I reckon
It will have

... the interesting question and imho more worth speculating about: What will it *not* have other than no ff sensor?

Knowing Canon, they will take great care not to deliver a "mini 1dx" at 1/3 of the price that even works better for wildlife in good light because of the gain in reach. Will they cripple the fw? Will the video have moire? Way less sealing? Will it have touch-amateur usability?

Your guess: (insert here)

They won't have to nerf it much as it is a different class of camera. Compared to the 1DX, the 7D2 won't have:

• As high a burst rate
• As good low-light performance
• As good build quailty and weather sealing
• An integral grip
• Spot metering at any AF point

Marsu, the first one is probably the only deliberate nerfing they will do, and the second is an APS-C reality that can't be too critical of. The rest is par for the course for a non-1-series body -- and I don't think 7D users should have expected to get something 1DX-like for those items anyway.

But that's like comparing a Corvette to a Ferrari. Both are pretty fun to drive, I'd wager. The 7D2 should be a state of the art APS-C rig and offer the great new sensor that will be blown down the XXD and Rebel lines for the next few years.

I think a crop 5D3 (or 'action-oriented' 5D3) is far more likely than a crop-sized 1DX. Other than on the video side of things (which I never use), I'd expect the 7D2 and 5D3 size/build/menus/ergonomics/etc. to be very very very very very similar. That's a great thing -- as a 5D3 owner, if I got more into shooting sports and wildlife, I'd pick up a 7D2 for more reach, framerate, etc. in a heartbeat if I had the confidence it was similarly well built and as intuitively designed as my 5D3.

- A

One of the possible specs from last year indicated the 7D II (or whatever it's called) might have a 12fps burst rate. It would be cool if true, but 10 fps would also be cool.

As to form factor, it might be a hybrid. It might be like a EOS 3-- 1 series controls but with a removable grip..or it might be like a mini-1DX or it might be like a 5D3. Any of those options are fine with me.

Why would it be called anything but 7d2??

and I thought I read here once, that the 5D3 was the mini 1Dx ;-) ???

 

[sirnose66]

So did anyone spot a 7D2 at the Brazil-Croatia game last night ?

I'm afraid for me it is going to retain its mythical status until I see hard evidence......

 

[canonvoir]

There is an absolute need for a 1.6x crop factor sensor in a pro body. Many sporting events benefit from changing a 400mm 2.8 into a 640mm 2.8. Sometimes you need the 1.4x TC to get the reach you need.

I shoot in M or AV 99% of the time with my 1DX.

I like a 7D II coming out as a 3D in a pro body. However, I am not sure why they would put a flash on it. :/

 

[Lee Jay]

I've never been a fan of a separate battery grip either. The vertical controls weren't exactly the same as the original set, but the thing that bothered me the most was the flex at the BG/body joint. If it came with an integrated grip, then I'd be more interested. That and I'd rather not buy 2 L-plates or fiddle with taking the grip on/off so that I can use it on a pod.

An integrated design is lighter, stronger and more water resistant. That is an idea that I can get behind. And as for the size difference and being less discrete... how discrete is any DSLR with a 70-200 lens on it amongst Rebels with kit lenses, iPads/iPhones?

The least discrete camera on Earth is an iPad.

I don't care a bit about being discrete. I care about storage, carrying, and handling, and the 1-series bodies are the worst of the Canon line in these areas for me, which is why I've never seriously considered buying one, and never will.

 

[Austin]

Why are so many people assuming a top plate must come in a gripped body? In fact, this whole talk of a 1D style body is ridiculous!

Canon would be fools to package something we know can fit perfectly well in a 7D body into a bigger one. Think of all the people that would pass on that bulk. It would be deal breaker for so many people - myself included.

If you want to attach a grip - go for it. Canon will gladly make one that you can purchase separately. No, they will not give it to you attached to any body for free unless it's a 1D series.

 

[lopicma]

The mention that this will be positioned as a Professional APS-C camera is what I hoped for. I think the Pentax K-3 fits this niche as well. If the price is attainable, I look forward to replacing my aged XS.

 

[ahsanford]

So did anyone spot a 7D2 at the Brazil-Croatia game last night ?

I'm afraid for me it is going to retain its mythical status until I see hard evidence......

Did anyone spot any officiating at the Brazil-Croatia game last night? That game was a farce.

 

[ahsanford]

The mention that this will be positioned as a Professional APS-C camera is what I hoped for. I think the Pentax K-3 fits this niche as well. If the price is attainable, I look forward to replacing my aged XS.

Pentax bodies are loaded full of tech but lack the stable of lenses Canon or Nikon offer. So I see Pentax users limited to really nerdy brand enthusiasts and I can't blame them -- they make nice bodies. (for perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ9MsmECULw)

Specifically, pro APS-C shooters are also not likely shooting standard focal lengths as much -- they choose APS-C for length: sports, wildlife, etc. So I'd imagine most pros shooting standard FL have made the jump to FF, but I am sure there's an exception or two out there. But since Pentax lacks a lot of longer FL options, the pro-APS-C scale tips even further in my mind towards Canon / Nikon than Pentax (and Sony).

I'm honestly not being a fanboy here so much as stating a value proposition for shooters. Canon and Nikon have much more glass to offer, so unless other companies offer mindblowingly better bodies, it's wiser to stay in the ecosystem with more lenses.

- A

 

[dgatwood]

I've never been a fan of a separate battery grip either. The vertical controls weren't exactly the same as the original set, but the thing that bothered me the most was the flex at the BG/body joint. If it came with an integrated grip, then I'd be more interested. That and I'd rather not buy 2 L-plates or fiddle with taking the grip on/off so that I can use it on a pod.

An integrated design is lighter, stronger and more water resistant. That is an idea that I can get behind. And as for the size difference and being less discrete... how discrete is any DSLR with a 70-200 lens on it amongst Rebels with kit lenses, iPads/iPhones?

The least discrete camera on Earth is an iPad.

I assume you mean discreet, but I will admit that an iPad's camera isn't typically discrete, either.

 

[Marauder]

Given the potential customer base of those moving from other APS-C models I reckon
It will have

... the interesting question and imho more worth speculating about: What will it *not* have other than no ff sensor?

Knowing Canon, they will take great care not to deliver a "mini 1dx" at 1/3 of the price that even works better for wildlife in good light because of the gain in reach. Will they cripple the fw? Will the video have moire? Way less sealing? Will it have touch-amateur usability?

Your guess: (insert here)

They won't have to nerf it much as it is a different class of camera. Compared to the 1DX, the 7D2 won't have:

• As high a burst rate
• As good low-light performance
• As good build quailty and weather sealing
• An integral grip
• Spot metering at any AF point

Marsu, the first one is probably the only deliberate nerfing they will do, and the second is an APS-C reality that can't be too critical of. The rest is par for the course for a non-1-series body -- and I don't think 7D users should have expected to get something 1DX-like for those items anyway.

But that's like comparing a Corvette to a Ferrari. Both are pretty fun to drive, I'd wager. The 7D2 should be a state of the art APS-C rig and offer the great new sensor that will be blown down the XXD and Rebel lines for the next few years.

I think a crop 5D3 (or 'action-oriented' 5D3) is far more likely than a crop-sized 1DX. Other than on the video side of things (which I never use), I'd expect the 7D2 and 5D3 size/build/menus/ergonomics/etc. to be very very very very very similar. That's a great thing -- as a 5D3 owner, if I got more into shooting sports and wildlife, I'd pick up a 7D2 for more reach, framerate, etc. in a heartbeat if I had the confidence it was similarly well built and as intuitively designed as my 5D3.

- A

One of the possible specs from last year indicated the 7D II (or whatever it's called) might have a 12fps burst rate. It would be cool if true, but 10 fps would also be cool.

As to form factor, it might be a hybrid. It might be like a EOS 3-- 1 series controls but with a removable grip..or it might be like a mini-1DX or it might be like a 5D3. Any of those options are fine with me.

Why would it be called anything but 7d2??

One of the rumours from the end of last year indicated that it may have a brand new name, rather than 7D Mark II. Personally I like the name 7D Mark II, but I guess we'll have to wait and see. A different name might actually point towards a validation of a different form factor for the product--it's possible that they may decide to call it something else if it has a 1 Series body, since that will be radically different from the current 7D.

 

[Lee Jay]

I've never been a fan of a separate battery grip either. The vertical controls weren't exactly the same as the original set, but the thing that bothered me the most was the flex at the BG/body joint. If it came with an integrated grip, then I'd be more interested. That and I'd rather not buy 2 L-plates or fiddle with taking the grip on/off so that I can use it on a pod.

An integrated design is lighter, stronger and more water resistant. That is an idea that I can get behind. And as for the size difference and being less discrete... how discrete is any DSLR with a 70-200 lens on it amongst Rebels with kit lenses, iPads/iPhones?

The least discrete camera on Earth is an iPad.

I assume you mean discreet, but I will admit that an iPad's camera isn't typically discrete, either.

Gosh...I can't even believe I did that!

I've seen iPad cameras move a bit more toward discrete, after a drop to pavement of the parent device.

 

[Random Orbits]

I've never been a fan of a separate battery grip either. The vertical controls weren't exactly the same as the original set, but the thing that bothered me the most was the flex at the BG/body joint. If it came with an integrated grip, then I'd be more interested. That and I'd rather not buy 2 L-plates or fiddle with taking the grip on/off so that I can use it on a pod.

An integrated design is lighter, stronger and more water resistant. That is an idea that I can get behind. And as for the size difference and being less discrete... how discrete is any DSLR with a 70-200 lens on it amongst Rebels with kit lenses, iPads/iPhones?

The least discrete camera on Earth is an iPad.

I assume you mean discreet, but I will admit that an iPad's camera isn't typically discrete, either.

True that the iPad isn't small, but I have yet to see someone taking photos with one being hassled or getting as much attention as one with something bigger than a Rebel + kit lens.

Good catch on the discrete/discreet!

 

[scyrene]

The 7DII will be really fast.

For fast, look at mirrorless system ... old-school dslr tech with a flipping mirror taking a lot of straing @high fps is really a technology from the last century. Good for Canon there are enough old-school photogs around

In 10 years from now, you won't even use the 7d2 as a doorstopper because your mirrorless does 100fps+ full res (or you just crop frames from video), has much more shutter cycles before it breaks and does things like "automatically track the bird with the read feathers across the whole frame".

Without wanting to open up a whole huge new area of debate, I remain unconvinced about this. I'm hardly wedded to old school methods or technology, I only took up serious bird photography a couple of years ago. And I hope your optimism about tracking and suchlike are well-founded, but I don't relish having to wade through hundreds or thousands of frames to find the ones that aren't motion blurred or otherwise unusable. There has to be an upper limit of what is workable per session - more than a few hundred takes too long to sort through in a day or two, especially if the shots are very similar.

Others will know more about this, but I've heard that using very fast exposures per frame leads to unappealing-looking video. But you need short exposure times to get fast-moving subjects like birds in flight without motion blur, if you're extracting frames for stills. Seems an unsatisfying compromise.

But we'll see. The mirrorless camera would need similar ergonomics to DSLRs to work with big lenses anyhow, imho.

 

[scyrene]

As a matter of interest, would an expectation of relatively clean image quality at ISO 1600 be unrealistic for a crop body?

One man's clean is another man's filthy. It's best to speak in comparative terms. For me, if the 7D-II's ISO 3200 image looks as good as the 6D's ISO 6400 image then I'd be very happy with it.

I hear you on that.

As a birder, I dial in ISO 400 on my 500D but just like the 7D, anything over 400 leads to very obvious noise.
Anything over ISO 800, the images become somewhat and probably poorly described as rough.
Useable ISO 3200 would be a very worthwhile reason to buy this camera.

Mind if I ask, is it usually sunny where you shoot? I'm almost never able to do bird shots at ISO 400, and even 800 is low. 1600-3200 normal (this is at f/10 though).

 

[Sabaki]

As a matter of interest, would an expectation of relatively clean image quality at ISO 1600 be unrealistic for a crop body?

One man's clean is another man's filthy. It's best to speak in comparative terms. For me, if the 7D-II's ISO 3200 image looks as good as the 6D's ISO 6400 image then I'd be very happy with it.

I hear you on that.

As a birder, I dial in ISO 400 on my 500D but just like the 7D, anything over 400 leads to very obvious noise.
Anything over ISO 800, the images become somewhat and probably poorly described as rough.
Useable ISO 3200 would be a very worthwhile reason to buy this camera.

Mind if I ask, is it usually sunny where you shoot? I'm almost never able to do bird shots at ISO 400, and even 800 is low. 1600-3200 normal (this is at f/10 though).

Sure you may ask, no problem.

As I know my 500D isn't the top camera, I work within its limits and I watch my subject and the sun very carefully.

I do not shoot unless my subject has direct light on it. If the bird is bathed in sunlight, I shoot in manual mode at ISO 400 and vary my shutter speed from 1/2000 - 1/4000.

I only do about 5% of my shots above ISO 400. I just do not like the lack of image clarity at the higher ISO's and just do not push my shutter in poor light.

 

[jrista]

As a matter of interest, would an expectation of relatively clean image quality at ISO 1600 be unrealistic for a crop body?

One man's clean is another man's filthy. It's best to speak in comparative terms. For me, if the 7D-II's ISO 3200 image looks as good as the 6D's ISO 6400 image then I'd be very happy with it.

I hear you on that.

As a birder, I dial in ISO 400 on my 500D but just like the 7D, anything over 400 leads to very obvious noise.
Anything over ISO 800, the images become somewhat and probably poorly described as rough.
Useable ISO 3200 would be a very worthwhile reason to buy this camera.

Mind if I ask, is it usually sunny where you shoot? I'm almost never able to do bird shots at ISO 400, and even 800 is low. 1600-3200 normal (this is at f/10 though).

Sure you may ask, no problem.

As I know my 500D isn't the top camera, I work within its limits and I watch my subject and the sun very carefully.

I do not shoot unless my subject has direct light on it. If the bird is bathed in sunlight, I shoot in manual mode at ISO 400 and vary my shutter speed from 1/2000 - 1/4000.

I only do about 5% of my shots above ISO 400. I just do not like the lack of image clarity at the higher ISO's and just do not push my shutter in poor light.

What aperture?