Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed

[dtaylor]

Maybe photos will help explain terminology.

This is the same (or similar as we shall see) total DR: http://s9.postimg.org/utzoq40rz/same_dr.png

This is what less total DR would look like if there was a large difference in total DR: http://s10.postimg.org/d004zl1nd/less_dr.png

And this is similar total DR, but with less shadow latitude because one has color/banding noise that the other does not: http://s14.postimg.org/d39sl03w1/less_latitude.png

I say "similar total DR" because there is clipping in the upper left corner of the Canon image pushed. This is a total DR difference. It's that 1 stop difference that IR measures, though we have to push the shadows to realize it's even there in this case.

(Note: these are SMALL screenshots for illustration only. So please, no one flip out over some artifact of size and start screaming that the Nikon RAW file is really better or the Canon RAW file is really worse. These tiny screenshots have diagonal banding that's not in the RAW files for example.)

 

[takesome1]

Maybe photos will help explain terminology.

This is the same (or similar as we shall see) total DR: http://s9.postimg.org/utzoq40rz/same_dr.png

This is what less total DR would look like if there was a large difference in total DR: http://s10.postimg.org/d004zl1nd/less_dr.png

And this is similar total DR, but with less shadow latitude because one has color/banding noise that the other does not: http://s14.postimg.org/d39sl03w1/less_latitude.png

I say "similar total DR" because there is clipping in the upper left corner of the Canon image pushed. This is a total DR difference. It's that 1 stop difference that IR measures, though we have to push the shadows to realize it's even there in this case.

(Note: these are SMALL screenshots for illustration only. So please, no one flip out over some artifact of size and start screaming that the Nikon RAW file is really better or the Canon RAW file is really worse. These tiny screenshots have diagonal banding that's not in the RAW files for example.)

While these may show what we are looking for, the examples would never prove anything without knowing the full level of control that each shot had. There lies the problem when posting files to convince someone that one body is better than the other. You can use your experiences to show someone what results you have and it may help them and they may believe what you tell them. You will seldom convince someone in a debate as they want firm hard proof, and even when they get it they may not be convinced.

 

[dtaylor]

While these may show what we are looking for, the examples would never prove anything without knowing the full level of control that each shot had.

That was a post to illustrate what total DR means and what shadow latitude means. That's all. Not a comparison of bodies (I used Dean's shots for convenience). So if you looked up photographic dynamic range and shadow latitude in a textbook on photography you might see photos just like that. An illustration of the meaning of words.

I did this because there is severe misunderstanding by certain people in this thread regarding the meaning of these two terms. When you push shadows and see roughly the same detail but more noise that is not a difference in dynamic range but in shadow latitude. If it was a DR difference there wouldn't be any detail in one, but blocked/clipped blacks.

That's all

 

[takesome1]

While these may show what we are looking for, the examples would never prove anything without knowing the full level of control that each shot had.

Are you...are you serious?

No...you're baiting me, right? Yeah, that's it. That must be it. Bait, right? ???

There lies the problem when posting files to convince someone that one body is better than the other.

No...you're...no please...you're serious?!

That was a post to illustrate what total DR means and what shadow latitude means. That's all. Not a comparison of bodies (I used Dean's shots for convenience). So if you looked up photographic dynamic range and shadow latitude in a textbook on photography you might see photos just like that. An illustration of the meaning of words.

I could have drawn it in MS Paint. Maybe I should have.

Yes I know they were to illustrate. The point I was making is that even if RAW files were given to someone to prove a point you couldn't make the point to the majority of the folks on this forum. (unless they agreed already)

 

[Loswr]

I think it's sad that people like me are forced to look elsewhere to satisfy their needs. Seems that's the case though. Just don't expect us to go quietly...we'll kick and scratch and scream until Canon finally delivers on the TTSNBS front, because we love Canon.

I agree, it would be great if Canon would please everyone. But that's a tall order – some want more DR, some want 4K video, some what other stuff. Canon cares about what people want...but mainly insofar as that helps them make a profit.

At least there's an elsewhere to look. You've talked about renting a D810, but honestly I'd rent an a7R with adapter and see if you run into issues with Sony's RAW compression. If not, that's likely a better way to go given your lens investment. I've said I'd buy a D8x0 if landscapes were my main interest, they're not...but if I wanted to try Exmor, I'd go the Sony route mainly for the TS-E 24mm that I have and the TS-E 17mm that's next on my list.

 

[Sporgon]

You have under exposed for this scene. Pic 0 histogram shows this, pic 2 shows that you have too much highlight detail after bringing in down 100.

Did you bracket for such a scene of difficult EV range ? If you had a 2/3 or 1 stop over exp you would be able to work the data much better.

At least you are trying with examples. Don't be frightened to go a little to the right, learn to judge when the LCD 'blinkies' are just joking. If you are working from the rear LCD picture set your picture style to 'neutral' and contrast '0' when shooting a scene like this so you will have a better visual of what the raw will able to cope with. Don't be afraid to bracket.

 

[Marsu42]

I did bracket it. At +1 EV the highlights are unrecoverable.

Usually you can recover ~1ev from the raw files, so imho your bracketing spacing is too small and only will create problems when assembling more shots than necessary.

The snow is *really* bright and the shadows in the tree quite dark.

To be on topic concerning the 7d2: Rejoice, in such scenes, no sensor dynamic range upgrade will be enough. Snow is very tough, a good choice is to bracket with a very large spacing (like 3ev) and then do not hdr tone mapping, but exposure fusion in postprocessing as the scene consists of very dark and very bright. To minimize wasted exposures, do exposure correction to get the correct brackets.

Where higher dynamic range of 14-15ev does help a lot though is in standard bright daylight to get shadow detail w/o blowing the sky. You can use Magic Lantern's raw histogram to show you exactly how much dr the scene has.

 

[x-vision]

I did this because there is severe misunderstanding by certain people in this thread regarding the meaning of these two terms.

Canon is using 14-bit RAW files. So, the range between the min and max values will be 14 EVs.

In a high contrast scene, you are likely going to clip both highlights and shadows.
Thus, you will have RAW values a ranging from 0 to 16,384 - which the histogram will show as 14-stops of DR.

The thing is, even though you've captured light intensities ranging between 0 and 16,384 - which is 14-stops of DR (technically) - you are not taking into consideration the noise.

You can't ignore noise, though, as it actually limits DR.
As per Imatest, which you are using as a reference, DR is closely related to noise: high noise implies low dynamic range.

So, you are claiming that Canon sensor have 14 stops of DR - but that's only if you ignore the noise.
Without accounting for the noise, any camera that uses 14-bit RAWs will technically have 14-stops of DR.
But when you consider the noise as well, the real DR will be less.

The engineering definition of DR does account for noise - and so does DxO.

I summary, this is the mistake that you are making: you are ignoring the noise.
Think this through and you will see that you can't do that.

Here's a good article with the theory and some good illustrations (it's from a professor in physics):
http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html

 

[Sporgon]

I did bracket it. At +1 EV the highlights are unrecoverable.

Usually you can recover ~1ev from the raw files, so imho your bracketing spacing is too small and only will create problems when assembling more shots than necessary.

The snow is *really* bright and the shadows in the tree quite dark.

To be on topic concerning the 7d2: Rejoice, in such scenes, no sensor dynamic range upgrade will be enough. Snow is very tough, a good choice is to bracket with a very large spacing (like 3ev) and then do not hdr tone mapping, but exposure fusion in postprocessing as the scene consists of very dark and very bright. To minimize wasted exposures, do exposure correction to get the correct brackets.

Where higher dynamic range of 14-15ev does help a lot though is in standard bright daylight to get shadow detail w/o blowing the sky. You can use Magic Lantern's raw histogram to show you exactly how much dr the scene has.

This is the point. You have to know when to let white be white.

Let's say that had been shot in exactly the same way on a D800. Probably about 85% of the scene is in heavy shadow opposed to the tiny amount of direct sun reflecting snow. Dilbert does exactly the same thing and lifts the majority of the scene. It's Exmor so he retains more detail and less noise. He's happy.

However, the majority of his picture will have been produced from under severely exposed data. When compared with someone using a superior technique / process, his image will be inferior even if that someone is using old tech such as 20D, or D70 or whatever.

 

[dufflover]

I still find it laughable though that in the end, it really really, really, does seem like people are all too happy for Canon to not get their DR up to where the competition is show things like changes in designs as a way to address it.
I don't think anyone would be so accommodating if say, CPU speeds of desktops/laptops and mobiles were like this. After all, a 5 year old computer can do stuff just fine too

 

[Khalai]

I still find it laughable though that in the end, it really really, really, does seem like people are all too happy for Canon to not get their DR up to where the competition is show things like changes in designs as a way to address it.
I don't think anyone would be so accommodating if say, CPU speeds of desktops/laptops and mobiles were like this. After all, a 5 year old computer can do stuff just fine too

My PC is 4 years old and still ticking good. LR5 and PS6 runs like a charm and starts up under 5s I bought myself two Intel SSDs however

 

[xps]

More pictures leaked:

http://thenewcamera.com/tag/canon-7d-mark-ii/

Text cited from this site:
More Images of the upcoming 7D Mark II camera leaked, the design is similar as its predecessor, canon 7D Mark II will feature a newly developed Dual Pixel AF CMOS sensor of 20.2MP and A new 65-point AF. All points cross type for more details click her

 

[xps]

What do you think of the design of the Cam?

Looks cleaned up & simplified

+: The button on the mode wheel

I hope they did not change the top menue (as the items are changed (e.g. Iso & flash +/-)

 

[Loswr]

Headline:

Canon Announces 7D Mark II with Massive Dynamic Range

 

[123Photog]

What do you think of the design of the Cam?

ergonomics is something canon is really perfect in (in my opinion).

i have some things i complain about but the design... nothing comes close.

 

[tayassu]

It is a great body design, just like the 5DIII. I wonder what that switch around the joystick does and why there are direction marks on the wheel... But otherwise, it is just great!

 

[DominoDude]

The top LCD is evidently from a camera that comes with 2 cards of different types. The mode dial is almost the same - looks like they baked together the autogreen-mode and the CA-mode. The left row of buttons on the back seem to have a slight change in their design, and the lower left front corner of the camera also seems more rounded.

 

[Loswr]

I wonder what that switch around the joystick does

Not sure, but I can tell you what I think/hope it is...a switch to toggle through AF point selection modes (auto, zone, single, spot, expansion). Currently that requires too many button presses, IMO.

 

[Loswr]

why there are direction marks on the wheel...

I'd guess those are part of silent controls for video shooting (change aperture, etc., without clicking the main dial).

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I wonder what that switch around the joystick does

Not sure, but I can tell you what I think/hope it is...a switch to toggle through AF point selection modes (auto, zone, single, spot, expansion). Currently that requires too many button presses, IMO.

I agree, that is a pain.