Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed

[dtaylor]

Are the improvements to Nikon APS-C cameras "unrealistic"? They seem to be not only realistic but highly beneficial for many photographers and types of photography. The D5300 is poised to completely topple the Canon domination of astrophotography thanks to its improved sensor and ultra low noise. The D800/810 could very likely become the first "budget" alternative to a full-blown high quality CCD camera once the black point hack is applied. And that's just in astrophotography.

When you browse astro landscapes on Flickr or 500px the key difference that stands out is format. You can generally tell a FF shot from a crop shot, especially when the FF shot is made using a fast wide prime. In this application light gathering ability rules.

You do not see any differences within formats, i.e. you can't reliably guess Canon or Nikon.

For tracked space only shots and star trails not even format seems to matter. Obviously since you are using stacking for light gathering. But for astro landscapes it stands out.

If I had to choose based entirely on astro landscapes I would take a 6D or 5D3 any day over any SoNikon crop camera. Given Canon's stellar fast wide primes, the only camera I would maybe take instead would be the Sony A7S with an EF adapter.

Again, real world vs. measurebating. Canon isn't loosing sales because the measurements you claim make all the difference in the world seem to make zero difference to the people producing stunning work on Flickr and 500px week after week after week.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Even if it has the 70D sensor (which it may not), this does not necessarily mean similar video quality, it's all about the processing.

I think the 7D II is poised to do better video than the 70D, given the use of dual DIGIC 6. They claim that DIGIC 6 is capable of making ISO 1600 in video look like ISO 400, or a two-stop reduction in noise:

http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/digic_6_image_quality

I'd say that bodes very well for the 7D II's video capabilities. It might help high ISO NR for stills as well...this is the first DSLR they have been used in, so we'll have to see. I think DIGIC 6 has a lot of the same functionality as Sony's BionzX, so I suspect video in general, and particularly at high ISO, should be pretty darn good.

Not sure about the line skipping..but with DUAL digic 6, it really shouldn't be necessary.

Yeah with dual digic 6 they should easily be able to do full sensor read without skipping and provide, at worst, 1DX 1080p video quality. It's a bit of a shame they didn't offer it 1080p RAW. One would hope they got rid of the mushy waxy DNR processing they are so fond of and expand it to at least 10bits per channel, but I doubt it.

I have a feeling 5D3 video with ML RAW will still be considerably better.
And some rumors say the D750 may offer up high-quality 4k next week.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Even if it has the 70D sensor (which it may not), this does not necessarily mean similar video quality, it's all about the processing.

I think the 7D II is poised to do better video than the 70D, given the use of dual DIGIC 6. They claim that DIGIC 6 is capable of making ISO 1600 in video look like ISO 400, or a two-stop reduction in noise:

http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/digic_6_image_quality

I'd say that bodes very well for the 7D II's video capabilities. It might help high ISO NR for stills as well...this is the first DSLR they have been used in, so we'll have to see. I think DIGIC 6 has a lot of the same functionality as Sony's BionzX, so I suspect video in general, and particularly at high ISO, should be pretty darn good.

Not sure about the line skipping..but with DUAL digic 6, it really shouldn't be necessary.

with a full sensor read it should also instantly get nearly 2 full stops better SNR for video compared to the 7D

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

They are doing just fine with good dslrs featuring mediocre sensors and good phase af systems, at least atm. If they add a stellar live view af and good usability, what amount of people outside geek forums really care about dr (dr. what)?.

Not picking on you Marsu, because your basic point about what people care about is valid, but I am pretty tired of claims that Canon sensors are "mediocre," which is one of the more mild terms used.

We have reached the point in sensor development where, absent some major breakthrough for some magical no noise-200-steps-of-dynamic-range-shoot-in-the-pitch black technology the differences between all major brands of sensors don't amount to a dime.

Every sensor -- even that little sensor in your iPhone -- produces better pictures than were generally available during the film era. Full frame, APS-C, Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, it doesn't matter. They all produce stellar results that were impossible not that long ago.

The only way anyone can tell any difference is by invoking obscure laboratory test results, blowing up images on a computer screen to bizarre proportions or shooting straight into the sun.

That is not true at low ISO when shooting scenes with a lot of DR. In those cases Canon is like 2-3 stops behind and that amounts to a heck of a lot more than a dime. At ISO6400 the differences are more on the order of a dime though (although a couple Canon and a few Nikon do offer an extra 1-2 stops DR at high ISO compared to the rest).

 

[dtaylor]

or you know, pictures taken in a stunning redwood forest or whatnot, but really it's the same nonsense, redwoods, lens caps, it's all the same lab geek stuff and matters to nobody who actually is an artiste and takes pictures and knows how to use a camera.... :

Please show us your redwood shots where the SoNikon sensor clearly out performed the Canon sensor. Thank you!

(I won't hold my breath : )

 

[PureClassA]

Even if it has the 70D sensor (which it may not), this does not necessarily mean similar video quality, it's all about the processing.

I think the 7D II is poised to do better video than the 70D, given the use of dual DIGIC 6. They claim that DIGIC 6 is capable of making ISO 1600 in video look like ISO 400, or a two-stop reduction in noise:

http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/digic_6_image_quality

I'd say that bodes very well for the 7D II's video capabilities. It might help high ISO NR for stills as well...this is the first DSLR they have been used in, so we'll have to see. I think DIGIC 6 has a lot of the same functionality as Sony's BionzX, so I suspect video in general, and particularly at high ISO, should be pretty darn good.

Not sure about the line skipping..but with DUAL digic 6, it really shouldn't be necessary.

with a full sensor read it should also instantly get nearly 2 full stops better SNR for video compared to the 7D

But didn't the recent firmware update for the 5D3 allow for uncompressed output in RAW video? Maybe a sign for the 7D2? The specs didn't list RAW output but nothing to suggest it might now show up with it, especially if what I said about the firmware update is accurate. Am I mistaken?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Even if it has the 70D sensor (which it may not), this does not necessarily mean similar video quality, it's all about the processing.

They claim that DIGIC 6 is capable of making ISO 1600 in video look like ISO 400, or a two-stop reduction in noise:

http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/digic_6_image_quality

Wow that's a BIG claim from Canon's part! If that actually materializes into the 7D video being two stops ahead of the 70D in low-light, that would be huge in the video world. That's way ahead of all the competition. I also can't imagine they will do line-skipping with moire and aliasing as on the 70D, if they did, it would be a clear sign from Canon for abandoning the filmmaking market.

I absolutely don't need a 4K camera. I just want it to be a great 1080p camera, with C100-like detail and high ISO noise, and with NO moire & aliasing as on the 5D mk III. Perhaps this will also have Clean HDMI out with mirroring like the 5D mk III. It seems to have a headphone jack (finally!) like the 5D III too. DPAF is a great addition for filmmakers. Just hope they give a great 1080p image. This will be my deciding factor of sticking with the Canon ecosystem or jumping to the A7s/GH4 crowd.

I think that is actually very worrisome. Canon video already looks waxy and loses detail anywhere there is not extreme contrast differences. So if D6 just ups the wax works even more.... YECH!!!!

Now if they avoid line skipping, that could give it a REAL 2 stop SNR advantage for video over the 7D (just as the 5D3 has like 2 stops better SNR compared to the 5D2 for video). I do expect it to have that, so it should have 2 real stops better SNR than the 7D for video.

But the wax works stuff scares me and I could see even a 4k offering using so much over-processing that areas of modest contrast might hold less fine texture and detail than ML 1080p RAW from 5D3.

 

[dtaylor]

That is not true at low ISO when shooting scenes with a lot of DR. In those cases Canon is like 2-3 stops behind and that amounts to a heck of a lot more than a dime.

Eagerly awaiting your real world sample photos which illustrate this ;D

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Ironic that they lock themselves into 1080p for their wildlife camera for another 3-5 years on the same day that SanDisc announces a high-speed, high-capacity card to suit the needs of all the current and arriving 4k cams.

that is also my main concern.

or canon plans to release a MK2 successor in 2 years?

I think the 5D4 with 4k next spring. But it does seem to show a bit of a lack of foresight to have held it back from the 7D2. The 7D2 certainly has the processing power to handle it (it has more processing power than the 1DC). It's not killer, since it's a reach/action/stills cam, but it still seems pretty short-sighted to me and the extra reach for wildlife video guys might have been nice.

 

[Tugela]

So I guess they decided not to take video seriously then.....disappointing.

Jippee, for once they took a good decision :-> ... if you want 4k video and a high dynamic range, a crop sensor won't do it anyway - so they probably moved these features to the 5d4.

That is not true, full frame creates more limitations on video than a crop sensor. A 5D4 would only be good for static video due to depth of field issues, it is entirely the wrong camera type for general purpose video. That is the reason why so many camcorders (which are designed specifically for video) have small sensors. The APS-C sensor size is roughly about the right compromise size for the two types of video people shoot, so it is the appropriate sensor type for a still/video hybrid system.

Canon have dropped the ball with the 7D2. I'm sure it will be a fine stills camera, but it is a fail as an integrated imaging system. Perhaps they could improve some things later through firmware, but the hardware limitations such as the use of Digic 6 processors and the lack of a touch screen cripple the camera for video use. There will be far superior alternatives as integrated imaging systems in competition, and the 7D2 will be a long way behind those cameras.

What in the world are you talking about? DIGIC 6 is a huge bonus for video. It's far more powerful than DIGIC 5+, and it has specific build-in video encoding features. The use of DIGIC 6 is NOT a hardware limitation, especially for video...it's a hardware benefit.

I don't know about the use of a touch screen. I think that's purely a matter of personal preference, so I don't think it's fair to say it cripples the 7D II for video. Canon still has some of the best lenses, and their excellent Cinema lenses, despite being expensive, still come in EF mount versions...so they can be used on a 7D II. Overall, as a system, I think the 7D II will be a great video camera. It's single biggest shortcoming is the lack of 4k. A pair of DIGIC 6 should be more than capable of handling the necessary throughput for 4k, so why it wasn't included is beyond me. And, as you say yourself, the smaller "super 35mm"-esque APS-C sensor is good for video users who don't have the skill to fully and properly utilize the benefits of a FF camera.

I think you should go read up on what DIGIC 6 is and what it does. It's one of the big reasons I personally think the 7D II IS a big video camera release. We still need to know how it pulls the data off the sensor...hopefully it's binning, rather than line skipping. If it is, then...awesome. Bummer about no 4k, but still...overall...awesome for video.

The Digic 6 is the same generation as the Digic DV 4 chips used in Canon's current high end consumer/prosumer video camcorders, only not optimized for video as the DV chips are. The encoder capabilities are the same. Performance is not going to be all that much different. The market already has lots of experience with these chips in consumer cameras, so we should not expect capabilities that are not already here.

The technology in the new 7D2 is the technology of the last few years, not the technology of the next few years. I would guess the reason is that the camera has been in development for a long time, but has been stalled for one reason or another. It would have been an awesome camera 2 years ago, but now it just seems mildly dated. I suspect that it basically has been dumped on the market, along with bunch of hype, so they can recover their investment. I would not be at all surprised if we see more advanced cameras in the 70D line appear in the relatively near future.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Then why can't any of the DRones produce real world examples for the rest of us? :

We did in the other thread.

 

[ULFULFSEN]

Again, real world vs. measurebating. Canon isn't loosing sales because the measurements you claim make all the difference in the world seem to make zero difference to the people producing stunning work on Flickr and 500px week after week after week.

with their smartphones...

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If Nikon does 4k, it'll have downsides, or if it's great, Canon will just release firmware updates on all of their cameras for 4k.

One could hope, but if marketing had them lock out 4k to begin with that just seems like more let us cripple it as much as we can and not even get out of the hardware what the hardware can do. And it's a big if to assume they will have a 4k video firmware upcoming.

Not a big deal, and do you really need 4k right now? Do you have a 4k monitor and hard drive array and thunderbolt 2 system?

4k runs just fine off of a regular HDs
although I do have a USB 3.0 raid drive too, anyway

and I do have 4k screens

And sometimes you visit amazing places and it may be a long time before you get back again, it's nicer to be able to capture it in 4k now.

I predict better paper specs (more cross-type points) than the 1dx, but lower real-world accuracy than the 1dx simply because the full frame sensor gathers more light to determine autofocus. It could be very close though, who knows. The 1dx will still have its place and be worth its price, regardless, at least that's my prediction.

That is not how AF works. The 1DX being FF doesn't give the AF more light. They don't use the sensor for AF. And the special AF sensors don't work well if they are too large due to angles of incoming light and mount distance, etc. so the AF array sensors are basically the same size for the aps-c, aps-h and FF cameras.

So I think it will likely have all around better AF than the 1DX.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Digic 6...so this won't be 'generation 1' of this processor but I am trying to understand a few things about sensors.

1. So what stays the same in order for it to remain a DIGIC 6 processor? Are there aspects of the 'architecture' that will be identical across all generations of this processor?

2. Aside from a name, what stops it from being DIGIC 7?

3. Can performance in this iteration be radically improved over earlier ones? How far can one 'dial up' the performance?

4. The 1DX-esque facial recognition function in the 7D2, is this also handled by the DIGIC 6 or is there a dedicated processor to handle this?

There's my silly questions. Hoping somebody can help out

The fist 7D had dual Digic 4 chips. The 1DX had Dual Digic 5 for processing plus an extra single Digic 4 that handled nothing but the autofocus. Hence it's ungodly precision and speed. I shot one for an entire weekend, over 8000 frames and lots a 12fps bursts. It's amazing.

The digic 4 is only used for the all points color-tracking AF mode and not for any other mode of AF.

If the 7D2 can match that... yeeeeha. I would think in theory you would need less processing power on a crop sensor than a full frame.

That said the Digic generations have improved exponentially. The Digic 5 have many times more processing power than the 4, the Digic 5+ having 2-3 times the power of the 5, and now the Digic 6. I haven't seen numbers compared to the 5 or 5+ but this is the FIRST DLSR body it will be used in. And not just one but 2. The Digic 6 is probably (based on previous generational history) 5-10x more powerful than 2 digic 4 chips put together. Hence my earlier theory this may be intentional overkill for this body for future upgrades.

It certainly should have had the power to have driven not just non-line skipped 1080p but also 4k as well.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

or you know, pictures taken in a stunning redwood forest or whatnot, but really it's the same nonsense, redwoods, lens caps, it's all the same lab geek stuff and matters to nobody who actually is an artiste and takes pictures and knows how to use a camera.... :

Please show us your redwood shots where the SoNikon sensor clearly out performed the Canon sensor. Thank you!

(I won't hold my breath : )

I didn't have one with me on that trip. But it's easy to know what 2-3 stops better looks like and to see how that would help such a shot a lot and you can compare to other shots taken with exmor.

Maybe the DR guys wouldn't get driven to act like such pests if you your ilk wouldn't constantly toss nonsense all over the place and would be able to just admit that there is a single thing that your precious Canon is not the best at.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

or you know, pictures taken in a stunning redwood forest or whatnot, but really it's the same nonsense, redwoods, lens caps, it's all the same lab geek stuff and matters to nobody who actually is an artiste and takes pictures and knows how to use a camera.... :

Please show us your redwood shots where the SoNikon sensor clearly out performed the Canon sensor. Thank you!

(I won't hold my breath : )

And when Fred posted same shots, same time, same cam and showed a big difference then you just had more excuses for why the differnce was not really there.

 

[joejohnbear]

Unrealistic is to expect a 7D II to have a better sensor than a 5DIII. Why would Canon sacrifice $3500 and $6000 price points within a couple of years to go after amateurs who never invest in their pro lenses? Riddle me that. It's called staying in the business. Don't put all your tech in one basket, then everyone is going to bitch and moan that next generations don't improve on much, then camera sales will fall, and then Canon's out of business, and then all of a sudden your warranty doesn't mean jack shit. Let them shaft CPS, fast repairs, etc., b.c. you want all your goodies in one year? Ask any product engineer and what they have to deal with in the marketing departments, and you'll see what I mean. I doubt a D5300 can outshoot a 5DIII in the worst of worst lighting conditions, but be my guest. Sensor size always affects AF and IQ, not counting the several generation old cameras like the 5d classic.

I agree. A 7D II with enormously, unrealistically improved sensor (all the people clamoring, oooh I wish this had more DR than the 5DIII) is just plain stupid when a 5DIV hasn't been released. I think you're right, Canon will iterate with the 7D II and release their cutting edge tech in the 5D IV and 1DXII.

How can anything be "unrealistically" improved? How do you define "unrealistic" in this context? For that matter, who is qualified to define what "unrealistic" is?

Are the improvements to Nikon APS-C cameras "unrealistic"? They seem to be not only realistic but highly beneficial for many photographers and types of photography. The D5300 is poised to completely topple the Canon domination of astrophotography thanks to its improved sensor and ultra low noise. The D800/810 could very likely become the first "budget" alternative to a full-blown high quality CCD camera once the black point hack is applied. And that's just in astrophotography.

I think it's incredibly unrealistic to call any kind of improvement "unrealistic". Any and all improvements in technology can be utilized, usually in many more than one way.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Even if it has the 70D sensor (which it may not), this does not necessarily mean similar video quality, it's all about the processing.

I think the 7D II is poised to do better video than the 70D, given the use of dual DIGIC 6. They claim that DIGIC 6 is capable of making ISO 1600 in video look like ISO 400, or a two-stop reduction in noise:

http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/digic_6_image_quality

I'd say that bodes very well for the 7D II's video capabilities. It might help high ISO NR for stills as well...this is the first DSLR they have been used in, so we'll have to see. I think DIGIC 6 has a lot of the same functionality as Sony's BionzX, so I suspect video in general, and particularly at high ISO, should be pretty darn good.

Not sure about the line skipping..but with DUAL digic 6, it really shouldn't be necessary.

with a full sensor read it should also instantly get nearly 2 full stops better SNR for video compared to the 7D

But didn't the recent firmware update for the 5D3 allow for uncompressed output in RAW video? Maybe a sign for the 7D2? The specs didn't list RAW output but nothing to suggest it might now show up with it, especially if what I said about the firmware update is accurate. Am I mistaken?

No, it allowed for uncompressed NON-raw video.
And it barely improved things in the slightest since it turns out the damage they do happens prior to h.264 encoding.

ML RAW firmware did allow for uncompressed RAW and that did boost the quality by an incredible amount.
If Canon had decided to do that for the 7D2 you'd think it would've been in the spec leak (but who knows, we'll see).

 

[PureClassA]

Even if it has the 70D sensor (which it may not), this does not necessarily mean similar video quality, it's all about the processing.

I think the 7D II is poised to do better video than the 70D, given the use of dual DIGIC 6. They claim that DIGIC 6 is capable of making ISO 1600 in video look like ISO 400, or a two-stop reduction in noise:

http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/digic_6_image_quality

I'd say that bodes very well for the 7D II's video capabilities. It might help high ISO NR for stills as well...this is the first DSLR they have been used in, so we'll have to see. I think DIGIC 6 has a lot of the same functionality as Sony's BionzX, so I suspect video in general, and particularly at high ISO, should be pretty darn good.

Not sure about the line skipping..but with DUAL digic 6, it really shouldn't be necessary.

with a full sensor read it should also instantly get nearly 2 full stops better SNR for video compared to the 7D

But didn't the recent firmware update for the 5D3 allow for uncompressed output in RAW video? Maybe a sign for the 7D2? The specs didn't list RAW output but nothing to suggest it might now show up with it, especially if what I said about the firmware update is accurate. Am I mistaken?

No, it allowed for uncompressed NON-raw video.
And it barely improved things in the slightest since it turns out the damage they do happens prior to h.264 encoding.

ML RAW firmware did allow for uncompressed RAW and that did boost the quality by an incredible amount.
If Canon had decided to do that for the 7D2 you'd think it would've been in the spec leak (but who knows, we'll see).

Ahh! Much obliged. I don't really do video but I just started fooling with it on my 6D for fun. So the ML hacked 5D3 is still the bad boy

 

[joejohnbear]

Don't get me wrong, I could appreciate additional dynamic range, and Canon is definitely "behind" on that development and the high megapixel cameras. But if you've been monitoring cameras for long enough, the bodies keep leapfrogging each other, but the lenses and customer support (CPS) stay constant. The 5D II used to be the high megapixel camera and the D700 the high accuracy focusing sports full frame, then Nikon and Canon switched places with the D800 and 5DIII. I'd even suspect there's some sort of conspiracy or agreement between the two companies, haha. The 5DIV or their high megapixel camera will prob swap places with Nikon, or the two will bring out their own competing product segments at different times (D750 vs Canon's high megapixel camera). Like I said, I love the DR on the D810, but there's more to a camera than just DR. Both camera systems are great, and you can't go wrong going either way. Just a few minor differences in different departments.

or you know, pictures taken in a stunning redwood forest or whatnot, but really it's the same nonsense, redwoods, lens caps, it's all the same lab geek stuff and matters to nobody who actually is an artiste and takes pictures and knows how to use a camera.... :

Please show us your redwood shots where the SoNikon sensor clearly out performed the Canon sensor. Thank you!

(I won't hold my breath : )

I didn't have one with me on that trip. But it's easy to know what 2-3 stops better looks like and to see how that would help such a shot a lot and you can compare to other shots taken with exmor.

Maybe the DR guys wouldn't get driven to act like such pests if you your ilk wouldn't constantly toss nonsense all over the place and would be able to just admit that there is a single thing that your precious Canon is not the best at.