Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed

[x-vision]

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

We did in the other thread.

Because so many photographers severely underexpose Diet Coke boxes then push 3 stops with no NR :

Try again.

Here's a real-worls example for you:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3723021

The guy is complaining about 'magenta strips' in his photos when pushing the shadows.
He seems to be unaware of the DR debates that we've been having.
So, there, a good example for you.

 

[Woody]

It's not a matter of having a closed mind. It's a simple matter of logic. It is completely illogical for them to create another 20.2mp sensor, if they have moved to a radically different fabrication process. Smaller transistors would allow them to do so much more with a much higher resolution sensor. It just makes no sense.

The other rumor was still just that...a rumor. Was it even more than a CR1?

The rumors are at CR2 level.

From http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/06/new-sensor-tech-in-eos-7d-mark-ii-cr2/

"We’re told to definitely expect new sensor technology to be introduced in the Canon EOS 7D Mark II. This tech will be used in all forthcoming Canon DSLRs."

From http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/canon-to-make-a-big-splash-at-photokina-cr2/

"First up, the successor to the EOS 7D will be announced. We’re told that there’s “a lot of the 1D X” in the new camera. As well as some revolutionary sensor technology."

I don't disagree with your reasoning about the re-use of old fabrication process. So, I suspect the so-called revolutionary technology probably has more to do with improvements in dual pixel AF which does not work in AF Servo mode currently.

In short, 7D M2 is going to be a product that showcases all the latest and best AF technology Canon has to offer: 65 all-cross AF sensor and DPAF with AF Servo capability. We'll know for sure on Sep 15th.

 

[joejohnbear]

And you're wildly glossing over my original comment in this thread (that you reposted). I specifically said that unrealistic = 7DII>5DIII, so I'm making an assumption that you READ my comment and didn't cherry-pick it out of its context. I don't think we disagree at all if you take the time to read through the original statement. I whole-heartedly agree that the 7D's sensor sucks. I used it with my 5DIII at a football game and hated the noise. And I apologize I didn't read all your old posts for the past five years, you're right, I haven't seen your past posts. Kudos for the long history here. You asked what how I would define unrealistic? I already did it in the previous statement.

Like I said, I don't think we're disagreeing on anything at this point, and I'm not going back however many pages to double-check. Correct me if I'm wrong. Your most recent post is quite a lot more in depth to what we were previously talking about, and I take no issue with it and rather agree with it.

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 S___. 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.

Your making wild assumptions. I never said I expected it to be better than the 5D III sensor. This is a major misconception everyone has about sensors...that any APS-C could be better than any FF, given same-generation technology. The larger the sensor area, the greater the DR is going to be, given similar technology. If you'ed been here longer than a day, you would know that I harp on those points more than ANYONE else on these forums. Assuming you have no read noise, the other kind of noise, the dominant form of noise in every camera for every sensor, photon shot noise, is fundamentally related to total sensor area. In that respect, an APS-C camera can never, ever, EVER have better performance than a larger sensor. It's rather humorous that you would think I don't understand the concept.

The kind of increase in DR I'm talking about has nothing to do with photon shot noise...it has everything to do with read noise. The reduction of read noise to Exmor levels (i.e. 3e- or less vs. ~13-14e- as the 70D has) would not make the 7D II produce better images from a photon shot noise standpoint than the 5D III. The larger sensor, ANY larger sensor, is still going to trump. It doesn't even matter how big the pixels are...on a normalized basis, total sensor area matters...that's it.

The reduction of read noise, however, eliminates a PROBLEM with the sensor. Canon's read noise is a bad thing. It's nasty, it's ugly, it's destructive to data. It's a problem. It needs to go. In that respect, this has NOTHING to do with making the 7D II produce better overall IQ than the 5D III. It has everything to do with removing a problem from Canon's fundamental sensor architecture, thereby making the 7D II sensor fully competitive with the rest of the market...competitive with OTHER APS-C SENSORS and cameras! Every other current APS-C sensor on the market is superior to Canon's APS-C sensors from an architectural standpoint...from a design standpoint...from a fundamental IQ standpoint. Same goes for FF...every other FF sensor on the market is superior to Canon's FF sensors, for the same reasons.

It's APS-C vs. APS-C here regarding the 7D II...making it better than any FF camera is so totally NOT the point.

 

[AccipiterQ]

Hah, spot on, FEBS.

I used to have a personal t2i that I'd use alongside a D300 for sports, and I call bullshit on Accipter's claim as well that he shoots wildlife/sports/action on it. Sold that S___ and upgraded as soon as I could afford it. If you ACTUALLY shot SERIOUS SPORTS, then you're going to know that AUTOFOCUS TRUMPS DR in any F______ argument. Have no money? Sell the t2i and get a 1d mk ii n and stop your bitching and moaning. Buy the 1dx otherwise if you're that "invested," which I doubt you are. If you have a 55-250 or a 70-200 f/4, go, SWITCH TO NIKON and stop your moaning. Can't afford their 70-200 f/4 VR? Boofuckinghoo. Entitled git.

I'm going to disagree.

That's the thing...I shoot wildlife/sports/action photography. I use a T2i right now when I'm shooting with a crop. Know why? My glass is all Canon. If it wasn't for that I'd have switched. The 70D offers absolutely no improvement in image quality over the T2i. It's the same flippin sensor, just using new technologies to squeeze a .001% image quality improvement out of it. Now this is coming out with the SAME F'ING SENSOR. The sensor is about 80% of the reason you'd buy a camera, once you choose your subject matter. The 7Dii is going to be a glorified T2i. Same old ancient sensor technology, with a few useless bells & whistles, none of which get down to the root: THEY HAVEN'T MADE A SINGLE INNOVATION IN SENSOR TECHNOLOGY IN YEARS. It's the same mediocre sensor, just rehashed. This is why they're starting to, or will continue to lose market share to other companies. Absolutely insane that it took a half decade to refresh, and it's basically going to be the exact same camera with the exact same sensor, just with a tiiiiny bit extra squeezed out of that sensor. Absolute garbage. I can't tell you how pissed off I am right now.

Don't let me laugh. The reason you bought a T2i as a camera for wildlife/sports/action photography is for sure NOT the sensor. Be honest, it was the price.

What a thought that the sensor would be 80% responsible for the purchase of such a camera. If sensor quality would be that important to you, then you would have bought a 1-series. Nothing else. What a bullsh_t you are telling here. And what about the 5D3 sensor? No progress made?

As a wildlife/sports/action photographer you are not interested in those fps, 65 crosspoints AF, f8, ... ? You really make me laugh man, don't call yourself a action photographer if you are only interested in the highest quality sensor.

If you have that good Canon glass that you can't change, then simple do buy a 1Dx and stop complaining and stop telling such a nonsense !!!

Ha! I don't agree with some of the points above (and pretty much any of the points Acci made, but all these posts made me break a chuckle.
Love the passion!

You actually think the 70D is an improvement over the T2i in any way shape or form? You actually think rehashing the same garbage sensor they've been retching up is going to give you what, more than a 1% upgrade in image quality? Seriously?

 

[joejohnbear]

Just bracket. It's not as if landscape photographers don't know how to exposure blend. If your landscape is in active motion, both foreground and background, then yeah, Canon could use some improvement. If it's really an issue and you can't wait for Canon to release a high DR full frame camera, go shoot medium format or Nikon. Nbd. No product is perfect, we get it.

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

We did in the other thread.

Because so many photographers severely underexpose Diet Coke boxes then push 3 stops with no NR :

Try again.

Here's a real-worls example for you:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3723021

The guy is complaining about 'magenta strips' in his photos when pushing the shadows.
He seems to be unaware of the DR debates that we've been having.
So, there, a good example for you.

 

[NancyP]

RE: "POTATO"
I always thought those designations next to our names were based on number of posts - that newbies with 20 posts were labeled "ancient PowerShot", people who have a hundred posts might be "EOS M" (I think that's my current designation), people who have 500 posts might be (gasp) "7D", people who have a thousand or so posts over several years might rank as "1DX". So what's "Potato"? Based on the fact that jrista has a huge number of posts (surely less than 1% of non-moderators have 4,000 posts here), perhaps the "Potato" designation signifies that CR management thinks that he is a COUCH "Potato". Jrista, you have interesting things to say, don't get offended - I think this theory is pretty amusing.

I do believe that we have sacrificed a sufficient number of electrons to the cause. Let's go out shooting. Or at least drool over some Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4 images, if we can't get out to shoot. Go visit Ming Thien's page or Bryan Carnahan's (the-digital-picture) page for some LENS PRON.

FWIW, I think that $1,800.00 for a top-grade AF system, 10 fps, big buffer APS-C camera plus an existing 400mm f/5.6L is going to help my bird photo keeper rate, compared with my existing 60D. I can't think of another under-$2,000.00 investment in equipment that will help me as much. Maybe renting a 1DX and 600mm f/4 L IS II and Wimberley for two weeks and heading to a major migration hot spot (time off, hotel or campsite, meals) would be a better use of $1,800.00.

 

[x-vision]

everyone believes the rumour where it says the sensor size is 20.2 megapixels
nobody believes the rumour where it says that it is not the same sensor as the 70D

It's not a matter of having a closed mind. It's a simple matter of logic. It is completely illogical for them to create another 20.2mp sensor, if they have moved to a radically different fabrication process. Smaller transistors would allow them to do so much more with a much higher resolution sensor. It just makes no sense.

Exactly.

If the 7DII sensor was a new sensor, they would have moved to at least 22mp - and more likely 24-28.
That would have been a competitive advantage.

 

[Lee Jay]

You actually think the 70D is an improvement over the T2i in any way shape or form?

Yes, in more than one way.

 

[can0nfan2379]

everyone believes the rumour where it says the sensor size is 20.2 megapixels
nobody believes the rumour where it says that it is not the same sensor as the 70D

and people are already condemning it, sight unseen.

Closed minds and pre-judgement.... way to go people! Try waiting for a week for a real announcement and facts before you go off on a hissy fit.....

Yep pretty much sums things up.....wait until the actual product has been demo'd and spec's confirmed before damning the thing to camera purgatory based on rumor and conjecture.

 

[joejohnbear]

I'm getting tired of responding to your posts quoting me out of context. Go get a K3 or D7100 if you're so preoccupied with keeping up with your neighbor. Canon can definitely use some improvement in dynamic range, big whoop dee fucking doo.

And you're wildly glossing over my original comment in this thread (that you reposted). I specifically said that unrealistic = 7DII>5DIII, so I'm making an assumption that you READ my comment and didn't cherry-pick it out of its context. I don't think we disagree at all if you take the time to read through the original statement. I whole-heartedly agree that the 7D's sensor sucks. I used it with my 5DIII at a football game and hated the noise. And I apologize I didn't read all your old posts for the past five years, you're right, I haven't seen your past posts. Kudos for the long history here. You asked what how I would define unrealistic? I already did it in the previous statement.

Like I said, I don't think we're disagreeing on anything at this point, and I'm not going back however many pages to double-check. Correct me if I'm wrong. Your most recent post is quite a lot more in depth to what we were previously talking about, and I take no issue with it and rather agree with it.

Your comment about the 7D II having better DR than the 5D III was an afterthought. I was directly addressing the whole notion that any improvement could be "unrealistic"...period. That's what you said, strait up:

"A 7D II with enormously, unrealistically improved sensor"

There is no such thing as unrealistically improved. In general, expectations for the 7D II having an improved sensor hardly have anything to do with it competing with the 5D III specifically...or any specific camera period. The improvements, for the people who have been expecting them, fundamentally have to do with the core design of the sensor...is it the same fundamental design that Canon has used for over a decade? Or is it competitive with the new APS-C designs from Sony and Toshiba?

If the 7D II DID get better total DR than the 5D III, 6D, and 1D X, thanks to a reduction in read noise, thus putting it on par with THE REST OF THE ENTIRE MARKET...is that really unrealistic? HELL NO! Of course not! There is no such thing as a realistic improvement. If it can be done...and, it has been...then it's realistic. It's not just realistic...it's REAL. There are REAL sensors out there, in consumer products, on the market, right this very moment that prove it's not just realistic, but actually real. They have been for years. Since the K-5 at least...which was, what...the better part of four years ago? That's several generations of DSLRs since then.

It's just never been done by Canon...and God only knows why.

 

[x-vision]

Specs wise, I think the 7D II has the specs it needs. I don't think it's a bad camera. I just think Canon missed an opportunity to tell their customers, potential customers, and those who might potentially jump ship (or at least stop waiting on Canon) for better DR that they have heard the message, have actually responded, and are now demonstrating that they, too, have the capacity to catapult their sensor technology into the 2010's. They missed it.

... Simple as that.

My thoughts exactly. Canon indeed missed a golden opportunity.

 

[Lee Jay]

I just think Canon missed an opportunity to tell their customers, potential customers, and those who might potentially jump ship (or at least stop waiting on Canon) for better DR that they have heard the message, have actually responded, and are now demonstrating that they, too, have the capacity to catapult their sensor technology into the 2010's. They missed it. Not are going to miss it, but missed it.

Past tense? It's not even announced yet! Maybe you're right, maybe not. At this point, it's still a rumor.

 

[jrista]

I just think Canon missed an opportunity to tell their customers, potential customers, and those who might potentially jump ship (or at least stop waiting on Canon) for better DR that they have heard the message, have actually responded, and are now demonstrating that they, too, have the capacity to catapult their sensor technology into the 2010's. They missed it. Not are going to miss it, but missed it.

Past tense? It's not even announced yet! Maybe you're right, maybe not. At this point, it's still a rumor.

The specs were confirmed, though. I mean...it's what the title says:

"Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed"

As I replied to Don...I find it to be completely illogical to think that the 20.2mp sensor is somehow new. With these confirmed specs, I see no evidence to suggest any alternative: It's the 70D sensor. It's Canon doing the Canon thing...reusing parts. Being cheap.

Anyway..."confirmed"...means something rather specific to me.

 

[dtaylor]

It's not a matter of having a closed mind. It's a simple matter of logic. It is completely illogical for them to create another 20.2mp sensor, if they have moved to a radically different fabrication process.

R&D costs. Not wanting to completely redesign something and risk a failure when the camera in question is their flagship crop body. Balancing pixels and CPU requirements / thermal issues, especially with DPAF. Even software could drive the decision to keep the same MP count for now if the algorithms for DPAF are tightly coupled to that MP count for performance reasons.

Smaller transistors would allow them to do so much more with a much higher resolution sensor. It just makes no sense.

How so? DR is driven in part by pixel size, so you want them to shrink the pixels and have more DR? 24 MP would look better to Joe Blow consumer because everything else is 24 MP, but unless they jump from 20 to 30 MP there's not a useful resolution difference. And judging from sales data Joe Blow hasn't cared yet.

The other rumor was still just that...a rumor. Was it even more than a CR1? We have real specs now...and the specs say 20.2mp. The real specs do not mention it's new...just that it's 20.2mp. Canon already has a 20.2mp sensor. Canon also has a long history of reusing sensors...over....and over.......and over.........AND OVER.................AAAAAAAND OOOOOOVEEERRRR. AND OVER! Can anyone say 18mp? Say it ten times fast. Over and over and over.

Except that the 18 MP sensors are not the same. How many times does this have to be said? I knew from the first day of shooting the M that it was an improved sensor over the 7D. Not dramatic, but there.

 

[Lee Jay]

I just think Canon missed an opportunity to tell their customers, potential customers, and those who might potentially jump ship (or at least stop waiting on Canon) for better DR that they have heard the message, have actually responded, and are now demonstrating that they, too, have the capacity to catapult their sensor technology into the 2010's. They missed it. Not are going to miss it, but missed it.

Past tense? It's not even announced yet! Maybe you're right, maybe not. At this point, it's still a rumor.

The specs were confirmed, though. I mean...it's what the title says:

"Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed"

As I replied to Don...I find it to be completely illogical to think that the 20.2mp sensor is somehow new. With these confirmed specs, I see no evidence to suggest any alternative: It's the 70D sensor. It's Canon doing the Canon thing...reusing parts. Being cheap.

Anyway..."confirmed"...means something rather specific to me.

Context - it's a "rumors" site.

Just for keeping things factual, every 18MP sensor Canon has made has had a different part number. Yes, they all perform similarly, but not the same. I would virtually guarantee that this one will have a new part number. Even if it does perform the same, that doesn't mean the off-sensor A-to-D will perform the same. In fact, it's almost certainly different just to keep up with the higher frame rate. And that might mean it performs differently. Finally what if it has some version of the Magic Lantern dual-ISO trick built in? That provides a substantial DR improvement even on the exact same sensor.

So, you're making an assumption. A series of them in fact. Those assumptions might be logical but that doesn't make them necessarily accurate. Let's wait until announcement and testing before putting such "conclusions" into the past tense.

 

[dtaylor]

Here's a real-worls example for you:

No RAW file...no notes on production...looks like he refused to nudge the color NR slider to me. And no shot made at the same time under the same conditions from a competing sensor.

FAIL.

Want to try again?

 

[joejohnbear]

Seriously, I told you stop quoting me out of context, hence my attitude, and you're still doing it, but whatever. Yeah, and Canon wouldn't do it because it's a bad business decision. Not everything is limited to the context of engineering and research and development. Nikon doesn't put a better sensor than the D810 in their D3200 or D7100, do they? It's called product segmentation. I'm all for better stuff, just try to remember any camera company is in it to make money. Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Fujifilm, Leica, name ANY camera company and they'll do the same thing if they're in the market for long enough. Do you see Sony put a better sensor into their A6000 just because they're releasing it after their A7s? Camera companies, like presidents, can't make everyone happy, and they sure as hell aren't in it to send their product prices spiraling downwards. So you don't like the dynamic range. Go get a D400 or a D810 and a 600mm from them and give it a break. Have fun, enjoy your life.

I'm getting tired of responding to your posts quoting me out of context. Go get a K3 or D7100 if you're so preoccupied with keeping up with your neighbor. Canon can definitely use some improvement in dynamic range, big whoop dee F______ doo.

Boy, your all attitude, aren't you.

I could care less about keeping up with my "neighbors". If you knew me, you would know how ludicrous that statement is. I care about eliminating boundaries. I care about removing the restrictions my gear places on me, so that the only bottleneck I have to think about is me. I can't make Canon's sensors better myself. I can, however, make myself better, if I am not constantly fighting with limitations in my hardware. The only one I care about keeping up with is myself. I'm not saying that to be arrogant...I have no questions about where I am skill wise...I compare my skill to the likes of the professionals that inspire me....Art Morris, Marc Adamus, Andy Rouse. I have years to go before I can compare to them...along that journey? I don't want to be fighting with my gear. For some types of photography, my gear isn't a limitation...for birds and wildlife, I am my own limitation. For landscapes? Both of my Canon cameras present specific limitations...and I literally can do nothing about it. I have to either wait for Canon to do something about it...or find another brand that doesn't have those limitations.

I absolutely do not think that there is any such thing as an unrealistic improvement. Even if that improvement meant that the 7D II, for a short time, ended up with a better sensor than the 5D III. That doesn't change anything, it being better than the 5D III sensor. Good god, the 6D sensor is better than the 5D III sensor, for Christ sake! Improvement is improvement...it's illogical to think it could be "unrealistic." It's certainly realistic that Canon is stuffing a better AF sensor in the 7D II than the 1D X. It's certainly realistic that Canon is reusing the premium 1D X iTR meter in the 7D II. If those things are realistic improvements, why is it that improving the sensor is unrealistic? What's special about the sensor, that it shouldn't be improved along with the AF system, meter, frame rate, and everything else?

 

[Loswr]

Let's wait until announcement and testing before putting such "conclusions" into the past tense.

Why should someone who's already made up their mind want to follow such logical advice? :

 

[dtaylor]

Let's wait until announcement and testing before putting such "conclusions" into the past tense.

Why should someone who's already made up their mind want to follow such logical advice? :

Logic? In a thread about a new Canon product when DRoners are in the forum? INCONCEIVABLE!

I'm all for grabbing pitch forks and torches and heading to a Canon service center ;D

 

[Lee Jay]

The fact that the 7D II is going to use DIGIC 6, which has been designed and still includes the ADC,...

By the way, I found out that DIGIC doesn't include the ADCs.

http://www.chipworks.com/en/technical-competitive-analysis/resources/blog/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/

"Of the Canon DSLRs analyzed, the imaging chip has remained analog, with Analog Devices’ analog front end (AFE) chips handling A/D conversion en route to the Digic-branded ISPs."