Canon 7Dmk2 any rumors??

[dlleno]

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.

exactly, +1 on that. its hard to imagine Canon abandoning the the crop body for serious wildlife. I mean beyond the current xxD line which is basically an upscale rebel. Just because Canon's announcement implied that the 1D4 would rest, doesn't mean the 1.3 is going away or that Canon would abandon the pro level wildlife photographers. What form that will take is the question - I'm not convinced that will be a 7D2 but I would certainly cheer if it was! Speaking of upselling though -- a 1.3 7D would be quite an upsell for the recreational wildlifers. Do you see the 1D4 crowd migrating to a body named higher than 1?

 

[briansquibb]

exactly, +1 on that. its hard to imagine Canon abandoning the the crop body for serious wildlife. I mean beyond the current xxD line which is basically an upscale rebel. Just because Canon's announcement implied that the 1D4 would rest, doesn't mean the 1.3 is going away or that Canon would abandon the pro level wildlife photographers. What form that will take is the question - I'm not convinced that will be a 7D2 but I would certainly cheer if it was! Speaking of upselling though -- a 1.3 7D would be quite an upsell for the recreational wildlifers. Do you see the 1D4 crowd migrating to a body named higher than 1?

I think if the specs were right then they would move - 3D sounds good. Imagine a 1D4 with 22mps - the video would be great as well.

 

[smirkypants]

I think if the specs were right then they would move - 3D sounds good. Imagine a 1D4 with 22mps - the video would be great as well.

Definitely. With the 5D3 there are plenty of former 1D-something users "downgrading." Most people who are sophisticated enough to buy a series 1 camera know enough to look at features not model numbers. How many studio photographers are really going to purchase a 1D something over a 5D3? The answer is, not that many. Just show me the specs and I can make up my mind. Hell, if it shot 8fps, a 1.6 crop and in all other ways matched the 5D3, I'd buy it even if it were named after a male sex organ.

 

[briansquibb]

I think if the specs were right then they would move - 3D sounds good. Imagine a 1D4 with 22mps - the video would be great as well.

Definitely. With the 5D3 there are plenty of former 1D-something users "downgrading." Most people who are sophisticated enough to buy a series 1 camera know enough to look at features not model numbers. How many studio photographers are really going to purchase a 1D something over a 5D3? The answer is, not that many. Just show me the specs and I can make up my mind. Hell, if it shot 8fps, a 1.6 crop and in all other ways matched the 5D3, I'd buy it even if it were named after a male sex organ.

History shows that many 1DS2 shooters moved to the 5DII instead of the 1DS3.

However the serious BIF shooters on the whole will go for the best rather than the cheapest

 

[dlleno]

exactly, +1 on that. its hard to imagine Canon abandoning the the crop body for serious wildlife. I mean beyond the current xxD line which is basically an upscale rebel. Just because Canon's announcement implied that the 1D4 would rest, doesn't mean the 1.3 is going away or that Canon would abandon the pro level wildlife photographers. What form that will take is the question - I'm not convinced that will be a 7D2 but I would certainly cheer if it was! Speaking of upselling though -- a 1.3 7D would be quite an upsell for the recreational wildlifers. Do you see the 1D4 crowd migrating to a body named higher than 1?

I think if the specs were right then they would move - 3D sounds good. Imagine a 1D4 with 22mps - the video would be great as well.

+1 the hesitancy might come if Canon really does abandon the 1.3 and a 1.6x 7D2 becomes the only wildlife body. But we haven't seen any real evidence that 1.3 is going away -- only that 1D and 1Ds are merging, which means a 1.3 could still appear in a different model. I like the 3D suggestion in fact.

This would leave the 7D as the premium 1.6x wildlife body, and the xxD as the premium rebel. I have to admit, having suggested that 7D would be confusing with 70D, that 1D and 1Ds didn't seem to cause any undo discomfort, save the fact that they are merging now

 

[!Xabbu]

exactly, +1 on that. its hard to imagine Canon abandoning the the crop body for serious wildlife. I mean beyond the current xxD line which is basically an upscale rebel. Just because Canon's announcement implied that the 1D4 would rest, doesn't mean the 1.3 is going away or that Canon would abandon the pro level wildlife photographers. What form that will take is the question - I'm not convinced that will be a 7D2 but I would certainly cheer if it was! Speaking of upselling though -- a 1.3 7D would be quite an upsell for the recreational wildlifers. Do you see the 1D4 crowd migrating to a body named higher than 1?

I think if the specs were right then they would move - 3D sounds good. Imagine a 1D4 with 22mps - the video would be great as well.

+1 the hesitancy might come if Canon really does abandon the 1.3 and a 1.6x 7D2 becomes the only wildlife body. But we haven't seen any real evidence that 1.3 is going away -- only that 1D and 1Ds are merging, which means a 1.3 could still appear in a different model. I like the 3D suggestion in fact.

This would leave the 7D as the premium 1.6x wildlife body, and the xxD as the premium rebel. I have to admit, having suggested that 7D would be confusing with 70D, that 1D and 1Ds didn't seem to cause any undo discomfort, save the fact that they are merging now

It seems to me like Canon is nowhere close to the limit of APS-C sensors. Nikon's equivalent sensors give better high ISO noise, more dynamic range and overall higher quality than the Canon equivalent.

It's like the D800 - a lot of people would have said that you need an MF camera to get such good image quality, but better technology proofed them wrong. I believe that advances in APS-C technology will be able to bring the IQ closer to today's FF sensors.

 

[briansquibb]

It seems to me like Canon is nowhere close to the limit of APS-C sensors. Nikon's equivalent sensors give better high ISO noise, more dynamic range and overall higher quality than the Canon equivalent.

It's like the D800 - a lot of people would have said that you need an MF camera to get such good image quality, but better technology proofed them wrong. I believe that advances in APS-C technology will be able to bring the IQ closer to today's FF sensors.

Just remember that the Nikon APS-C has a bigger sensor than Canon

D800 is nowhere near a MF yet - rather like saying the a crop gives as good image quality as ff. High mps does not directly equate to high IQ

 

[stilscream]

Nikon uses 1.5 crop vs 1.6 Canon uses, so larger sensor creates the differences in ISO noise reduction.

 

[!Xabbu]

It seems to me like Canon is nowhere close to the limit of APS-C sensors. Nikon's equivalent sensors give better high ISO noise, more dynamic range and overall higher quality than the Canon equivalent.

It's like the D800 - a lot of people would have said that you need an MF camera to get such good image quality, but better technology proofed them wrong. I believe that advances in APS-C technology will be able to bring the IQ closer to today's FF sensors.

Just remember that the Nikon APS-C has a bigger sensor than Canon

D800 is nowhere near a MF yet - rather like saying the a crop gives as good image quality as ff. High mps does not directly equate to high IQ

OK, I wasn't aware of that - however, it seems like Nikon gets better IQ out of their 1.5 crop than Canon did out of FF -> see http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_II-vs-Nikon_D7000.

So, crop apparently already caught up with older FF.

 

[Marsu42]

however, it seems like Nikon gets better IQ out of their 1.5 crop than Canon did out of FF. So, crop apparently already caught up with older FF.

I wouldn't really cite a computer generated comparison as a reliable source :-o ... esp. I really doubt the advantage of the d7000 in dynamic range (at which iso???) because it seems you can recover more dr out of Canon raw files than from Nikon. The noise comparison doesn't say what iso they tested or how it was averaged, that could have given you some doubt...

 

[unfocused]

Nikon Rumors is reporting that the D3200 will be announced within the next 24 hours, with a 24 mp sensor. This is, of course, a Rebel equivalent.

Canon likes to hand down sensor technology from the top of the line (7D) to the lower levels. Nikon seems to be less concerned about that. Honestly, I'm not excited about a 24mp sensor (I'd rather Canon stick with 18-20 mp and improve ISO and dynamic range), but given the rave reviews that the D800 seems to be getting, it will be interesting to see how this 24mp sensor performs in comparison to Canon's current APS-C sensor.

Competition is good, so it will be fun to see how Canon reacts. I don't anticipate a new 7D until Photokina. This will give Canon at least four months to dissect the new Nikon sensor and figure out how to best it. I'm hoping Nikon has really raised the bar.

I can't wait to see how much APS-C sensor technology has advanced since the release of the 7D nearly three years ago. This new Nikon should give us an idea about that.

 

[Marsu42]

Nikon Rumors is reporting that the D3200 will be announced within the next 24 hours, with a 24 mp sensor. This is, of course, a Rebel equivalent.

I really hope this gives "double the price for everything" Canon such a kick in the a** that they either quit the race or get a grip - a affordable full frame successor to the 5d2 might be a good start, and I recently read in this forum that Canon's techs seem to have something in mind if the d800 keeps selling.

 

[!Xabbu]

however, it seems like Nikon gets better IQ out of their 1.5 crop than Canon did out of FF. So, crop apparently already caught up with older FF.

I wouldn't really cite a computer generated comparison as a reliable source :-o ... esp. I really doubt the advantage of the d7000 in dynamic range (at which iso???) because it seems you can recover more dr out of Canon raw files than from Nikon. The noise comparison doesn't say what iso they tested or how it was averaged, that could have given you some doubt...

The computer generated comparison uses DxO results as a basis for the analysis. Many people seem to consider DxO to be a reliable source. DR will most likely be done at ISO 100 and a better RAW file format doesn't replace a better sensor. Anyway, my point is that we'll definitely see an APS-C sensor in - let's say 5 years - that will have a much better performance than for example the 5D II.

Overall, I believe that a modern APS-C is already much better than an old FF (like for example the 5D) - and this development will keep on going.

 

[briansquibb]

Overall, I believe that a modern APS-C is already much better than an old FF (like for example the 5D) - and this development will keep on going.

I would put my 1Ds3 up against a 7D - especially at iso1600

 

[Marsu42]

Anyway, my point is that we'll definitely see an APS-C sensor in - let's say 5 years - that will have a much better performance than for example the 5D II.

No doubt at all about this - actually, this is what I've been saying again and again. The only question is how much the ff technology advances at the same time and if it is able to keep the distance to aps-c in noise and dynamic range and if the cpu tech in 5 years will allow your average ff body to take pictures with 10fps, too.

For the average photog, I think the point has been already reached when a ff sensor does not deliver any serious advantage for your average shots at ok lighting. When I recover highlights from raw (that's why I have insisted on this) and shoot at up to iso 400, I can hardly say anything negative about the iq from my 60d and there are very few shots in between when I find it really lacking.

 

[dlleno]

Nikon Rumors is reporting that the D3200 will be announced within the next 24 hours, with a 24 mp sensor. This is, of course, a Rebel equivalent.

Canon likes to hand down sensor technology from the top of the line (7D) to the lower levels. Nikon seems to be less concerned about that. Honestly, I'm not excited about a 24mp sensor (I'd rather Canon stick with 18-20 mp and improve ISO and dynamic range), but given the rave reviews that the D800 seems to be getting, it will be interesting to see how this 24mp sensor performs in comparison to Canon's current APS-C sensor.

Competition is good, so it will be fun to see how Canon reacts. I don't anticipate a new 7D until Photokina. This will give Canon at least four months to dissect the new Nikon sensor and figure out how to best it. I'm hoping Nikon has really raised the bar.

I can't wait to see how much APS-C sensor technology has advanced since the release of the 7D nearly three years ago. This new Nikon should give us an idea about that.

+1. I think Canon is getting serious wake up call and swift kick in the pants from the competition. A high-performance 1.6 would be awesome. Because of pixel density I don't see the 1.6 ever approaching the larger sensors in noise/ISO at least at the same technology cycle. But as the technology improves, all formats will benefit. Rather than handing stuff down, though it seems the other way to me: what they learn in the crops appears in the larger sensors at lower pixel densities with improved IQ.

 

[briansquibb]

+1. I think Canon is getting serious wake up call and swift kick in the pants from the competition. A high-performance 1.6 would be awesome. Because of pixel density I don't see the 1.6 ever approaching the larger sensors in noise/ISO at least at the same technology cycle. But as the technology improves, all formats will benefit. Rather than handing stuff down, though it seems the other way to me: what they learn in the crops appears in the larger sensors at lower pixel densities with improved IQ.

So back to the 30mps 1.3 which would frighten Noink

 

[unfocused]

Rather than handing stuff down, though it seems the other way to me: what they learn in the crops appears in the larger sensors at lower pixel densities with improved IQ.

Sorry, imprecise writing on my part.

I just meant that Canon tends to introduce its latest and greatest sensors in the most expensive bodies and then hand that sensor down to less expensive. 7D to 60D to T3i for example. I agree that they are no doubt using what they learn with smaller sensor technologies and applying those lessons to bigger sensors. In fact, I suspect that the APS-C sensor has benefited from lessons learned in the point and shoots.

 

[Marsu42]

I just meant that Canon tends to introduce its latest and greatest sensors in the most expensive bodies and then hand that sensor down to less expensive. 7D to 60D to T3i for example.

I thought so, too, until I was told better - and now I can correct you ... the 18mp sensor was 7d to t2i to 60d to t3i (see http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_rumours.html#canon_age_chart) and before that, Canon introduced new sensors not only "trickle down" but when it suited them marketing-wise or they had the tech ready to go.

 

[dlleno]

yea with three different 1.6x crop bodies they have a lot of choices and can put a given sensor in whatever body that makes sense to their bottom line. I'm more interested, not so much in which part number appears in which body (although that is interesting, to be sure) , but what is the technology lifecycle of the sensor in the body and how the technology learnings cross the C-H-FF boundaries. With the volumes of 1.6x bodies flying off the shelves Canon has a good proving ground for studying the artifacts of pixel density,and then to apply those learnings to the larger sensors.