Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed

[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.

I don't know where the wax works comes from in Canon sensors. That is probably the biggest single difference in sensor IQ overall that I see between Canon camera and the competition (including Toshiba sensors). This isn't even a DR thing...it's just a basic IQ thing. Even the 5D III seems to have a bit of the waxworks. You can ultimately process it out, but it is more work. I don't know if that's due to Canon's overall imaging pipeline architecture, with ADCs off-die, or something else. Either way...I'm not sure that DIGIC 6 is the cause...it's been in the 7D (DIGIC 4) and 5D III (DIGIC 5), so it is probably something else.

It's either that DIGIC chips simply stink at image processing, the Canon team has decided to turn up all sorts of stupid anti-grain/anti-noise tech and turns even ISO100 video into wax works when simpky using different settings could avoid it, or marketing has them apply some sort of gaussian filter to make it not look like their 1DC and Cxx and such video.

All I know is if you use ML RAW which bypasses almost all processing, the video quality in the 5D3 is suddenly WORLDS better, it has tons and tons more detail and even has more DR as well. ML SAVED the 5D3 for video. It took it from a nice improvement (2 stops better and not much aliasing) but all the same waxy and low in detail in a disappointing manner into able to provide some really impressive 1080p video and that made the 5D3 a video beast. Without ML though....

It is not the compression stage, since the new firmware that allows for uncompressed, but processed video on the 5D3 provides barely any image quality improvement at all.

 

[joejohnbear]

Canon basically condones the Magic Lantern hack for the 5DIII, because they will not allow a first party, fully supported and official RAW recording function that would obliterate their C500 sales. They're thinking long term. However, for people not backed by major studios that demand first party and reliable firmware, the 5DIII with ML is great. Canon has a cease and desist notice for any ML tampering with the 1DX, they could certainly pursue ML if they wanted to, so let's be straight about one thing, ML is allowed to survive because Canon ALLOWs it to. Do you see ML on Nikon? Wonder why? ML is a GOOD thing for Canon users, not a mark against the company.

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).

 

[Northbird]

Price?

I've been told $1799 give or take $100 between the USA and Canada. I haven't confirmed that though.

Seems like a reasonable range. I'm surprised given the specs it won't be priced between $2K-$2.5K.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

JJB - 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.

True, but the thing that is becoming concerning is that they don't seem to be leap frogging for sensor quality anymore. Canon hasn't improved DR one single bit at low ISO since the release of the 1Ds3. Pretty soon it will be a decade of zero improvement (and, in fact, they actually got worse and worse for low ISO DR over most of that time frame, only with the 6D did they get back to or maybe just slightly exceed the 1Ds3) and yet other makers have improved 3-4 stops over that time (and are now 2-3 ahead of Canon).

How long do we wait?
We thought the 5D3 might fix it, it didn't. We thought the 70D, it didn't.

I still have hope for the 5D4, but I'm no longer super sure about it, but if even that doesn't do it....

 

[joejohnbear]

Video codecs have always been there on DSLR's so the still camera companies don't take a huge shit on the video camera companies. Why would a video camera company want to sell the tech in their $12,000 and $20,000 cameras for some little guy who will make a couple of movies for fun? When another company in Canon's range, i.e. Nikon releases a competing feature (i.e. uncompressed HDMI) in video, Canon will answer it in a firmware update. Otherwise, why take a shit on the company for something its competitors don't even offer? A GH4 is a 2x crop sensor. Blackmagic is a 3.2x or 6x crop sensor (I'm not exactly sure on the black magic, but it's pretty cropped in when I used it as a director of photography on set). A RED sells for fucking $20000 with mandatory accessories. How is Canon responsible for giving you something that no other company does at that price point? I get that more features is nicer, but you kinda get what you pay for. Built-in ND filters, matteboxes, zebra stripes, etc., these are more important to a filmmaker and you have to pay a premium anyways. Don't get me wrong, I would appreciate all the features you're asking for spec-wise, but you have to understand Canon from a business standpoint in regard to the rest of the industry! Jump ship if you really think Nikon gives you better video! (Hint, it doesn't! Why do you think so few filmmakers and wedding videographers shoot with it? You can't change the aperture, etc. while in live view [you have to switch it off, change settings, then turn it back on] on all cameras except the recent D810!). Have you tried a d3200 for video? It sucks!!

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.

I don't know where the wax works comes from in Canon sensors. That is probably the biggest single difference in sensor IQ overall that I see between Canon camera and the competition (including Toshiba sensors). This isn't even a DR thing...it's just a basic IQ thing. Even the 5D III seems to have a bit of the waxworks. You can ultimately process it out, but it is more work. I don't know if that's due to Canon's overall imaging pipeline architecture, with ADCs off-die, or something else. Either way...I'm not sure that DIGIC 6 is the cause...it's been in the 7D (DIGIC 4) and 5D III (DIGIC 5), so it is probably something else.

It's either that DIGIC chips simply stink at image processing, the Canon team has decided to turn up all sorts of stupid anti-grain/anti-noise tech and turns even ISO100 video into wax works when simpky using different settings could avoid it, or marketing has them apply some sort of gaussian filter to make it not look like their 1DC and Cxx and such video.

All I know is if you use ML RAW which bypasses almost all processing, the video quality in the 5D3 is suddenly WORLDS better, it has tons and tons more detail and even has more DR as well. ML SAVED the 5D3 for video. It took it from a nice improvement (2 stops better and not much aliasing) but all the same waxy and low in detail in a disappointing manner into able to provide some really impressive 1080p video and that made the 5D3 a video beast. Without ML though....

It is not the compression stage, since the new firmware that allows for uncompressed, but processed video on the 5D3 provides barely any image quality improvement at all.

 

[9VIII]

Now I wait for the next 1D/5D. If neither of them are over 40MP then I'll get the 7DII.
Except if they bump something up to 32MP and keep the FPS and AF performance near 1DX levels, that would still be an amazing camera, but I won't sacrifice AF performance for just a moderate increase in pixel density.

 

[ULFULFSEN]

Video codecs have always been there on DSLR's so the still camera companies don't take a huge S___ on the video camera companies. Why would a video camera company want to sell the tech in their $12,000 and $20,000 cameras for some little guy who will make a couple of movies for fun? When another company in Canon's range, i.e. Nikon releases a competing feature (i.e. uncompressed HDMI) in video, Canon will answer it in a firmware update. Otherwise, why take a S___ on the company for something its competitors don't even offer? A GH4 is a 2x crop sensor. Blackmagic is a 3.2x or 6x crop sensor (I'm not exactly sure on the black magic, but it's pretty cropped in when I used it as a director of photography on set). A RED sells for F______ $20000 with mandatory accessories. How is Canon responsible for giving you something that no other company does at that price point? I get that more features is nicer, but you kinda get what you pay for. Built-in ND filters, matteboxes, zebra stripes, etc., these are more important to a filmmaker and you have to pay a premium anyways. Don't get me wrong, I would appreciate all the features you're asking for spec-wise, but you have to understand Canon from a business standpoint in regard to the rest of the industry! Jump ship if you really think Nikon gives you better video! (Hint, it doesn't! Why do you think so few filmmakers and wedding videographers shoot with it? You can't change the aperture, etc. while in live view [you have to switch it off, change settings, then turn it back on] on all cameras except the recent D810!). Have you tried a d3200 for video? It sucks!!

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.

I don't know where the wax works comes from in Canon sensors. That is probably the biggest single difference in sensor IQ overall that I see between Canon camera and the competition (including Toshiba sensors). This isn't even a DR thing...it's just a basic IQ thing. Even the 5D III seems to have a bit of the waxworks. You can ultimately process it out, but it is more work. I don't know if that's due to Canon's overall imaging pipeline architecture, with ADCs off-die, or something else. Either way...I'm not sure that DIGIC 6 is the cause...it's been in the 7D (DIGIC 4) and 5D III (DIGIC 5), so it is probably something else.

It's either that DIGIC chips simply stink at image processing, the Canon team has decided to turn up all sorts of stupid anti-grain/anti-noise tech and turns even ISO100 video into wax works when simpky using different settings could avoid it, or marketing has them apply some sort of gaussian filter to make it not look like their 1DC and Cxx and such video.

All I know is if you use ML RAW which bypasses almost all processing, the video quality in the 5D3 is suddenly WORLDS better, it has tons and tons more detail and even has more DR as well. ML SAVED the 5D3 for video. It took it from a nice improvement (2 stops better and not much aliasing) but all the same waxy and low in detail in a disappointing manner into able to provide some really impressive 1080p video and that made the 5D3 a video beast. Without ML though....

It is not the compression stage, since the new firmware that allows for uncompressed, but processed video on the 5D3 provides barely any image quality improvement at all.

We need Squirrels too if this quoting goes on.

 

[crashpc]

Wow, you have an EOS M. You're SOOO invested. You must know about ALL the great lenses, flash and understanding light. Real pro, dude. True, the sensor on the EOS M (price of $200-300 means that's the best sensor for the paltry money) is better than its af. But you really can't compare systems until you've tried them both. I've used both the full frame Canon and Nikon systems (D700,800, D3, 5DIII, 16-400mm in f/2.8 lenses and f/1.2 and f/1.4 prime lenses on both), and there are upsides and downsides to both. Focus accuracy is way better on Canon. Dynamic range is better on Nikon. They're neck and neck, and harping about Canon's dr is limiting your scope. Both systems are good, but a D7100 without a F______ good lens is a dumb decision. Pay attention to lenses and lighting gear, and you'll get much better results than fapping off to the latest body that will probably empty your budget (if you're on an EOS M, I don't think you can afford a D7100, 24-70 f/2.8G and 70-200G VR II right off the bat). And if you're on Nikon, you WILL want one of their full frame lenses as their APS-C lenses are complete S___.

Bahaha, stupid "I'ma threaten to jump ships b.c. I can't make good images with my current gear" crowd. Sony ergonomics and alpha/nex lenses (either price or quality) are awful for the most part. They'll take longer to iterate to match Canon's ergonomics and lens selection and prices (their damn 70-200 II is $3000) than Canon will to release a sensor update. I had a long chat with a sony store salesman who bragged that he used an a77 and 70-200 ($3000) for surfing photography. He claimed to be still working on his portfolio website, but I checked out his images that were online already, pure S___! Measurebators and armchair commandos can go suck it while the rest of us use what we have instead beating our sticks to specs.

Sensor, sensor, sensor. I still hope they managed to make it better, but I won´t upgrade in something what´s already years old, to use it for another 4-6 years. Not a chance. Do you hear me, Canon!? Sony is waiting behind door if you don´t deliver!

Maybe holding your breath and stomping your foot would help?

With EOS M, I really am not able to make good images at times. Mostly due to AF, but when I will buy new body (and I have not many lenses) I might be in good position to upgrade, but with different brand. But you seem to be all knowing. I might bite my tongue and go back DSLR with D7100 or maybe D7200 instead on anything else. I just don´t know, and I won´t buy any old "pathetic" product for next decade.

Wow this topic flows fast...
No, you really don´t know my situation. I had SL1 before, I had different things before, I tried many DSLRs (all Canons up to 5D III) from my friends, I can even borrow L lenses for free, but I want to go mirrorless, and moderately smaller. I shoot primes Have 50mm f/1,4, 22mm f/2, sold some zooms, saving for 135mm f/2 L. That way you missed my point and stucked yourself on stuff that has nothing to do with anything, just poor deduction. I´d be happy to stay with Canon because I can borrow very expensive gear, but I don´t like what do they do today. I can put better stuff in use even if I absolutely don´t need it. I just want, and when I see Sony can deliver (at least Nikon with Sony sensor), it is valid point. I also like Nikon ergonomics very much. Canon doesn´t feel THAT good in my hands.

 

[schmidtfilme]

These are the least exciting specs I saw on a new camera for a while in particular if I look at Sonys specs.

I cannot believe it took Canon 5 years. What are they actually doing in their R&D labs? Sleeping?

 

[joejohnbear]

Product cycles have always been long. Again, the major complaint about the 5dII when it was released was the autofocus. When the 5DIII came out, the goal post got moved by netizens to dynamic range. 3-4 years is typical for the big two (Canon and Nikon). Sony and Fujifilm iterate much faster because they're new players and they have to. But they don't have the full lens lineup or professional service support yet either, so that's their only competitive edge (they need it to even make any leeway). In the process, you get half-assed products (sometimes!) like the Black Magic Cinema Cameras (2.5k and pocket) with lots of malfunctions and products. But yeah, I get what you mean, I do envy the DR on sony cameras, and if they had more lenses and I had more money, I'd get them to play with on the weekend or shoot as a third camera at a wedding. Be patient, Canon WILL bring out the product you want. If you have unlimited income, buy the other company's products, but you WILL lose a tremendous amount of money selling your system because you couldn't wait a couple of years for a new body. And really, the rumor expectations will always let you down, just know that Canon will release better sensor tech when they're finished upgrading their lenses (makes sense, right? upgrade your lens system before you pump out a sensor that outresolves all of them, right?).

JJB - 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.

True, but the thing that is becoming concerning is that they don't seem to be leap frogging for sensor quality anymore. Canon hasn't improved DR one single bit at low ISO since the release of the 1Ds3. Pretty soon it will be a decade of zero improvement (and, in fact, they actually got worse and worse for low ISO DR over most of that time frame, only with the 6D did they get back to or maybe just slightly exceed the 1Ds3) and yet other makers have improved 3-4 stops over that time (and are now 2-3 ahead of Canon).

How long do we wait?
We thought the 5D3 might fix it, it didn't. We thought the 70D, it didn't.

I still have hope for the 5D4, but I'm no longer super sure about it, but if even that doesn't do it....

 

[joejohnbear]

Sony's specs are great...until you shoot with wide aperture luxury primes or NCAA Div I sports. All of a sudden their 10-12 fps look like shit when your in-focus shots are 2-8 out of 10-12 (might apply more to some mirrorless bragging about fps, don't recall the exacts), and you missed the game winning touchdown. Specs are worthless when your real-world results are subpar. Go to any major NCAA Div I or NFL game and tell me if you see ONE Sony supertelephoto on the field. Didn't think so. If you do, it's pretty rare, at the very least, and for good reason.

These are the least exciting specs I saw on a new camera for a while in particular if I look at Sonys specs.

I cannot believe it took Canon 5 years. What are they actually doing in their R&D labs? Sleeping?

 

[CaiLeDao]

To me it looks like the rumour sites have just announced the most radical sensor for some time (from Canon).
All things do point to this being a foveon style sensor so each site is reading RGB +IR. The new limits on the ISO support this concept as RGB pixel sites are much deeper so you get more fall of in the light reading hence lower ISO limits. Restricted ISO makes sense to the physics of an RGB sensor.

If this is really what we see then the sensor is effectively a 60MP bayer sensor so would produce quite big images. That may also explain the limitations of video in that you would really struggle to process and downsample the dates rates necessary to produce hi quality video. Maybe that is a natural limitation of the higher volumes of sensor data.

Again if the rumours prove correct, as said by others earlier this will be a landmark camera and I am really interested in what the real announcements deliver. I hope it is an RGB sensor and they have improved noise handling with on sensor chip ADC(s), which for current sensors is the issue with DR I will then become an owner.

 

[Loswr]

To me it looks like the rumour sites have just announced the most radical sensor for some time (from Canon).
All things do point to this being a foveon style sensor so each site is reading RGB +IR.

So, you're saying that the metering sensor will take great, Foveon-style images? :

The image sensor is the standard Bayer-masked, AA-filtered CMOS sensor...

 

[joejohnbear]

Do you make money from your photography? True, Canon doesn't do mirrorless that well now. It's just a matter of time before Canon and Nikon pay attention to it with great products, but for now they see sales in DSLR's still sustaining them, so you may look into another mirrorless camera system if you're shooting for fun or your own pleasure, more power to you. Expect to pay $1000+ for a decent mirrorless camera and another $800-1500 for decent lenses. Let's be real here, a $200-300 EOS M doesn't compete with an OMD or an Xt1 or a7/s/r. Btw, does your friend shoot with a 70-200 IS II, a supertelephoto or any of Canon's L primes? If not, you really haven't seen the 5DIII in its full potential. The 50 1.4 while good for beginner standards is pretty outdated.

I OWN the 135L and off topic, I really stress that this lens is best enjoyed on full frame. You really need good glass to appreciate Canon and Nikon cameras, let alone any camera system. That means 85LII, Sigma 35, Sigma 50, Canon 24LII, not any of Canon's older lenses like 35L, 50L, 85non-L(it's good, but too much CA and not as accurate as 135L at AF), plus their mark II f/2.8 zooms, 16-35f/4L, mark II supertelephotos, etc. They are LIGHTYEARS ahead of things like Nikon's 58mm f/1.4, although Nikon offers competitive offerings in their f/2.8 zooms and supertele's.

Yeah, ergo's are subjective, but I feel ya brah, I liked Nikon for a while. Stick with their pro controls on their D300,700-800,3-4's, and you are solid if you go that route. Their D90-style controls on the D7000,7100, and 600/610 are not my cup of tea and not in any way a leg up over Canon's equivalent pro control competitors (7D,5DIII,1D).

Wow, you have an EOS M. You're SOOO invested. You must know about ALL the great lenses, flash and understanding light. Real pro, dude. True, the sensor on the EOS M (price of $200-300 means that's the best sensor for the paltry money) is better than its af. But you really can't compare systems until you've tried them both. I've used both the full frame Canon and Nikon systems (D700,800, D3, 5DIII, 16-400mm in f/2.8 lenses and f/1.2 and f/1.4 prime lenses on both), and there are upsides and downsides to both. Focus accuracy is way better on Canon. Dynamic range is better on Nikon. They're neck and neck, and harping about Canon's dr is limiting your scope. Both systems are good, but a D7100 without a F______ good lens is a dumb decision. Pay attention to lenses and lighting gear, and you'll get much better results than fapping off to the latest body that will probably empty your budget (if you're on an EOS M, I don't think you can afford a D7100, 24-70 f/2.8G and 70-200G VR II right off the bat). And if you're on Nikon, you WILL want one of their full frame lenses as their APS-C lenses are complete S___.

Bahaha, stupid "I'ma threaten to jump ships b.c. I can't make good images with my current gear" crowd. Sony ergonomics and alpha/nex lenses (either price or quality) are awful for the most part. They'll take longer to iterate to match Canon's ergonomics and lens selection and prices (their damn 70-200 II is $3000) than Canon will to release a sensor update. I had a long chat with a sony store salesman who bragged that he used an a77 and 70-200 ($3000) for surfing photography. He claimed to be still working on his portfolio website, but I checked out his images that were online already, pure S___! Measurebators and armchair commandos can go suck it while the rest of us use what we have instead beating our sticks to specs.

Sensor, sensor, sensor. I still hope they managed to make it better, but I won´t upgrade in something what´s already years old, to use it for another 4-6 years. Not a chance. Do you hear me, Canon!? Sony is waiting behind door if you don´t deliver!

Maybe holding your breath and stomping your foot would help?

With EOS M, I really am not able to make good images at times. Mostly due to AF, but when I will buy new body (and I have not many lenses) I might be in good position to upgrade, but with different brand. But you seem to be all knowing. I might bite my tongue and go back DSLR with D7100 or maybe D7200 instead on anything else. I just don´t know, and I won´t buy any old "pathetic" product for next decade.

Wow this topic flows fast...
No, you really don´t know my situation. I had SL1 before, I had different things before, I tried many DSLRs (all Canons up to 5D III) from my friends, I can even borrow L lenses for free, but I want to go mirrorless, and moderately smaller. I shoot primes Have 50mm f/1,4, 22mm f/2, sold some zooms, saving for 135mm f/2 L. That way you missed my point and stucked yourself on stuff that has nothing to do with anything, just poor deduction. I´d be happy to stay with Canon because I can borrow very expensive gear, but I don´t like what do they do today. I can put better stuff in use even if I absolutely don´t need it. I just want, and when I see Sony can deliver (at least Nikon with Sony sensor), it is valid point. I also like Nikon ergonomics very much. Canon doesn´t feel THAT good in my hands.

 

[Vgramatikov]

To much talking here.

1. Nobody will buy a 7d ii instead of 6d for portraits, landscape, studio work and so one.
2. Nobody will but 6d for sport, action and wildlife photography.

(when i say nobody mean most of the normal thinking people)

3. Before a year there was no 7d competitor for sport, wildlife action crop camera.
-Now we have pentax k-3 and Alfa but who cares about them they do not have the system/lenses.
-Mirrorless are useless for sport and action and they do not have the lens to.

4.Nikon have some...d7100 with weak buffer and slow frame rate.7d and 70d are better like cameras but yes weaker like sensor IQ but only at base iso/DR who cares for sports and wildlife AF performance ,frame rate and buffer is much important.

SO?

7d ii come in time that even the 7d and 70d almost do not have real competition like camera system and performance.

7d ii is ground breaking crop body for sports and wildlife with the 10 fps, this new af module and the ITR.

So that whats up....

May be we all needed just a better sensor from Canon. This part missing to many years. But 70d is not bad at all...it will be enough just 7d ii to be little better ))

 

[joejohnbear]

Sorry about my blabbing, I really want a 1dx on this forum . Simple and well-stated.

To much talking here.

1. Nobody will buy a 7d ii instead of 6d for portraits, landscape, studio work and so one.
2. Nobody will but 6d for sport, action and wildlife photography.

(when i say nobody mean most of the normal thinking people)

3. Before a year there was no 7d competitor for sport, wildlife action crop camera.
-Now we have pentax k-3 and Alfa but who cares about them they do not have the system/lenses.
-Mirrorless are useless for sport and action and they do not have the lens to.

4.Nikon have some...d7100 with weak buffer and slow frame rate.7d and 70d are better like cameras but yes weaker like sensor IQ but only at base iso/DR who cares for sports and wildlife AF performance ,frame rate and buffer is much important.

SO?

7d ii come in time that even the 7d and 70d almost do not have real competition like camera system and performance.

7d ii is ground breaking crop body for sports and wildlife with the 10 fps, this new af module and the ITR.

So that whats up....

May be we all needed just a better sensor from Canon. This part missing to many years. But 70d is not bad at all...it will be enough just 7d ii to be little better ))

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

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

So am I. I hope the prove is not DxO scores though. I challenge anyone to find me an example where the 70D's sensor is outperformed by any APS-C sensor from any manufacturer by 1 full stop in terms of anything, lowlight performance, dynamic range at any ISO, and resolution. Just one stop, not 2 or 3 as you people claim.


____________________________________

Regarding video: Do we know anything about the 7D's video to the point of determining it's a bad video camera and crippled and not suitable as a hybrid?

No. We don't know squad about the 7D's video. Nothing. Just that it does 60p. that's it.

The factors that will determine whether this is an awesome video camera or nor are all unknown:
What exactly is the sensor?
How does the camera downscale the full resolution to 1080p? Line skipping or pixel binning?
How does the processor compress the feed to H.264, what's the codec, bit rate, 90mbits ALL I or higher, or less?
How fast does it read the sensor lines for the rolling shutter effect?
Does it have a clean HDMI output? Or not?
Does it have a headphone jack, good preamps? Are the audio meters controlled whilst recording or just prior to?
Is reading the sensor at 60p going to introduce worse IQ than normal speed, or will it be just as good for slowmotion?
Are the new processor affecting the noise performance by two stops as Canon claims? Are they affecting the downsampling process therefore the detail?
How well does the autofocus work in video mode?

Come on this is just getting ridiculous, you're concluding somehow that it's bad and crippled for video based on having 60p? That's all you've got about the 7D mk II video mode!

and concerning 4K, just because it's not 4K doesn't mean it's a bad video camera. This is ridiculous. 4K is the next step forward but there still is a place for a great 1080p camera in the market for the next few years.

What is the most successful camera in the video world? The Canon C300. It dominates the broadcast/news/rournalism industry, and the documentary world. Is it a 4K camera? No. 1080p. It does perfect 1080p. And the highest-end professionals are fine with that, but not consumers on the forums, for some reason.
Another example, the Arri Alexa? The most successful cinrma camera in the industry. All the films you see in cinema are shot on the Alexa, is it 4K? No. 2K. The Arri Amira, which is a 60 thousand dollars professional camera that's announced this year, is it 4K? No, 1080p. Yet it's creating the biggest interest among video professionals, but not us. 1080p is too little for us.

All things being equal, do I want 4K vs. 1080p? I do. It's better.
But all things are rarely equal, and many times perfectly done 1080p is way better than poorly done 4K. A GH4 at 4K is not a better video image than a 1080p C300. Not by any means. There are MANY different aspects to image quality than just resolution. There is dynamic range, sensor size, noise charachter and pattern, high ISO performance, colour depth, colour science, etc.

There are certain things the 7D need to nail to be a great video camera, but 4K is not one of them. There still IS a place for a great 1080p camera other wise they wouldn't be selling 1080p cameras at 10K$ to 60K$!
Just give me a perfect 1080p image on the 7D mk II and I am VERY happy. The sensor size in the 7D is more suitable for video/cinema applications than the 5DIII, APS-C equals super 35mm which is the absolute professional standard in the video world. I want the 7D to be a perfect s35 video camera upgrade for all Canon video shooters. It really makes sense. But we don't know a thing. Nothing.

 

[joejohnbear]

Sounds like you know your stuff about video. Very good points on how 4k is not necessarily better than 2k, and well-articulated to include the nuanced differences of what makes or breaks a video camera.

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

So am I. I hope the prove is not DxO scores though. I challenge anyone to find me an example where the 70D's sensor is outperformed by any APS-C sensor from any manufacturer by 1 full stop in terms of anything, lowlight performance, dynamic range at any ISO, and resolution. Just one stop, not 2 or 3 as you people claim.


____________________________________

Regarding video: Do we know anything about the 7D's video to the point of determining it's a bad video camera and crippled and not suitable as a hybrid?

No. We don't know squad about the 7D's video. Nothing. Just that it does 60p. that's it.

The factors that will determine whether this is an awesome video camera or nor are all unknown:
What exactly is the sensor?
How does the camera downscale the full resolution to 1080p? Line skipping or pixel binning?
How does the processor compress the feed to H.264, what's the codec, bit rate, 90mbits ALL I or higher, or less?
How fast does it read the sensor lines for the rolling shutter effect?
Does it have a clean HDMI output? Or not?
Does it have a headphone jack, good preamps? Are the audio meters controlled whilst recording or just prior to?
Is reading the sensor at 60p going to introduce worse IQ than normal speed, or will it be just as good for slowmotion?
Are the new processor affecting the noise performance by two stops as Canon claims? Are they affecting the downsampling process therefore the detail?
How well does the autofocus work in video mode?

Come on this is just getting ridiculous, you're concluding somehow that it's bad and crippled for video based on having 60p? That's all you've got about the 7D mk II video mode!

and concerning 4K, just because it's not 4K doesn't mean it's a bad video camera. This is ridiculous. 4K is the next step forward but there still is a place for a great 1080p camera in the market for the next few years.

What is the most successful camera in the video world? The Canon C300. It dominates the broadcast/news/rournalism industry, and the documentary world. Is it a 4K camera? No. 1080p. It does perfect 1080p. And the highest-end professionals are fine with that, but not consumers on the forums, for some reason.
Another example, the Arri Alexa? The most successful cinrma camera in the industry. All the films you see in cinema are shot on the Alexa, is it 4K? No. 2K. The Arri Amira, which is a 60 thousand dollars professional camera that's announced this year, is it 4K? No, 1080p. Yet it's creating the biggest interest among video professionals, but not us. 1080p is too little for us.

All things being equal, do I want 4K vs. 1080p? I do. It's better.
But all things are rarely equal, and many times perfectly done 1080p is way better than poorly done 4K. A GH4 at 4K is not a better video image than a 1080p C300. Not by any means. There are MANY different aspects to image quality than just resolution. There is dynamic range, sensor size, noise charachter and pattern, high ISO performance, colour depth, colour science, etc.

There are certain things the 7D need to nail to be a great video camera, but 4K is not one of them. There still IS a place for a great 1080p camera other wise they wouldn't be selling 1080p cameras at 10K$ to 60K$!
Just give me a perfect 1080p image on the 7D mk II and I am VERY happy. The sensor size in the 7D is more suitable for video/cinema applications than the 5DIII, APS-C equals super 35mm which is the absolute professional standard in the video world. I want the 7D to be a perfect s35 video camera upgrade for all Canon video shooters. It really makes sense. But we don't know a thing. Nothing.

 

[Loswr]

Nikon's autofocus is better in the dark because of their built-in af-assist light, and their autofocus points blink red compared to the 1dx system which stays black.

Have you used a 1D X? You can turn on red AF point illumination if you want, all the time or auto (they light up only when the camera think the light level is dim enough to warrant it). In AI Servo mode, they blink on and off as the camera focuses.

 

[that1guyy]

I'm laughing at the people saying its a new sensor. Makes no sense to have a new fabrication process and keep the same pixel count. From a marketing perspective, it is a nightmare. It is the same sensor as the 70D maybe with some software tweaks. Overall quite disappointing for five years of work.