Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?

[crashpc]

Are there really that many indie movie makers that are shooting in 4K nowadays or is this just all baloney? Who here has a 4K monitor or software that can edit 4K video? I have yet to actually watch something in 4K. So why is it all of a sudden we need this in a camera that is primarily designed to shoot sports and wildlife pictures?

We all know that ML will squeeze 4K out of it anyway, so chill out with the 4K already.

Totally agree. 1080p @ 60Hz is good enaugh for 99% of needs. But so is 20Mpx sensor. I´d rather want to have 64Mpx one (here we really have no need for AA filter) with choice to merge four pixels into one to have 16Mpx low noise image. Also two by two pixels could work for DPAF. I will keep dreaming. Seems I will do for two more weeks.

 

[Loswr]

Very simple: If these are truly the Specs, then this camera should have been released 2 years ago.

Very simple: The 7D was still selling quite well, until the 70D launched.

Very disappointing. I may pick up a Nikon 7100 and obtain lens conversions for the long lens.

Again: H and G.

 

[Dylan777]

I think Canon understands it's target market far better than most of the people here...

+1

The 7DII/X looks to be a mini-1D X in many respects. It'll have the best AF of any APS-C camera on the market. 65-pts will push AF point coverage almost to the sides of the frame. 10 fps. Dual cards. The iTR suggests a new RGB metering sensor.

The minuscule number of forum DRones will whine and complain, and say they won't buy it (not that they intended to anyway, in most cases). Meanwhile, the camera will be very popular with buyers.

+1+1

Whenever Canon (or Nikon) comes out with a new camera, I enjoy trying to reverse-engineer their market research.

It was clear from the 5DIII that they had done excellent research on what wedding and event photographers wanted and hit the bulls eye (while still offering a camera that would be great all-around for other serious users).

I wondered what their market research showed about the 7D. I figured that it would be targeted at sports, birders and wildlife shooters. But I really thought they would up the pixel count significantly and sacrifice higher ISOs, in part to protect the full frame line.

What's interesting to me with these rumors (and I am fully aware that they are rumors) is that Canon appears to have decided to try to reach a balance between resolution and ISO performance, possibly deciding that a 24 mp sensor was just too noisy at modestly high ISOs (Which, by the way, is also very evident in reviews of Nikon and Sony 24mp APS-C sensors, despite what some people on this forum think.)

People love to talk about Canon "crippling" one camera to protect another more expensive model. That's almost always B.S. and it appears it might be the case here as well. By holding the resolution down to 20 mp, they may be trying to keep the noise level manageable at higher, but reasonable ISOs, like 1600, 3200 and even 6400. Even though there may be some risk that potential 6D or even 5D buyers would go for the 7DII.

These specs show a company that knows what their target audience wants and I suspect it will sell very well when it's released. At a minimum, it will certainly outsell the Nikon D400.

Agree with unfocused. 7D II rumor specs seem to target outdoor shooters.

I can see Speed and acuracy:
•Dual Pixel CMOS AF
•Dual DIGIC 6 Processors
•65 AF points “All Cross-type”. Dual cross on the center point.
•10fps

You can only put so much marbles in small bucket.

 

[transpo1]

Don't you understand how many cameras you could sell?

I'm sure they understand that quite well. I'm not sure why so many people seem to think they know more than Canon...

Neuro: respect your Canon input a great deal.

As a loyal Canon customer, I know that they must have great data on the video market.

My frustration lies with them holding back on video features that competitors are releasing in similarly priced camera bodies.

There are two parts to my frustration-

1) I want a Canon camera with 4K, not a Sony or Panasonic, because Canon makes better stuff.

2) They could sell a TON of 7DII cameras on volume if they added those features and make up any loss of $$ on their Cinema EOS line from that.

So, my hunch is that the only reasons they refuse to do it is for the reason we've suspected all along- to protect and save face with their pro video line- not a good enough reason to prevent release of a great product that would fly off shelves in my opinion (such as a 7DII with 4K or RAW).

Pro video people are going to be buying GH4s and A7Ss or perhaps Blackmagics as backup cameras when they could be buying 7DIIs.

In other words, Canon's not capitalizing on their market lead in DSLR video and not following the Apple rule: cannibalize yourself before someone else does it to you.

Are there really that many indie movie makers that are shooting in 4K nowadays or is this just all baloney? Who here has a 4K monitor or software that can edit 4K video? I have yet to actually watch something in 4K. So why is it all of a sudden we need this in a camera that is primarily designed to shoot sports and wildlife pictures?

We all know that ML will squeeze 4K out of it anyway, so chill out with the 4K already.

An explanation: for film / video makers, having 4K is more about future proofing when 4K hits big and increased resolution in 1080p, not about playback for normal videos. It's like taking a small JPEG and using it for quick web distribution but wanting to have the .CR2 file for later use in case you want to blow it up for print.

That said, I'd be happy with a RAW 1080p feature in place of 4K because it would offer increased dynamic range.

But I don't want a Magic Lantern solution- I want a stable, well thought out Canon solution for 4K and / or RAW because it's more reliable and because I own enough Canon glass and bodies that I **care** about the company's future

 

[Zv]

If these specs are close, it is a bit disappointing. If they were going to stay right around 20MB, I would want higher ISO. If they are keeping this size, there needs to be a significant improvement in DR.

The 65 AF could be nice. Will be interesting to see the spread and how well it functions. Was really hoping for 24MP+ and closer to 30.

My calculations could be way off here but I think that going from a 20MP sensor to 30MP would mean doubling the file size. The file size would be about 50Mb (I could be wrong) in which case it would require a much larger buffer. It would be tough to achieve 10 fps with that large a file and CF cards aren't fast enough to clear that huge backlog quickly enough. This camera is built for speed so choking it up with huge files is counter-intuitive IMO.

 

[Dylan777]

Too many replies for me to browse through. I just registered in order to comment.

Very simple: If these are truly the Specs, then this camera should have been released 2 years ago. Why the secrecy for such Specs?

Nowadays I shoot mostly birds and use ONLY the centre focusing point. My main upgrade requirement would be for more pixels to define the tiny subjects. Second upgrade requirement would be faster focusing speed. Subjects are extremely flighty.

I broke my 7D to unrepairable condition and ignored the service department's offer to allow me to purchase a replacement body for a price greater than local stores were charging. Instead I purchased a 70D and it gives me more pixels on the subjects and focuses faster than the 7D. One feature I would like is GPS. If there isn't a built-in GPS, then I shall not purchase an add-on, but instead do a time-synch to a portable GPS and use Lightroom's feature to add GPS data to Exif data.

A camera with these Specs just is insufficient to bother with an "upgrade". Very disappointing. I may pick up a Nikon 7100 and obtain lens conversions for the long lens.

Best wishes... :

 

[Loswr]

Don't you understand how many cameras you could sell?

I'm sure they understand that quite well. I'm not sure why so many people seem to think they know more than Canon...

Neuro: respect your Canon input a great deal.

As a loyal Canon customer, I know that they must have great data on the video market.

My frustration lies with them holding back on video features that competitors are releasing in similarly priced camera bodies.

I understand your frustration. The real issue is that Canon's goal (legal mandate as a public company, actually) is to attempt to maximize shareholder value. Decisions made to maximize profit in the short- and long term are almost guaranteed to not make all customers happy.

4K isn't mainstream, yet. It will be at some point, and that's when we'll see it in consumer-level Canon dSLRs. They will be quite happy to sell you a future iteration of the 7-series at that time.

 

[Steve]

I think a lot sports photographers are taking pictures and focusing on the sport. Big agencies have runners who grab the cards, while the photographer flips to the other card and continues. Transferring GB of data over wifi? I doubt this would be quicker for the qty that a Pro photographer shoots....

That may be true for the few at the upper end of the profession but the pros I've met are paid garbage and often do it as a second job or as part of other journalistic duties. They certainly don't have assistants at beck and call. Transferring an entire card's worth of data? Probably not a good idea, no, but that one rad shot/series of that amazing play? Sure, preview shot->upload to editing desk->publish->done. That would be amazing and in this day and age its gonna start being a lot more common.

My question, that I've asked others and still haven't got an answer to, is why should wifi be specifically excluded? It would cost nothing to the end user and it would have use to some percentage of photographers. In fact, a well implemented, fully integrated wifi would be a godsend for many. The opposition just sounds, to me, like curmudgeonly old men complaining about kids these days with their idroids and googlefaces.

It's going to be a mini 1DX with extra reach, but not as good high iso quality and not the same frame rate, otherwise it eats too much into the high end range. That for me is sound economics, not so much marketing.

e: I keep seeing people say that they understand Canon purposely limiting the burst rate because of marketing. So, another question: who here that owns a 1DX would sell it off for a 7DII, spec'd as listed, if it shot 12fps and pocket the extra cash? Who here would purchase a 7DII, spec'd as listed, that shot 12fps over a 1DX if money were not the limiting factor? I sure as heck wouldn't!

 

[Loswr]

My question, that I've asked others and still haven't got an answer to, is why should wifi be specifically excluded? It would cost nothing to the end user and it would have use to some percentage of photographers.

See, you answered your own question. Canon would rather make a profit on an accessory product (a highly overpriced one, at that).

 

[Steve]

See, you answered your own question. Canon would rather make a profit on an accessory product (a highly overpriced one, at that).

Trust me, I get that this is the reason Canon isn't including it as a feature, I just don't understand posters here being against it.

 

[Loswr]

... I just don't understand posters here being against it.

Ahh, ok. I don't get that, either.

 

[jrista]

... I just don't understand posters here being against it.

Ahh, ok. I don't get that, either.

They are against it because they know it wouldn't cost Canon anything, they want the feature, most people are cheap, therefor..."Why the hell didn't Canon include WiFi?!?" That isn't hard to understand. Especially when the feature counts on competitors products keep increasing, at a faster rate than on Canon cameras. Especially when, outside of the AF system, the 7D II is looking like a relatively small upgrade from the 70D & 7D...which is rather pitiful after such a LOOOONG wait for it.

It really isn't that hard to understand. It's a basic facet of the human psyche...we want what we aren't getting, and we want it even more when the other guy has it.

 

[Steve]

You misunderstand, we are saying the opposite. I was arguing with people who are against including Wifi in cameras for some reason.

 

[jrista]

You misunderstand, we are saying the opposite. I was arguing with people who are against including Wifi in cameras for some reason.

Oh. Well in that case, I agree...that's strange.

 

[sagittariansrock]

Other than the wifi, the features look great.
Particularly like the built-in RT function... damn, I want it...

 

[jeffa4444]

The Wi-Fi on the 6D has been one of the most used features since Ive had it. I never used the camera remote any longer I use the iPhone app. via WI-FI to trigger the shutter release then NOTHING is touching the camera for landscape its perfect.

 

[jrista]

In a follow up thread, CR stated they think the iTR metering and tacking system of the 1D X will be included in the 7D II. That, combined with a 65pt AF system and 10fps, and I think this really is a mini 1DX.

I'm still bummed that Canon has STILL not demonstrated they are getting competitive again on the sensor front...re-purposing the 70D sensor in the 7D II just smells really sloppy and cheap....the 7D II was the PERFECT camera to release a new sensor in, and I think this is the worst move, from a perceptual standpoint, given the competition out in the market, that they could have made. I don't think the 7D II is going to be a big "low ISO usage" camera, given it's specs...but I do think Canon should have demonstrated that they are still capable of competing on the sensor IQ front.

Maybe with the 5D IV, or if Canon introduces another line of cameras to replace the 1Ds line when they release a "big megapixel" camera...maybe then they will finally release a sensor fabricated on 180nm, with on-die ADC, better low ISO DR, maybe even multi-layered, etc. Still...it'll suck, if the 7D II really doesn't hit with a better sensor, to have to wait ANOTHER couple years to see if Canon is going to do something on the sensor front.

 

[fragilesi]

Other than the wifi, the features look great.
Particularly like the built-in RT function... damn, I want it...

I agree! For many a better focusing system would be a huge upgrade in of itself. We're already possibly talking about something that takes the best of the 7d and 70d and puts them into one package plus that focusing system. My guess is that for many of the actual target market that focusing improvement is actually worth much more than all the wifis, GPSs, touch screens, step of DR etc combined. Obviously . . . that's based on the assumption that it is a fairly large improvement!

And I'm not saying that the other stuff is trivial as camera functions go but give me the basics any time in any product over the bells and whistles!

 

[Loswr]

Particularly like the built-in RT function... damn, I want it...

The more recent rumor update suggested that the -RT master would not be a feature, it'll be optical master only.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

I think Canon understands it's target market far better than most of the people here...

+1

The 7DII/X looks to be a mini-1D X in many respects. It'll have the best AF of any APS-C camera on the market. 65-pts will push AF point coverage almost to the sides of the frame. 10 fps. Dual cards. The iTR suggests a new RGB metering sensor.

The minuscule number of forum DRones will whine and complain, and say they won't buy it (not that they intended to anyway, in most cases). Meanwhile, the camera will be very popular with buyers.

+1+1

Whenever Canon (or Nikon) comes out with a new camera, I enjoy trying to reverse-engineer their market research.

It was clear from the 5DIII that they had done excellent research on what wedding and event photographers wanted and hit the bulls eye (while still offering a camera that would be great all-around for other serious users).

I wondered what their market research showed about the 7D. I figured that it would be targeted at sports, birders and wildlife shooters. But I really thought they would up the pixel count significantly and sacrifice higher ISOs, in part to protect the full frame line.

What's interesting to me with these rumors (and I am fully aware that they are rumors) is that Canon appears to have decided to try to reach a balance between resolution and ISO performance, possibly deciding that a 24 mp sensor was just too noisy at modestly high ISOs (Which, by the way, is also very evident in reviews of Nikon and Sony 24mp APS-C sensors, despite what some people on this forum think.)

People love to talk about Canon "crippling" one camera to protect another more expensive model. That's almost always B.S. and it appears it might be the case here as well. By holding the resolution down to 20 mp, they may be trying to keep the noise level manageable at higher, but reasonable ISOs, like 1600, 3200 and even 6400. Even though there may be some risk that potential 6D or even 5D buyers would go for the 7DII.

These specs show a company that knows what their target audience wants and I suspect it will sell very well when it's released. At a minimum, it will certainly outsell the Nikon D400.

+100

the grass is always greener.

" By holding the resolution down to 20 mp, they may be trying to keep the noise level manageable at higher, but reasonable ISOs, like 1600, 3200 and even 6400. Even though there may be some risk that potential 6D or even 5D buyers would go for the 7DII."

I think this depends on the actual cost of the 7d2, and yeah other factors too. when I stepped up from my xsi to a 7d, I was taking a good look at the 5d2 as well but ended up going with the 7d because it had a lesser cost (and because I was playign the field in terms of what I was shooting, kind of all over the place so the 7d was a good fit at the time).

If the 7d comes in at under 2k, then canon may have to refresh that 6d (give it more cross points) because that is the body that will be in danger from a 7d2 under 2K. If it's 2k+ though, then it actually makes the upgrade path more clear. With the 6d at $1600, those who want to step up for things like portraits and weddings have a very valid budget option in the 6d. If you know you are shooting sports and wildlife, now you have your 7d2. And if your further along, then you have your 5 series. I really doubt those that not only want but need what the 5 series brings to the table will buy a 7d2 though, even if it is under 2k.