Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?

[East Wind Photography]

They are all cross type, however Canon throttles AF speed at f/5.6 relative to f/4 or f/2.8. Even on the 61pt system, even when using only the center points, AF speed slows when I slap on a 1.4x TC onto my 600/4, vs. just using the 600/4. Additionally, at f/5.6, the chances of "hunting" increase. Canon's AF system caters towards looking for a closer subject first when the scene is out of focus by more than a certain (unspecified) amount. So, if I need to photograph a bird in flight, it's FAR better to use an f/4 lens, which is likely to lock on directly immediately, than f/5.6, which is going to hunt forward first if I'm not already close to focus on the bird.

Maybe the 65pt system changes that, but it looks like the same general firmware as the 5D III and 1D X, so I suspect it'll behave the same.

No, Canon does not throttle AF speed at f/5.6 relative to f/4 or f/2.8. Yes, when you put the 1.4x TC behind your 600/4, AF slows down. But that's not because the combo is f/5.6, it's because of the TC. By design (firmware), a 1.4x TC drops AF speed by 50%, and a 2x TC drops it by 75%. If you put the 1.4x behind the 200mm f/2, you'll have a 280mm f/2.8 lens that activates all 61 AF points including the 5 dual-cross points on the 5DIII/1D X...and still focuses 50% slower.

The 'hunting' you describe also appears to not be specific to the max aperture or the AF points, but rather to lens or TC combo. For example, the 100-400L @ 400/5.6 hunts with a busy background, whereas the 400/5.6L locks on much more effectively in that scenario.

Hmm, curious. When I rent the 300 f/2.8 II, and use the 1.4x TC, it still seems to focus extremely fast. Faster than the 600/4 with the same TC.

Maybe it's just the design of the 100-400, but that lens doesn't focus fast, period, as far as I can tell. I haven't used the 400/5.6 with the 61pt system, so I can't speak to it.

The 300/2.8 II is arguably Canon's fastest-focusing lens. The focusing group in the 600/4 II is ~25% more massive than that in the 300/2.8 II. The bare 300 II focuses faster than the bare 600 II, so the former will be faster with the same TC. I suspect the 300/2.8 II is just so fast to begin with that you don't notice the AF speed reduction as much.

Here's the relevant bit from Canon:

[quote author=Canon DLC]As with previous EF Extenders, usage of Series III EF Extenders lowers AF drive speed to improve AF performance. When Extender EF 1.4X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 50%. When Extender EF 2X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 75%. This may seem like a drawback, but in reality subject tracking performance remains quite high when Series III Extenders are used with IS II lenses. This is due to improvements in AF precision made possible by the new microcomputer in the extenders.

The 100-400L focuses noticeably slower than the 400/5.6, as well, even though both are 400mm f/5.6.

Actually the 70-200 IS II focuses faster than the 300 IS II. And I can not notice any focusing slowdown on the 300 IS II even with 2x converter. The 70-200 however is slooooow with the 2x. This is my experience with both 5DIII and 1DX, the 1DX is slightly faster with both lenses.
[/quote]

So apparently (wether its true or not) the af speed is supposed to be the same with or without the converters. Af has to move less distance with the converters attached so time to reach focus is about the same. Now getting a lock at f5.6 or f8 is another story

 

[privatebydesign]

Actually the 70-200 IS II focuses faster than the 300 IS II. And I can not notice any focusing slowdown on the 300 IS II even with 2x converter. The 70-200 however is slooooow with the 2x. This is my experience with both 5DIII and 1DX, the 1DX is slightly faster with both lenses.

Do you have any actual evidence of that or just an empirical feeling? For many years Canon touted their 300 f2.8's as the "fastest focusing af slr's".

 

[East Wind Photography]

They are all cross type, however Canon throttles AF speed at f/5.6 relative to f/4 or f/2.8. Even on the 61pt system, even when using only the center points, AF speed slows when I slap on a 1.4x TC onto my 600/4, vs. just using the 600/4. Additionally, at f/5.6, the chances of "hunting" increase. Canon's AF system caters towards looking for a closer subject first when the scene is out of focus by more than a certain (unspecified) amount. So, if I need to photograph a bird in flight, it's FAR better to use an f/4 lens, which is likely to lock on directly immediately, than f/5.6, which is going to hunt forward first if I'm not already close to focus on the bird.

Maybe the 65pt system changes that, but it looks like the same general firmware as the 5D III and 1D X, so I suspect it'll behave the same.

No, Canon does not throttle AF speed at f/5.6 relative to f/4 or f/2.8. Yes, when you put the 1.4x TC behind your 600/4, AF slows down. But that's not because the combo is f/5.6, it's because of the TC. By design (firmware), a 1.4x TC drops AF speed by 50%, and a 2x TC drops it by 75%. If you put the 1.4x behind the 200mm f/2, you'll have a 280mm f/2.8 lens that activates all 61 AF points including the 5 dual-cross points on the 5DIII/1D X...and still focuses 50% slower.

The 'hunting' you describe also appears to not be specific to the max aperture or the AF points, but rather to lens or TC combo. For example, the 100-400L @ 400/5.6 hunts with a busy background, whereas the 400/5.6L locks on much more effectively in that scenario.

Hmm, curious. When I rent the 300 f/2.8 II, and use the 1.4x TC, it still seems to focus extremely fast. Faster than the 600/4 with the same TC.

Maybe it's just the design of the 100-400, but that lens doesn't focus fast, period, as far as I can tell. I haven't used the 400/5.6 with the 61pt system, so I can't speak to it.

The 300/2.8 II is arguably Canon's fastest-focusing lens. The focusing group in the 600/4 II is ~25% more massive than that in the 300/2.8 II. The bare 300 II focuses faster than the bare 600 II, so the former will be faster with the same TC. I suspect the 300/2.8 II is just so fast to begin with that you don't notice the AF speed reduction as much.

Here's the relevant bit from Canon:

[quote author=Canon DLC]As with previous EF Extenders, usage of Series III EF Extenders lowers AF drive speed to improve AF performance. When Extender EF 1.4X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 50%. When Extender EF 2X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 75%. This may seem like a drawback, but in reality subject tracking performance remains quite high when Series III Extenders are used with IS II lenses. This is due to improvements in AF precision made possible by the new microcomputer in the extenders.

The 100-400L focuses noticeably slower than the 400/5.6, as well, even though both are 400mm f/5.6.
[/quote]

400 f5.6 also has better contrast lines wide open than the 100-400 wide open. Part of the noisy background hunting issue is due to the coma which blurs the lines between black and white. How a lens looks wide open is a great indicator of how well and how quickly it will get a lock. Now there is a real reason to pixel peep prior to purchasing a lens.

 

[dickgrafixstop]

Excited? - By boring incremental change to a dated system? No, I'm not excited, but I am disappointed. I see an
aging technology de-tuned to protect it's product cousins filling a marginal price point in a broad market. It's
easy to see accountants overruling engineers in product design issues and marketing refusing to demand a bold
step forward. Canon may have jumped the shark.

 

[icassell]

I'm excited. I'm a wildlife photographer. I want a camera with some reach over FF. I want outstanding AF . I want high ISO capability. I want f/8 focus (I want to put a TC on my 400/5.6 so I don't always need to lug my 500/4 around). I don't shoot video. This camera looks like it will give me what I want to upgrade my 7D. I pre-ordered on day 1. I just wish I didn't need to wait to get it!

 

[IslanderMV]

Very interesting digression about lenses and AF performance.

However, to answer the original question about being excited by the new 7D mk2 … Yea, I am very interested. The price to performance ratio is very attractive. 90% of my shoots are of wildlife out in the bush or on the shoreline. I have an aging and well used 60D that I would like to replace.

I am going to wait for some actual reviews and user feedback before I buy.

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

For all people looking at video, it's a huge disappointment, because even if you don't need 4K now, you might need it in the coming 4 years. definitely you don't need mushy unsharp video now. in times with very fast developments in technology canon honestly thinks videographers want to work with the same video quality until the year 2018 that they already gave us in 2008? that's weird, especially as at photokina 2 years ago they already did show what is possible in terms of dslr video. missing focus peaking etc clearly is a sign that their marketing departments dictate the technology, by falsely thinking giving us those features would cannibalize their expensive cinema line. i personally would have bought 3x 7D2 if it was 4K as addition to my 1DC, now i have 3x GH4. bad luck canon, they should fire all of their japanese decision makers. even for photo people it's a huge disappointment having no wifi, no swivel screen, no high megapixels etc. as an upgrade 5 years after the first 7D you can say that it won't hurt to simply keep the old model.

I have been looking for someone who owns and shoots with the 1DC to get his thoughts on a few points so I would really appreciate your input as someone wo actually uses the camera.

How is the camera like to work with in post? I mean the Motion JPEG files, are they too weak for proper colour grading or is it a robust image I can play with? In short, is it as gradable as the C300's image or closer to the 5D?

A real-life input in how much money I will spend on media when shooting with it would be very helpfull too. Is it thousands of dollars just for media? I am asking this specifically because my budget barely covers the camera body therefore it will be very hard for me to justify spending 4-5K$ extra just for memory cards.

Lastly how would you rate the overall image quality compared to say the C300 (when outputing in HD), better? Worse?

I own a GH4 as you do as well, and I love how detailed the image is, but I also despise everything else about the image, the colours, the noise levels at all ISOs, Dynamic range and highlight roll off, and the small sensor aesthetic and overall video/broadcast feel. In fact, I like the 60Ds image better than the GH4 for everything but wide detailed shots, the Canons simply rock at these aspects, but they are quite poor just in resolution. So I was wondering if the 1Dc is the perfect camera that has the resolution of the GH4 plus all the pleasing characteristics of the Canon cameras, it seems like a match made in heaven in terms of overal image quality, would you say that's true as a user of both?

And I also heard of the s35 crop mode on that camera being absolutrly stunning and even better than the C300s image at times, while the full frame crop is just like the 5D, I would love to hear your comments on the s35 mode.


I am very tempted to invest in one for my business after the latest price drops. Especially since it seems to will stay around for quite sometime as we've just transitioned into 4K so it's a good investment, Canon will not be pushing a 6K 1DC successor soon I predict.

 

[Loswr]

Canon may have jumped the shark.

LOLz at YAPODFC. :

 

[Marauder]

Yes, I'm VERY excited! On the IQ front, I never expected a sensor that would somehow match FF IQ. I expected something with a moderate improvement over the 70D in IQ (and a substantial advantage over my 7D) and the 7D II appears to deliver.

Of FAR greater interest to me is the AF system, FPS and buffer--I wanted a killer AF system and a high FPS with a large enough buffer to use it--and Canon appears to have delivered! And for substantially less than I'd expected, which is a bonus!

Yeah, I'm PUMPED and want one! Just waiting to hear the first solid reviews and I've got to save some more $$'s, but I want one!!! ;D

 

[Marauder]

Yes, I'm VERY excited! On the IQ front, I never expected a sensor that would somehow match FF IQ. I expected something with a moderate improvement over the 70D in IQ (and a substantial advantage over my 7D) and the 7D II appears to deliver.

Of FAR greater interest to me is the AF system, FPS and buffer--I wanted a killer AF system and a high FPS with a large enough buffer to use it--and Canon appears to have delivered! And for substantially less than I'd expected, which is a bonus!

Yeah, I'm PUMPED and want one! Just waiting to hear the first solid reviews and I've got to save some more $$'s, but I want one!!! ;D

You might have misunderstood something somewhere along the line. The 7D II is marginally improved over the 70D.,.most of the improvement is on the color noise front, and less banding (but the 70D already had less banding than the 7D, so that isn't really new.)

It is about 1 stop better than the original 7D. The stop better than the original 7D was expected, given the performance of the 70D...but the 7D II doesn't come close to FF performance in equivalent situations. It will still enjoy the reach benefit with shorter lenses, but I honestly think you might be getting your hopes up a bit too high if you really expect the 7D II to deliver FF-level IQ in identical-framing situations. The 5D III, 6D, 1D X, or other FF DSLRs are still going to enjoy a stop benefit or more at high ISO over the 7D II. Larger frame means better IQ unless your reach limited.

It's possible you misread my post. I said I never expected the 7D2 to match FF. I expected a marginal improvement over the 70D and a fairly substantial improvement over my current 7D, which of course is a given since the 70D already has a substantial advantage over the 7D. In essence, I'm saying that the slight improvement over the 70D is already a sufficient increase in IQ for my needs. Sure a killer sensor that blows away the IQ of every other crop framed camera would be awesome, but it was never my expectation. The 7D II looks set to deliver a useful improvement in IQ over my current 7D, while giving a MASSIVE improvement in AF, speed and buffer--and those last three points are the critical ones for me. 8)

 

[Marauder]

Yes, I'm VERY excited! On the IQ front, I never expected a sensor that would somehow match FF IQ. I expected something with a moderate improvement over the 70D in IQ (and a substantial advantage over my 7D) and the 7D II appears to deliver.

Of FAR greater interest to me is the AF system, FPS and buffer--I wanted a killer AF system and a high FPS with a large enough buffer to use it--and Canon appears to have delivered! And for substantially less than I'd expected, which is a bonus!

Yeah, I'm PUMPED and want one! Just waiting to hear the first solid reviews and I've got to save some more $$'s, but I want one!!! ;D

You might have misunderstood something somewhere along the line. The 7D II is marginally improved over the 70D.,.most of the improvement is on the color noise front, and less banding (but the 70D already had less banding than the 7D, so that isn't really new.)

It is about 1 stop better than the original 7D. The stop better than the original 7D was expected, given the performance of the 70D...but the 7D II doesn't come close to FF performance in equivalent situations. It will still enjoy the reach benefit with shorter lenses, but I honestly think you might be getting your hopes up a bit too high if you really expect the 7D II to deliver FF-level IQ in identical-framing situations. The 5D III, 6D, 1D X, or other FF DSLRs are still going to enjoy a stop benefit or more at high ISO over the 7D II. Larger frame means better IQ unless your reach limited.

It's possible you misread my post. I said I never expected the 7D2 to match FF. I expected a marginal improvement over the 70D and a fairly substantial improvement over my current 7D, which of course is a given since the 70D already has a substantial advantage over the 7D. In essence, I'm saying that the slight improvement over the 70D is already a sufficient increase in IQ for my needs. Sure a killer sensor that blows away the IQ of every other crop framed camera would be awesome, but it was never my expectation. The 7D II looks set to deliver a useful improvement in IQ over my current 7D, while giving a MASSIVE improvement in AF, speed and buffer--and those last three points are the critical ones for me. 8)

Ah. With the "I'm very excited" bit in front, it made it sound like you were saying that you never expected the 7D II to approach FF quality, and that you were "realizing it did". If that's not the case, then good. At least you won't be disappointed.

NP. I guess you can say I'm very excited despite much of the negativity about IQ. I'm excited because the IQ improvements, although evolutionary rather than revolutionary, are sufficient as far as I'm concerned. And, of course, we only have a few images to go by so far.

Personally, I think the camera will be a huge hit for the target market of the wildlife and sports shooter. It will be a hit right out the door, although its ability to sustain that success depends on the AF system, more than any other feature. If it delivers as promised, this will be a hugely popular action camera, especially for outdoor use. But it all hinges on whether the AF system DELIVERS! Given the success of the AF system on the 5D III and the 1DX, I think it will be a fantastic AF system. On the flip side, if it repeats the AF debacle of the 1D III, it would be a punishing blow to Canon, but I think that's unlikely. I suspect that the reason the camera was delayed so long is that Canon was tweaking and perfecting the AF system---I think they realize how much is at stake if the AF system isn't simply excellent.

 

[Marauder]

Yeah, the AF system is probably the most important feature for the 7D II. Frame rate is probably next important, and they did well there. I personally was looking at the sensor to see if Canon had moved to a new fab, and it does not appear they have. That's disappointing to me, just in what it indicates for the future (which could change, but I'm skeptical.) I am very curious to see how the Samsung NX1 performs in real life. If it has Canon lens adapters, it might be a very viable competitor, given it's high FPS. The AF system sounds awesome...if it is as awesome as it sounds...I might actually pick one of them up (in part also for astrophotography...a high res BSI APS-C would be pretty awesome for OSC AP.)

I also just saw the Canon page on the updated information they are now displaying in the viewfinder, which is pretty cool. I don't see a histogram in there yet, which is sad, but Canon seems to be moving in that direction with it.

I concur that the AF and frame rate (and the buffer to use the frame rate!) are the key elements. A new "knock your socks off" sensor would have been cool too, but it was less of a priority for me than the AF, FPS and buffer. "Decent" IQ with a killer AF/FPS and buffer was more important than a great new sensor and a disappointing AF/FPS and buffer. But getting both would have been awesome of course. I think we'll have to wait for the next FF camera to see what else Canon has up their sleeves for sensor tech.

The NX1 appears to be an amazing effort from a company trying to break into serious image capture. Will be interesting to see how it performs on all fronts.

 

[Marauder]

Yeah, the AF system is probably the most important feature for the 7D II. Frame rate is probably next important, and they did well there. I personally was looking at the sensor to see if Canon had moved to a new fab, and it does not appear they have. That's disappointing to me, just in what it indicates for the future (which could change, but I'm skeptical.) I am very curious to see how the Samsung NX1 performs in real life. If it has Canon lens adapters, it might be a very viable competitor, given it's high FPS. The AF system sounds awesome...if it is as awesome as it sounds...I might actually pick one of them up (in part also for astrophotography...a high res BSI APS-C would be pretty awesome for OSC AP.)

I also just saw the Canon page on the updated information they are now displaying in the viewfinder, which is pretty cool. I don't see a histogram in there yet, which is sad, but Canon seems to be moving in that direction with it.

I concur that the AF and frame rate (and the buffer to use the frame rate!) are the key elements. A new "knock your socks off" sensor would have been cool too, but it was less of a priority for me than the AF, FPS and buffer. "Decent" IQ with a killer AF/FPS and buffer was more important than a great new sensor and a disappointing AF/FPS and buffer. But getting both would have been awesome of course. I think we'll have to wait for the next FF camera to see what else Canon has up their sleeves for sensor tech.

If, once tested, the 7D II hits with around 35,000e- FWC, I'll be more impressed. That would be a fairly significant improvement, meaning dynamic range really did improve. It would still be half (at best) what you get out of a full frame, but, it would be enough to really improve IQ at high ISO. ISO 16,000 could have a decent amount of DR and color fidelity with such a charge capacity. I suspect it'll be somewhere around 26-27ke-, which is about the same as the 70D...but if it tops 30-35k, that would be pretty nice.

It will be interesting to see what happens once production models start getting tested and reviewed.

 

[raptor3x]

Yeah, the AF system is probably the most important feature for the 7D II. Frame rate is probably next important, and they did well there. I personally was looking at the sensor to see if Canon had moved to a new fab, and it does not appear they have. That's disappointing to me, just in what it indicates for the future (which could change, but I'm skeptical.) I am very curious to see how the Samsung NX1 performs in real life. If it has Canon lens adapters, it might be a very viable competitor, given it's high FPS. The AF system sounds awesome...if it is as awesome as it sounds...I might actually pick one of them up (in part also for astrophotography...a high res BSI APS-C would be pretty awesome for OSC AP.)

I also just saw the Canon page on the updated information they are now displaying in the viewfinder, which is pretty cool. I don't see a histogram in there yet, which is sad, but Canon seems to be moving in that direction with it.

I concur that the AF and frame rate (and the buffer to use the frame rate!) are the key elements. A new "knock your socks off" sensor would have been cool too, but it was less of a priority for me than the AF, FPS and buffer. "Decent" IQ with a killer AF/FPS and buffer was more important than a great new sensor and a disappointing AF/FPS and buffer. But getting both would have been awesome of course. I think we'll have to wait for the next FF camera to see what else Canon has up their sleeves for sensor tech.

If, once tested, the 7D II hits with around 35,000e- FWC, I'll be more impressed. That would be a fairly significant improvement, meaning dynamic range really did improve. It would still be half (at best) what you get out of a full frame, but, it would be enough to really improve IQ at high ISO. ISO 16,000 could have a decent amount of DR and color fidelity with such a charge capacity. I suspect it'll be somewhere around 26-27ke-, which is about the same as the 70D...but if it tops 30-35k, that would be pretty nice.

Somebody over on FM dug through the sample RAWs and it appears that while the low ISO DR hasn't improved much, the high ISO DR has improved very signficantly. They're measuring the DR at ISO 6400 to be equal to the 5D3.

 

[papa-razzi]

Here is the thing for me. The 7D is a great camera. It does quite a lot for a very reasonable price - affordable to a large number of people. I have used it for 4 years, to take track, volleyball, football, soccer, & basketball photos, as well as general shooting. I have captured some awesome pictures. The AF, once you really know how to use it and adjust the settings to your style, is very good. The images are usable even in lower light. Ergonomics of the camera are excellent. Granted, in low light, needing a faster shutter speed for sports you push the ISO limits of the camera - but you still get shots you couldn't otherwise get - unless you spent significantly more money than the 7D costs. My only wish was less noise at high ISO in low light - a lot to ask for any camera. High ISO in good light wasn't that bad.

The 7D II improves on the 7D in high ISO performance, AF performance, and FPS performance, among other things. The price point has remained close to the same (comparing introductory pricing). For what it does, and for the price it does it for, you are not going to be able to beat this camera.

Granted, if your focus is IQ and you largely use the center focus point, get a 6D. If you want an awesome all-round camera with great IQ and very good AF, get a 5DIII (for much more $$). If you want everything without much compromise on anything, get a 1DX for (substantially more $$).

For the price point, the 7DII provides a tremendous amount of value. I believe this camera will sell quite well.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

They're measuring the DR at ISO 6400 to be equal to the 5D3.

No, it's less.
It is better than for the 7D though, but about half a stop (maybe +/- 1/3 stop as the masked vs main area and high ISO ratings might differ).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

But at the end of the day as a speedy reach/AF stills cam it (7D2) really should excel and be pretty kick-ass. Nothing else seems to have the specs to match.

Sony 7100 might have better low ISO, but it has a really bad buffer, it's slower, very likely worse AF....
No way I can imagine the Samsung's AF being close....
etc.

 

[raptor3x]

They're measuring the DR at ISO 6400 to be equal to the 5D3.

No, it's less.
It is better than for the 7D though, but about half a stop (maybe +/- 1/3 stop as the masked vs main area and high ISO ratings might differ).

The dynamic range of both the 7D2 and 5D3 at ISO 6400 is 8.3EV based on the measurements from the sample RAWs for the 7D2 and DXO for the 5D3.

 

[NancyP]

Well, for the money, yes, I am excited about having a pro-level AF and frame rate for my reach-limited application (birding). When I do landscape or astro shooting, I take my 6D. Should I have gotten a 5D3? That wouldn't solve the reach issue.

Most cameras are better than most photographers.

 

[msm]

Actually the 70-200 IS II focuses faster than the 300 IS II. And I can not notice any focusing slowdown on the 300 IS II even with 2x converter. The 70-200 however is slooooow with the 2x. This is my experience with both 5DIII and 1DX, the 1DX is slightly faster with both lenses.

Do you have any actual evidence of that or just an empirical feeling? For many years Canon touted their 300 f2.8's as the "fastest focusing af slr's".

I have evidence in that I just recorded it at 50FPS and it takes the 70-200 36frames to go from infinity to MFD and back to infinity compared to 39 for the 300 IS II. So the difference was less than I expected from my memory but it is still there.