Canon EOS 7D Mark II Related Announcements Coming for Photokina [CR2]

[tron]

I think a lot of people are looking for 7Diii rumors. Unfortunately, I bet these 7Dii announcements are just a hold over and we are a long way off from seeing a 7Diii (at least photokina 2017).

You must mean Photokina 2018. It is held biennially as far as I know.

You are correct, thank you for correcting me. To clarify, I don't think we will see a 7Diii earlier than end of 2017 but more likely mid or end of 2018.

This is what I believe too. At least - if true - let's hope they put this delay to good use ( = sensor much better at high iso not only having better dr in very low iso just like 80d)

 

[Dave Del Real]

I just hope Canon doesn't hold back on this firmware update. Unlocking new features would be huge.

 

[whothafunk]

if Canon really wants to unlock some features on the 7D2 with the firmware, I don't see anything worth mentioning other than:
- bigger buffer
- more incremental AF tweaks like the 1Dx has

 

[LoneRider]

I also believe the 2017 time frame is exceptionally possible. *IF* they can use the same, or most of, the same mechanical tooling for the 7Dii. The weather sealing, buttons and so forth would not need to change.

So, what would be the delta from the 7Dii to 7Diii, sensor, main circuit board to support CFast and newer DIGIC processor(s). The 7Diii may only need a single DIGIC7[+]. We do not know the real capabilities of that ASIC yet.

The only 2 caveats are WIFI and Touchscreen. It is very possible they will be able to change the GPS module to a GPS/WIFI module, maybe NFC in there as well. Broadcom, and the like, have some compelling solutions.

As far as Touchscreen, I would have to guess, minimal changes to the tooling would be required.

As for the rest, the sensor, as a previous comment suggests, it would be in development at the same time as the 5DSii and 5Div. I have to imagine that is already in the works, and depending on form factor, the existing slappy bits would not have to change.

The final component is firmware, between the 80D, 1DXii and 5Div, all the bits for the firmware will be available for integration into the 7Diii.

Again, so unless there is a compelling reason to change the mechanical enclosure, the R&D for a 7Diii is very minimal compared to the 5Div.

 

[ahsanford]

I also believe the 2017 time frame is exceptionally possible. *IF* they can use the same, or most of, the same mechanical tooling for the 7Dii. The weather sealing, buttons and so forth would not need to change.

... truncated ...

Again, so unless there is a compelling reason to change the mechanical enclosure, the R&D for a 7Diii is very minimal compared to the 5Div.

No one is doubting that Canon could make the 7D3 in 2017. We're just saying that they have bigger fish to fry / they have more pressing needs in 2017:

• 6D2
  
  
• A prosumer / better-than-basic EOS-M model with an integral viewfinder (still APS-C)
  
  
• A new slate of Rebels (As unsexy as these are, the money from this line underwrites all the sexy stuff we love)
  
  
• Possibly a surprise of a new type of camera -- perhaps FF mirrorless with a fixed lens, perhaps a high MP sensor in a 1-series body, perhaps a new SL1 rig, perhaps an interchangeable lens version of the XC10, etc. Canon can't just fill its development pipeline with sequels -- it needs to leave room in the release calendar for new product types that disrupt the market or go after new customers.

I'll reiterate from other threads: the D500's mere existence is not enough to get Canon to radically change it's heretofore glacial refresh timelines for the 7D brand -- it needs to actually sell well. The D500 needs to either convert large numbers of Canon users or be a such a standalone financial success for Nikon that Canon has a rethink of the opportunity in this market segment. I personally have not seen the data that would suggest the D500 is that successful of a product.

- A

 

[LoneRider]

I'll reiterate from other threads: the D500's mere existence is not enough to get Canon to radically change it's heretofore glacial refresh timelines for the 7D brand -- it needs to actually sell well. The D500 needs to either convert large numbers of Canon users or be a such a standalone financial success for Nikon that Canon has a rethink of the opportunity in this market segment. I personally have not seen the data that would suggest the D500 is that successful of a product.

I would agree with notion that Canon does not necessarily have to go toe to toe with Nikon. My point is simply that with as great as much of the 7Dii is, the most work and cost intensive parts to upgrade do not need to be updated. Literally, the 7Diii would be a handful of very minor mechanical changes, PCB changes and software lifts from the 1DXii and 5Div.

If I am correct, the effects on other products in development would be minimal.

But I certainly agree that if those changes were to materially effect a release of a new mirror-less or 6Dii, or 5DSii, then it is likely they will push it off.

I can not imagine a place where Canon product managers did not include the 7Diii sensor in the roadmap when they planned the 80D, 1DXii, 5Div [and mirror-less option if there].

And in the same conversation there will be the 6Dii and 5DSii. I still will suggest they will be the only 2 in the line of xxD and xD cameras without DPAF.

 

[ahsanford]

I'll reiterate from other threads: the D500's mere existence is not enough to get Canon to radically change it's heretofore glacial refresh timelines for the 7D brand -- it needs to actually sell well. The D500 needs to either convert large numbers of Canon users or be a such a standalone financial success for Nikon that Canon has a rethink of the opportunity in this market segment. I personally have not seen the data that would suggest the D500 is that successful of a product.

I would agree with notion that Canon does not necessarily have to go toe to toe with Nikon. My point is simply that with as great as much of the 7Dii is, the most work and cost intensive parts to upgrade do not need to be updated. Literally, the 7Diii would be a handful of very minor mechanical changes, PCB changes and software lifts from the 1DXii and 5Div.

If I am correct, the effects on other products in development would be minimal.

But I certainly agree that if those changes were to materially effect a release of a new mirror-less or 6Dii, or 5DSii, then it is likely they will push it off.

I can not imagine a place where Canon product managers did not include the 7Diii sensor in the roadmap when they planned the 80D, 1DXii, 5Div [and mirror-less option if there].

And in the same conversation there will be the 6Dii and 5DSii. I still will suggest they will be the only 2 in the line of xxD and xD cameras without DPAF.

Sure, but this speaks to a business that frequently tweaks/upgrades it's offerings because it is relatively easy to do so. You are describing Sony's business model, which is to flood the market with new offerings to get a foothold against two very well cemented competitors.

Frequent tweaking of models = dramatically increased excess and obsolescence costs and a very difficult prospect for getting top dollar for new products (if you know new products are right around the corner). So Sony is burning through cash to establish itself when Canon simply doesn't need to.

Again, all that changes when Canon starts being outsold, starts losing core customers, etc. This (to my knowledge) hasn't happened yet.

- A

 

[Alastair Norcross]

And people say that the gap to the 7DIII will be as long as the 7D to 7DII gap.

I don't think so...

Are you addressing the gap in terms of AF performance?

It will be, but in a different way. The DR coming off the 80D sensor at low ISO is heads and shoulders above the 7DII. One would assume the 7DIII will have at least as good of a sensor as the 80D. That's a considerably bigger jump than the 7D to 7DII in terms of image sensor performance.

The 80D has about one stop more DR at low ISO than the 7DII. For almost every shooting situation, that's literally imperceptible. Unless you are pushing your low ISO shadows by more than 3 stops, no-one will see the difference. At high ISO, the difference between the two sensors is also imperceptible. The difference between the 7D and 7DII is actually quite significant. I owned the 7D for 4 years, and have had the 7DII since it was released. The high ISO is a lot better, and at low ISO, the banding in the shadows is gone, making NR much more effective. So, no, the jump in sensor performance from 7DII to 80D is actually a lot smaller than the jump from 7D to 7DII.

 

[anden]

The one thing I miss on my 7D2 is 720p100/120 video, for sports slow motion. I guess I can only dream of that type of upgrade from new firmware.

 

[Dave Del Real]

The one thing I miss on my 7D2 is 720p100/120 video, for sports slow motion. I guess I can only dream of that type of upgrade from new firmware.

If we're dreaming, why not 1080p 120? I fully believe the camera is capable.

 

[anden]

The one thing I miss on my 7D2 is 720p100/120 video, for sports slow motion. I guess I can only dream of that type of upgrade from new firmware.

If we're dreaming, why not 1080p 120? I fully believe the camera is capable.

720p is a good balance between quality and space, for my usage.

And I need autofocus. The fact that 1080p60 is available but without AF I think suggests some sort of fundamental limitation. 1080p120 with AF therefore feels beyond dreaming. But I wouldn't say no thanks.

 

[Michael Clark]

And people say that the gap to the 7DIII will be as long as the 7D to 7DII gap.

I don't think so...

Are you addressing the gap in terms of AF performance?

It will be, but in a different way. The DR coming off the 80D sensor at low ISO is heads and shoulders above the 7DII. One would assume the 7DIII will have at least as good of a sensor as the 80D. That's a considerably bigger jump than the 7D to 7DII in terms of image sensor performance.

The 80D has about one stop more DR at low ISO than the 7DII. For almost every shooting situation, that's literally imperceptible. Unless you are pushing your low ISO shadows by more than 3 stops, no-one will see the difference. At high ISO, the difference between the two sensors is also imperceptible. The difference between the 7D and 7DII is actually quite significant. I owned the 7D for 4 years, and have had the 7DII since it was released. The high ISO is a lot better, and at low ISO, the banding in the shadows is gone, making NR much more effective. So, no, the jump in sensor performance from 7DII to 80D is actually a lot smaller than the jump from 7D to 7DII.

I also own both a 7D and 7DII. I don't see that big a difference between them in terms of DR at low ISO. I do see quite a bit less shot noise at high ISO with the newer model. But most of my work with the 7D2 is at high ISO shooting sports under lights or as my "long" body when shooting theatrically lit concerts. When I am using it at low ISO it's usually in very bright daylight. If I'm shooting in very low light or high contrast scenes I'm using a 5DIII with 5DII if a second body is needed.

 

[Mikehit]

When people were wondering when the 7D2 was going to be released I read a couple of comments that they did not want it to be merely an incremental improvement over the 7D and they wanted it to be right in all departments, especially the AF. In that time, there were developments which they then wanted to incorporate like dual-pixel AF and there were a couple of things that Canon were not quite happy with so rather than delay a half-baked change they preferred to wait (in that time the 7D was still a fine camera).
I would not be surprised if they are taking the same approach again - the 7D2 is a damned good camera so what is the rush? Make sure you have a package that is a genuine step forward.

 

[Alastair Norcross]

And people say that the gap to the 7DIII will be as long as the 7D to 7DII gap.

I don't think so...

Are you addressing the gap in terms of AF performance?

It will be, but in a different way. The DR coming off the 80D sensor at low ISO is heads and shoulders above the 7DII. One would assume the 7DIII will have at least as good of a sensor as the 80D. That's a considerably bigger jump than the 7D to 7DII in terms of image sensor performance.

The 80D has about one stop more DR at low ISO than the 7DII. For almost every shooting situation, that's literally imperceptible. Unless you are pushing your low ISO shadows by more than 3 stops, no-one will see the difference. At high ISO, the difference between the two sensors is also imperceptible. The difference between the 7D and 7DII is actually quite significant. I owned the 7D for 4 years, and have had the 7DII since it was released. The high ISO is a lot better, and at low ISO, the banding in the shadows is gone, making NR much more effective. So, no, the jump in sensor performance from 7DII to 80D is actually a lot smaller than the jump from 7D to 7DII.

I also own both a 7D and 7DII. I don't see that big a difference between them in terms of DR at low ISO. I do see quite a bit less shot noise at high ISO with the newer model. But most of my work with the 7D2 is at high ISO shooting sports under lights or as my "long" body when shooting theatrically lit concerts. When I am using it at low ISO it's usually in very bright daylight. If I'm shooting in very low light or high contrast scenes I'm using a 5DIII with 5DII if a second body is needed.

I agree that there isn't a big difference in DR at low ISO, which was never a big deal for me anyway. The only time extra DR at low ISO is relevant is when you want to push shadows a lot. What the 7DII did improve, as I said, was shadow banding at low ISO. Specifically, it's pretty much gone. This doesn't show up in standard measurements of DR, but it, in fact, makes a difference in precisely those situations where people want more DR. Because it's easier to clean up pushed shadows at low ISO on the 7DII, it does have more effective DR, if you really want it. Because none of the standard DR tests actually try to produce the best image, by using NR, for example, this difference doesn't show up. Most 7DII owners who use low ISO a lot have commented on it. If you are mostly using your 7DII at high ISO for sports, you won't notice this difference, though you will, as you do, notice a significant improvement in high ISO performance over the 7D. My point was simply that, when you take all aspects of the sensor into consideration, the improvement from the 7D to the 7DII is actually quite large, much larger than that from the 7DII to the 80D.

 

[unfocused]

I'll reiterate from other threads: the D500's mere existence is not enough to get Canon to radically change it's heretofore glacial refresh timelines for the 7D brand -- it needs to actually sell well.

My point was simply that, when you take all aspects of the sensor into consideration, the improvement from the 7D to the 7DII is actually quite large, much larger than that from the 7DII to the 80D.

Agree with these comments, which I think sums things up nicely.

The main reason to update the 7DII would come from both internal and external market pressures.

Internally, the latest APS-C sensor (80D) is a nice improvement, but not huge. And, in fact any advantage disappears at higher ISOs, which is where the 7DII lives for many of its users. This isn't unique to APS-C, by the way. The 1DX II significantly improved low ISO dynamic range, but it isn't a big jump at higher ISOs over the original 1DX.

So, other than a desire to have the "latest" sensor, there isn't a compelling reason for an update. An extra year or so of sensor research and improvements would likely benefit 7D users more than a quick refresh.

Externally, one would have to know how much of a competitive threat the D500 is. We could debate that endlessly. If the D500 is a big seller, even that doesn't necessarily have any significance for Canon. The time between the 7DI and 7DII was nothing in comparison to the long-delay between the D300 and D500, which means there was a lot of pent-up demand for Nikon to address.

Looking at the side-by-side feature comparison that was posted some time back, there really isn't that much difference (Touch Screen, Flip Screen, Wireless and 4K) between the Nikon and the Canon.

For those who want 4K, it is a really big deal. But, for most of us it's not. Touch Screen and Flip Screen are nice features, but nobody is going to switch brands over that. If Canon offers an inexpensive wireless accessory, that could take care of that deficiency (Personally, I'd love to see a battery grip with wireless integrated into the grip).

The other differences are chiefly brand differences (Nikon vs. Canon autofocus and sensor performance). Canon isn't going to adopt either of these (they will instead continue to perfect their own versions), which again means patience will be a virtue.

Having said all that though, I do think it is entirely possible that a new 7DIII will surface before the end of 2017 or possibly in early 2018, which would be sooner than before, but not a rushed refresh.

 

[kaptainkatsu]

Well after getting a 1DXII, the 7DII hasn't been used much but I'd like 4K to be enabled so I can use it as a B cam with like resolution.

 

[xps]

Seems to be/Maybe this WIFI-Adapter:
http://digicame-info.com/2016/07/wi-fiw-e1.html

As read on another rumor page

SD-Card-Wifi Adapter

 

[Meatcurry]

Seems to be/Maybe this WIFI-Adapter:
http://digicame-info.com/2016/07/wi-fiw-e1.html

As read on another rumor page

SD-Card-Wifi Adapter

Interesting that it appears it can enable remote control of the camera, something missing from the eye-fi cards

 

[Dave Del Real]

I wonder if the update will come towards the end of the month or sooner?

 

[Don Haines]

Seems to be/Maybe this WIFI-Adapter:
http://digicame-info.com/2016/07/wi-fiw-e1.html

As read on another rumor page

SD-Card-Wifi Adapter

YES!

And this is why a firmware update is part of the package....