Canon EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

[Random Orbits]

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.

I think most companies do not hold back because it's unprofitable. Why would you delay the release of something that will get you more profit? 100-400L II rumors have been around for years. Has it been held back all this time waiting for a 7DII or is it more likely that worthy successor to the 100-400L had yet to be developed?

I remember when the 5DIII/D800 came out, and Chuck Westfall stated that Canon had high MP technologies and implied that Canon could respond quickly if the market demanded more MP. Well, it's been 2 years and still nothing. Maybe the response will come this year, but it won't be cheap and it won't be across the Canon product line (70D didn't have it, 7D won't have it [according to rumors]). People that work in PR or deal with media are there to tell the outside world what the company wants them to hear. It's in Canon's interest that we think Canon can respond to the threats of other companies (so that people don't switch away from the Canon ecosystem), but they don't tell you when.

 

[Random Orbits]

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+.

Agreed.

 

[Loswr]

I remember when the 5DIII/D800 came out, and Chuck Westfall stated that Canon had high MP technologies and implied that Canon could respond quickly if the market demanded more MP. Well, it's been 2 years and still nothing.

The 5DIII has outsold the D800/E. Maybe it has 'been 2 years and still nothing' because the market HAS NOT demanded more MP.

 

[Tugela]

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.

If you are shooting regular pictures is doesn't matter what processor you use since there isn't much processor overhead.

The main use of an upgraded processor will be for (A) computationally intensive operations, such as tracking and image modification; and (B) for perfoming video processing/encoding.

The hardware encoders in the DIGIC 5 series were limited to 1080p30 at 24mbps. In DIGIC 6 that was increased to 1080p60. The DIGIC DV4 used in camcorders can additionally encode at 35 mbps through hardware. Older still cameras could generate MOV and other format files at higher bit rates, but those were prepared through firmware. If any new camera was to do better than that (such as shoot in 4K, or use hardware encoding at higher bit rates), there pretty much has to be a new processor, and it is fairly safe to say that such a processor would be significantly faster than the older ones in general processing as well. They are not going to go to all the trouble of making a processor with a new encoder and leave it with old logic and fabrication tech. They would update everything else as well.

 

[Dylan777]

I spoke to someone who said that their brother's mother's cousin's ex-boyfriend's lover said that it would come in pink.

Pink? What's the point of that? At least white would lean towards arctic camouflage

If it is pink, then people are less likely to steal it......

You haven't seen my wife RX1 case yet

 

[dslrdummy]

I spoke to someone who said that their brother's mother's cousin's ex-boyfriend's lover said that it would come in pink.

Pink? What's the point of that? At least white would lean towards arctic camouflage

Pink would provide camouflage among the herd of unicorns where the 7DII is found.

Or flamingos?

 

[dslrdummy]

Presumably the rumour is meant to be "announcement" in the Fall not 'release'.

 

[Random Orbits]

I remember when the 5DIII/D800 came out, and Chuck Westfall stated that Canon had high MP technologies and implied that Canon could respond quickly if the market demanded more MP. Well, it's been 2 years and still nothing.

The 5DIII has outsold the D800/E. Maybe it has 'been 2 years and still nothing' because the market HAS NOT demanded more MP.

I don't disagree that Canon's strategy was wrong with the 5DIII vs. D800/E, but then why is Canon developing a high MP body now if it doesn't think it is profitable? Unless the high MP rumor is smoke in the wind and there won't be a 35MP+ Canon body at all. I take exception to what Westfall implied that Canon could respond "quickly." At 2 years and counting, it's getting close to a full product cycle.

 

[Loswr]

I remember when the 5DIII/D800 came out, and Chuck Westfall stated that Canon had high MP technologies and implied that Canon could respond quickly if the market demanded more MP. Well, it's been 2 years and still nothing.

The 5DIII has outsold the D800/E. Maybe it has 'been 2 years and still nothing' because the market HAS NOT demanded more MP.

I don't disagree that Canon's strategy was wrong with the 5DIII vs. D800/E, but then why is Canon developing a high MP body now if it doesn't think it is profitable? Unless the high MP rumor is smoke in the wind and there won't be a 35MP+ Canon body at all. I take exception to what Westfall implied that Canon could respond "quickly." At 2 years and counting, it's getting close to a full product cycle.

You don't disagree that Canon's strategy was wrong? That double negative means you think Canon's strategy was wrong. Given that the 5DIII has sold better than the D800/E, please explain the flaws in Canon's strategy...

Canon is developing a high MP body? They produced a 120 MP APS-H sensor, clearly they have the capability. But if your 'evidence' for an imminent high MP body is rumor posts, we'd have seen a new 100-400L over five years ago.

I think you miss the point. Westfall said Canon could respond quickly if the market demanded it. The fact that the 22 MP 5DIII has outsold the 36 MP D800/E and a7R supports the idea that the market has not demanded high MP...therefore, Canon sees no need to respond, quickly or otherwise.

Please note that 'the market' does not comprise a few complainers on Internet forums.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I heard from someone who talked to photographers in the world cup that 7dmkII will come with:

5dmkIII's autofocus
10 fps
20-24MP
f8 autofocus
1D's top plate
Dual DIGIC 5 +

hmm does dual digic 5+ even have enough power for 24MP at 10fps? digic 6 is already out for many months
with all the talk about better video, I'd sooner bet digic SEVENs than digic 5+, i'm not sure but isn'd dual digic 5+ complete video read limited to about 18MP?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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.

Yeah and the 5D4 video better not be worse than 5D3+ML RAW! It needs 2k RAW (and not all mushed up, real, good raw, without NR and grain smushing and DR killing and so on) and 4k compressed (and again not overly DNR'ed mush where you get high contrast and sharp edges at say 3.5k res and areas of lower contrast but with detail all mushy and like 0.7k detail or something).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

These two points seem antagonic:

*Quite high MP count
*Greatly improved low light and ISO / noise performance

Those are NOT opposed to each other! At the same final size, more pixels on the same size sensor will produce LESS noise at the same final level of detail, not more (this myth got started because of comparing at 1:1 rather than constant final size and detail level). The only exception is at very extreme ISOs up into the 6 digit range.

Cue jrista...

;D ;D

Hah let us hope not, because he will go on about how normalization is not a valid way to compare and even if this camera does deliver better effective DR and SNR than the 7D, if it really has a ton of MP, he will insist at comparing with DxO Screen 100% views : and say the 7D2 stinks (even though the sensor might actually be awesome).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

What is it with the "more megapixels"? This is a camera for action and wildlife photographers, not for landscape photographers. The landscape photographers already have a decent camera in the 6D, and might like something with a few more MP, to take advantage of the ever-increasing quality of lenses. The action/wildlife photographers want "more throughput (fps and buffer depth).

Someone at the camera club meeting last night pestered the local camera shop representative about the "7D2". Hey, everyone is in the dark, including the CR1 and CR2 sources.

Well it's wildlife guys who often love lots of MP since the get more reach.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Canon holding back 7Dmk2 for a reason. I suspect 100-400 mk2 announcement, or some other coinciding situation.

Silly statement.

Canon could have released a 100-400 II at any time over the past five years or so. Lens technology doesn't change that much and this lens design has probably been sitting around for quite some time, just waiting for the right time to put it into production. There is no reason Canon would need to "hold back" any camera body for a lens.

And, what exactly does "holding back" mean? The implication is that the 7DII has been completed and ready to go for quite some time and Canon has allowed it to sit idle. Hardly a likely strategy for camera technology, which has a relatively short shelf life. Certainly all companies time their releases to obtain the maximum benefit, but that is a matter of weeks or months. To call it "holding back" reflects a gross misunderstanding of everything involved in a successful product launch.

Maybe to make sure the D400 doesn't make it look silly? And if so, then delay it six more months to go with option #2 instead??

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Canon holding back 7Dmk2 for a reason. I suspect 100-400 mk2 announcement, or some other coinciding situation.

Silly statement.

Canon could have released a 100-400 II at any time over the past five years or so. Lens technology doesn't change that much and this lens design has probably been sitting around for quite some time, just waiting for the right time to put it into production. There is no reason Canon would need to "hold back" any camera body for a lens.

And, what exactly does "holding back" mean? The implication is that the 7DII has been completed and ready to go for quite some time and Canon has allowed it to sit idle. Hardly a likely strategy for camera technology, which has a relatively short shelf life. Certainly all companies time their releases to obtain the maximum benefit, but that is a matter of weeks or months. To call it "holding back" reflects a gross misunderstanding of everything involved in a successful product launch.

"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.

Or maybe to make sure it passes all the AF and usage tests at the World Cup, just to be safe so they don't have another 1D3/etc.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Here's my guess:
9.3 fps (2 more than 70D, 3 less than 1DX)
28MP with equal or slight bump in high iso performance
Better weather sealing
4k video @24 fps, 120fps 1080 video slo-mo
$2100 starting price, falling to $1950 within 6 months.
dual digic 5 and digic 4 processor
cf and sd card slot, though sd card limits higher functionality
dual pixel AF version of the 1D4
Headphone jack
wifi and gps

not sure d5+ and d5+ and d4 can all fit in a 7D sized body
also even dual d5+ can't drive 28MP at 9.3fps
but other than the minor digic guesses, that sounds reasonable
(not sure what you mean by dual pixel AF version of the 1D4 though)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Digic5+ - 17 times faster than Digic4
Dual Digic5+ - 34 times the computing power of Digic4

are you sure they got dual digic to do full scaling? I know with past generations going dual seemed to only give 50-60% boost not 100%

 

[Orangutan]

but then why is Canon developing a high MP body now if it doesn't think it is profitable? Unless the high MP rumor is smoke in the wind

First, it's a rumor. Second, you may have misunderstood the rumor: it said "Quite high MP count." That's quite ambiguous by my reading. That wording could simply mean it will be significantly higher than than 70D's MP count, say 24MP or 28MP. That's still not "quite high" relative to the entire market.

Also, as someone previously said, depending on how you think about dual-pixel tech (or possibly the next-gen multi-pixel tech) it could be perceived as extremely high MP count, even if the the resulting raw image is close to expectations.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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+...

I would, digic 5+ is OLLLLLDDDD, they will put a chip already YEARS old, into something that they might want to last another 3-4 years?? Heck I wouldn't be surprised a digic 7.

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.

I don't believe that is the case at all for wildlife shooters, epecially not bird shooters. Maybe for sports, withing reason, though.

 

[Don Haines]

Digic5+ - 17 times faster than Digic4
Dual Digic5+ - 34 times the computing power of Digic4

are you sure they got dual digic to do full scaling? I know with past generations going dual seemed to only give 50-60% boost not 100%

A lot depends on how the software is written and what the task is.... but there will always be overhead. My feel is that an 80 percent increase would be almost perfection.... but so much depends on the task and how parallel it can be made.

I wouldn't be surprised if the setup was dual chips, but of different types... one optimized for video and the other optimized for stills.