Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]

[roadrunner]

Drives are very cheap. Doing backup of the drives continues to be a stone in the shoe, though

That's what more drives are for.

You're missing the point.

That is why raid 1 was invented, two identical drives that automatically backs itself up to the other.

OK, two misconceptions here:

First, RAID-1 is not "two identical drives that automatically backs itself up to the other". RAID-1 is writing data identically to two drives all the time, producing a "mirrored set" (when reading you don't have to read from both drives). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID#RAID_1

Secondly, RAID is used to protect you against accidental drive crashes (except for RAID-0, where there is no redundancy) and to get very large drive volumes, not to protect against deletions because deletions are recorded on all disks at the same time.

Backup ... is backup! Backup ensures that when you accidentally deleted at file, you can find it and restore it. So using RAID and backup are really orthogonal issues.

The reason that backup is 'expensive' is that it takes a lot of time (and performance out of your system) to rummage through your terabytes storage, and whirling off the changes to your backup platform. It's so expensive in terms of performance and time, that people just don't do full backups all the time, but only during weekends to be able to complete the backup before people come back to work Monday morning.

But yes, this is decidedly outside the 7D2 discussion.

I gave up waiting for the 7D2 last year and went for the 5D3 (I'm still in love with it). But an 7D2 like RLPhoto predicted would be very interesting indeed!
I'm crossing my fingers that Canon have been able to work on the IQ - I was always disappointed with the 'mushy' pictures from my 50D, and my friends' 7D was no better.

Great explanation. I was just getting ready to type up my response, but then I saw your's, and it hits all of the important points spot on.

TL;DR version: Raid provides redundancy, not a backup. Redundancy and backups are very different, and are not a replacement for one another. I run my file server in RAID5, and conduct weekly backups.

 

[Don Haines]

TL;DR version: Raid provides redundancy, not a backup. Redundancy and backups are very different, and are not a replacement for one another. I run my file server in RAID5, and conduct weekly backups.

And might I add have an offsite backup. If your home burns down or thieves take your computer, and your backup is sitting attached to your computer, it's gone too.

more to the real topic.... I really hope the 7D2 is out by the end of the year, but if they announce early next year then that probably means spring. It might happen sooner because once the 70D comes out, sales of the 7D will flatline.

 

[roadrunner]

TL;DR version: Raid provides redundancy, not a backup. Redundancy and backups are very different, and are not a replacement for one another. I run my file server in RAID5, and conduct weekly backups.

And might I add have an offsite backup. If your home burns down or thieves take your computer, and your backup is sitting attached to your computer, it's gone too.

more to the real topic.... I really hope the 7D2 is out by the end of the year, but if they announce early next year then that probably means spring. It might happen sooner because once the 70D comes out, sales of the 7D will flatline.

Another great point. Something I slack on a little bit. They're so darn inconvenient. Still, I run a hard drive over to my parent's house every month or two (Sometimes three... Not enough, I know) and store it there in a fireproof safe. Better than nothing I suppose.

 

[schill]

TL;DR version: Raid provides redundancy, not a backup. Redundancy and backups are very different, and are not a replacement for one another. I run my file server in RAID5, and conduct weekly backups.

And might I add have an offsite backup. If your home burns down or thieves take your computer, and your backup is sitting attached to your computer, it's gone too.

more to the real topic.... I really hope the 7D2 is out by the end of the year, but if they announce early next year then that probably means spring. It might happen sooner because once the 70D comes out, sales of the 7D will flatline.

Another great point. Something I slack on a little bit. They're so darn inconvenient. Still, I run a hard drive over to my parent's house every month or two (Sometimes three... Not enough, I know) and store it there in a fireproof safe. Better than nothing I suppose.

I keep backup drives in a couple places, including a safe deposit box at my bank. It's fairly cheap at under $50 a year.

 

[Marsu42]

The question is, is the 7DII supposed to be a consumer camera? If yes, why should Canon put their 61-point pro AF system in a consumer camera - as many are asking here. And if not, why should Canon appeal to consumers with a (noisy) 24mp sensor.

Answer: Because Canons wants to maximize profits, as any company, and Canon is the market leader by selling volume with broad appeal and not by producing niche products (aps-h anyone? ).

So at the same time they will want to put enough consumer features into the 7d2 to make vanilla amateurs upgrade even if a 70d would do just fine (= more mp on 7d, fw features, gimmicks), and give a good reason for enthusiasts/semi-pros to upgrade even if they know some $$$ is better invested in lenses (= much better af on 7d).

As for the 61pt system, I don't think Canon will go Nikon like d4->7100, but they'll engineer something between the 7d1 and 5d3 to protect their ff cameras.

 

[Diko]

<div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"\">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Lots of talk


</strong>There is lots of talk about the successor to the Canon EOS 7D. For the last 6 months we have written that the EOS 70D would move up rung in features in the EOS lineup, as such the EOS 7D Mark II will be doing the same thing.</p>
<p>We’re told two possible sensors are in play for the EOS 7D Mark II, the 20.2mp sensor in the 70D and a 24.1mp sensor that has yet to see the light of day. If they want separation with the EOS 7D Mark II and to charge a premium for it, I think moving beyond the sensor that will appear in the next Rebel, an EOS M camera and the EOS 70D is a good idea.</p>
<p><strong>When is it coming?


</strong>It will not be shipping before the end of 2013, there is a possibility of an announcement before the year is out, but I’d say that is unlikely at this time. Timing could also depend on what Nikon is going to be doing with the D400. We’ve been told for ages that the EOS 7D Mark II will be an early 2014 camera.</p>
<p>We’re also told that 2 new “pro” bodies will arrive in 2014, and that doesn’t include the EOS 7D Mark II, which will be a pro specced APS-C camera.</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>

Is it just me or CR stated nothing new as a rumor...? He maybe ONLY updated the trustworthiness of what he already told us?

 

[Marsu42]

Is it just me or CR stated nothing new as a rumor...? He maybe ONLY updated the trustworthiness of what he already told us?

Hey, give the CR guy some credit, with a company as secretive as Canon it's hard to do regular updates on a rumor site (except for amazing deals with affiliated stores and pre-order possibilities) :->

The question is, is the 7DII supposed to be a consumer camera? If yes, why should Canon put their 61-point pro AF system in a consumer camera - as many are asking here. And if not, why should Canon appeal to consumers with a (noisy) 24mp sensor.

Answer: Because Canons wants to maximize profits, as any company, and Canon is the market leader by selling volume with broad appeal and not by producing niche products (aps-h anyone? ).

So at the same time they will want to put enough consumer features into the 7d2 to make vanilla amateurs upgrade even if a 70d would do just fine (= more mp on 7d, fw features, gimmicks), and give a good reason for enthusiasts/semi-pros to upgrade even if they know some $$$ is better invested in lenses (= much better af on 7d).

As for the 61pt system, I don't think Canon will go Nikon like d4->7100, but they'll engineer something between the 7d1 and 5d3 to protect their ff cameras.

 

[Lawliet]

As for the 61pt system, I don't think Canon will go Nikon like d4->7100, but they'll engineer something between the 7d1 and 5d3 to protect their ff cameras.

I'm not sure how much that matters any more - for most uses, high fps or high precision, a Hybrid/PDAF via image sensor is conceptually superior, just add enough computing power. That goes hand in hand with the requirements of the video market of the coming years. That 61pt system is on a course to niche market/secondary feature, its more a question whether its the next generation or the one after.

 

[jrista]

As for the 61pt system, I don't think Canon will go Nikon like d4->7100, but they'll engineer something between the 7d1 and 5d3 to protect their ff cameras.

I'm not sure how much that matters any more - for most uses, high fps or high precision, a Hybrid/PDAF via image sensor is conceptually superior, just add enough computing power. That goes hand in hand with the requirements of the video market of the coming years. That 61pt system is on a course to niche market/secondary feature, its more a question whether its the next generation or the one after.

With the exception that you can't use the sensor when you have an optical viewfinder. If you use the viewfinder, and expect it to be optical and not electronic (even the BEST EVFs are pitiful in comparison to an OVF), then the only option is to have a dedicated AF unit that works in concert with a viewfinder and main mirror. I wouldn't call that a niche market, either...any serious or professional photographer who relies on actual real-time update and large, full-detail viewfinder won't be moving to EVF any time soon. There is just plain and simply no replacement for a prism.

 

[privatebydesign]

"So if anybody has a set of hand held, AF'd, >400iso, wide open aperture, focal length limited images from a 7D and a 5D MkII/1Ds MkIII, please, post them, I'd be interested to see how much different than my results yours are."

Interesting, despite the vilification of me, not one person has ever replied to this challenge either in this thread or any other. After I did the real world tests, that wouldn't stand up to scrutiny here, I concluded that the over twice the pixels the crop camera put on the subject amounted to an insignificant, in normal use, difference in resolution.

That is why I didn't buy a 7D and have zero interest in a >18mp APS-C or >25mp FF sensor, I actually did the tests, no theoretical posturing to the crowds, and realised for me, and probably 95% of other users, there is no practical benefit. Sure I'll enjoy the improved iso performance and increases in DR and other performance metrics, but MP, you can keep them.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15785.msg289316#msg289316
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15785.msg289013#msg289013

 

[jrista]

"So if anybody has a set of hand held, AF'd, >400iso, wide open aperture, focal length limited images from a 7D and a 5D MkII/1Ds MkIII, please, post them, I'd be interested to see how much different than my results yours are."

Interesting, despite the vilification of me, not one person has ever replied to this challenge either in this thread or any other. After I did the real world tests, that wouldn't stand up to scrutiny here, I concluded that the over twice the pixels the crop camera put on the subject amounted to an insignificant, in normal use, difference in resolution.

That is why I didn't buy a 7D and have zero interest in a >18mp APS-C or >25mp FF sensor, I actually did the tests, no theoretical posturing to the crowds, and realised for me, and probably 95% of other users, there is no practical benefit. Sure I'll enjoy the improved iso performance and increases in DR and other performance metrics, but MP, you can keep them.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15785.msg289316#msg289316
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15785.msg289013#msg289013

Hmm. In your first link, I don't see any comparison images either. In the second link, the same image you posted before, personally I see quite a difference between the two. Now, we are talking about pixels here...on a pixel scale, the 7D IS about TWICE as sharp as the 1D III. If you compare the finest strand of the brush from the 7D image, which is only a couple pixels in diameter, the same thing in the 1D III is very soft, and blurred by another couple of pixels. That is an improvement of nearly a factor of two. The larger pixels of the FF help offset the spatial resolution loss, less noise/higher SNR, but unless you have a really terrible screen or something, I don't think there is any denying that the 7D photo in your second link is markedly sharper and clearer than the 1D III.

That may not be enough for you, but take the situation to a greater extreme...photographing birds from a greater distance. That extra resolution edge of the 7D gives you an edge over the 1D III, and DOES produce sharper images. If Canon ever releases a 47mp or greater FF camera that can do 6-7fps, I'll HAPPILY trade in my 7D, as the FF would then provide just as much or more reach, as well as the ability to get even MORE pixels on subject when you are not focal length limited. Simple fact of the matter, though, is your own example, on my calibrated Apple CinemaDisplay 30" screen, clearly appears meaningfully sharper to me. Given that, what all of this really boils down to is a matter of opinion and preference. You prefer FF, and the loss of detail does not bother you. I prefer getting as many pixels as I can, and putting as many of those pixels on my subject as I possibly can, and prefer APS-C in focal length limited situations because it does that job better than any current FF camera.

 

[privatebydesign]

Do you know the difference between a 1D MkIII and a 1Ds MkIII, because you never seem to be talking about the correct camera?

 

[Lawliet]

...any serious or professional photographer who relies on actual real-time update and large, full-detail viewfinder won't be moving to EVF any time soon. There is just plain and simply no replacement for a prism.

Wouldn't a serious photographer know the benefits of a waist level finder and consider the prism a technical detail rather then a dogma? The viewfinder of a 1Dx feels rather tiny compared to a 645, and don't even think about anything large. And if one compares the mandatory ~40ms release lag to the less then 10ms you can get electronically...
Guess it will take some time for the pros who now shoot tethered and use the computers screen as VF to accept anything else then a prism.
Just think of switchable glass, a surface that changes from clear to mirror depending on a static voltage applied to it, that allows for a hybrid viewfinder with a user selectable blending ratio. You'd still be limited in VF size though.

 

[jrista]

Do you know the difference between a 1D MkIII and a 1Ds MkIII, because you never seem to be talking about the correct camera?

I know the difference, I'm just being lazy. The 1Ds III is the studio full frame. Whether I spell the name right or not, the comparison was between a 21mp FF and an 18mp APS-C, a point I was quite clear on, and the difference IS clear...the 7D is definitely sharper, and enough so that it is easily visible.

 

[jrista]

...any serious or professional photographer who relies on actual real-time update and large, full-detail viewfinder won't be moving to EVF any time soon. There is just plain and simply no replacement for a prism.

Wouldn't a serious photographer know the benefits of a waist level finder and consider the prism a technical detail rather then a dogma? The viewfinder of a 1Dx feels rather tiny compared to a 645, and don't even think about anything large. And if one compares the mandatory ~40ms release lag to the less then 10ms you can get electronically...
Guess it will take some time for the pros who now shoot tethered and use the computers screen as VF to accept anything else then a prism.
Just think of switchable glass, a surface that changes from clear to mirror depending on a static voltage applied to it, that allows for a hybrid viewfinder with a user selectable blending ratio. You'd still be limited in VF size though.

Well, you've switched contexts from sports to studio photography, where use of a tethered laptop or computer is quite normal. The original context was sports and action photography, where the OVF and a dedicated AF unit still rules as king.

I would take my tethered Surface Pro any day over an EVF, though. There was a thread a while back where I computed the necessary pixel densities to make an EVF screen be high enough resolution for the average 20/20 viewer at a 25mm eye relief such that pixels were invisible. For 20/20 vision, you would need just over 5000ppi. To accomodate users who have better vision, or users such as myself who have 20/10 vision with contacts, you would need an insane 12,000ppi. With the average size of a viewfinder, 5000ppi is pushing the limit of how small pixels can be and still be transparent to light. At 12000ppi, you are already cutting off the longer frequencies of light, and therefor only able to pass greens, blues, and violets. And that isn't even touching DR, or the fact that even if the EVF supports high bit depth it is still limited by the camera's DR.

The day will never come when an EVF (or, for that matter, a tethered laptop screen) becomes superior to an optical view finder for action photography. There is no substitute for a truly real-time, high resolution, bright, optical prism based viewfinder. For action. Studio work is a different matter, but as you say, people have been tethering and using huge screens for a very long time in that industry, so they still have a superior tool than an EVF.

Not really sure what you mean about switchable glass. Sounds like you are talking about the piezoelectric effect, however I am not really sure how that is much different than what Canon already has with their transmissive LCD that overlays their current viewfinders. It is fairly simple right now, but there is no reason Canon couldn't drop a whole ton of information into that screen with a selectable mode button...imagine seeing the histogram as black bars in the viewfinder...or the electronic level...or, any amount of information you desire, and still always have full use of the OVF.

 

[Marsu42]

I'm not sure how much that matters any more - for most uses, high fps or high precision, a Hybrid/PDAF via image sensor is conceptually superior, just add enough computing power. That goes hand in hand with the requirements of the video market of the coming years.

Agreed, but there is a medium volume conservative dslr market (many of the forum users here are part of it) of people that are either pro and thus hesitant to break their successful habits or old-school enthusiasts that wouldn't touch a evf with a ten-foot pole. This group will keep demanding traditional dslrs for the next decade and pay (nearly) any price premium, so Canon will be careful to shape and deliver to this market.

 

[privatebydesign]

...any serious or professional photographer who relies on actual real-time update and large, full-detail viewfinder won't be moving to EVF any time soon. There is just plain and simply no replacement for a prism.

Wouldn't a serious photographer know the benefits of a waist level finder and consider the prism a technical detail rather then a dogma? The viewfinder of a 1Dx feels rather tiny compared to a 645, and don't even think about anything large. And if one compares the mandatory ~40ms release lag to the less then 10ms you can get electronically...
Guess it will take some time for the pros who now shoot tethered and use the computers screen as VF to accept anything else then a prism.
Just think of switchable glass, a surface that changes from clear to mirror depending on a static voltage applied to it, that allows for a hybrid viewfinder with a user selectable blending ratio. You'd still be limited in VF size though.

There are many full time pros using EVF's, Ctein and Kirk Tuck are very prominent ones that springs to mind. Neither is sponsored by any camera manufacturer and are both pro EVF's and have written many articles on their blogs pointing out how good they are. Ctein might not need ultrafast refresh, but Kirk Tuck is a very active general shooter often in theaters and poorly lite events. Not saying EVF's are for everybody, but blanket statements like jrista's are clearly unsupportable and easily shown to be false.

As an individual I can well understand

 

[privatebydesign]

Do you know the difference between a 1D MkIII and a 1Ds MkIII, because you never seem to be talking about the correct camera?

I know the difference, I'm just being lazy. The 1Ds III is the studio full frame. Whether I spell the name right or not, the comparison was between a 21mp FF and an 18mp APS-C, a point I was quite clear on, and the difference IS clear...the 7D is definitely sharper, and enough so that it is easily visible.

Yet you often pull other people up for being imprecise, it is certainly difficult to take people that are being lazy seriously.

However, my example was stage managed to show the biggest difference possible between the two. You don't need a 30" anything to view my 700px 100% crop. Further, when printed there is zero difference.

Now, do you have any example images that demonstrate your assertions or not?

 

[Don Haines]

...any serious or professional photographer who relies on actual real-time update and large, full-detail viewfinder won't be moving to EVF any time soon. There is just plain and simply no replacement for a prism.

Wouldn't a serious photographer know the benefits of a waist level finder and consider the prism a technical detail rather then a dogma? The viewfinder of a 1Dx feels rather tiny compared to a 645, and don't even think about anything large. And if one compares the mandatory ~40ms release lag to the less then 10ms you can get electronically...
Guess it will take some time for the pros who now shoot tethered and use the computers screen as VF to accept anything else then a prism.
Just think of switchable glass, a surface that changes from clear to mirror depending on a static voltage applied to it, that allows for a hybrid viewfinder with a user selectable blending ratio. You'd still be limited in VF size though.

There are many full time pros using EVF's, Ctein and Kirk Tuck are very prominent ones that springs to mind. Neither is sponsored by any camera manufacturer and are both pro EVF's and have written many articles on their blogs pointing out how good they are. Ctein might not need ultrafast refresh, but Kirk Tuck is a very active general shooter often in theaters and poorly lite events. Not saying EVF's are for everybody, but blanket statements like jrista's are clearly unsupportable and easily shown to be false.

As an individual I can well understand

I am most definitly not a pro, but I do have an SX-50 with an electronic viewfinder. I find that it works suprisingly well in daylight, but at night it is patheticly bad. Perhaps the day will come when they are as good, or even exceed an OVF, but I don't think we are there yet... certainly not with the SX-50...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Now, do you have any example images that demonstrate your assertions or not?

I'd like to see that, as well. But only as a comparison between APS-C and FF...not just how sharp a shot with the 7D can be.

I recall a couple of posts by AlanF, where he performed mathematical calculations to determine the theoretical resolution advantage of the 7D over the 6D, followed by shots of a feather with his 7D and 300/2.8L IS II + 2xIII, showing how the image approached the theoretical limit of resolution, concluding that the 7D must outresolve the 6D.

Then he got himself a 5DIII and compared the real world performance of the two. He found that despite his earlier theoretical predictions and testing (testing only the 7D), the IQ of the cropped 5DIII image was equivalent to the 7D. I found the same thing with my 1D X and 600 II, which is why I eventually sold the 7D (that, and the higher hit rate with the better AF system).

My conclusion matches that of PBD - when looking at real world images, the 'extra reach' of the APS-C sensor is an illusion, provided that the cropped image from the FF sensor gives you sufficient resolution for your desired output format. Plus, that applies only at low ISO - at high ISO (>800), the IQ advantage of the cropped FF image progressively surpasses the APS-C image as the ISO increases.