Canon EOS 7D Mark II Specifications Confirmed

[joejohnbear]

I already addressed this in my previous reply to you. Just because a camera company has developed a technology doesn't mean they should release the technology when you want, at the price you want it. There are bigger product and pricing strategies and schemes than you or I understand. The market will determine how the company responds and when they will, not necessarily one individual's Christmas wishlist. If Canon released all their new R&D tech this year in one product, they wouldn't have a product with new features the next, and then their engineers would be out on the streets begging for alms. Does that business plan sustain R&D for the future? The usual business practice is to dole out new features little by little and also slow down in response to a recession. Every big camera company does this, every big technology company does this. When competition heats up, then the doling becomes quicker, but so far, Pentax and Sony are not big competition despite what all the internet bloggers say. Haven't you heard? Mirrorless has killed the DSLR already (as of Spring of 2013, if you read Engadget, Verge, etc)!

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.

Your free to do what you want. I also don't doubt the sensor will get a new part number. Concurrently, I don't expect there to be any significant differences, just like the 18mp sensors. I think the downstream parts, the DIGIC 6 processors, have the potential to improve high ISO noise performance. By how much I don't know. It seems to do fairly well on the PowerShots that used it, but they never had really high ISO. Sure, we'll have to wait and see on that front.

As far as any key sensor technology changes, if there are any, I suspect it's primarily DPAF. Canon did file for another patent after the 70D, which described a DPAF sensitivity improvement. Maybe the 7D II sensor gets DPAF pixels right out to the edges of the frame, and are able to still focus despite vignetting. That would improve the video features...but fundamentally, it's still the same sensor.

I'm looking for something specific. I'm looking for a major shift away from 500nm and to 180nm or smaller transistors. I'm looking for the ADC units to be moved out of the DIGIC processor and onto the sensor itself. I'm looking for the ADC's to become column-parallel (I know Canon has a patent for that, a Dual Scale CP-ADC patent). I'm looking for the employment of a couple other Canon patents that aim to reduce noise directly within the sensor hardware.

The fact that the 7D II is going to use DIGIC 6, which has been designed and still includes the ADC, tells me these things haven't happened. If they haven't happened...well, it's not the kind of sensor technology I'm looking for from Canon. I KNOW they have the technology. They have to have had the technology since the 9.5fps 120mp APS-H...they couldn't read such a large sensor out fast enough without hyperparallelism of the ADC, and their press releases even said that they moved "image processing" on-die and made it extremely parallel. Canon has the technology...they just aren't using it. They are staying the course...which is what Canon does.

So, sorry, but for me, the evidence is clear enough. Nothing has really changed.

 

[x-vision]

Want to try again?

No, dude, you don't get it.

That's was a real-world example from a guy who likely doesn't know what DR is.
His photo got strange artifacts (shadow noise and banding) and he was asking what that is.
It really doesn't get any more 'real world' than that.

But you keep dismissing any real world example that is given to you (in addition to the controlled tests e.g. DxO) - and you keep mindlessly parroting your stupid mantra.
That's FAIL.

You and your Canon masters deserve each other.

 

[andrewrsnyd]

Does anybody know (approximately) what the price of the Canon 7d Mark II?

 

[x-vision]

Does anybody know (approximately) what the price of the Canon 7d Mark II?

Rumor is around $1800.

 

[Don Haines]

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

Confirmed means something rather specific to me too.... The problem is that only Canon can confirm the specs and they are not talking....

 

[joejohnbear]

Does it actually affect photos that you've taken this year? Can you show some of your own real world examples? If it's just lab tests and other people's photos and you're not running into the problem personally, who cares? There are ways around dynamic range constraints, and it's called bracketing and exposure blending. The top landscape photographers do it all the time, and even the ones with D810's and Pentax 645z's will do it too. Sure, there are situations like with wind and stuff that would prevent bracketing and blending, but you'd be surprised what some people can do in most other situations with an old 5d classic or mark ii instead of balking at their camera limitations. Work around them by learning new techniques and then when a new camera body is released with the dynamic range, enjoy it. Your art shouldn't stop just because a camera company's sensor tech. If sensor was such a big deal (make or break feature), you should have done your research when selecting a camera system and gone with one that delivers more DR at that moment. Or be my guest and go develop your own sensor and camera system like JPL and other orbiting camera manufacturers does. Their dynamic ranges are unparalleled, but that system also weighs and costs a shit ton. Every system has give and take.

Want to try again?

No, dude, you don't get it.

That's was a real-world example from a guy who likely doesn't know what DR is.
His photo got strange artifacts (shadow noise and banding) and he was asking what that is.
It really doesn't get any more 'real world' than that.

But you keep dismissing any real world example that is given to you (in addition to the controlled tests e.g. DxO) - and you keep mindlessly parroting your stupid mantra.
That's FAIL.

You and your Canon masters deserve each other.

 

[Lee Jay]

I wonder if the 7D II will intrigue Chipworks enough to analyse it...they haven't really done much with Canon cameras since that one article, and nothing with Canon sensors since that article.

They have a detailed analysis of the 70D sensor. It's just $16,000 to purchase it.

The only reason on-sensor ADC is good is so that you have lots and lots of them (and don't need lots and lots of PC board traces). Discrete ADCs can be quite good. I'm about to start using some commercial parts that are 24 bits at +/- 500mV with a rated DR of 110db, and that's with screw terminals to bring the voltages to it from entirely off the module.

And the only reason lots and lots of them is a good thing is so they can each run slowly. I wonder if Canon could implement a high DR mode that would slow the 7DII down to 1fps for lower read noise, and a super high DR mode that would do that and do the Magic Lantern dual-ISO trick too. All with the same sensor.

 

[Lee Jay]

DR is driven in part by pixel size,...

If that were true, the G15 wouldn't have more base ISO DR than the 1DX:

http://sensorgen.info/CanonPowershot_G15.html
http://sensorgen.info/CanonEOS-1D_X.html

 

[pknight]

... Focus accuracy is way better on Canon. Dynamic range is better on Nikon.

This seems to be the consensus. I will take a lower DR in-focus shot over a OOF shot with more OOF detail in the shadows any day. If the 7DII AF is as good as folks here are speculating, this trade-off is OK with me.

(I know. Does there need to be a trade-off? Ideally not, but if it comes down to excellent AF vs a stop of DR, the choice is easy for me.)

 

[preppyak]

Finally including the intervalometer makes me laugh. ML has had that one solved for years...good thing they finally figured it out themselves

 

[joejohnbear]

Long before Exmor came on the scene means that you should be able to wait a few more years, no? What's the difference if Canon does't give you huge DR this year? They'll do it next year or the year after that with a 5DIV or whatever. If you're invested in 30000 dollars worth of equipment, then just buckle down and wait for that announcement. I believe we already talked about leapfrogging. Go see Thom Hogan's article on it. It's unrealistic to expect Canon to release top of the line features for every single segment every single year. Canon used to have the biggest megapixel sensor (22mp on the 5d mk ii) and NO ONE could touch it for a while on 35mm size sensor. Now Nikon does it, and yes they have a great sensor (DR), but make no mistake, Canon will follow up sooner or later. Then Nikon will roll out a feature, and then everyone will demand Canon have the same, and the pros will just roll their eyes and continue making money off of the gear they already have. I get the frustration, but Canon's playing the smart business move by not using Sony's sensor. Outsource your tech, and then all of a sudden your parts supplier will turn around and compete with you. Look to Samsung vs. Apple and many other cases. The world is bigger than just R&D and specs, there's also business variables at play here too.

If sensor was such a big deal (make or break feature), you should have done your research when selecting a camera system and gone with one that delivers more DR at that moment.

This makes another wild assumption that everyone who does photography started buying cameras within the last few years. Many bought cameras long before Exmor came on the scene, and were thoroughly invested well before the D800 made another leap in DR beyond what the K-5 and D7000 were capable of.

For those of us like that...we have very expensive kits. It's not unreasonable to hope, and after a certain point, expect, Canon to stay competitive with their products. On all fronts...just just a few. Outside of completely dumping our kits (which in my case is close to thirty grand...no way on earth I could ever get that much for it), were stuck either trying to blend kits...using something like the RAW-gimped A7r with adapters and Canon lenses...or adding a Nikon body and a whole new set of lenses to our kit (which is FAR from cheap...JUST a D810 and 14-24 is six grand. !$$$$!)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

yeah but we are heading towards a ten year cycle at this point and maybe even longer

think of all the shots and amazing places you visit in ten years

sure many shots didn't need to DR, but plenty enough along the way could've been helped for sure

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....

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Yeah, for now the other choice would ahve to be Nikon.

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 S___ 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?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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.

Yeah, but so far Canon DSLR give poor 1080p fo ranything less than 1 series (they all had bad aliasing other than the 5D3 and they are all waxy, poor detail, poor DR).

The only one that gives great 1080p is the 5D3 but only if using ML RAW (it is great in that case, which also means that there is no way the 7D2 can deliver better video unless they went 4k with it and then you'd hope).

Also if they gave 7D2 4k it means they'd be a bit freer to not cripple whatever 4k they put in the 5D4.

If it delivers C300 1080p detail and has 10bits then maybe the 7D2 does decently well and that is easier to deal with than 5D3 RAW. But the way they are already talking about the advanced NR in the Digic6 makes me think it will be more wax works (and 8bits only of course), we'll see.

 

[joejohnbear]

Fair point, but I think DR-commentators aren't giving Canon credit for improving vastly in a lot of other areas. Also, I think the length of the cycle has more to do with the stock market crashing and the recession starting in 2008, the year before the 7D was released I believe. With a retracting economy, Canon responded by pacing out their features instead of releasing them quickly at higher prices. The higher prices of things like the 24-70 mark ii has everything to do with the value of the yen at the time, before we ever start on that topic. So even if Canon had some amazing dynamic range, medium format, or mirrorless tech, they refrain from releasing it because no one has that much money. Also, the tsunami that affected Japan had an influence on Canon and Nikon's technology rollout, as I'm sure it did on Sony and Fujifilm and the rest of the hot topic, constantly blogged about camera companies. I go back to my point that no company is perfect, and Canon leads on its entire system while Sony does the opposite, selling on its body alone without a comprehensive set of lenses or professional services to accompany it. Nikon is great, but they've had some issues with customer support within the past couple of years. If I really wanted better DR, I'd go with them, but Canon's AF is slightly better, and immensely better if you shoot at f/1.4 and f/1.2 all the time like I do. However, my style is shifting from exotic wide aperture primes shot wide open, so Canon and Nikon are both great companies for what I do.

yeah but we are heading towards a ten year cycle at this point and maybe even longer

think of all the shots and amazing places you visit in ten years

sure many shots didn't need to DR, but plenty enough along the way could've been helped for sure

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....

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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.

I don't know what diet coke boxes you are going on about.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I didn't have one with me on that trip.

Please stop making these claims until you have these shots.

But it's easy to know what 2-3 stops better looks like

No it's not. The human eye is terrible at judging scene DR precisely because it's so amazing at capturing everything and leveling out a scene regardless of DR.

Don't beg the question. Post photos. Don't have photos? Then stop complaining until you do.

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

YOU DON'T HAVE PHOTOS. Until you HAVE photos that clearly back up your claims it is you who is posting nonsense.

Photo up or shut up.

SOme of us even have put up the exact same shot at the same time and you still made excuses and said it didn't count. So bye.

 

[joejohnbear]

I agree, Canon's codecs could use some major overhaul. I shot a video without ML on my mk III and it pissed me off in many ways. However, it's understandable they would try to differentiate between their DSLR's and their cinema camera lineup. Enough pressure from Nikon, however, and Canon will respond with better native codecs at that time through a firmware update. Sony doesn't have count entirely as a fully competing system because they either don't have the same lens assortment, esp. supertelephotos, or you can use their FS100/700 series cameras with adapters, so you'd end up using the same Canon or Nikon lenses.

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.

Yeah, but so far Canon DSLR give poor 1080p fo ranything less than 1 series (they all had bad aliasing other than the 5D3 and they are all waxy, poor detail, poor DR).

The only one that gives great 1080p is the 5D3 but only if using ML RAW (it is great in that case, which also means that there is no way the 7D2 can deliver better video unless they went 4k with it and then you'd hope).

Also if they gave 7D2 4k it means they'd be a bit freer to not cripple whatever 4k they put in the 5D4.

If it delivers C300 1080p detail and has 10bits then maybe the 7D2 does decently well and that is easier to deal with than 5D3 RAW. But the way they are already talking about the advanced NR in the Digic6 makes me think it will be more wax works (and 8bits only of course), we'll see.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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.

Fred who? Miranda? When you use NR on the Canon RAW the difference is inconsequential. While pixel peeping the hard pushed sample the Nikon file had a little more detail and less noise. But the actual DR range was the same, and you would be hard pressed to notice detail/noise differences even in a large print. Especially since the scene was artificial as you would never push the shadows that hard in that example.

Your side by side redwood examples that are evidence for your conclusion of a 2-3 stop shortfall, please. Because absent those you are wasting everyone's time.

Yeah artificial. Right. So the times people actually do bother to take the same shot the same way are artificial since that means it was a test and then when someone is out hiking they usually don't have the time to do that so they only have shots from one camera (plus if they did do that then it would be an 'artificial' test again anyway :) and then even if you see noise you still have to ignore it because there is 'no way' to remotely tell that it would look different if it had more stops of DR :.

And sure, apply NR and this and that to the Canon file and THEN compare it to the Exmor, that is really fare (plus it still looks like junk in comparison anyway and lots of details are not there, even if the smoothness is much closer at that point).

 

[pknight]

That's exactly why the 7DII is disappointing.
Yes, the specs are fantastic.
But out of the gate, the image quality is already lagging behind the competition.

And this is Canon's flagship 1.6x camera - with expected shelf-life of 3-5 years.
The image quality of this camera is already unexciting in 2014. Imagine in 2019 ??

Really? Can you post those terrible IQ 7DII photos for us? You know nothing, Jon Snow. Perhaps you will turn out to be right, once there actually are 7DII images, but for now, this is the purest of speculation.