Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]

[pierlux]

*UPDATE 2*
The battery does help a camera body autofocus an EF lens faster.
From Chuck Westfall… “In addition, the EOS-1D X achieves a higher lens motor drive speed with select L-series USM telephoto lenses than the 5D Mark III because of the 1D X’s more powerful battery pack.”

Exactly, power, i.e. V x A = W.

1 x LP-E4N is 11.1 V x 2450 mAh = 27.195 W
2 x LP-E6 is 7.2 V x 1600 mAh x 2 = 23.040 W

27 W vs. 23 W, not much of a difference, but it's there.

You missed the point, battery capacity has little effect, its the current driving the lens motor, and that is based on the voltage and resistance using ohm's law E=IR.

Given the same internal resistance of the lens motor, the current would be about 11.1/7.2 times larger or 1.52 times as much current going thru the motor. Presumably the internal resistance of the bigger battery is lower, so it would have little effect.

That will drive the motor much faster.

I don't think I'm missing the point, the point is the lens motor is powered neither at 11.1 V nor at 7.2 V. It is powered at a voltage which I don't know, but which is undoubtedly the same whichever body you are using whith whatever battery voltage/number of batteries you are using. The lens is NOT powered directly from the battery, but from a circuit which delivers constant voltage whichever body/battery combo you are using.

Sure, the internal resistance of a big battery is lower than that of a smaller one, but resistance comes to play only when you exceed a certain current absorption from the battery so that the battery itself is no longer able to supply the nominal voltage. When you read the battery specs, say, 7.2 V - 1600 mAh, the internal resistance of the battery has already been taken into account, you don't have to worry about that. And when the battery performace declines, it is exactly the battery's internal resistance which increases, giving you a lower voltage even at a low current absorption.

When you're using your camera, you're draining power from the battery which is generally lower than the max power the battery is capable of delivering, otherwise I would claim bad engineering. That's why we are discussing about the possibility for the 7DII to drive simultaneously a big lens AF and IS plus a 12+ fps burst either with a big batt or two smaller ones. But, again, it's a matter of power (W), not simply voltage alone, or current alone. Should only voltage matter, nothing would prevent a camera maker to equip their products with 24 V or 36 V power supplies...

 

[Loswr]

I don't think I'm missing the point, the point is the lens motor is powered neither at 11.1 V nor at 7.2 V. It is powered at a voltage which I don't know, but which is undoubtedly the same whichever body you are using whith whatever battery voltage/number of batteries you are using. The lens is NOT powered directly from the battery, but from a circuit which delivers constant voltage whichever body/battery combo you are using.

If the lens motor was receiving the same power from a 1D X and a 7D, then the AF speed for the lens would be the same with both bodies. But it's not, it's faster with the 1D X.

Could it be firmware trickery on the part of Canon, the 7D delivers the same power as the 1D X, but the 7D just tells the lens to AF slower? Possible, I suppose...but that seems a little too cynical, even for me.

 

[sagittariansrock]

I think this would be a game changer IF it comes in under $2.5k.

It almost certainly will not be that cheap. I'd expect a camera that's billed as a 'mini 1D X' to be priced in the $3500-$4000 range.

That sounds about right on the price. Although it really depends on features. If it has new sensor tech that is very impressive, I could see it coming in over $4k. Rehash of the same sensor technology, but with 1DX AF system, great weather sealing, maybe 24 MP, then ~$3k.

From a structure standpoint it would put the 5DIII and the 7DII beneath the 1Dx at about the same price point with the 5DIII being FF aimed at event and portrait photographers and the 7DII being aimed at sport/wildlife photographers.

I don't feel that distinction will be possible any more with the 5DIII having a decent burst rate and excellent AF system. When Canon had 1DIV and 5DII as the second tier below 1DsIII, then 5DII aimed at event and portrait and 1DIV aimed at sports/wildlife made sense. But now, people will probably not favor a 1.6 crop priced higher if they can get the 5DIII to work for sports/wildlife reasonably while being excellent for event/portrait, all the time being cheaper.

There are both pros and cons of the 7DII being a mini-1Dx to me, the former involving better ergonomics and the latter mostly involving size/weight and price. However, if 70D fills the niche of an advanced general-purpose APS-C body and pushes 7DII to a pro body exclusively for sports and wildlife, I am fine with that. All I care about is the current 7D setup (all of it) with good performance at high ISOs.
Except, it feels like a step backwards- what will Canon achieve with a low-light capable, excellent AF, fast frame-rate APS-C body- didn't they have all that in an APS-H body in the 1DIV already? What can be gained additionally other than the ability to use EF-S lenses?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Just a crazy thought, but could Canon produce a camera without battery grip that uses the LP-E6 battery at 7.2V, and have an optional battery grip which uses the LP-E4N battery at 11.1V? That way the people that desire a smaller camera, with a battery interchangable with their 5D3 and 7D are happy, as well as the people that want a faster-focusing camera with the battery grip, higher shots/charge, and interchangability with 1D X. How big would an add-on battery grip need to be in order to accomodate the larger battery? Much larger than a BG-E7 (7D) or BG-E11 (5D Mark III)?

What you are asking for is a dual voltage camera. There is more to a camera than just a lens motor, and, for example, the LCD backlight is just one of the things that is designed for a specific voltage.

Its certainly possible to put in voltage regulators to reduce the voltage to components that use a low voltage, and I'm sure that it is done for many components in a camera.

However, it really makes little economic sense to go to the extreme of designing a dual voltage camera and then charging a near 1 series price for it, just get a 1 series camera that is optimized for the 11.1 volt battery.

 

[Sabaki]

When you guys say $3500, it equates to R40 000 (South African rands). Can you guys imagine paying $40k for a camera?

Makes no sense. It's not $40K, it's R40K. How about paying 192K for a camera? That's how many rupees equate to $3500. How about 34 million rupiah for a camera, if you were paying in Indonesia? It's all relative.

exactly (that said, the effective pain of the price probably is less in the US than in RSA but it is certainly not an order of magnitude)

You guys are missing the point. But hey, if you need to be that way then cool.

 

[KyleSTL]

Just a crazy thought, but could Canon produce a camera without battery grip that uses the LP-E6 battery at 7.2V, and have an optional battery grip which uses the LP-E4N battery at 11.1V? That way the people that desire a smaller camera, with a battery interchangable with their 5D3 and 7D are happy, as well as the people that want a faster-focusing camera with the battery grip, higher shots/charge, and interchangability with 1D X. How big would an add-on battery grip need to be in order to accomodate the larger battery? Much larger than a BG-E7 (7D) or BG-E11 (5D Mark III)?

That was my point. I'm pretty sure Nikon even allows that with the same grip, you can either stuff it with regular little ones or a pro large battery. I never understood why Canon didn't allow that. That said it is not something I've looked into much.

Yeah, I saw your post after I posted the comment. There is one battery grip Nikon makes that does what you're saying - the MB-D10 (D700, D300, D300s) - and it can use the following power:
(1) EN-EL3(e) - 7.4V 1500mAH
(1) EN-EL4(A) - 11.1V 2500mAH [must use optional BL-3 accessory]
(8) AA batteries - 11.2V (NiMH) or 12V (alkaline/lithium)

However, I don't like that Nikon has different framerates for the difference power sources (especially given that Canon achieves similar results with the lower voltage).

 

[c.d.embrey]

We’re told at least one variation of the camera being developed has an integrated grip, ...

An intergrated grip is a deal-breaker for me. I need small and light, that's why I use a crop body instead of FF. I've used a 5D3, it's a great camera but too big and heavy for me -- not something I want to hold all day.

I'll wait and see what the 70D has to offer before buying. A camera is just a tool, and the best tool for me may now be a Sony a77 or a Panasonic GH3.

 

[V8Beast]

If Canon puts a 61-point AF system off of the FF 1Dx/5d3 on a crop sensor, does that mean it will cover a larger percentage of the frame? If so, I'd imagine that you could get the 61-point system to cover a massive percentage of an APS-C sized frame.

Having more AF points is great, but what I really love about the 61-point AF system on the 5D3 is that it covers SO much more of the frame compared to the 5DC and 5D2. This is such a nice luxury if you frequently shoot subjects that aren't centered in the frame.

 

[facedodge]

What if Canon leaks all these different rumors and uses our comments as a free focus group session?

 

[BruinBear]

*UPDATE 2*
The battery does help a camera body autofocus an EF lens faster.
From Chuck Westfall… “In addition, the EOS-1D X achieves a higher lens motor drive speed with select L-series USM telephoto lenses than the 5D Mark III because of the 1D X’s more powerful battery pack.”

Exactly, power, i.e. V x A = W.

1 x LP-E4N is 11.1 V x 2450 mAh = 27.195 W
2 x LP-E6 is 7.2 V x 1600 mAh x 2 = 23.040 W

27 W vs. 23 W, not much of a difference, but it's there.

mAh is a measure of electrical charge and not max current output :-X

 

[RS2021]

I think Canon will put forward an affordable camera in 7D2...~$2500 at introduction perhaps even a tad lower...a price that tracks down with time to ~$2000 or even ~1900 (gasp! WHAT!? NO?....yes!)

This is based on the assumption we are talking about 7D2 and its intended mass market and not the 4D or 3D etc.

Given that the original 7D cycle has stretched a few years now, and the pent up interest to buy is there for original users, I think they have the potential to sell a lot of units...*IF* it is priced right.

IF they miss the price mark...and offer some super-duper camera which is out of reach of many current 7D users, they have a problem... accolades and admiration by few who buy and can afford it and envy and apathy by many who can't... never paid no bills at Canon

In such a case they will have to make embarrassing "Adorama ebay sale" kind of backdoor price reduction (5D3 anyone?) moves to bring the price in line with market forces to move enough units. Bring it down a bit, and they sell more units to easily off-set even the price reduction.

One should expect the 7D "preorder" price to be high (duh! It is targeted toward a certain kind of sap...er...I meant user). Look at the price trajectory of 6D in just the past few months... and it has not settled into its "real" target price yet...give it few more months.

So the intended target price for 7D may well end up being $2000 just few months after release in which case they cannot really pack it with high-end 1DX features in earnest.

Again, we are talking about 7D successor here, not a would-be 4D candidate. Canon is a conservative company. No risky market experimentation or bold moves usually...

So 7D2 will be a sensible camera at a sensible price.

 

[bseitz234]

I think Canon will put forward an affordable camera in 7D2...~$2500 at introduction perhaps even a tad lower...a price that tracks down with time to ~$2000 or even ~1900 (gasp! WHAT!? NO?....yes!)

This is based on the assumption we are talking about 7D2 and its intended mass market and not the 4D or 3D etc.

Given that the original 7D cycle has stretched a few years now, and the pent up interest to buy is there for original users, I think they have the potential to sell a lot of units...*IF* it is priced right.

IF they miss the price mark...and offer some super-duper camera which is out of reach of many current 7D users, they have a problem... accolades and admiration by few who buy and can afford it and envy and apathy by many who can't... never paid no bills at Canon

In such a case they will have to make embarrassing "Adorama ebay sale" kind of backdoor price reduction (5D3 anyone?) moves to bring the price in line with market forces to move enough units. Bring it down a bit, and they sell more units to easily off-set even the price reduction.

One should expect the 7D "preorder" price to be high (duh! It is targeted toward a certain kind of sap...er...I meant user). Look at the price trajectory of 6D in just the past few months... and it has not settled into its "real" target price yet...give it few more months.

So the intended target price for 7D may well end up being $2000 just few months after release in which case they cannot really pack it with high-end 1DX features in earnest.

Again, we are talking about 7D successor here, not a would-be 4D candidate. Canon is a conservative company. No risky market experimentation or bold moves usually...

So 7D2 will be a sensible camera at a sensible price.

God I hope you're right. I was getting worried I was the only one expecting/hoping this would be where they'd take a 7d2...

What if Canon leaks all these different rumors and uses our comments as a free focus group session?

hahaha I'd be lying if I said this didn't occur to me... great use of Keanu, though.

 

[jrista]

When you guys say $3500, it equates to R40 000 (South African rands). Can you guys imagine paying $40k for a camera?

Makes no sense. It's not $40K, it's R40K. How about paying 192K for a camera? That's how many rupees equate to $3500. How about 34 million rupiah for a camera, if you were paying in Indonesia? It's all relative.

exactly (that said, the effective pain of the price probably is less in the US than in RSA but it is certainly not an order of magnitude)

You guys are missing the point. But hey, if you need to be that way then cool.

The real point is that each country has different laws regarding the import, taxation, and regulation of products like cameras and the components they are made up of. There is a real-world actual cost to make these things, and an essential profit margin the company has to make in order to stay in business and remain competitive, while also needing to make sure the product conforms to regulatory concerns in MULTIPLE target locales...which can have a significant impact on cost, inflating the price in all countries (such as whether or not they need to conform to, say, regulations regarding batteries...it wouldn't matter if the US did not require more stringent battery regulations...the fact that Japan does forces an increase in design costs that is ultimately levied on consumers from all countries.)

In Japan, that minimum required price might be 280,000 yen, which translates into $3000 USD. The cost in another currency, however, would be that core cost plus whatever additional import taxes and costs related to regulation exist in the target country. It's for this reason that many electronics devices like phones and tablets cost several times as much in a country like Australia as they do in the US. The increase in cost is not always just due to the exchange rate, there are often significant and burdensome taxes and regulatory limitations/costs that factor into higher prices in other countries.

 

[woollybear]

*UPDATE 2*
The battery does help a camera body autofocus an EF lens faster.
From Chuck Westfall… “In addition, the EOS-1D X achieves a higher lens motor drive speed with select L-series USM telephoto lenses than the 5D Mark III because of the 1D X’s more powerful battery pack.”

Exactly, power, i.e. V x A = W.

1 x LP-E4N is 11.1 V x 2450 mAh = 27.195 W
2 x LP-E6 is 7.2 V x 1600 mAh x 2 = 23.040 W

27 W vs. 23 W, not much of a difference, but it's there.

You missed the point, battery capacity has little effect, its the current driving the lens motor, and that is based on the voltage and resistance using ohm's law E=IR.

Given the same internal resistance of the lens motor, the current would be about 11.1/7.2 times larger or 1.52 times as much current going thru the motor. Presumably the internal resistance of the bigger battery is lower, so it would have little effect.

That will drive the motor much faster.

You are confusing power and energy.

 

[Drum]

Nikon would Just love the 7D mk 2 to be 3k, would make the d400 pretty easy to sell ;D (and yes I am a Canon user, but also a realist!!!!!!!)

 

[aznable]

if this news is true, it will push the price of used 1d mk iv down

 

[zim]

UK intro price £3175
A new production line sensor will be a gravy train for Canon

 

[RS2021]

Nikon would Just love the 7D mk 2 to be 3k, would make the d400 pretty easy to sell ;D (and yes I am a Canon user, but also a realist!!!!!!!)

Canon knows which side of their bread is buttered... for reasons I discussed few posts earlier, it is likely 7D2 will come in under 3K...well under probably.

If Canon priced their cameras based on clueless fanboys drooling over gear while living in their parents' basement playing dungeons and dragons and wondering about Taylor Swift's bra size... we would be living in an alternate universe with Minolta as king of the market

 

[lol]

The maximum current you can take from a battery is generally proportional to the battery's capacity in (m)Ah. Internal resistance is the killer as you try to take more current. That will cause a voltage drop, so you get less power out than you think. Unfortunately that power is released as heat inside the battery. Too much of that is not a good thing! As a designer you would probably lean towards worst case here. You're in the middle of Africa at noon on a sunny day, with a big white lens and making use of servo AF tracking the wildlife as it moves around... in that condition, the system still needs to operate safely. Normal shooting may therefore appear to have more headroom than is given.

If you have two batteries in parallel (assume they're perfectly balanced for now), you just doubled the current you can take compared to a single battery. Or, for the same draw as a single battery, the current you take from each is halved and you gain a little efficiency.

As for driving the AF faster or not, I'd be surprised if the power wasn't regulated between battery and lens, and voltage converters can be very efficient these days. The AF speed is likely a system feature involving both body and lens, such that in use the power drain due to AF is kept in a safe region. More power available means it may be able to command faster AF. I certainly wouldn't base predictions on the assumption that the motor would be a resistive load and how that responds to varying voltage.



Anyway, the integrated grip isn't my thing anyway, and here I have to wonder if its a name game. If indeed the 70D is going upmarket, could that take over where the current 7D sits? Only then could a 1D level and spec body become more possible for a 7D successor. But still, I find calling that a 7D mk2 tough to swallow. I think that would deserve a new model number. 2D, 3D, 4D are still available, as are variations of the 1D name. I don't think it could be 8D or 9D since that would be positioned lower than 7D.

Assuming the rumoured announcement of the 70D is soon, the form the 70D takes will serve as guidance as to what may be offered in a 7D position, or 1D like position. My gut feeling is if the 70D leap-frog the 7D in spec and takes its place, then the integrated grip APS-C starts to make sense. If the 70D doesn't exceed the existing 7D, then I feel the 7D mk2 will be normal bodied.

I just can't imagine something called 7D mk2 being integrated grip, but it could exist as another name.

 

[kphoto99]

If the lens motor was receiving the same power from a 1D X and a 7D, then the AF speed for the lens would be the same with both bodies. But it's not, it's faster with the 1D X.

Could it be firmware trickery on the part of Canon, the 7D delivers the same power as the 1D X, but the 7D just tells the lens to AF slower? Possible, I suppose...but that seems a little too cynical, even for me.

This is something that has puzzled me about saying the lens is doing the AF. The lens does not have the AF points and it does not see the image, so how can "the lens" be doing AF.
As far as I can understand this, the camera is doing the AF and is telling the lens motor to rotate the lens to bring the image into focus. If I am wrong, please point me at something that explains it. I have read the generic description of the AF process, just nothing that would correspond to the notion that the lens is doing the AF.