Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed

[dtaylor]

...
No. The times people do things they WOULD NEVER DO WITH A REAL WORLD PHOTOGRAPH like turn off all NR, push a properly exposed photo 5 stops, or severely underexpose a photo then push it 5 stops with no NR, are artificial because YOU WOULD NEVER DO THAT WITH A REAL WORLD PHOTOGRAPH.
...
Now it might make a noticeable difference in some scenes. If I wanted to play devil's advocate I bet I could illustrate in a real world scene where it would be noticeable. But I could still get the shot with the Canon with a little work. But the DRoners...the DRoners seem incapable of actually showing where it matters at all.

You would appear to have a very narrow experience of the world.

You have my sympathies.

Spoken by someone with lots of words and no photos.

 

[flyingSquirrel]

I'm asking this as a serious question, because I know nothing about shooting video, and I'm genuinely curious:

Why were/are so many people looking at the 7DmkII, a crop sensor camera, with such hope for a bounty of strong video features? As mentioned, I know nothing about video, but I would not think that a crop sensor camera would be the best option for that. What benefit would a crop sensor have for video?

Thanks for any clarification.

 

[dtaylor]

This is what I was referring to:

I don't care. He underexposed by 3 stops. You have to underexpose then push the scene 3 stops to see the problem, or analyze a single color channel in the underexposed RAW. Red is the worst channel...even on Exmor...and has 1/4th the info of the total pixel, so it's really no different from amplifying the entire scene to see a problem.

There's noise in the deep shadow region of a 3 stop underexposure which you will see if you amplify the exposure in post. WHAT A SHOCK.

I linked his RAWs on my onedrive. I encourage everyone to download and take a gander themselves. The banding in the Canon file is obvious. Without any adjustments.

I think you better open them again

 

[Lee Jay]

I'm asking this as a serious question, because I know nothing about shooting video, and I'm genuinely curious:

Why were/are so many people looking at the 7DmkII, a crop sensor camera, with such hope for a bounty of strong video features? As mentioned, I know nothing about video, but I would not think that a crop sensor camera would be the best option for that. What benefit would a crop sensor have for video?

Thanks for any clarification.

Realize that most cinema cameras like RED are smaller sensor cameras than full frame. There's no reason a camera like the 7D couldn'thave decent video performance and newer video features.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Now I find it impressive that Exmor can handle this situation with grace. But you would never do this. You would never underexpose a scene with a deep shadow area that has no detail, then push that shadow area hard. There's zero reason to do this in the real world.

???
Do YOU ever get outside of the lab and take real world shots??
No reason, no scene ever needs that much DR?

 

[x-vision]

I'm asking this as a serious question, because I know nothing about shooting video, and I'm genuinely curious:

Why were/are so many people looking at the 7DmkII, a crop sensor camera, with such hope for a bounty of strong video features? As mentioned, I know nothing about video, but I would not think that a crop sensor camera would be the best option for that. What benefit would a crop sensor have for video?

Thanks for any clarification.

The Super-35 format, which is the standard movie format, has basically the size of a crop sensor.
So, crop sensors are already standard size for movies; FF is larger than the standard.

As for why the big hopes for the 7DII: there were all kinds of hopes for the 7DII.
One of them was that it would have a new sensor with advanced performance for both stills and video.

In retrospect, it was indeed too much to ask for - knowing Canon, that is.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

sure many shots didn't need to DR, but plenty enough along the way could've been helped for sure

Waiting for real world examples of what we are all missing ;D

Dude, you were already given them. But no matter what you are given, you have some new excuse. BYE.
troll.

 

[joejohnbear]

Wait, what, what'd I say wrong? I'm just saying that everyone is harping on DR, and it's not Canon's forte now, they do other stuff better, who cares?

...I think DR-commentators aren't giving Canon credit for improving vastly in a lot of other areas.

Dude, pull your head out. It's clear that you just don't get what a camera actually is. "I'll explain and I'll use small words so that you'll be sure to understand, you warthog faced buffoon."

A camera is a box. A worthless hunk of plastic and some metal, its sole purpose is to contain and protect the glory that is the imaging sensor, keeping the grubby fingerprints of plebes like you from despoiling it's pristine surface.

"There was a mighty duel. It ranged all over. The gestalt performance ran off alone, the sensor followed those color prints toward Exmor."

"Shall we track them both?"

"The loser is nothing. Only the DR matters."

;D



(You're new here, so you may not know that I enjoy quoting The Princess Bride and sarcasm...not necessarily in that order of preference.)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

In that case, yes. Pushing shadows that hard...with no NR...might be fun in order to see differences in the shadows, but the entire scene becomes a blown out mess.

So pulling shadows blows the highlights then? :
OK, so you don't even know how to do basic photo processing.

Anyway it's useless responding to you, so that was the last one.
Write whatever you want.

 

[joejohnbear]

This, there is more to a tool than just one aspect. Sensor is just one of them.

OK, all you sensor geeks, here's your purgatory assignment. Shoot with any Sigma Foveon sensor camera. These are odd beasts. I love my Sigma DP Merrills but they are operationally odd, and the software is s-l-o-w and buggy. The cameras are very good for rendering natural landscapes and foliage, with excellent color subtlety.

Why am I going on about Brand X? Sigma DP Merrill cameras are (big) pocket-sized landscape low ISO cameras with limited DR and wonderful resolution and color - specialty beasts. The as-yet-not-fully-specified 7D2 is an action camera, also a specialty beast. I am intrigued with the Sony A7r/A7s concepts, and these two cameras are different types of specialty cameras. Were I to do professional product photography, I might opt for the A7r, provided that it played well with tilt-shift lenses. Low light work, especially low light video, I would go for the A7s. Lots of choices out there.

 

[joejohnbear]

You just watch your back, PureClassA. I will one day make Rebel SL class.

...I think DR-commentators aren't giving Canon credit for improving vastly in a lot of other areas.

Dude, pull your head out. It's clear that you just don't get what a camera actually is. "I'll explain and I'll use small words so that you'll be sure to understand, you warthog faced buffoon."

A camera is a box. A worthless hunk of plastic and some metal, its sole purpose is to contain and protect the glory that is the imaging sensor, keeping the grubby fingerprints of plebes like you from despoiling it's pristine surface.

"There was a mighty duel. It ranged all over. The gestalt performance ran off alone, the sensor followed those color prints toward Exmor."

"Shall we track them both?"

"The loser is nothing. Only the DR matters."

;D



(You're new here, so you may not know that I enjoy quoting The Princess Bride and sarcasm...not necessarily in that order of preference.)

"My name is Neuro. You insulted my camera. Prepare to die"

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

There were a lot of us, however, who were hoping the 7D II would give us an indication that Canon has been pushing the envelope regarding their overall sensor IQ.

+1000

That's exactly why the 7DII is disappointing.
Yes, the specs are fantastic.
But out of the gate, the image quality is already lagging behind the competition.

And this is Canon's flagship 1.6x camera - with expected shelf-life of 3-5 years.
The image quality of this camera is already unexciting in 2014. Imagine in 2019 ??

and no 4k video. ;(

even when someone don´t need 4K video yet, most people who know what they are doing will love the ability to downsample to full hd.

and all the years it was rumored to be THE VIDEO DSLR. ???

people complained that canon focuses too much on video.
and now.. video looks like it´s unimportant for canon.
sensor probably the same as 70D, all they really do is pushing the AF performance.

Ugh potentially worse:

From a Canon employee (although he does NOT work in the DSLR division or even in Japan): "....or those expecting 4K video in a DLSR will be very disappointed. Canon sees no reason for this in a consumer camera yet. They told my boss only about 10% of people buy a 5D III for it's video capabilities. They are focusing on cinema market and want you to pay big dollars for the C300/500 or 1DC if you must have a DSLR with 4K. 5D IV will not get it IMO and at best we will see 1080p @ 60fps."

Great so they want to go from a lot buying the 5D2 for video to 10% for the 5D3 to 0.1% for the 5D4. Brilliant.

If this is true and no Exmor-low ISO.... maybe Canon really and truly has lost the plot.
We'll see next year.

EDIT: I still find it hard to believe they'd be that that foolish to leave 4k out of even the 5D4 though. I still think it will have it. I know they have become followers and reactive and like the milk stuff for all it's worth, but I still don't think they are they have become quite that far out of it.

 

[dtaylor]

Your missing the point. With an Exmor, you CAN do that.

You're missing the point because you've never actually touched an Exmor equipped camera.

At a 5 stop push your tonality is junk compared to a blend where the shadows are properly exposed. Been there, tested that, would never do it except in an absolute emergency.

As other Exmor camera owners have told you point blank in this forum: at first you're blown away by the ability to push Exmor RAWs. Then you realize that's not the path to optimal IQ even without shadow noise. Then you come down from the high and realize that yes, Exmor is a little easier to work with and/or produces somewhat better shadow results in some real world cases. But Canon and Exmor are not that different after all. And generally if you are blending or using GND filters on the Canon, you want them on the Exmor as well. Likewise, with a little technique and work you can get the photo on Canon.

That's reality.

Now, I wouldn't blame anyone for buying Exmor based on that. I might ignore one camera and buy another based on button placement. Everyone has their own priorities. But...the whining and the hyperbole and the false claims in every thread of a Canon forum needs to come to a screeching halt. If I remember correctly...Neuro correct me here because I think you were the one who mentioned it in another thread...someone asked about setting LCD brightness here and got a treatise on freaking Exmor DR

And for the record: I am done believing that you actually care about this except to use as a soapbox to complain. A Sony A7 can be had for $1,300. EF adapters are...what...$100? $200? But any time someone says that it's another whine: "Sony uses lossy RAW and I might see it in 1 out of 100,000 frames."

If I was CEO of Canon and you were my customer...I would send you a gift card to a Nikon store.

 

[dtaylor]

And I can bet $1000 that any of your photos could have been taken with a phone camera or a P&S.

My 24" and 36" landscape prints want to know when you are going to send me a $1,000 check

 

[joejohnbear]

Because there are a lot of people who can't afford Super-35 cameras dedicated for video like the FS-700, FS-100, C100,300,500 and are hoping for features from top end features to trickle down to "cheap" cameras as soon as in their dreams. That said, the Canon DSLR's do suck for video IF you don't publish to web. ML takes care of it, but you pay tooth through nail for actual first-party support on real video cameras instead of dula purpose DSLR's/video cameras. Remember, 5d mk ii was more than enough to start the "DSLR" video revolution, but mark my words, that revolution was unintentional and more than over now that Canon has released their own cinema cameras. When prodded, they'll release more features, but as of now there are no competitors at the same price point, despite what people will try to tell you.

I'm asking this as a serious question, because I know nothing about shooting video, and I'm genuinely curious:

Why were/are so many people looking at the 7DmkII, a crop sensor camera, with such hope for a bounty of strong video features? As mentioned, I know nothing about video, but I would not think that a crop sensor camera would be the best option for that. What benefit would a crop sensor have for video?

Thanks for any clarification.

 

[dtaylor]

???
Do YOU ever get outside of the lab and take real world shots??
No reason, no scene ever needs that much DR?

That's not what I said. You do not underexpose 3 stops then push shadows 3 stops when those shadows have no detail to recover in the first place! Not unless you are trying to produce banding.

 

[dtaylor]

Dude, you were already given them. But no matter what you are given, you have some new excuse. BYE.
troll.

Neither photos nor links from you. Who is the troll?

Oh...the underexposed Coke box is a real world example. Oh kay :

 

[takesome1]

Wait, what, what'd I say wrong? I'm just saying that everyone is harping on DR, and it's not Canon's forte now, they do other stuff better, who cares?

...I think DR-commentators aren't giving Canon credit for improving vastly in a lot of other areas.

Dude, pull your head out. It's clear that you just don't get what a camera actually is. "I'll explain and I'll use small words so that you'll be sure to understand, you warthog faced buffoon."

A camera is a box. A worthless hunk of plastic and some metal, its sole purpose is to contain and protect the glory that is the imaging sensor, keeping the grubby fingerprints of plebes like you from despoiling it's pristine surface.

"There was a mighty duel. It ranged all over. The gestalt performance ran off alone, the sensor followed those color prints toward Exmor."

"Shall we track them both?"

"The loser is nothing. Only the DR matters."

;D



(You're new here, so you may not know that I enjoy quoting The Princess Bride and sarcasm...not necessarily in that order of preference.)

While Nero's comments were not on the serious side, I am not aware of the vast improvements Canon has made in other areas that would be demonstrated with the specs listed for the 7D II. To me it looks like a rehash using existing components.
Nothing ground breaking yet, maybe when the announcement is official Canon will reveal something we do not see on the surface of the specs.

 

[dtaylor]

In that case, yes. Pushing shadows that hard...with no NR...might be fun in order to see differences in the shadows, but the entire scene becomes a blown out mess.

So pulling shadows blows the highlights then? :
OK, so you don't even know how to do basic photo processing.

Says the guy who is confusing pushing and pulling.

Go away until you have a sample to defend your claims.

 

[unfocused]

Anyway it's useless responding to you, so that was the last one.
Write whatever you want.

And yet, three minutes later, your are back posting. Don't promise to leave and then keep posting. It raises our hopes too much.