It seems to me it was mentioned 12 posts ago.Everybody seems to be forgetting that the 90D is rumoured to have 2 digics. Doesn’t sound like a normal 80D upgrade to me. We’ll see soon enough..
Upvote
0
It seems to me it was mentioned 12 posts ago.Everybody seems to be forgetting that the 90D is rumoured to have 2 digics. Doesn’t sound like a normal 80D upgrade to me. We’ll see soon enough..
I wrote "You cannot realistically expect that Canon will deliver a camera named xxD and priced at around USD 1400.00 to be as good an action camera as a camera from the xD-series..." and then you replied with a comparison about a landscapeing/studio camera (5D), derived from an action camera (1D).
Apparently you also missed that I explicitly wrote about action photography, not the landscaping/studio that you introduced and based your wrong conclusion on.
I really do not see why you want to argue that statement by introducing irrelevant comparisons and misrepresenting the specifics of what I wrote.
Wanting a feature is perfectly reasonable. Threatening consequences if you don’t get that feature is silly. Unless you happen to own a few million shares of CAJ, your threat is meaningless. Neither Canon nor anyone on this forum care if you buy the 90D, buy a Nikon D500, or buy a soggy piece of toast.Funny at the reaction from wanting clean hdmi out is. I guess I’m the only one that wants it and anyone else that does is just one person that Canon doesn’t care about. If that is the mentality that you allegedly have insight to, I really don’t feel good about that hubris mentality which has led to the decline of major corporations over time.
This is spot on. It's very difficult to actually explain why the 7D series is so beloved to someone who has never handled one.
There's a very distinct difference between the 80D and the 7DM2. It's not just specs. It feels better and respondes quicker. Everything is exactly where you need it to be. No fluff. It just shoots and makes your job easier (two card slots helps a lot).
One often overlooked fact about the 7Dm2: it has a special shutter mechanism shared only with the 1D series, according to Imaging Resource. This results in less vibration and a longer shutter life.
Did your professional studies include any lessons on respect to others?
Wanting a feature is perfectly reasonable. Threatening consequences if you don’t get that feature is silly. Unless you happen to own a few million shares of CAJ, your threat is meaningless. Neither Canon nor anyone on this forum care if you buy the 90D, buy a Nikon D500, or buy a soggy piece of toast.
N
The difference in DR between the two models isn’t really noticeable in real world photographs. Like I said, the quality of the colours from the 80D files when you have to increase the exposure or push the shadows is better. I prefer the files from the 80D.
Yah, there’s a significant difference between ‘measurable’ and ‘visible’.
I had both at the same time, till the 80D died as I described earlier, still have the 7D2. Predominantly stills, but like the all rounder aspect of video as well.
Your step down isnt everyones, it depends on what you liked about it.
Which kind of proves the point about which is more robust than the other.
The 80D has a shutter rating of 100,000
The 7D Mark II has a shutter rating of 200,000
Additionally, the 7D Mark II has a superior AF system and a superior light meter (150,000 RGB+IR pixels in 252 zones vs. 7560 RGB+IR in 63 segments). These things are important when shooting sports/action in dim light. The color metering is critical when shooting straight to JPEG to meet tight publishing deadlines.
It was just luck it wasnt the 7D2 instead, you might have missed how it happened and the general point I was making. Many of the things you're listing are claimed specs vs reality. In my view they often arent so meaningful in practise. I still have to watch for the same situations with metering but overall its very reliable for either. Shutter counts are still ultimately a matter of trust and luckily are generally vast underestimates. Durability is still extremely good even with the so called flimsy 80D, but the same issues with be lethal for either.
Much of it is more about piece of mind in my view.
Unless the three samples of 7D2 which made it over 500,000 made it to exactly 1,000,000, I’m not convinced the evidence supports that claim.You can claim it is just a spec, but here's the reality of the 80D shutter life versus the reality of the 7D Mark II shutter life. A 7D Mark II has a better chance of making it to 1,000,000 actuations than an 80D has of making it to 150,000.
Unless the three samples of 7D2 which made it over 500,000 made it to exactly 1,000,000, I’m not convinced the evidence supports that claim.
nope. no viewfinder. What "we" (some of us) are waiting for is a KILLER EOS M5 II, every bit as good as a (not coming) EOS 7D III should have been. But priced at 999. ;-)
I would only be interested in that if the viewfinder were about a million times better than the ones in the R and RP. Those are just awful, compared side-by-side with my 7D Mark II. Blurry when panning, low-res, brightness doesn't match the scene, crushed blacks, blown whites - close to unusable in difficult conditions.
Oh, and I'd need at least 1,000 shots + 3 hours of viewfinder on time per battery charge.
You think after years of spamming these forums with nonsense, the person they were addressing deserves any respect?
I think that might be confusing absence of data with a finding. Theres very different sample sizes.
If you take a look at the 60D or 70D with larger samples, you see a much closer match in overall patterns to the 7D2, with the majority of failures at 10-35k, and a fair chance of some very good numbers afterwards. Still not a completely fair comparison given lots of caveats (user base, age rates, selection bias etc) but interesting.
Using that data I have a 44% chance of getting 250k-500k with a 70D and a 58% chance with a 7D2. I mean sure its measurable, but they're both pretty awesome in my view.