Canon 7Dmk2 any rumors??

[!Xabbu]

I upgraded from a 40D to a 7D. I was impressed with how it dealt with processionals and recessionals at weddings. It made up for the disappointment I felt when I went from the 5D to the 5D2.

I see no need for a 7D2 at the moment. Hope they sort out the bugs soon on the 5D3.

I really don't understand why so many people feel that there is no need for progress. The 7D is everything but perfect. High ISO noise is not too good, dynamic range could be improved, it doesn't have the Digic V processor - of course you can take great pictures with it, but there is a lot of room for improvement.

I think that it is about time to improve the AF system of the 60D, which means that the 7D needs a significant improvement to have room above an improved 70D. From the reviews I read Nikon is significantly ahead especially in AF features and probably performance.

 

[smirkypants]

I really don't understand why so many people feel that there is no need for progress. The 7D is everything but perfect. High ISO noise is not too good, dynamic range could be improved, it doesn't have the Digic V processor - of course you can take great pictures with it, but there is a lot of room for improvement.

I think that it is about time to improve the AF system of the 60D, which means that the 7D needs a significant improvement to have room above an improved 70D. From the reviews I read Nikon is significantly ahead especially in AF features and probably performance.

+1
The IQ on the 7D is pretty mediocre and verging on bad given recent improvements in sensors. If you're used to an iPhone it's great, but it's behind the Nikon d7000 in image quality and dynamic range. 800 sees degradation and 1600 ISO starts to get really sketchy. Given that it's marketed as a sports enthusiasts camera, this really won't do. You need 1600 ISO to get high shutter speeds when it's cloudy, unless you're shooting f2.8.

 

[V8Beast]

I like it. I know what's coming next though. Canon is not going to re-badge a 1D4 as a 7D2 and sell it for $2-2500. We could see the same or similar specs, just not in a 1D fully sealed body. Your idea seems reasonable though.

Nah, I wouldn't expect Canon to build such a body in a 1-series chassis. That would be crazy, although I certainly wouldn't complain if it happened If the 7D2 has the same gripless form factor and similar weather sealing and build quality as the 7D and 5D3, that would be fine by me. Considering that many sports shooters already supplement their 1D4s with 7Ds, I can see a camera like this being wildly popular with both pros and enthusiasts. I know you can get stunningly good results with an APS-C sensor, but fitting an APS-H sensor into the 7D2 would allow Canon to easily address people's noise and IQ complaints of the 7D.

 

[Marsu42]

but fitting an APS-H sensor into the 7D2 would allow Canon to easily address people's noise and IQ complaints of the 7D.

... while voiding all their investments in ef-s lenses and making them join a lynchmob to get Canon. Not all 7d users shoot sports or birds with tele ef lenses, many (at least the guys I see around) are your average well-off customer with a kit lens or maybe 17-55 & ef-s ultrawide. You don't need aps-h to get more iq (noise & dr), see Nikon d7000, released over a year ago.

 

[V8Beast]

... while voiding all their investments in ef-s lenses and making them join a lynchmob to get Canon.

Not really. If the APS-H ever made it into the 7D2, Canon could just make the 70D the successor to 7D. An APS-H 7D2 would create a new niche. Between a 7D-like 70D and all the Rebel models, there would still be a huge market for EF-S lenses. In this scenario, if current 7D users don't like an APS-H 7D2, a 70D would fit their needs well.

Plus, the xxD line has gotten a bit goofy with the 60D. It's more of a higher-priced Rebel than a successor to the 50D. A camera that's like the current 7D, but sold as a 70D, would create a clear distinction between the Rebel and xxD line.

 

[dlleno]

How about this proposal: Canon comes out with an APS-H 7D2, and since it would obviously be more expensive than the prior model, the 70D would fill in the 7D's former price slot. Someone asked me why they should spend the extra money on a 60D over a Rebel a few months ago, and I couldn't come up with a good answer. A greater separation in features between the Rebel and xxD line couldn't hurt.
[/quote

I see the room for an upgraded 7D2, and without regards to what sensor might be used ,the marketing problem still exists: a 70D and a 7D at the same time? as for product differentiation, if Canon thinks there is room for three (7D, xxD, rebel) then 7D2 will have to be more than just an xxD with better focusing and fps. It will have to have some IQ advantage as well. While I'd prefer a 1.3 as you do, there might be room for three lines all at 1.6 -- if they can get the IQ up there. the problem with a 1.3 in a 7D2 is that the number 7 is too high

 

[V8Beast]

I see the room for an upgraded 7D2, and without regards to what sensor might be used ,the marketing problem still exists: a 70D and a 7D at the same time? as for product differentiation, if Canon thinks there is room for three (7D, xxD, rebel) then 7D2 will have to be more than just an xxD with better focusing and fps. It will have to have some IQ advantage as well.

I agree 1000%.

While I'd prefer a 1.3 as you do, there might be room for three lines all at 1.6 -- if they can get the IQ up there. the problem with a 1.3 in a 7D2 is that the number 7 is too high

OK, they can just call it a 6D Canon hasn't yet proven that it can build a APS-C sensor that can go head to head with the D7000. If Canon does, then the APS-H talk is kinda pointless, but then again, stuffing a 1.3 sensor in the 7D2 wouldn't just match but stomp anything Nikon has to offer at that price point.

On a side note, it's refreshing to be speculating on speculating on rumors for something other than the 5D3 for a change

 

[!Xabbu]

I see the room for an upgraded 7D2, and without regards to what sensor might be used ,the marketing problem still exists: a 70D and a 7D at the same time? as for product differentiation, if Canon thinks there is room for three (7D, xxD, rebel) then 7D2 will have to be more than just an xxD with better focusing and fps. It will have to have some IQ advantage as well.

I agree 1000%.

While I'd prefer a 1.3 as you do, there might be room for three lines all at 1.6 -- if they can get the IQ up there. the problem with a 1.3 in a 7D2 is that the number 7 is too high

OK, they can just call it a 6D Canon hasn't yet proven that it can build a APS-C sensor that can go head to head with the D7000. If Canon does, then the APS-H talk is kinda pointless, but then again, stuffing a 1.3 sensor in the 7D2 wouldn't just match but stomp anything Nikon has to offer at that price point.

On a side note, it's refreshing to be speculating on speculating on rumors for something other than the 5D3 for a change

It seems to me like Canon is currently making a lot of money with their current line up. The 7D, 60D and 600D are more or less all the same camera just with different FPS, AF and micro adjust in the 7D. So, it seems to me that there is no marketing problem at all.

As to the APS-H sensor (and I know this might be a stupid question) - will it need a bigger body than the 7D currently has? I feel like most people don't want a brick like the 1D bodies and rather would go with something smaller like the 7D.

+1 to your side note - the 5D III is way out of my price range and hence it's cool to find some discussion around cameras, which I might be able to afford.

 

[D.Sim]

I see the room for an upgraded 7D2, and without regards to what sensor might be used ,the marketing problem still exists: a 70D and a 7D at the same time? as for product differentiation, if Canon thinks there is room for three (7D, xxD, rebel) then 7D2 will have to be more than just an xxD with better focusing and fps. It will have to have some IQ advantage as well.

I agree 1000%.

While I'd prefer a 1.3 as you do, there might be room for three lines all at 1.6 -- if they can get the IQ up there. the problem with a 1.3 in a 7D2 is that the number 7 is too high

OK, they can just call it a 6D Canon hasn't yet proven that it can build a APS-C sensor that can go head to head with the D7000. If Canon does, then the APS-H talk is kinda pointless, but then again, stuffing a 1.3 sensor in the 7D2 wouldn't just match but stomp anything Nikon has to offer at that price point.

On a side note, it's refreshing to be speculating on speculating on rumors for something other than the 5D3 for a change

It seems to me like Canon is currently making a lot of money with their current line up. The 7D, 60D and 600D are more or less all the same camera just with different FPS, AF and micro adjust in the 7D. So, it seems to me that there is no marketing problem at all.

As to the APS-H sensor (and I know this might be a stupid question) - will it need a bigger body than the 7D currently has? I feel like most people don't want a brick like the 1D bodies and rather would go with something smaller like the 7D.

+1 to your side note - the 5D III is way out of my price range and hence it's cool to find some discussion around cameras, which I might be able to afford.

If you can fit an FF sensor into a 5D body, a APSH sensor wouldnt need something *much* bigger than the 7D now. Remove the flash and you have even more space - what with not needing a capacitor.

 

[briansquibb]

I wish that people would stop going on about people's investment in EF-S lens when they are considering upgrading. To hog tie yourself to a specific technology is to put a ceiling on what can be achieved – so why limit yourself to APS-C when it is clearly demonstrable that other technologies can deliver more. APS-C is a budget technology nowadays, technology has moved on and as photographers we should always be aiming for the best.

There is pretty much a consensus about the best glass on the body is the way to go. So people wanting to upgrade their bodies will almost certainly already have a collection of non EF-S lens.

How many really top quality ef-s lens are there to really consider?

- 10-22
- 17-55
- 15-85

???

People upgrade because they want something better than they currently have. What is being discussed in this thread is the IQ improvement, specifically moving from APS-C to APS-H which would give an upgrade path from the current 7D to provide better IQ, better low light performance and higher fps - in other words a super sports body without going down the more expensive (for lens) ff route.

At the moment the lens technology is limiting us, from a budgetary point of view, from delivering a mid-range solution with full frame sensors to get the reach that many want for their photography. As said many times the 1.3 crop APS-H approach is a compromise solution, not the best in anything just very good all round. The 1.3 sensor is much cheaper to produce than ff, so it will be possible to continue for Canon to produce bodies in the price range of the 7D/5DII whilst delivering technological improvements – we already know it would be straight forward for them to deliver high mps sensors (40+)

 

[Marsu42]

The 1.3 sensor is much cheaper to produce than ff, so it will be possible to continue for Canon to produce bodies in the price range of the 7D/5DII whilst delivering technological improvements

They certainly could - but why would they want to? They've got a nice split into an amateur and pro market and can deliver different strategies to them while having the ef-s barrier between them - that's why they made sure you cannot use ef-s on full frame, unlike Nikon dx/fx. As it stands, Canon gains from this split *because* there's no aps-h middle ground, but if you want to improve upon your aps-c sensor, you have to scrap your ef-s lenses and pay big money.

How many really top quality ef-s lens are there to really consider?

You're forgetting the highly regarded Tokina 11-16 & Sigma 8-16, there are other things than Canon out there.

APS-C is a budget technology nowadays, technology has moved on and as photographers we should always be aiming for the best.

Best pictures - yes. Best (i.e. highest) system price and largest cameras - no. If you wanted that, you probably wouldn't be writing here, but sitting behind your 50k$ middle format camera with some 10$k lenses.

I think aps-c is a budget technology because it's made a budget technology - it's still a larger sensor than most system cameras. And while it has the disadvantage of the smaller viewfinder, it does have some advantages over full frame: Easier to build quality ultrawides, smaller bodies because of the smaller mirror. The only point aps-c is so screwed is that the traditional 35mm film uses the so-said full frame format and ef lenses, but that's just a historic fact. With each upgraded sensor generation, for your usual shots there will be less and less need for full frame.

 

[briansquibb]

APS-C is a budget technology nowadays, technology has moved on and as photographers we should always be aiming for the best.

Best pictures - yes. Best (i.e. highest) system price and largest cameras - no. If you wanted that, you probably wouldn't be writing here, but sitting behind your 50k$ middle format camera with some 10$k lenses.

I think aps-c is a budget technology because it's made a budget technology - it's still a larger sensor than most system cameras. And while it has the disadvantage of the smaller viewfinder, it does have some advantages over full frame: Easier to build quality ultrawides, smaller bodies because of the smaller mirror. The only point aps-c is so screwed is that the traditional 35mm film uses the so-said full frame format and ef lenses, but that's just a historic fact. With each upgraded sensor generation, for your usual shots there will be less and less need for full frame.

I have no issue with aps-c, what I am proposing is that Canon fill that ground that is currently being ignored ie the mid range that is between aps-c and ff and give the 7D owners a reasonably priced upgrade path

 

[Marsu42]

I have no issue with aps-c, what I am proposing is that Canon fill that ground that is currently being ignored ie the mid range that is between aps-c and ff and give the 7D owners a reasonably priced upgrade path

That's what I was writing about, too, and a question only Canon marketing looking at their sales stats and research could answer: Why offer a reasonably priced upgrade path if users will take the unreasonably priced one, too, if there is no other one available?

But I'm absolutely in favor of an aps-h model at a somewhat affordable price and would get it over a 7d any moment, but I just don't think it'll happen.

 

[Musouka]

But what if the rumored $2K FF became a reality? Heck the 5D2 is currently selling at $2200.

Surely Canon won't be charging a similar price for an APS-H model, would they? The 7D BO debuted for $1700 and currently retails for around than $1550. Seeing the recent trends in Canon's pricing, a successor would most probably be priced at $1800-$2000.

Maybe that rumored FF is the upgrade path?

 

[briansquibb]

5DII is hardly an upgrade for a sport aps-c where a good AF and fps is required

A aps-h with the same spec as the current 7D - but with the AF, IQ and high iso would be an attractive upgrade.

Think of the L lens Canon would start selling - and also ease the path for dual body ownership

The cost of the body is significantly smaller than the cost of the lens and other acessories

 

[!Xabbu]

But what if the rumored $2K FF became a reality? Heck the 5D2 is currently selling at $2200.

Surely Canon won't be charging a similar price for an APS-H model, would they? The 7D BO debuted for $1700 and currently retails for around than $1550. Seeing the recent trends in Canon's pricing, a successor would most probably be priced at $1800-$2000.

Maybe that rumored FF is the upgrade path?

Yes, it's selling for $2.2K, but it has mediocre FPS and AF. I wouldn't pay that much money for a camera which will miss the shots in lots of situations. If someone is solely a landscape and studio photographer it is of course a great bargain.
However, I would much rather pay between $2K - $2.5K for an improved 7D with an APS-C sensor, which addresses the current issues - better high ISO performance, ... - and some other nice upgrades (like further improved AF, Digic V, ...)

 

[Musouka]

Okay, I made a mistake by mentioning the 5D2 which made you concentrate on it : I apologize for the confusion.

I was mainly talking about the rumored entry level FF camera. Surely, it would have better AF than the current 5D2... maybe even the AF from the 7D. Well, let's wait and see if that ever happens.

 

[Marsu42]

I was mainly talking about the rumored entry level FF camera. Surely, it would have better AF than the current 5D2... maybe even the AF from the 7D. Well, let's wait and see if that ever happens.

If there ever is a successor to the 5d2 as an entry full frame body, Canon will make sure it retains a huge gap to the 5d3. And there aren't too many things that come into mind: Build quality for one, and then af. That's why I guess the entry ff will be a cheaper to produce, tuned down 5d2 with another name and the af of 60d line, not 7d.

 

[takoman46]

5DII is hardly an upgrade for a sport aps-c where a good AF and fps is required

A aps-h with the same spec as the current 7D - but with the AF, IQ and high iso would be an attractive upgrade.

Think of the L lens Canon would start selling - and also ease the path for dual body ownership

The cost of the body is significantly smaller than the cost of the lens and other acessories

I realize there is a lot of concern with 7D owners not knowing what their future will hold in the fields of sport photography... but shouldn't one use a 1DX for sports photography? And if they can't afford a 1DX, the 5D Mark III is also seen as a viable alternative for sports shooting. Especially with another FF body being added to the line up at the entry-level, I don't know if there would be justification to have two more prosumer aps-c bodies above the rebel line. Additionally, they are adding a 1DC to the FF line up as well... So maybe they will still keep an expanded aps-c line around in the future. But at the 7D price point, I think we might be looking at an entry level FF rather than a 7D successor. Maybe the entry level FF will have a decent continuous shooting rate but take cuts on ISO, AF (maybe keeping a 19pt), and IQ and resolution. It might be called a 6D???...

 

[briansquibb]

5DII is hardly an upgrade for a sport aps-c where a good AF and fps is required

A aps-h with the same spec as the current 7D - but with the AF, IQ and high iso would be an attractive upgrade.

Think of the L lens Canon would start selling - and also ease the path for dual body ownership

The cost of the body is significantly smaller than the cost of the lens and other acessories

I realize there is a lot of concern with 7D owners not knowing what their future will hold in the fields of sport photography... but shouldn't one use a 1DX for sports photography? And if they can't afford a 1DX, the 5D Mark III is also seen as a viable alternative for sports shooting. Especially with another FF body being added to the line up at the entry-level, I don't know if there would be justification to have two more prosumer aps-c bodies above the rebel line. Additionally, they are adding a 1DC to the FF line up as well... So maybe they will still keep an expanded aps-c line around in the future. But at the 7D price point, I think we might be looking at an entry level FF rather than a 7D successor. Maybe the entry level FF will have a decent continuous shooting rate but take cuts on ISO, AF (maybe keeping a 19pt), and IQ and resolution. It might be called a 6D???...

I am sure that the 1DX would manage for sports and at a pinch, birding. Not so sure that the 5DIII would be useful for anything more than occasional sports and birding use.

However we then get back to the issue of the lack of reach of a ff and the extra lens you need to achieve the same image.

The simple arithmetic shows that the 500mm:
- 1.6 gives 800mm equivalent
- 1.3 gives 650mm equivalent
- ff gives 500mm equivalent

I cannot imagine that a 7D owner with a 500mm used for birding would want an upgrade that would mean dropping $5k+ for the 1Dx and $10k+ for an 800 - just to take the same pictures. A 7D owner with a 600 would have nowhere to go.

It isn't even as if an 800 can be used with a 1.4 as the 1Dx doesn't support f/8 AF

The gap is very large between a 1.6 and a ff - what I am suggesting is that a 1.3 aps-h in a 5DIII shell would be an easy solution to help bridge that gap. It is proven (and good) technology that would give Canon a mid range sports shooter with significantly better IQ and low light performance than the 7D plus the proven potential to support significantly more mps.