Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed

[joejohnbear]

Yup, no actual direct answer.

Avoiding the question:

"When trying to make a case for some position or idea, we frequently encounter questions which challenge the coherency or validity of that position. When we are able to adequately answer those questions, our position becomes stronger. When we cannot answer the questions, then our position is weaker. If, however, we avoid the question altogether, then our reasoning process itself is revealed as possibly weak.

It is unfortunately common that many important questions and challenges go unanswered — but why do people do this? There are surely many reasons, but a common one may be a desire to avoid admitting that they might be wrong. They might not have a good answer, and while “I don’t know” is certainly acceptable, it may represent an unacceptable admission of at least potential error."

+1

Some people like to reinvent history.

Five years ago Canon's product was superior to Nikons. They let Nikon catch up. If what you say is true I am not sure how that plays out as sound business strategy.

You're right, it's a terrible business strategy. That's why, over the past five years Canon has steadily lost dSLR market share to Nikon, and Canon is no longer the market leader by a significant margin.

Oh, wait...Nikon hasn't gained market share, and Canon is still the dSLR market leader by a significant margin.

I guess Canon's business strategy is sound, although your opinion of it is apparently not.

I had my morning laugh this morning. Looks like I will not have to go to Yahoo and read this mornings Dilbert either.

 

[joejohnbear]

It's a business move, but you're welcome to question it.

Also, everyone's sales were down. Canon was "behind" in tech because it had nothing to compete with the D700 or D3. All of their pro cameras were 1.3 crop.

http://www.bythom.com/2010predictions.htm

Yup, your opinion over Thom Hogan's. Guess who has a better track record on analyzing the economy?

The D700 sensor was ahead of Canon's on low-light. Nikon had better f/2.8 zooms and supertelephotos. I knew because I SHOT on their system, I didn't just flip the pages of their catalog. Can you say the same? Just because DXO measurebators weren't on the scene fapping away doesn't take away that Nikon was doing VERY well five years ago. Bloody history revisionist.

And yeah, you got shut down by Neuro. You can't reword what you said, because it's all there in the thread.

That is laughable. Especially since Neuro commented on a comment I was making about your theories on marketing.

Go read Nikon's financial report for 2009, it was a downturn year for Nikon. I wonder why, they had such great technology at that time.

 

[takesome1]

However;

Go back five years ... Would you have seen the DxO number fan boys and the Nikonian trolls on this website bashing Canon's sensors?

Well, these forums don't go back to 2009. They launched in July, 2010. So, here's a post from about one month after CR Forums first launched...

Gaaarbage.

Given this event, should Canon just throw in the damn towel? They've been floundering since 1D3, 1Ds3, and the 50D; they've had time enough and resources enough to retake superiority from Nikon.

Meanwhile, the Nikon D7000 will add another stop of ISO performance...

Seriously, I regret deeply that I did not buy a D90 and jump on the Nikon wagon; sure, Canon has slightly better resolution at low-ISOs, but Nikon <--- dynamic range, very high ISO performance on the D3s, cheaper budget lenses (you don't have to pay for a lens hood on top of it!), better crop lenses (35mm prime, instead of fitting a .55x converter to reduce image quality on a 50mm 1.8, better wide angle crop lenses)...

I just can't see where people on the Nikon side would be jealous of Canon equipment. You get 50% more MP on the 5D2 and 7D/60D/550D, but that's it. You throw in high dynamic range at ISO 100 and you get banding.

So the Nikonian trolls have been here since the beginning. However, I didn't coin the term 'DRones' until 2013...

Trolls have been on the internet since the day the first chat room opened. The Trolls had far less to talk about in 2010 when it comes to Nikon vs Canon. They became real bad when the D800 was released.

By the way the thread this all started with was joejohnbear saying that Canon withholds technology because of the bad economy. He can drag the discussion through different piles of poo to color it in different ways, but no matter how you bend it the concept is still just silly.

 

[takesome1]

Yup, no actual direct answer.

Avoiding the question:

"When trying to make a case for some position or idea, we frequently encounter questions which challenge the coherency or validity of that position. When we are able to adequately answer those questions, our position becomes stronger. When we cannot answer the questions, then our position is weaker. If, however, we avoid the question altogether, then our reasoning process itself is revealed as possibly weak.

It is unfortunately common that many important questions and challenges go unanswered — but why do people do this? There are surely many reasons, but a common one may be a desire to avoid admitting that they might be wrong. They might not have a good answer, and while “I don’t know” is certainly acceptable, it may represent an unacceptable admission of at least potential error."

+1

Some people like to reinvent history.

Five years ago Canon's product was superior to Nikons. They let Nikon catch up. If what you say is true I am not sure how that plays out as sound business strategy.

You're right, it's a terrible business strategy. That's why, over the past five years Canon has steadily lost dSLR market share to Nikon, and Canon is no longer the market leader by a significant margin.

Oh, wait...Nikon hasn't gained market share, and Canon is still the dSLR market leader by a significant margin.

I guess Canon's business strategy is sound, although your opinion of it is apparently not.

I had my morning laugh this morning. Looks like I will not have to go to Yahoo and read this mornings Dilbert either.

What is stupid about your post, not that others of your posts are not equally stupid. The questions you are coming up with have nothing to do with the original topic we were discussing. Which is your concept of technology companies withholding technology in a down turned economy.

 

[takesome1]

It's a business move, but you're welcome to question it.

Also, everyone's sales were down. Canon was "behind" in tech because it had nothing to compete with the D700 or D3. All of their pro cameras were 1.3 crop.

http://www.bythom.com/2010predictions.htm

Yup, your opinion over Thom Hogan's. Guess who has a better track record on analyzing the economy?

The D700 sensor was ahead of Canon's on low-light. Nikon had better f/2.8 zooms and supertelephotos. I knew because I SHOT on their system, I didn't just flip the pages of their catalog. Can you say the same? Just because DXO measurebators weren't on the scene fapping away doesn't take away that Nikon was doing VERY well five years ago. Bloody history revisionist.

And yeah, you got shut down by Neuro. You can't reword what you said, because it's all there in the thread.

That is laughable. Especially since Neuro commented on a comment I was making about your theories on marketing.

Go read Nikon's financial report for 2009, it was a downturn year for Nikon. I wonder why, they had such great technology at that time.

Canon had a 2.9% increase from previous year of 2008. Nikon far worse.

Quote from 2009 financial;
Within the consumer business unit, sales volumes of such new products as the competitively priced EOS
Digital Rebel T1i (EOS 500D) and advanced-amateur model EOS 7D digital SLR cameras recorded solid
growth.

Doesn't sound bad to me.

 

[ritholtz]

Canon will release next rebel with this same sensor. Am I going to see big improvement over t3i. I guess I should wait for next quarter bumper results from Canon.

 

[Loswr]

However;

Go back five years ... Would you have seen the DxO number fan boys and the Nikonian trolls on this website bashing Canon's sensors?

Well, these forums don't go back to 2009. They launched in July, 2010. So, here's a post from about one month after CR Forums first launched...

Gaaarbage.

Given this event, should Canon just throw in the damn towel? They've been floundering since 1D3, 1Ds3, and the 50D; they've had time enough and resources enough to retake superiority from Nikon.

Meanwhile, the Nikon D7000 will add another stop of ISO performance...

Seriously, I regret deeply that I did not buy a D90 and jump on the Nikon wagon; sure, Canon has slightly better resolution at low-ISOs, but Nikon <--- dynamic range, very high ISO performance on the D3s, cheaper budget lenses (you don't have to pay for a lens hood on top of it!), better crop lenses (35mm prime, instead of fitting a .55x converter to reduce image quality on a 50mm 1.8, better wide angle crop lenses)...

I just can't see where people on the Nikon side would be jealous of Canon equipment. You get 50% more MP on the 5D2 and 7D/60D/550D, but that's it. You throw in high dynamic range at ISO 100 and you get banding.

So the Nikonian trolls have been here since the beginning. However, I didn't coin the term 'DRones' until 2013...

Trolls have been on the internet since the day the first chat room opened. The Trolls had far less to talk about in 2010 when it comes to Nikon vs Canon. They became real bad when the D800 was released.

You suggested we wouldn't see trolls bashing Canon sensors here a few years ago. I showed the opposite. Now you come back with, well they were here, but they had less to talk about.

Never admit you are wrong when you can make excuses instead. Great motto to live by, good job. :

 

[tcmatthews]

If you shoot raw, then stick with ISO100 and be prepared to "underexpose" then fix in post.

well that's not good advice!

Care to explain why shooting at ISO100 but underexposed by 2 stops is worse than shooting at ISO400 on a Nikon 800/600 series?

Numbers are useful here.

Try it.

This is how I shoot low light on my 30D.. I stop at ISO800.. here's the implied readout noise levels from the DxO data... on the D800 looks like ISO200 is worth having but benefit rapidly drops beyond that.

that´s all fine, the data i mean.

but what if you only have 1024 tonal values you can boost because you underexposed so much.

from experience and not whitepapers i come to the conclusion that not underexposing by 2 stops and raising ISO instead i get the better images.

i usually shoot at a maximum of ISO 1600.

you may get a bit more noise but you also get more tonal values.
i can clean the noise in post but when i have banding it´s hard to fix that.

Personally I do not think that it is ever a good idea to underexpose by 2 stops on any camera. Unless you using it for artistic effect. So is it at that point underexposing?

I generally prefer to under on my Sony by at max 1.5 stops. 2 stops is pushing it a bit far.

It seems any time a discussion like this we fail to realize that Canon and Sony sensors are flat out different. The techniques for maximizing their performance are different. As is everyone's artistic expression. Canon ETTR, Sony/Nikon ETTL, but regardless of what is best approach for the camera EXPOSE FOR THE SCENE.

Last year I took a picture in the woods with my Nex6 in which I intentionally underexposed by 2 stops. Then in Lightroom adjusted exposure slider up 1 stop, highlights up 1 stop, shadows down 1 stop, and drove the black slider nearly all the way to black. The image was a little over saturated so I had to reduce saturation. It produced the image I intended to take and I have done very similar shots with my 60D.

There are no hard rules but In general as you go up in ISO the closer you need to be to proper exposure to the scene. The more DR in the scene the closer to proper exposure you need to be if you want the DR in the final picture.

The more DR the sensor has the more adjustment options exist in post at low ISO. So for the Sony sensors there are cases where using lower ISO and underexposing to keep shutter speed up is appropriate. The DR can be used to adjust in post.

Max ISO in general for me is the following.
Nex6/EOS M ISO 1600 (800 no noise reduction)
60D ISO 800(400 no noise reduction)
6D ISO 3200

 

[tcmatthews]

In my experience the ISO performance of the EOS M is better than the 60D. I expect the ISO performance of the 7D II to be better than the 70D.

We currently have an incomplete list of specs. So as usual I will withhold judgment until the camera is officially announced. It looks like it will be a larger camera than I would like but if it gets me usable ISO 3200 in a crop camera I might be tempted.

What I consider usable is completely subjective. Until then I will wait for the images.

 

[takesome1]

Never admit you are wrong when you can make excuses instead. Great motto to live by, good job. :

Pull text out of context, bash the person when you did not bother to understand the context of the comments for no reason and hit them hard. If it makes you feel better about yourself good for you.

Start another thread Complain about the "trolls" and coin words for them, as if that makes you superior somehow. Then after years you turn in to one yourself.

 

[joejohnbear]

This is the quote that I'm referring to:

"The only camera maker that hasn't clearly succumbed to the "follow the shouts" form of design so far is Canon. Sure, they've tested some waters with a smaller/lighter DSLR and an even smaller mirrorless camera that devolve from their DSLRs, but those are natural progressions given the "real" needs in the market. Some might say "Canon's behind, Sony is going to eat their lunch." Evidence so far suggests that Canon still has a far bigger plate than Sony has and Sony's plate isn't empty yet, so that would just be more hyperbole for the moment.

Canon has the most to lose by getting decisions wrong and following the user claim of the moment, so I don't expect them to do what Sony has and basically throw a huge number of different camera designs on the market to see which one sticks. Canon also has other businesses that can help stabilize their overall business as the camera group tries to figure out the proper future course. So they can risk being a bit conservative in trying to figure out the changing camera market."

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/trends-fore-and-aft.html

"Every indication is that Canon regards cameras as a fully mature market and is managing it as such."
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/february-2014-nikon-news/camera-company-financials.html

Sure, it's a bit of a tangent, but it's true, you're a catalog reader, not a real-life Nikon shooter like Thom who's predicted the market time and time again, INCLUDING this 7D Mk II announcement (focus is on focus, not sensor).

Yup, no actual direct answer.

Avoiding the question:

"When trying to make a case for some position or idea, we frequently encounter questions which challenge the coherency or validity of that position. When we are able to adequately answer those questions, our position becomes stronger. When we cannot answer the questions, then our position is weaker. If, however, we avoid the question altogether, then our reasoning process itself is revealed as possibly weak.

It is unfortunately common that many important questions and challenges go unanswered — but why do people do this? There are surely many reasons, but a common one may be a desire to avoid admitting that they might be wrong. They might not have a good answer, and while “I don’t know” is certainly acceptable, it may represent an unacceptable admission of at least potential error."

+1

Some people like to reinvent history.

Five years ago Canon's product was superior to Nikons. They let Nikon catch up. If what you say is true I am not sure how that plays out as sound business strategy.

You're right, it's a terrible business strategy. That's why, over the past five years Canon has steadily lost dSLR market share to Nikon, and Canon is no longer the market leader by a significant margin.

Oh, wait...Nikon hasn't gained market share, and Canon is still the dSLR market leader by a significant margin.

I guess Canon's business strategy is sound, although your opinion of it is apparently not.

I had my morning laugh this morning. Looks like I will not have to go to Yahoo and read this mornings Dilbert either.

What is stupid about your post, not that others of your posts are not equally stupid. The questions you are coming up with have nothing to do with the original topic we were discussing. Which is your concept of technology companies withholding technology in a down turned economy.

 

[joejohnbear]

See my post with a link to Thom Hogan's article.

However;

Go back five years ... Would you have seen the DxO number fan boys and the Nikonian trolls on this website bashing Canon's sensors?

Well, these forums don't go back to 2009. They launched in July, 2010. So, here's a post from about one month after CR Forums first launched...

Gaaarbage.

Given this event, should Canon just throw in the damn towel? They've been floundering since 1D3, 1Ds3, and the 50D; they've had time enough and resources enough to retake superiority from Nikon.

Meanwhile, the Nikon D7000 will add another stop of ISO performance...

Seriously, I regret deeply that I did not buy a D90 and jump on the Nikon wagon; sure, Canon has slightly better resolution at low-ISOs, but Nikon <--- dynamic range, very high ISO performance on the D3s, cheaper budget lenses (you don't have to pay for a lens hood on top of it!), better crop lenses (35mm prime, instead of fitting a .55x converter to reduce image quality on a 50mm 1.8, better wide angle crop lenses)...

I just can't see where people on the Nikon side would be jealous of Canon equipment. You get 50% more MP on the 5D2 and 7D/60D/550D, but that's it. You throw in high dynamic range at ISO 100 and you get banding.

So the Nikonian trolls have been here since the beginning. However, I didn't coin the term 'DRones' until 2013...

Trolls have been on the internet since the day the first chat room opened. The Trolls had far less to talk about in 2010 when it comes to Nikon vs Canon. They became real bad when the D800 was released.

By the way the thread this all started with was joejohnbear saying that Canon withholds technology because of the bad economy. He can drag the discussion through different piles of poo to color it in different ways, but no matter how you bend it the concept is still just silly.

 

[Loswr]

We've now had several pages where the debate boiled down to a debate about semantics. Semantics about a point that was about something that really didn't have anything to do with the 7D II specs that have been confirmed.

Compared to the hundreds of pages wasted on DRoning DRivel, 'several pages' is nothing. :

 

[crashpc]

We've now had several pages where the debate boiled down to a debate about semantics. Semantics about a point that was about something that really didn't have anything to do with the 7D II specs that have been confirmed.

Are you guys having fun yet?

Okay, you was a tad faster. From previous discussion it seems that he who bought Nikon camera knows more about market. :-D DOH I´m pretty lost here, but what did I expect....

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Just another great day on Canonrumers. ;D

You guys are a hoot!

 

[Khalai]

This thread is hilarious. It's better than Duracell rabbit, because it's going and going ang going and going... (repeat ad libitum/nauseam)

 

[joejohnbear]

It's a problem, sure, but if you shoot landscape, it's not an issue if you know how to properly exposure blend. That's what fine art landscape photographers have been doing for over a decade now. High DR just makes things more convenient.

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

Go shooting in mountains where you've got snow and sunshine hitting the snow and shadows deep in the valley. There you want to keep "detail in the snow" (so that you don't just have big white areas) plus you also want to keep shadows from and in trees, etc.

Is that real world enough for you or are you going to say "Post a picture or it doesn't exist"?

Since I've shot scenes like that and not had a problem: pictures or it didn't happen.

I'm sick of words. I'm sick of opinions. I'm sick of theorizing. I'm sick of people misremembering underexposure tests as "real world normal exposure and there was banding!"

Pics or it didn't happen. If I was a mod it would be: pics or you are banned for a week

Since you claim all of these things are possible, why don't you lead from the front and show us how it is done?

Where are your pictures showing that Canon doesn't have a problem with keeping highlights and shadows?

Lots of people saying Canon's cameras can't do it and you're insisting that they can.

Show us.

 

[Loswr]

It's only DRoning DRivel to you (and a handful of others here who seem to have a seething hate for the subject.) It's not an unreasonable subject to discuss, especially given the (now very long standing) state of Canon sensor technology, and when you guys jump in with your name calling and belittling...

Ahhhh, yes. That explains ZigJakeyDean posting Diet Coke box DRivel in a thread on Canon LCD color tones. Or Mikael's barbecues and awnings in thread after thread...we all recall how tolerant you were of those posts.

Maybe one day I, too, will find DReligion, kneel before the Holy Exmor, and Mikael can retroactively become my Prophet with Dean as his disciple.

 

[Marsu42]

It's a problem, sure, but if you shoot landscape, it's not an issue if you know how to properly exposure blend.

I'm not much of a landscape photog, but in my limited experience it's surprising how many parts of the nature move if you look at them @20mp 100% crop. Of course pasting another exposure of sky over a landscape is easy and there are good programs to do exposure blending for you. But if low- and high dr parts get intertwined like sun through leaves, it gets tricky - or am I mistaken?

 

[unfocused]

This thread is hilarious. It's better than Duracell rabbit, because it's going and going ang going and going... (repeat ad libitum/nauseam)

Just another great day on Canonrumers. ;D

You guys are a hoot!

This has gone through so many levels, I can't even tell who is arguing what anymore. Maybe the teams need to adopt a name and start wearing shirts. One thing is for sure, that "typing at the speed of thought" thing isn't working out too well. There is a lot more typing than thought going on.

What was this thread about? Oh yeah, Canon is introducing a new 7D.