Canon EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

[Lee Jay]

What is it with the "more megapixels"? This is a camera for action and wildlife photographers, not for landscape photographers.

I would argue that wildlife and action photographers need it more than landscapers do. Wildlife and action often lead to focal-length-limited situations that result in heavy cropping. More pixels helps with that in a big way.

For a given amount of energy (battery capacity) and processing capability, you can either have more pixels or a higher framerate, not both. The 1DX has a higher frame rate and lower resolution than the 5D. It'd be nice if the 7DII could match the framerate of the 1DX, but that would require the same amount of processing power (both 18MP). With the 5DIII at 6 FPS, the 7D II would have to be a bit faster for people to consider a 5DIII/7DII combo, like many people had done with the 5DII/7D.

A higher frame rate doesn't require more energy for the same total number of shots, just more power. Now, if you're arguing that a higher frame rate leads to more shots, then maybe that's so, but 2,000 shots is still 2,000 shots.

 

[bsbeamer]

4K video or not? I'm a filmmaker, so I know I'm in the minority here.

If it doesn't come with 4K H.264 or built-in RAW video, I won't even think of buying. Canon needs to step up their game for us video folks.

Came here to air my thoughts and agree with you 100%. The majority of people here seem to want LESS video features, but I really want to see MORE video features incorporated and the ones that are there already improved. 4K for this camera is almost a must for me to consider.

 

[Lee Jay]

4K video or not? I'm a filmmaker, so I know I'm in the minority here.

If it doesn't come with 4K H.264 or built-in RAW video, I won't even think of buying. Canon needs to step up their game for us video folks.

Came here to air my thoughts and agree with you 100%. The majority of people here seem to want LESS video features, but I really want to see MORE video features incorporated and the ones that are there already improved. 4K for this camera is almost a must for me to consider.

I'm mostly into stills, but I need a camcorder and it turns out that there are exactly zero camcorders available with both a wide range zoom lens and an EVF at the same time. So, I was thinking of buying an SX50 (or the rumored SX60) to be my wide focal length camcorder with an EVF. However, if the 7D replacement has good video features (including a hybrid viewfinder), then I'd seriously consider using it instead of a compact hyperzoom.

4K isn't a necessity for this (for me), but it would be a nice bonus.

 

[Random Orbits]

What is it with the "more megapixels"? This is a camera for action and wildlife photographers, not for landscape photographers.

I would argue that wildlife and action photographers need it more than landscapers do. Wildlife and action often lead to focal-length-limited situations that result in heavy cropping. More pixels helps with that in a big way.

For a given amount of energy (battery capacity) and processing capability, you can either have more pixels or a higher framerate, not both. The 1DX has a higher frame rate and lower resolution than the 5D. It'd be nice if the 7DII could match the framerate of the 1DX, but that would require the same amount of processing power (both 18MP). With the 5DIII at 6 FPS, the 7D II would have to be a bit faster for people to consider a 5DIII/7DII combo, like many people had done with the 5DII/7D.

A higher frame rate doesn't require more energy for the same total number of shots, just more power. Now, if you're arguing that a higher frame rate leads to more shots, then maybe that's so, but 2,000 shots is still 2,000 shots.

Sure it does. You need more circuitry and processing power to sustain processing higher MP/sec. To sustain 12 FPS at 18 MP, you need 1Dx processing capability. More processing require larger/faster memory, processors, buses, etc. and that does take more power even when not used to to its capability. In any case, most sports users value FPS over MP. The 1DX was state of the art 2 years ago, and it uses a larger battery. D4S is 11 fps at 16.2 MP. The 5D3 already reaches 6 FPS, and if the 7DII is to improve on the 7D's 8 FPS, it'll have to get closer to 10 FPS, which is approaching the computing requirements to what the flagship cameras do, even if it remains at 18 FPS.

 

[Lee Jay]

Sure it does. You need more circuitry and processing power to sustain processing higher MP/sec. To sustain 12 FPS at 18 MP, you need 1Dx processing capability. More processing require larger/faster memory, processors, buses, etc. and that does take more power even when not used to to its capability.

You seem to be using the words "power" and "energy" interchangeably. Faster processing requires more power, all other things being equal, but not more energy.

 

[Tugela]

4K video or not? I'm a filmmaker, so I know I'm in the minority here.

If it doesn't come with 4K H.264 or built-in RAW video, I won't even think of buying. Canon needs to step up their game for us video folks.

Came here to air my thoughts and agree with you 100%. The majority of people here seem to want LESS video features, but I really want to see MORE video features incorporated and the ones that are there already improved. 4K for this camera is almost a must for me to consider.

The majority of people here are not the majority of people who will actually buy this camera. Canon will cater to their customers, not people who belong to an enthusiast board.

 

[Random Orbits]

Sure it does. You need more circuitry and processing power to sustain processing higher MP/sec. To sustain 12 FPS at 18 MP, you need 1Dx processing capability. More processing require larger/faster memory, processors, buses, etc. and that does take more power even when not used to to its capability.

You seem to be using the words "power" and "energy" interchangeably. Faster processing requires more power, all other things being equal, but not more energy.

No, not interchageably. A Chevy Malibu is traveling on the highway (EPA profile) next to a Corvette. Both are going the same speed. The Corvette has lower drag and is slightly lighter, yet its highway efficiency is 29 mpg compared to the Malibu's 36 mpg. Larger components (engine, transmission, etc.) required for greater performance use more power on average and more energy over the same distance. For electronics, components spec'ed for higher performance also take more power even if they're doing the same work. They are capable of higher power consumption but will also consumer more over doing the same task at a slower rate as less capable components. Take a look at computer processors. The fastest use more power for incremental performance improvement, so the ratio of performance/(power or energy) decreases.

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

4K video or not? I'm a filmmaker, so I know I'm in the minority here.

If it doesn't come with 4K H.264 or built-in RAW video, I won't even think of buying. Canon needs to step up their game for us video folks.

Came here to air my thoughts and agree with you 100%. The majority of people here seem to want LESS video features, but I really want to see MORE video features incorporated and the ones that are there already improved. 4K for this camera is almost a must for me to consider.

I make wedding films, and I'm hoping Canon delivers on the video features. My finger is twitching over the "buy it now" button for the GH4 and A7s, but I want to give Canon the opportunity to respond to those products. I don't necessarily need 4k, but I do want better DR and sharpness. The 5D with Magic Lantern is currently getting the job done, but the highlights are blown and and the detail mushy. Yes, Canon has already done it with the 1DC and C100/300, but Panasonic just did for $1,700, and Sony for $2,500. Come on Canon.

 

[mine1]

GOOD PRICING?

is that the point of view of a Professional Photog. that has a 1Dx for sports... or is that good pricing for a regular consumer/hobbyist like me :-\

Well don't forget that this camera will in no way be marketed towards a regular consumer like us. that is what the 70d and 6d are for. this will be for people that need more reach than their 1dx or more reach speed than their 5d3 gives them

 

[Lee Jay]

Sure it does. You need more circuitry and processing power to sustain processing higher MP/sec. To sustain 12 FPS at 18 MP, you need 1Dx processing capability. More processing require larger/faster memory, processors, buses, etc. and that does take more power even when not used to to its capability.

You seem to be using the words "power" and "energy" interchangeably. Faster processing requires more power, all other things being equal, but not more energy.

No, not interchageably. A Chevy Malibu is traveling on the highway (EPA profile) next to a Corvette. Both are going the same speed. The Corvette has lower drag and is slightly lighter, yet its highway efficiency is 29 mpg compared to the Malibu's 36 mpg. Larger components (engine, transmission, etc.) required for greater performance use more power on average and more energy over the same distance.

So far, so good. But using a thermodynamic analogy isn't a good idea.

For electronics, components spec'ed for higher performance also take more power even if they're doing the same work.

In most cases, the opposite is actually true, due to thermal reasons and enabled by process technology. To have a faster device, it needs to be more efficient, not less, or it will get too hot. If it's less efficient AND doing more work, it will dissipate a lot more power, not just a little, making the thermal management more difficult.

One of the big reasons computers can get more powerful with each generation is that they consume less power per switching event. If this were not the case, we would have current generation CPUs demanding tens of kW, and burning up during POST.

 

[Tugela]

What is it with the "more megapixels"? This is a camera for action and wildlife photographers, not for landscape photographers.

I would argue that wildlife and action photographers need it more than landscapers do. Wildlife and action often lead to focal-length-limited situations that result in heavy cropping. More pixels helps with that in a big way.

For a given amount of energy (battery capacity) and processing capability, you can either have more pixels or a higher framerate, not both. The 1DX has a higher frame rate and lower resolution than the 5D. It'd be nice if the 7DII could match the framerate of the 1DX, but that would require the same amount of processing power (both 18MP). With the 5DIII at 6 FPS, the 7D II would have to be a bit faster for people to consider a 5DIII/7DII combo, like many people had done with the 5DII/7D.

A higher frame rate doesn't require more energy for the same total number of shots, just more power. Now, if you're arguing that a higher frame rate leads to more shots, then maybe that's so, but 2,000 shots is still 2,000 shots.

Sure it does. You need more circuitry and processing power to sustain processing higher MP/sec. To sustain 12 FPS at 18 MP, you need 1Dx processing capability. More processing require larger/faster memory, processors, buses, etc. and that does take more power even when not used to to its capability. In any case, most sports users value FPS over MP. The 1DX was state of the art 2 years ago, and it uses a larger battery. D4S is 11 fps at 16.2 MP. The 5D3 already reaches 6 FPS, and if the 7DII is to improve on the 7D's 8 FPS, it'll have to get closer to 10 FPS, which is approaching the computing requirements to what the flagship cameras do, even if it remains at 18 FPS.

No you don't need a 1DX. To get 12 fps you need dual DIGIC 5+ processors, but a single DIGIC 6 can do 14 fps. That is the processor currently in point and shoot cameras. And there is almost certainly an upgraded version of DIGIC 6 in the works to provide the additional horsepower for the needs of video functions in cameras. Dual DIGIC 5+ is obsolete.

 

[Random Orbits]

No you don't need a 1DX. To get 12 fps you need dual DIGIC 5+ processors, but a single DIGIC 6 can do 14 fps. That is the processor currently in point and shoot cameras. And there is almost certainly an upgraded version of DIGIC 6 in the works to provide the additional horsepower for the needs of video functions in cameras. Dual DIGIC 5+ is obsolete.

14 FPS at how many megapixels? DIGIC 6 is used in PowerShot G16, PowerShot N100, PowerShot S120, PowerShot SX280 HS and PowerShot SX270 HS, which are all about 12 MP. According to CanonUSA, the max sustained frame rate is closer to 9 FPS (without continuous AF)... not 14 FPS. What DIGIC 6 camera does 14 FPS at >= 18 MP?

 

[Don Haines]

Sure it does. You need more circuitry and processing power to sustain processing higher MP/sec. To sustain 12 FPS at 18 MP, you need 1Dx processing capability. More processing require larger/faster memory, processors, buses, etc. and that does take more power even when not used to to its capability.

You seem to be using the words "power" and "energy" interchangeably. Faster processing requires more power, all other things being equal, but not more energy.

No, not interchageably. A Chevy Malibu is traveling on the highway (EPA profile) next to a Corvette. Both are going the same speed. The Corvette has lower drag and is slightly lighter, yet its highway efficiency is 29 mpg compared to the Malibu's 36 mpg. Larger components (engine, transmission, etc.) required for greater performance use more power on average and more energy over the same distance.

So far, so good. But using a thermodynamic analogy isn't a good idea.

For electronics, components spec'ed for higher performance also take more power even if they're doing the same work.

In most cases, the opposite is actually true, due to thermal reasons and enabled by process technology. To have a faster device, it needs to be more efficient, not less, or it will get too hot. If it's less efficient AND doing more work, it will dissipate a lot more power, not just a little, making the thermal management more difficult.

One of the big reasons computers can get more powerful with each generation is that they consume less power per switching event. If this were not the case, we would have current generation CPUs demanding tens of kW, and burning up during POST.

and don't forget variable clock speeds... when the load is low, reduce the clock speed and save energy....

and don't forget that in multi-core processors you can shut cores down when not needed, further saving energy...

you make a processor faster by shrinking the manufacturing process. Make the transistors smaller and they use less power. Make them smaller and the signals don't have as far to go and they can run faster.

 

[Don Haines]

No you don't need a 1DX. To get 12 fps you need dual DIGIC 5+ processors, but a single DIGIC 6 can do 14 fps. That is the processor currently in point and shoot cameras. And there is almost certainly an upgraded version of DIGIC 6 in the works to provide the additional horsepower for the needs of video functions in cameras. Dual DIGIC 5+ is obsolete.

14 FPS at how many megapixels? DIGIC 6 is used in PowerShot G16, PowerShot N100, PowerShot S120, PowerShot SX280 HS and PowerShot SX270 HS, which are all about 12 MP. According to CanonUSA, the max sustained frame rate is closer to 9 FPS (without continuous AF)... not 14 FPS. What DIGIC 6 camera does 14 FPS at >= 18 MP?

Digic4 - can handle 5.3FPS at 18MP (60D)
Digic5 - 6 times faster than Digic4
Digic5+ - 17 times faster than Digic4
Dual Digic5+ - 34 times the computing power of Digic4
Digic6 - 20% faster than Dual Digic5+, or 41 times the computing power of Digic4

Somehow, I don't think a lack of computing power is slowing down frame rates

 

[unfocused]

"holding back" could mean that production has started and they are waiting until they have sufficient stock produced and in place around the world for the release. Don't forget that it also takes time to get electronics certified in various countries and they cant ship until they can put that CSA, UL, or whatever certification on the units.

I guess it's a matter of semantics. I consider "holding back" to mean you have something all ready to go and you are choosing not to release it when you could. I don't think of all the ordinary, if massive, steps needed to move a product into the release stage as holding back.

At any rate, my point was the a camera body is not going to be held back by a version II of a long-existing lens. Much more likely, that the release date of a lens, which has a far longer shelf life and much more stable development path than a camera, is going to be determined by the release date of a camera, rather than the reverse.

All very minor points, but with forty-plus years of working in reporting and public information I get annoyed with throw-away editorial comments that have no basis in fact.

What is it with the "more megapixels"?...

Requirement of the marketing department. And people who want to crop excessively.

What's "excessively."

Higher megapixels plays to the strengths of the 7D. Full frame will always outperform APS-C at higher ISOs and with the 6D, Canon offers an affordable full-frame sensor for that market.

It's likely that the initial price of the 7DII will exceed the current street price of the 6D. So Canon has to target the product to audience demand.

Birders and wildlife shooters are a lucrative market that is not all that price sensitive – being comprised largely of people whose buying decisions are based on wants, rather than needs. Although most aren't going to be buying $8,000 super telephotos no matter how much they might want to.

These customers are often distance-limited and that requires cropping because you cannot get closer to the subject for dozens of various reasons. I expect people who want a bargain-priced 5DIII or 1D-X with high ISO sensitivity and low megapixels will be disappointed in the 7DII.

But for a great many people, pairing a 24mp or more 7DII with f8 focusing and a new 100-400 zoom plus 1.4 extender and then cropping it to 10mp will be their dream combination. Maybe you feel that's cropping "excessively" but absent the ability to sprout wings and fly alongside a Osprey fishing offshore, this is likely to be the only available option for many people.

 

[dickgrafixstop]

The more you know about photography, the less equipment you need.

 

[Random Orbits]

Sure it does. You need more circuitry and processing power to sustain processing higher MP/sec. To sustain 12 FPS at 18 MP, you need 1Dx processing capability. More processing require larger/faster memory, processors, buses, etc. and that does take more power even when not used to to its capability.

You seem to be using the words "power" and "energy" interchangeably. Faster processing requires more power, all other things being equal, but not more energy.

No, not interchageably. A Chevy Malibu is traveling on the highway (EPA profile) next to a Corvette. Both are going the same speed. The Corvette has lower drag and is slightly lighter, yet its highway efficiency is 29 mpg compared to the Malibu's 36 mpg. Larger components (engine, transmission, etc.) required for greater performance use more power on average and more energy over the same distance.

So far, so good. But using a thermodynamic analogy isn't a good idea.

For electronics, components spec'ed for higher performance also take more power even if they're doing the same work.

In most cases, the opposite is actually true, due to thermal reasons and enabled by process technology. To have a faster device, it needs to be more efficient, not less, or it will get too hot. If it's less efficient AND doing more work, it will dissipate a lot more power, not just a little, making the thermal management more difficult.

One of the big reasons computers can get more powerful with each generation is that they consume less power per switching event. If this were not the case, we would have current generation CPUs demanding tens of kW, and burning up during POST.

Now compare options within the same generation, and your case doesn't hold water. DIGIC 5+ is used in the 70D, 5DIII, 6D and 1DX. Unless you're counting on the 7DII to sport a DIGIC 6+... Canon has a longer pro body cycle than Nikon. But what has the D4S done compared to the D4? Same MP, 1 more FPS... To get the 7D II to get the same framerate as the 1DX, which has dual DIGIC 5+ and a DIGIC 4, it'll need that same processing ability with a smaller battery. And to get more MP at that frame rate, you'll need even more processing power. So, unless Canon leap-frogs the competition in computational efficiency, I don't expect to see a large difference in Canon's processing abilities.

You're original post:

I would argue that wildlife and action photographers need it more than landscapers do. Wildlife and action often lead to focal-length-limited situations that result in heavy cropping. More pixels helps with that in a big way.

Wildlife/action applications have favored higher FPS to MP (1DX vs. 5DIII, D4 vs. D800). Nothing that you have posted has suggested that there isn't a trade between MP and frame rate, and most wildlife/action users favor higher FPS to MP.

 

[Loswr]

The more you know about photography, the less equipment you need.

It depends more on what you shoot. My TS-E 24L II is great for architecture, my 600/4L IS II is great for birds. Is knowing more about photography going to help me use a wide TS for birds or a supertele for buildings? :

Sure...great images can be made with a beat up film camera and a 50mm lens. But not necessarily of my chosen subjects.

 

[Random Orbits]

No you don't need a 1DX. To get 12 fps you need dual DIGIC 5+ processors, but a single DIGIC 6 can do 14 fps. That is the processor currently in point and shoot cameras. And there is almost certainly an upgraded version of DIGIC 6 in the works to provide the additional horsepower for the needs of video functions in cameras. Dual DIGIC 5+ is obsolete.

14 FPS at how many megapixels? DIGIC 6 is used in PowerShot G16, PowerShot N100, PowerShot S120, PowerShot SX280 HS and PowerShot SX270 HS, which are all about 12 MP. According to CanonUSA, the max sustained frame rate is closer to 9 FPS (without continuous AF)... not 14 FPS. What DIGIC 6 camera does 14 FPS at >= 18 MP?

Digic4 - can handle 5.3FPS at 18MP (60D)
Digic5 - 6 times faster than Digic4
Digic5+ - 17 times faster than Digic4
Dual Digic5+ - 34 times the computing power of Digic4
Digic6 - 20% faster than Dual Digic5+, or 41 times the computing power of Digic4

Somehow, I don't think a lack of computing power is slowing down frame rates

Tugela's post implied that 1 DIGIC 6 can outdo the processing of a 1 DX (Dual DIGIC 5+). Do you disagree?

 

[Don Haines]

No you don't need a 1DX. To get 12 fps you need dual DIGIC 5+ processors, but a single DIGIC 6 can do 14 fps. That is the processor currently in point and shoot cameras. And there is almost certainly an upgraded version of DIGIC 6 in the works to provide the additional horsepower for the needs of video functions in cameras. Dual DIGIC 5+ is obsolete.

14 FPS at how many megapixels? DIGIC 6 is used in PowerShot G16, PowerShot N100, PowerShot S120, PowerShot SX280 HS and PowerShot SX270 HS, which are all about 12 MP. According to CanonUSA, the max sustained frame rate is closer to 9 FPS (without continuous AF)... not 14 FPS. What DIGIC 6 camera does 14 FPS at >= 18 MP?

Digic4 - can handle 5.3FPS at 18MP (60D)
Digic5 - 6 times faster than Digic4
Digic5+ - 17 times faster than Digic4
Dual Digic5+ - 34 times the computing power of Digic4
Digic6 - 20% faster than Dual Digic5+, or 41 times the computing power of Digic4

Somehow, I don't think a lack of computing power is slowing down frame rates

Tugela's post implied that 1 DIGIC 6 can outdo the processing of a 1 DX (Dual DIGIC 5+). Do you disagree?

The DIGIC6 is supposed to have 20 percent more computing power than the dual DIGIC5+, so yes I agree that it is more powerful... but computing power and I/O bandwidth are two different things. I am sure that there are many instances where the extra pins of two chips are better than the faster pins of a single chip.

Computing-wise, if a 60D can handle 5.3fps at 18M, then a single DIGIC6 should be able to handle 100fps at 36Mpixels.... but there is no way the I/O of the DIGIC6 will support that so the comparison is meaningless.

about the only safe statement is that if they use dual DIGIC6 it will be faster than dual DIGIC5+.