Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Myths die hard, don't they.

The IR method has a lot more variables and they don't test RAW they test after conversion RAW with cooked in NR of various who knows what degrees (and that also explains how they manage to get this type of DR to actually measure higher than engineering DR measurements of the RAW file). So I don't particularly see how this method is better.

Anyway it's also convenient that you don't post this little part: "Like all recent Canon SLRs, the higher quality scores [of the 70D] are somewhat below average for a modern sensor. For example, the Nikon D7100 managed 10.1 f-stops at the highest quality level, almost 2 stops better."

 

[Alino]

OK, We can expect a 1700$ for this, no more!

And why the hell, they have wait 5 full years to produce just this upgrade?

 

[Keith_Reeder]

Funny you mention Ansel Adams since I'd bet a lot of money that he'd be.... not on your side here.

Nonsense - his trademark look involved strong contrast, black blacks: he could easily have dug into the shadows more than he did, and very intentionally chose not to.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

it doesn't seem subtle to me

and how exactly is it that a bye the eye DR rating gives a higher score than an engineering rating which goes deeper in the noise floor than some eyes would like?

For the nth time...DxO is not measuring photographic DR. They are measuring sensel SNR, running those values through a 'black box' formula, and predicting DR.

Actually I found out how. IR is measuring after raw conversion and NR has been applied!

And DxO is simply measuring it directly on the actual RAW no converter and any hidden difference applied under the hood.

Understand that direct observation always trumps theory and prediction. Always. Never the other way around. No matter how much math, effort, belief, or faith you put in a theory, nor how many so called 'experts' trust in the theory, direct observation always wins.

Yeah and DxO is more direct, they measure the actual RAW file without having to deal with potentially different and hidden NR and sharpening and so on in ACR and how those aspects might vary from how it treats files from different cameras and where mid-tone gray is chosen and so on. The IR method is subject to a lot more potentially hidden aspects and variability.

And for all that, the funny this is that you don't even dare quote their main finding: "Like all recent Canon SLRs, the higher quality scores [of the 70D] are somewhat below average for a modern sensor. For example, the Nikon D7100 managed 10.1 f-stops at the highest quality level, almost 2 stops better."

DxO measures sensel SNR and concludes that a 70D (for example) only has 11.6 stops DR. Someone photographs a step wedge and sees 13 stops between black and white. The question is not "how exactly is it that a bye the eye DR rating gives a higher score than an engineering rating"? No, the question is "where did the engineering testing, model, or rating fail?"

And ironically enough it turns out that the DxO measurement didn't fail and that there is an explanation for the IR result, ACR applies hidden NR even with NR turned off, under the hood and IR used ACR and didn't test the actual RAW file itself.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Funny you mention Ansel Adams since I'd bet a lot of money that he'd be.... not on your side here.

Come back when you've read some of his work.

[instantly] I'm back.

 

[jrista]

OK, We can expect a 1700$ for this, no more!

And why the hell, they have wait 5 full years to produce just this upgrade?

It's a good upgrade in all but the sensor department. A 65pt all-cross-type AF sensor and 10fps in an APS-C is a first. As far as an action/wildlife APS-C body, it is specced well enough. Most shooters will be using it at high ISO, so the low ISO DR doesn't really matter for this particular camera.

Many of us, however, were looking to the 7D II as a marker, an indicator of whether Canon had improved their sensor fabrication and design technology or not. The sensor sounds like a mildly improved 70D sensor, so it sounds likely they have not improved their core sensor tech. It doesn't really matter for this particular camera...however it is a concerning point for Canon's photography division at large. We STILL have the open question: When is Canon going to step up their game, improve their core sensor technology, and start competing on the same playing field as Exmor?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Funny you mention Ansel Adams since I'd bet a lot of money that he'd be.... not on your side here.

Nonsense - his trademark look involved strong contrast, black blacks: he could easily have dug into the shadows more than he did, and very intentionally chose not to.

He spent of time in the lab trying to improve what he could get out of film and did all sorts of dodging and burning and loved trying to push the tech of the day forward as much as he could.

 

[jrista]

Funny you mention Ansel Adams since I'd bet a lot of money that he'd be.... not on your side here.

Nonsense - his trademark look involved strong contrast, black blacks: he could easily have dug into the shadows more than he did, and very intentionally chose not to.

He spent of time in the lab trying to improve what he could get out of film and did all sorts of dodging and burning and loved trying to push the tech of the day forward as much as he could.

True, however that does not change the fact that in practice, his images had VERY high contrast, and his blacks were often very deep and blocked. That was his style, his signature. If Ansel had today's technology, he wouldn't be using tons of DR...he'd be using strongly-shouldered tone curves to stretch the midtones and compress the highlights and shadows.

 

[that1guyy]

Same sensor.

No wifi or gps

No touch screen

No 4k video or any notable improvements in video

This camera could've come out in 2008.

What a terrible disappointment and further evidence of Canon's incompetence and lack of vision. I hope they go bankrupt if all of this is true.

 

[ishdakuteb]

I guess that I now probably know the reason why Dr. Michael Adams chose to be a pilot and physician, and retired as major general, instead of photographer LOL...

 

[Lightmaster]

If this turns out to be the same old sensor technology, good luck to Canon, because all other manufacturers aren't setting on their asses or resting on their laurels...

what some people don´t realize is, that the majority of customers does not seem to care about who has the best sensor or how much you can push the shadows.

only the minority of geeks on forums like this care about sensor performance.
there are millions of canon users out there.. how many member has this forum?

otherwise you can´t explain the business numbers of sony, nikon and canon.

http://petapixel.com/2014/05/18/nikons-financial-woes-relentless-prompt-restructuring/

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/08/09/nikon-cuts-yearly-forecasts-after-reporting-lower-sales-and-income-in-first-quarter.aspx/

canons camera sector suffers from the market situation too.
but for nikon it really looks bad. despite all the geek world praises their better sony sensors.

and i bet the 7D MK2 even when it comes with a dissapointing sensor.. will not change that. it will sell well compared to the competition.

from the eight 7D owners i know only 2 use RAW. all other shoot JPG.
and they don´t care much about post processing.

they have jobs and don´t want to spend 80% of their free time on internet forums arguing about nonsense or editing images.

i guess that´s the reality out there....

 

[x-vision]

OK, We can expect a 1700$ for this, no more!

And why the hell, they have wait 5 full years to produce just this upgrade?

Yup. But it's clear to me now that Canon just won't make a 1.6x camera that would challenge FF in term of image quality.

A 7DII with new sensor tech would have been too close to the 5DIII and 6D in image quality (or even better?).
I was hoping for just that - but it's obviously not happening.

In Canon's product hierarchy, FF is both more expensive and has better image quality than crop.
And this obviously remains unchanged for now.

 

[Lightmaster]

OK, We can expect a 1700$ for this, no more!

And why the hell, they have wait 5 full years to produce just this upgrade?

Yup. But it's clear to me now that Canon just won't make a 1.6x camera that would challenge FF in term of image quality.

A 7DII with new sensor tech would have been too close to the 5DIII and 6D in image quality (or even better?).
I was hoping for just that - but it's obviously not happening.

In Canon's product hierarchy, FF is both more expensive and has better image quality than crop.
And this obviously remains unchanged for now.

obvious?

how can you say that?
you know nothing about the new sensor, do you?

we think/guess it´s a pimped 70D sensor but that doesn´t mean it is.

you look at the MP number and think "meh.. 70D" --..but that it is "only" 20 MP does not mean it´s the same sensor.

all i want to say... there is still a few days of hope left.

 

[Loswr]

20.2MP “Fine Detail” CMOS Sensor (I want more information on this)

= No OLPF or anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor.

= Nope. The 70D and 5DIII are both described by Canon as having a 'fine detail CMOS sensor', both have an AA filter.

 

[Lightmaster]

20.2MP “Fine Detail” CMOS Sensor (I want more information on this)

= No OLPF or anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor.

= Nope. The 70D and 5DIII are both described by Canon as having a 'fine detail CMOS sensor', both have an AA filter.

did not know canon calls their sensors "fine detail CMOS sensors".

so it seems this part of the rumor does not indicate anything new.

 

[Loswr]

In Canon's product hierarchy, FF ... has better image quality than crop.

Amazing how Canon's product hierarchy aligns so well with physics (or maybe the other way around?)...

 

[Lightmaster]

Amazing how Canon's product hierarchy aligns so well with physics (or maybe the other way around?)...

at least for the same state of sensor technology.

sensor size is important, no question.
but i read a lot from hasselblad owners who are very suprised and pleased by the D800 image quality in the studio. some write it comes very close to the 40MP MF backs.

http://www.photigy.com/nikon-d800e-test-review-vs-hasselblad-h4d40-35mm-against-medium-format/

if im not wrong the area difference (APS-C -> FF and FF -> MF as used by hasselblad) is nearly equal.

so i would not say that challenging canons current FF performance with new technology is impossible.

 

[x-vision]

obvious?

how can you say that?
you know nothing about the new sensor, do you?

Well, the leaks that appear two weeks before announcement are usually 100% right.
So, these latest specs are the real thing - trust me on that .

And then if it looks like a duck, you know it will quack like a duck too.
You will see - trust me on that .

 

[x-vision]

In Canon's product hierarchy, FF ... has better image quality than crop.

Amazing how Canon's product hierarchy aligns so well with physics (or maybe the other way around?)...

Well, physics would have been 'challenged' at the transition period, when a smaller sensor has superior tech vs the larger - but old - sensor.

But Canon is not taking this risk.

 

[Lightmaster]

obvious?

how can you say that?
you know nothing about the new sensor, do you?

Well, the leaks that appear two weeks before announcement are usually 100% right.
So, these latest specs are the real thing - trust me on that .

And then if it looks like a duck, you know it will quack like a duck too.
You will see - trust me on that .

again... you don´t know anything beside the MP and that it will be DP from the sensor.
so how can we talk about the image quality?

it COULD be that canon HAS improved sensor performce but decided to stick to 20 MP.

it´s still just guesswork.

not that i have great hopes... but still i have some. ;D