EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR2]

[sagittariansrock]

My 7D is languishing because its ISO perf is just not good enough.

Then a 7DII won't be the answer, because the real limitation on ISO performance is the APS-C-sized sensor. Unfortunately, physics trumps hopes and dreams.

While it is true that a similarly-specc'ed FF sensor will always capture more than twice the amount of light as an APS-C sensor (because of the physics that you mention), it is quite likely that electronics innovation will produce a sensor that makes the newer generation APS-C sensor close to or even better than the previous generation FF. A lot of rumors about 7DII suggested exactly that. And it may still happen, considering this "70D sensor spec" is also a rumor. However, basing one's hopes and dreams on rumors is fraught with the possibility of disappointment.

 

[Marsu42]

Fyi: Here are raw samples of 20mp crop vs. 18mp crop, so you know what you'll get if you continue to wait patiently until 2014 to enjoy the 7d2 ... http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=16248.msg299011#msg299011

 

[Sabaki]

I belong to a community of roughly 150 photographers and less than 3% of those are keen on the video capabilities of their cameras. 100% are very interested in image quality.

How many already use FF cameras? How many more would, budget permitting? If you're 'very interested' in IQ, you should first get the best lenses you can, then be hoping to get a FF body, not hoping for dramatic improvements in APS-C sensor IQ.

Hey Neuro. Roughly 15-20% of them own FF, perhaps leaning towards the 15%.

I do have 3 L lenses and I'm saving for a 24-70 now.

Perhaps it's your last comment that is most correct: have APS-Cs reached their limits and should they be replaced by APS-H bodies?

PS I'm a total dufus when it comes to tech. I can mostly repeat what I read on the net but I don't fully understand the 'science of limitations' as it pertains to sensors.

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

I guess we have to wait even longer for a Canon camera with film like DR then, oh well.

 

[Nawaf]

If you own $10k+ of longer glass, I still think a built-for-war, high FPS, stellar focusing APS-C rig could sell for $2500 and be successful.

What fraction of Canon's intended 7DII market segment do you think owns $10K+ of longer glass?

A lot of the serious birding crowd I'm sure.

But again, how large is the serious birding crowd? Probably no more than 5% of the 7DII's intended market.

While I do REALLY like the idea of a "pro" grade APS-C, it all boils down to high-ISO performance for me. If they can't make a comparable ISO leap on the 7D to 7DII with what they did for the 5dMk II to MkIII, then I see no point in complimenting my Mark III with one. Nothing irritates me more than shooting with two bodies, both at the same settings, and having noisy photos/video from one but not the other.

And, given the limitations of high MP APS-C sensors (as others have mentioned), I'm very skeptical they can make such a jump unless they reduce the MP count. In my opinion, a 12 to 16MP, 10fps, 61 point auto focus 7DII would be awesome. That's the only way I see them both offering a real "upgrade" while at the same time differentiating a new body from the rest of their line-up. Although, I'm sure a good number of people would prefer high MP to better ISO. It all boils down to shooting needs I guess.

I would prefer both high MP count (24 like the competition), better ISO, and 12 stops of DR (which my Olympus E-M5 does). Before anyone says it can't be done well look at Sony, Nikon, Olympus, and Panasonic.

If they can't make the sensors that can rival those companies well then why won't they have someone make sensors for them... we can go on and on.

Canon has to take the D400 into consideration so maybe that is why they delayed it. Lets play this waiting game but with all honesty I don't have any confidence in saying that the 7D II will deliver in the sensor department.

 

[ahsanford]

I do like the 6D for its IQ, the fact it's smaller and lighter, and because on it the 40mm pancake gives a 40mm FOV (relevant to me because I do like the option of such a small set up and there's no EF/EFS pancake in the 22 to 28 mm range). However I'm finding it VERY hard to part with the 7D.

+ a lot.

How is there no pancake 22mm for APS-C? EF-M has a length that EF-S doesn't. That's nuts.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

If I loook at the products Canon introduced during the last few years almost all of them are far away from that what customers want to buy.

Canon is now loosing a lot of customers. No new lenses long awaited lenses, no 7D Mark II, now 1Ds Mark III replacement, no bigger megapixel camera etc.

You must have missed the refresh of the supertele lineup, the new 70-200 and 24-70s, and the 200-400.

They're losing customers? Got any data to support that? Or is it just more hot air?

Agree with Neuro.

For every Gear Acquisition Syndrome guy that must have exactly what he's dreaming of that leaves Canon, other equally impatient/nuts/unreasonable people are leaving their brand to join us. The only thing the 'leavers' do is pony up mad cash to sate their needs, and that keeps all the companies in business.

And then there's the rest of us. We use the largest and most popular SLR system in the world, and that's only maintained through Canon's marketeers actually putting decent bets on what they think we'd pay for and then delivering and supporting said bets to market.

For instance, I have two of the newer lenses that are reviled by this forum in that they just weren't deemed as important as what people really wanted: the 28mm F/2.8 IS USM and the 24-70mm F/4L IS USM. But as much as they aren't the lenses the fanboys and forum-dwellers wanted, they are both @#%@ing dynamite lenses -- especially for how and what I shoot.

Also, leaving for (say) Nikon for it's stellar 14-24mm lens would open up many other holes in your bag as I'm sure that they lack something Canon uniquely offers. Congrats, you'd have a D800 and a 14-24. Now you need to buy some F/1.2 primes that Nikon doesn't sell...

So the grass may be greener on the other side to some of you, but my 5D3 and associated gear is a joy to use. Mark my words, the 7D owners will say the same after they make plunge for the 7D2.

- A

 

[Pi]

While it is true that a similarly-specc'ed FF sensor will always capture more than twice the amount of light as an APS-C sensor (because of the physics that you mention), it is quite likely that electronics innovation will produce a sensor that makes the newer generation APS-C sensor close to or even better than the previous generation FF.

With the 6D having 50% QE, Canon has to break a few physics laws, including that of energy conservation, to produce a Bayer APS-C sensor with QE of 128% (=1.6^2*50).

 

[ahsanford]

people take this rumor as an absolute truth. its a RUMOR. second half of 2014? more than 12 months (again a rumor) until released? many things can change.

+1

It's quite believable, though, that the 7DII will come in the second half of 2014.
I was actually thinking that the 7DII will get announced in March next year.
Now July-August seems more likely.

On the other hand, I don't believe that the 7DII will have the 70D sensor.
Canon won't be able to charge too much premium for the 7DII if it has the same sensor as the 70D - regardless of AF.

So, we'll see.

They collected quite a premium on the 5DIII over the 5DII when the most significant upgrade was the AF. My guess is that the new 7D will end up with the 5DIII style AF. That would actually be pretty nice on an APS-C body.

RLPhoto and I are on the same page here. If the 7D2 is nothing more than a 70D + the 1DX/5D3 AF system + a high burst rate, even that alone will see it sell and sell well. As much as I am bummed / possibly disbelieving the 70D sensor choice for the 7D2, the other features alone are worth the upgrade.

Keep in mind that there is a subset of sports (and mainly) wildlife people out there that always are operating on the crazy long end of things. A crop body to them is a super high quality alternative to a teleconverter, or the opportunity to get the same shot as 600mm FF without needing to pay for 600mm glass. Those folks will always upgrade in the crop world as long glass never gets cheaper over time.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

You must have missed the refresh of the supertele lineup, the new 70-200 and 24-70s, and the 200-400.

I certainly don't want to intervene in a good dogfight but I notice the 70-200L refresh was quite a while ago, but the rest are all products targeted towards a high budget (tele primes, 200-400) and/or special/pro crowd (24-70L2 w/o IS, but great edge sharpness).

The 5d3 of course is a good product if you forget about the first retail price, but from there the 6d is for low-light shooting with sub-par af and what the 24-70L/4 is for nobody has figured out yet. And let's not forget, no let's forget about the IS primes. Imho Canon is indeed postponing some updates (50L, 35L, I'd like a 180L/IS) for reasons unknown while 3rd party manufacturers fill the void.

But probably now Canon is going for the enthusiast market again, the 70D will be a good camera for a good price, and maybe the new lenses won't stay a [CR] and won't be updated with a multiplied price tag...

I'll speak to the 24-70 F/4 IS statement:

• It is the nearly perfect travel lens. Light, shorter length, and macro means take it anywhere with you -- hikes, vacations, international trips with limited luggage space, etc.
• Sharper than than the 24-105 and 24-70 Mk I.

If I get one lens and only one lens to put in my bag for something, it's either that lens or a prime in the 24-35mm neighborhood.

- A

 

[Marsu42]

It is the nearly perfect travel lens. Light, shorter length, and macro means take it anywhere with you -- hikes, vacations, international trips with limited luggage space, etc.[/list]

The 24-70/4 is ot, but well, I know what you wrote is what Canon intended, but at least for the current price I'm not so sure if iq wide open outweighs zoom range for travel. Plus I am sure with a macro w/o working distance you'll bring back nice memories of your own shadow ... heck, even the 100mm macro working distance is really small.

I've got the impression Canon released the 24-70/4 so no one can say they don't have a ff standard zoom w/o IS and so they can sell more 70-xyz lenses w/o "overlapping" zoom range, but customers would have been better served just with an updated 24-105L2/4.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

While it is true that a similarly-specc'ed FF sensor will always capture more than twice the amount of light as an APS-C sensor (because of the physics that you mention), it is quite likely that electronics innovation will produce a sensor that makes the newer generation APS-C sensor close to or even better than the previous generation FF.

With the 6D having 50% QE, Canon has to break a few physics laws, including that of energy conservation, to produce a Bayer APS-C sensor with QE of 128% (=1.6^2*50).

The one possible way to increase high ISO IQ a good bit would be to radically increase high ISO DR. If you somehow radically reduced the black frame noise at high ISO. ISO3200 has a lot less DR than ISO200 and it becomes small indeed at ISO6400+. But that might require expensive tech at this point and perhaps advanced cooling systems as well. So it improved high ISO a ton is at a tricky state at this point.

At low ISO other makers are doing pretty well although Canon has quite a few stops they could improve there and that has been proven by many to be possible in reasonable fashion.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

people take this rumor as an absolute truth. its a RUMOR. second half of 2014? more than 12 months (again a rumor) until released? many things can change.

+1

It's quite believable, though, that the 7DII will come in the second half of 2014.
I was actually thinking that the 7DII will get announced in March next year.
Now July-August seems more likely.

On the other hand, I don't believe that the 7DII will have the 70D sensor.
Canon won't be able to charge too much premium for the 7DII if it has the same sensor as the 70D - regardless of AF.

So, we'll see.

They collected quite a premium on the 5DIII over the 5DII when the most significant upgrade was the AF. My guess is that the new 7D will end up with the 5DIII style AF. That would actually be pretty nice on an APS-C body.

RLPhoto and I are on the same page here. If the 7D2 is nothing more than a 70D + the 1DX/5D3 AF system + a high burst rate, even that alone will see it sell and sell well. As much as I am bummed / possibly disbelieving the 70D sensor choice for the 7D2, the other features alone are worth the upgrade.

Keep in mind that there is a subset of sports (and mainly) wildlife people out there that always are operating on the crazy long end of things. A crop body to them is a super high quality alternative to a teleconverter, or the opportunity to get the same shot as 600mm FF without needing to pay for 600mm glass. Those folks will always upgrade in the crop world as long glass never gets cheaper over time.

- A

yeah 5D3 AF + 20MP APS-C + dual-phase AF + 12fps would sell even with old sensor

OTOH the other high-end bodies, especially 5 series and 6 series become increasing tricky unless they match Exmor and fix up maximumal DR and IQ quality.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

You must have missed the refresh of the supertele lineup, the new 70-200 and 24-70s, and the 200-400.

I certainly don't want to intervene in a good dogfight but I notice the 70-200L refresh was quite a while ago, but the rest are all products targeted towards a high budget (tele primes, 200-400) and/or special/pro crowd (24-70L2 w/o IS, but great edge sharpness).

The 5d3 of course is a good product if you forget about the first retail price, but from there the 6d is for low-light shooting with sub-par af and what the 24-70L/4 is for nobody has figured out yet. And let's not forget, no let's forget about the IS primes. Imho Canon is indeed postponing some updates (50L, 35L, I'd like a 180L/IS) for reasons unknown while 3rd party manufacturers fill the void.

But probably now Canon is going for the enthusiast market again, the 70D will be a good camera for a good price, and maybe the new lenses won't stay a [CR] and won't be updated with a multiplied price tag...

I'll speak to the 24-70 F/4 IS statement:

• It is the nearly perfect travel lens. Light, shorter length, and macro means take it anywhere with you -- hikes, vacations, international trips with limited luggage space, etc.
• Sharper than than the 24-105 and 24-70 Mk I.

If I get one lens and only one lens to put in my bag for something, it's either that lens or a prime in the 24-35mm neighborhood.

- A

Yeah 24-70 f/4 IS isn't bad. Not a match for the 24-70 II (other than the edges at 70mm where it is actually most likely better). But no other (other than the 24-70 II) zoom can match it's wide end image quality and deliver a truly satisfying edge to edge image at 24mm (maybe tamron 24-70 VC gets close, although it definitely has more distortion there? it also has f/2.8, although it lacks the macro and is a lot bulkier). From what I've seen it's miles better than the 24-105 at the wide end for edge to edge performance on FF and the IS is more effective (it actually really helps a LOT at 24mm on the 24-70 f/4 IS). In most ways the 24-70 II is better but when you have no time/desire/are not allowed to use a tripod be it a museum, finishing a hike as light gets dimmer, etc. it'll definitely produce better images than the 24-70 II. And the macro thing can be neat, it's a bit tricky compared to a real macro, but then again don't most people simply not bother dragging their stand alone macro other than on dedicated macro trips?

If the tamron wasn't out there I think it would already be getting a good rep. I still think it will in time anyway. At $1500 it is a bit much, but I see for as low as $1025 a times from rep dealers. Anyway I think the 24-70 f/4 IS most likely won't be so joked about after a couple more years. It may be a bit like with the 70-300L. It went from being the black sheep of the forums to one of the more often praised lenses these days. Of course that one is more truly unique as nothing remotely close to the size is better for any price.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I've got the impression Canon released the 24-70/4 so no one can say they don't have a ff standard zoom w/o IS and so they can sell more 70-xyz lenses w/o "overlapping" zoom range, but customers would have been better served just with an updated 24-105L2/4.

I don't know. Would a 24-105L II with scarcely better IQ (might be hard to improve with a lens with such wide range) and a little better IS at 50% more better have served the customers?

 

[BozillaNZ]

The one possible way to increase high ISO IQ a good bit would be to radically increase high ISO DR. If you somehow radically reduced the black frame noise at high ISO. ISO3200 has a lot less DR than ISO200 and it becomes small indeed at ISO6400+. But that might require expensive tech at this point and perhaps advanced cooling systems as well. So it improved high ISO a ton is at a tricky state at this point.

At low ISO other makers are doing pretty well although Canon has quite a few stops they could improve there and that has been proven by many to be possible in reasonable fashion.

That's simply not possible. For high ISO DR to beat low ISO, the low ISO DR has to be really BAD.

For the ideal sensor, each stop increase in ISO, the DR will reduce by a stop. And that has almost been the case for D800's sensor.

The reason why Canon's sensor can keep the same DR in ISO 100-800 is because it is has very bad DR at ISO 100, not the other way around! :-[

 

[Loswr]

OTOH the other high-end bodies, especially 5 series and 6 series become increasing tricky unless they match Exmor and fix up maximumal DR and IQ quality.

Yeah, Canon had better get on that quick, or else they'll lose market share to Nikon, Sony, and Pentax.






Except, they're not............ :

 

[dstppy]

THAT'S IT!!! I'm moving to Nikon

My 7D, newly arrived a few weeks ago BURST INTO FLAMES and STOPPED TAKING PICTURES on the note of this rumor . . ..

Oh, wait, it didn't. Neither did a lot of this other stuff

My bad. Carry on people.

 

[Pi]

The one possible way to increase high ISO IQ a good bit would be to radically increase high ISO DR. If you somehow radically reduced the black frame noise at high ISO. ISO3200 has a lot less DR than ISO200 and it becomes small indeed at ISO6400+. But that might require expensive tech at this point and perhaps advanced cooling systems as well. So it improved high ISO a ton is at a tricky state at this point.

Nah... Reducing the read noise is always good but .... away from the shadows, most of the noise you see at high ISO is shot noise.

BTW, the 6D has less read noise than the D600 at high ISO.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

The one possible way to increase high ISO IQ a good bit would be to radically increase high ISO DR. If you somehow radically reduced the black frame noise at high ISO. ISO3200 has a lot less DR than ISO200 and it becomes small indeed at ISO6400+. But that might require expensive tech at this point and perhaps advanced cooling systems as well. So it improved high ISO a ton is at a tricky state at this point.

At low ISO other makers are doing pretty well although Canon has quite a few stops they could improve there and that has been proven by many to be possible in reasonable fashion.

That's simply not possible. For high ISO DR to beat low ISO, the low ISO DR has to be really BAD.

For the ideal sensor, each stop increase in ISO, the DR will reduce by a stop. And that has almost been the case for D800's sensor.

The reason why Canon's sensor can keep the same DR in ISO 100-800 is because it is has very bad DR at ISO 100, not the other way around! :-[

Yeah but maybe they can improve DR overall or improve late stage noise so it would do maybe the same at low ISO as Exmor now and then do better at high ISO because they couldn't improve early state read noise but fixed up late stage more. I don't know what it takes to do the two stages or what the balance is now, maybe the only way would be to improve it universally. It might take active cooling and such perhaps.