Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]

[sanj]

Sorry, a little off topic. Anyone know what Canon camera is in this below linked picture? Never seen one with the red piece by the hotshoe. Looks like a 7D is why I am posting on this thread.

http://500px.com/photo/26318243

Update:Even more suspicious is the Canon logo has been removed, this has a pop-up flash and looks to be in new condition. Can't place the lens either the more I look at this - size wise looks like the 85mm 1.2 but the bulge appears different by the camera mount from the current 85,1.2???

Could it be a 7D with some red thingy stuck on by the flash shoe?
Nothing else out there for sale now that it could be.

I cant really figure out why I am saying this but it seems like a cut paste photoshop job. It seems to me that camera was inserted in the photo in post...

 

[gunship01]

They could have made this a FF!!!

 

[RMC33]

They could have made this a FF!!!

No... that misses the point entirely.

 

[jrista]

But physics, are well, pretty much set in stone.

Crop sensors will always have a smaller surface area for each pixel; but allow for less expensive lens.

that holds true if you compare sensor technology from the same generation.

that does not mean an improved APS-C sensor can not be better then an older FF sensor.

Already warned the other half of the budget committee

For all the detractors of being single, one thing I will say about it: There is no budget committee.

If the noise is not significantly reduced, then, well, I guess the $2k can go to another hobby.

Ditto, although in my case, I'd probably just pick up the 5D III. The IQ that I've seen from the 5D III so far is just phenomenal, and I never fail to be surprised by how much lower the noise is at ISO 1600, 3200, even 6400 than my current 7D. I plan to pick one up anyway, however if the 7D II doesn't impress on the sensor tech front, with low noise and all that...I'll just get the 5D III sooner.

They could have made this a FF!!!

No... that misses the point entirely.

Completely.

The entire point is REACH! GIVE ME MY REACH!! (Of course, of the BigMP camera actually does show up at 47mp and has a 6fps frame rate...that just might be the perfect camera!)

 

[sanj]

how can a 7d be professional, and a 6d be semi professional? the numbers literally dont add up! surely a FF camera has to be better than an aps-c in terms of spec. 9 af points vs 61 is just crazy!!

Why not?
APS-H is not full frame, but it was considered a professional camera compared to a full frame like a 5D ... so it is possible to make an APS-C camera that can be considered a professional camera, especially for budget conscious sports photographers if the 7D II has 10 fps and all the other goodies that were mentioned.

there has to be something wrong with the cheaper camera having better af and a better housing to protect it, whatever the size of the sensor.

Don't underestimate the cost of an FF sensor. They are still almost 4x the area of an APS-C. Also, the 7D has classically had a higher frame rate, and if the "trend" holds true, it will be 2fps less than the FF 1D series flagship. At 24mp, no matter how good the sensor is (unless its got about 80-90% Q.E., which I HIGHLY doubt), it will most certainly be noiser than the 5D III. The much larger pixel area of the 5D III will always give it the edge in terms of IQ. The 5D III will also have other benefits, such as thinner DOF thanks to the larger FoV (allowing closer focus), etc.

The two cameras are designed for different audiences. The 5D III is still going to be the king of general purpose cameras, hands down. The 7D II will fill more of a niche market of wildlife photographers who want extra reach in a lighter package, but I wouldn't call it a real "general purpose" camera like the 5D III. I'd look to a 5D III for portraiture, landscapes, pretty much everything outside of wildlife and birds, and even then...if I have the opportunity to get closer, such as when photographing songbirds in my yard, I'll grab the 5D III and telephoto lens like the 600 f/4 without a TC. Better boke, closer focus, and frame-filling such that the 7D would clip the subjects.

No no no no. 7d is THE general purpose camera for MANY!!

 

[aroo]

No no no no. 7d is THE general purpose camera for MANY!!

7D is indeed THE camera. If Mark II keeps the wireless flash trigger and loses the pop-up... I wouldn't mind that too much.

 

[RMC33]

No no no no. 7d is THE general purpose camera for MANY!!

7D is indeed THE camera. If Mark II gets the Radio flash trigger and loses the pop-up... I wouldn't mind that too much.

Fixed=)

 

[Robert Welch]

What strikes me odd is if Canon makes this camera, it would mean their highest MP camera would be an APS-C format body, not full frame. That just doesn't sound logical, why would they do that? This camera would have a pixel density equal to a 61mp full frame camera, that is far beyond the resolving power of most lenses. I doubt this camera would really come anywhere close to the IQ of the 5DmkIII, that is just wishful thinking, at any ISO.

 

[Woody]

This camera would have a pixel density equal to a 61mp full frame camera, that is far beyond the resolving power of most lenses. I doubt this camera would really come anywhere close to the IQ of the 5DmkIII

Doesn't this answer your own question?

Nothing odd about APS-C having more pixels than FF. Happened several years ago when Canon's own compact cameras have more pixels than their APS-C DSLR offerings.

 

[weixing]

Hi,

What strikes me odd is if Canon makes this camera, it would mean their highest MP camera would be an APS-C format body, not full frame. That just doesn't sound logical, why would they do that? This camera would have a pixel density equal to a 61mp full frame camera, that is far beyond the resolving power of most lenses. I doubt this camera would really come anywhere close to the IQ of the 5DmkIII, that is just wishful thinking, at any ISO.

This DSLR is not aim at user who image quality is their highest priority... get FF DSLR for that.

Basically, "Image Quality, Performance & Built and Price"... choose 2 of them:
1) If you want image quality and better price, performance & built will not be good -> Canon 6D
2) If you want image quality and performance & built, price will be high -> Canon 1Dx.
3) If you want performance & built and better price, image quality will not be as good -> Canon 7D.

Anyway, base on my "eyeball" compare, 6D is 2 stop better than 7D in noise performance, so if this DSLR can have 1 stop better than current 7D, I'll be happy.

Have a nice day.

 

[Marsu42]

7D is indeed THE camera.

The next Canon gear is often predicted to be THE camera or lens, but it doesn't work this way with Canon (or the leopard has changed his shorts): Either the price is extremely high or there are built-in problems, the 7d2 will not be a mini-1dx (i.e. 1dx with lower iso performance) for €2000 for sure. But this is a rumor site, so dreaming is encouraged

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I don't get how it can feature "5dMkIII build quality" and GPS. Wasn't the reason for the partial weather sealing of the 6D that GPS needs a polycarbonate top for signal reception and can't use a full metal shell like the 1D?

Not all metal is the same.... Some metals are really good at blocking RF and others just do a so-so job. Also, the antenna can be outside of the metal body and it can still be sealed.... Take a look at the 5D3.... it's a sealed camera, yet look at the shell.... more holes than swiss cheese. just because it is a metal body does not mean that it is electromagneticly sealed.

EDIT: and it can talk to a wireless flash....

Actually, the body being "swiss cheese" does not really have anything to do with whether it is capable of shielding EM radiation or not. Look up "Faraday Cage" to learn more about EM shielding. A Faraday cage or shield only works with conductive materials, and since magnesium is not really conductive (base charge of +2, so it is missing electrons, rather than having extra electrons it can "give up" as required for conductivity), it probably doesn't offer much at all in the way of shielding itself. The bulk of EM shielding in a DSLR is probably internal...simple "swiss cheese" plates and caps made out of conducting material with small holes to allow thermal venting around anything that might give off undesired EM frequencies (or behave poorly if it encounters random EM frequencies) are probably found all over the electronics inside the body.

The easiest demonstration of the concept is your microwave oven. Ever wonder why your brain doesn't fry while you watch your food cook? Ever wonder why the window into the microwave has that annoying "swiss cheese" screen behind it? Faraday cage. It saves your life every time you nuke something. ;P

You know I have been feeling kind of strange every since I replaced that nasty window on my microwave with a clear pane of glass. This may explain a lot.

 

[nicku]

On the paper the 7D2 looks good....
I'm sure will have improved ISO performance at base ISO ( 100-400)... but how about the sharpness of the images???

Is really hard to maintain a good ISO performance AND sharpness on a 24MP APS-C sensor.

Maybe Canon has started to use the new sensor manufacturing technology.

 

[Marsu42]

Is really hard to maintain a good ISO performance AND sharpness on a 24MP APS-C sensor.

Imho these things have nothing to do with each other, unless the manufacturer decides to hide iso noise problems with forced noise reduction resulting in a sharpness loss - other than that iso performance is just a sensor feature, and so far Canon doesn't have the edge on the competition.

Sharpness can be impaired by a strong aa filter against moire (like on the 5d3), but mostly it's dependent on the lens - and starting with 24mp many people with cheaper or older lenses will be up for a disappointment because their lens is outresolved by the sensor, for example my 17-40L wouldn't take much more than 18mp on aps-c.

 

[BrandonKing96]

What strikes me odd is if Canon makes this camera, it would mean their highest MP camera would be an APS-C format body, not full frame. That just doesn't sound logical, why would they do that? This camera would have a pixel density equal to a 61mp full frame camera, that is far beyond the resolving power of most lenses. I doubt this camera would really come anywhere close to the IQ of the 5DmkIII, that is just wishful thinking, at any ISO.

From past experiences, the a lot of people who buy a 7D aren't "pro's" etc etc. The most of them see that it's a professional looking camera so they target it. Then those who haven't been in the photography world for long would brag to their other friends (who don't know so much about photography as well) that their camera is "24.1 MP" which is what most consumers who are looking for a camera look for the higher megapixel. And those who do buy are mainly Asians (not sounding racist. I'm half-Asian) and Canon was rated as Asia's number 1 brand (well the several billboards I saw in the Philippines say so at least). With saying that it easily attracts newcomers to buy such a camera (especially the ones willing to spend $2000 and flash it around).

I honestly hope that the 24.1mp isn't true. I loved the 18mp all I really wish for is improved ISO performance, update the AF system, and I hope they keep the pop-up flash!

 

[nicku]

Is really hard to maintain a good ISO performance AND sharpness on a 24MP APS-C sensor.

Imho these things have nothing to do with each other, unless the manufacturer decides to hide iso noise problems with forced noise reduction resulting in a sharpness loss - other than that iso performance is just a sensor feature, and so far Canon doesn't have the edge on the competition.

Sharpness can be impaired by a strong aa filter against moire (like on the 5d3), but mostly it's dependent on the lens - and starting with 24mp many people with cheaper or older lenses will be up for a disappointment because their lens is outresolved by the sensor, for example my 17-40L wouldn't take much more than 18mp on aps-c.

...That I'm afraid. If Canon decide to use THE SAME 10 years old technology to make the sensor, than the only way to improve the ISO performance is to use forced noise reduction soft, and that will result in lots of sharpen loss.

 

[jrista]

Is really hard to maintain a good ISO performance AND sharpness on a 24MP APS-C sensor.

Imho these things have nothing to do with each other, unless the manufacturer decides to hide iso noise problems with forced noise reduction resulting in a sharpness loss - other than that iso performance is just a sensor feature, and so far Canon doesn't have the edge on the competition.

Sharpness can be impaired by a strong aa filter against moire (like on the 5d3), but mostly it's dependent on the lens - and starting with 24mp many people with cheaper or older lenses will be up for a disappointment because their lens is outresolved by the sensor, for example my 17-40L wouldn't take much more than 18mp on aps-c.

Ironically, a sensor that outresolves the lens is the ideal alternative INSTEAD of having an AA filter. The AA filter simply blurs high frequencies that can't be meaningfully resolved. If the sensor always outresolves the lens, then the AA filter is moot, and you should always be able to resolve more detail, even if the lens can't match the sensor...without EVER having to worry about aliasing of any kind.

That said...

What strikes me odd is if Canon makes this camera, it would mean their highest MP camera would be an APS-C format body, not full frame. That just doesn't sound logical, why would they do that? This camera would have a pixel density equal to a 61mp full frame camera, that is far beyond the resolving power of most lenses. I doubt this camera would really come anywhere close to the IQ of the 5DmkIII, that is just wishful thinking, at any ISO.

I think both of you guys are greatly underestimating the resolving power of Canon's new Mark II generation of lenses. According to my experiences renting many of them, they are unbelievably sharp...far sharper than necessary to completely resolve detail for the 18mp APS-C sensor. I wouldn't be surprised if they were good enough to resolve just enough detail for a 24mp APS-C (which, again, would be ideal from an AA filter standpoint...it wouldn't need to be all that strong), and plenty good enough for 40-50mp FF sensors.

 

[K3nt]

If this spec list is even slightly right, count me in!
I find the current 7D to be a brilliant general-purpose camera and this just seems to make it one notch better on all fronts..
Now let's wait for the actual image samples... this should be interesting. ;D

 

[Hillsilly]

Now that Canon has pocketed all of the cash from 5Dii to 5Diii upgraders, they can now start releasing cameras with their revolutionary next generation sensor. Can't wait to see the discussion when DXO give it an "83".

 

[AvTvM]

Whether I upgrade from my current 7D to the 7D II or to Fullframe mainly depends on:
1. Sensor quality
Needs to have minimum +2 EV Hi ISO AND DR .. atv ALL ISOs, including 100. in RAW. Do not care abaout ooc jpeg
Also, I am perfectly fine with with 18MP on APS-C, do not need 24.
2. AF system
the closer to 1D-X the more likely I will take it
If it falls short on count 1 or 2. I will definitely not buy it.

At the rumoured price tag I would also expect:
* FULLY functional Auto-ISO - exactly like in Nikon D800
* Wifi, GPS built in - but not "always on"!
* Pop-Up flash with optical wireless commander - as in 7D
* additionally a built in Canon RT-radio transmitter .. that chip is probably only a few square millimeters. so fits easily alongside a pop up flash. It is not -... one or the other!
* fps .. I do not need 10 ... 8 is plenty for me, I would even accept 6 if IQ would be improved
* video .. don't ever use it, don't need it, don't want it. Buy a camcorder, canon makes nice ones.

IF I move to FF .. and Canon wants my money, it needs to be a 5D IV at the price of a Nikon D800, besting the Nikon's sensor in terms of DR.