EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR2]

[crasher8]

Prototypes for a 7D Mark II now exist over a year, but if I look at the 70D and 6D price I think that there is no space for an 7D Mark II between the mentioned cameras.

It seen so, that the 70D IS the new 7D Mark II. But without CF cards the camera has no change to go in the bag of pros.

I wouldn't say that the 7D2 needs to be "between" the 70D and the 6D, indeed I think it could potentially be above the 6D if its given 5D3 level build, pro AF and 10 FPS.

+1

 

[Dylan777]

Show me what your 1D X can do that make my 5D III looks like a children's toy.

Shoot pictures during a hurricane. Pound in nails if you can't find your hammer. Etc.

"Shoot pictures during a hurricane": never done that before. However, my 5D III + 16-35 II did got hit badly with heavy rain when I was in HongKong & China(see pics below).

"Pound in nails if you can't find your hammer" : I have a better tool for that - I use my 70-200 f2.8 ;D

 

[Dylan777]

Once you owned 5D III, your 7D will most likely sitting in the bag & collecting dust - or end up on CL.

Other than all the times you shoot distance limited wildlife (when you will badly wish you had your 7D back from CL).

As a prev owner of 7D, I'm well aware what 7D can & can't do - that's why I bought 2nd 5D III.

 

[ahsanford]

Yes, but for being right once they have been wrong 10 times as far as I remember ... Canon internal information may leak just before an announcement because more people have access to it, but I suspect no one but the Japanese Canon execs and techs know the specs of 2014 camera bodies.

Agree. Think about other much larger sites for smartphones that have people around the world hunting for subcomponents, calling up vendors, reading pending FCC listings, trolling Best Buy's inventory system, etc. -- even those folks don't nail it too often.

I'm not knocking CR with this -- I read the site every day. But rumor mongering is a tough game with a low batting average.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Prototypes for a 7D Mark II now exist over a year, but if I look at the 70D and 6D price I think that there is no space for an 7D Mark II between the mentioned cameras.

It seen so, that the 70D IS the new 7D Mark II. But without CF cards the camera has no change to go in the bag of pros.

I wouldn't say that the 7D2 needs to be "between" the 70D and the 6D, indeed I think it could potentially be above the 6D if its given 5D3 level build, pro AF and 10 FPS.

Agree. I've been saying that the 7D2 will cost more than the 6D when it is released. As expensive as the FF sensors are, I believe a 'pro' APS-C rig can out-price a budget FF shooter, solely in that there is a highly invested bunch of 'long-reach' photogs who will gladly spend 2x on a camera body to not have to spend 5-10x on the longest glass Canon sells.

- A

 

[Pi]

I wouldn't say that the 7D2 needs to be "between" the 70D and the 6D, indeed I think it could potentially be above the 6D if its given 5D3 level build, pro AF and 10 FPS.

In terms of price or capabilities? If the latter, let us agree that I will be "next" to the 6D, not "above" it.

 

[Krob78]

I've owned a 7D since shortly after its introduction. I bought a 6D this past April. On my recent trip I shot the 6D as my carry-around (still getting to know it) and anytime the light was low. I used either/or in daylight. Action (surfers, birds, etc.) in daylight was almost exclusively 7D. The dynamic range of the 6D beats the 7D hands-down. 7D AF, AF points, frame rate is way above 6D capabilities. My 7D captures almost double the frames my 6D does in the same amount of time. I don't regret buying the 6D just for the increased ability to shoot well at night, and for better detail in my landscapes. The 7D has survived so long because as a new breed it was far superior to the xxD line, and its features pushed the xD line; though it lacked xD DR & ISO capabilities most of these issues could be addressed in ppc. Marry the best features of the two bodies together for a sure winner in the 7D MkII.

They already did - it's called the 5DIII and Canon would like you to buy one.

They already did - it's called the 5DIII and Canon would like you to buy one.

+1 My sentiments exactly. Any previous 7D, now current 5D Mk III owner will likely agree!

 

[robertbanksoz]

Wonder if it will be worth the upgrade. ...

 

[Krob78]

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

The 5d3 of course is a good product if you forget about the first retail price

A lot of us have found the 5d3 to be of course not only a good product but a great product, even when remembering the retail price...

 

[unfocused]

Before we wade too deep into the "5DIII makes the 7DII unnecessary" swamp, let's have a bit of a reality check here.

The 5DIII is a wonderful camera and I would love to have one. But, it comes with a minimum price of entry of about $3,500 in the U.S. under the best case scenario (I arrive at that figure by adding the lowest available U.S. prices for the 5DIII with the lowest available prices for the 24-105mm zoom. 7D users simply cannot get to comparable wide focal lengths without purchasing at least one new lens).

That's a entry price that only a tiny fraction of the market can or is willing to bear. So, all of those who smugly declare that 7D users should just switch to a 5DIII...well...that's not possible or practical or desirable for the majority of 7D owners.

The 6D may be a slightly more affordable option, but it still comes with a heavy cost of entry, the same lens costs and is a significant step down from the 7D in everything but sensor size. The 6D may be a good replacement for the 60D, but it falls short as a good replacement for the 7D (Supplement, yes. Replacement, no).

My interests in photography are eclectic. I shoot portraits for starving actors, I shoot birds and other wildlife for the challenge, nature to soothe my soul and the streets to document the world I live in. The 7D offers the flexibility to do that. The 5DIII may be a better option, but I simply can't justify the cost of entry.

Too many times, on this forum, we pretend that people should be so dedicated to the craft to be willing to pay any price for the best tools, but the reality is, very few consumers can or will make that choice.

I am certain Canon understands that and that is why they will refresh the 7D with new features and options at a price that the market will bear. I am happy for all of those on this forum who can afford to invest in the 5DIII and hope that eventually, I may be able to as well. But, let's not pretend it's an option for most photographers.

 

[Zv]

Does anyone here actually need a 7D2? What would be the distinguishing feature of a 7D2? Just high fps? Is the jump from 8-10 fps noticeable? Am asking because I haven't tried 10fps.

It could be that Canon made the original 7D so good that they are finding it hard to improve upon. Sure, it's not perfect but in over 4 years there hasn't really been a need for a replacement.

 

[ahsanford]

Does anyone here actually need a 7D2? What would be the distinguishing feature of a 7D2? Just high fps? Is the jump from 8-10 fps noticeable? Am asking because I haven't tried 10fps.

It could be that Canon made the original 7D so good that they are finding it hard to improve upon. Sure, it's not perfect but in over 4 years there hasn't really been a need for a replacement.

I'd encourage a read of the previous posts. The AF system of the 7D is dated and misses shots compared to the state of the art system that the 1DX and 5D3 enjoy. That single feature alone is worth it if you are a sports/wildlife shooter.

- A

 

[unfocused]

Does anyone here actually need a 7D2? What would be the distinguishing feature of a 7D2? Just high fps? Is the jump from 8-10 fps noticeable? Am asking because I haven't tried 10fps.

It could be that Canon made the original 7D so good that they are finding it hard to improve upon. Sure, it's not perfect but in over 4 years there hasn't really been a need for a replacement.

I'd encourage a read of the previous posts. The AF system of the 7D is dated and misses shots compared to the state of the art system that the 1DX and 5D3 enjoy. That single feature alone is worth it if you are a sports/wildlife shooter.

- A

+1.

Also, An additional 1-2 stop improvement in ISO performance would be welcome. I don't expect it to match the 5DIII or 6D, but a marginal boost in ISO is important. And, like the autofocus, the camera's weather sealing was very good when released, but it could be upgraded to match at least the 5DIII.

However, Zv is correct in that even four years after introduction, the 7D remains pretty much at the top of the APS-C world. Canon set a high bar with the 7D. Owners are very loyal and want the next upgrade to again set the standards for the industry.

 

[MichaelHodges]

Does anyone here actually need a 7D2? What would be the distinguishing feature of a 7D2? Just high fps? Is the jump from 8-10 fps noticeable? Am asking because I haven't tried 10fps.

It is noticeable, but not "I need to sell my 7d for the 7D II" noticeable.

It could be that Canon made the original 7D so good that they are finding it hard to improve upon. Sure, it's not perfect but in over 4 years there hasn't really been a need for a replacement.

This is precisely what happened.


------------------

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/

 

[ahsanford]

Before we wade too deep into the "5DIII makes the 7DII unnecessary" swamp, let's have a bit of a reality check here.

The 5DIII is a wonderful camera and I would love to have one. But, it comes with a minimum price of entry of about $3,500 in the U.S. under the best case scenario (I arrive at that figure by adding the lowest available U.S. prices for the 5DIII with the lowest available prices for the 24-105mm zoom. 7D users simply cannot get to comparable wide focal lengths without purchasing at least one new lens).

That's a entry price that only a tiny fraction of the market can or is willing to bear. So, all of those who smugly declare that 7D users should just switch to a 5DIII...well...that's not possible or practical or desirable for the majority of 7D owners.

The 6D may be a slightly more affordable option, but it still comes with a heavy cost of entry, the same lens costs and is a significant step down from the 7D in everything but sensor size. The 6D may be a good replacement for the 60D, but it falls short as a good replacement for the 7D (Supplement, yes. Replacement, no).

My interests in photography are eclectic. I shoot portraits for starving actors, I shoot birds and other wildlife for the challenge, nature to soothe my soul and the streets to document the world I live in. The 7D offers the flexibility to do that. The 5DIII may be a better option, but I simply can't justify the cost of entry.

Too many times, on this forum, we pretend that people should be so dedicated to the craft to be willing to pay any price for the best tools, but the reality is, very few consumers can or will make that choice.

I am certain Canon understands that and that is why they will refresh the 7D with new features and options at a price that the market will bear. I am happy for all of those on this forum who can afford to invest in the 5DIII and hope that eventually, I may be able to as well. But, let's not pretend it's an option for most photographers.

Appreciate the comments. Entirely fair.

Consider if you are a sports/wildlife shooter on the longer end of things, and you currently own a good body (7D) and a good lens (300mm F/4L IS).

Upgrading to FF and capturing similar length / aperture* images would require:
(*let's couch the FF vs. APS-C DOF considerations for now...)

• 'Higher but not Highest' end -- 5D3 for $3,500 and 500mm F/4L IS II for $10,300 = $13,800
• 'Middle' end -- 6D for $2,000 and a 400mm F/4 DO IS or 500mm F/4 IS I for (guess) $6,000 = $8,000
• 'Low' end -- 6D for $2,000 and 1.4x T/C for $450 = $2,450

Or you can pony up the expected $1800-$2500 (depending on what features they end up offering) for a 7D2 and you are good to go. One might argue that the IQ you'd get from the 7D2 and the 300m F/4 IS might trump even the 'middle' end above as the 6D will miss a bunch of shots that the 7D2's improved AF will nail -- and that's why I think the 7D2 should command a higher price than the 6D.

So that defines a specific need (longer shooters) that will always have a compelling value-proposition to stay with APS-C. Yes, you can opt for a different upgrade path, the double whammy for FF upgraders is clear: You need to buy the FF rig and get longer glass.

For folks shooting closer subjects, the economics of upgrading are much less toxic. There is an immediate need to pitch EF-S glass and trade up for a standard zoom, but that's about it. There's also the 'adjusting to lengths in your bag' you need to get used to without the 1.6x in the mix, but it's like getting used to a new pair of jeans -- it feels natural after a while.

But Unfocused is dead on. APS-C will be here for a very long time, and not just for soccer moms with Rebels.

- A

 

[MichaelHodges]

Too many times, on this forum, we pretend that people should be so dedicated to the craft to be willing to pay any price for the best tools, but the reality is, very few consumers can or will make that choice.

I am certain Canon understands that and that is why they will refresh the 7D with new features and options at a price that the market will bear. I am happy for all of those on this forum who can afford to invest in the 5DIII and hope that eventually, I may be able to as well. But, let's not pretend it's an option for most photographers.

You claim that too many are focused on paying the highest price for the best tools, and then you insist Canon release an update to the 7D with at best marginal improvements.

Wouldn't just using and enjoying the 7D fit with the first paragraph in your post?

 

[Don Haines]

Before we wade too deep into the "5DIII makes the 7DII unnecessary" swamp, let's have a bit of a reality check here.

The 5DIII is a wonderful camera and I would love to have one. But, it comes with a minimum price of entry of about $3,500 in the U.S. under the best case scenario (I arrive at that figure by adding the lowest available U.S. prices for the 5DIII with the lowest available prices for the 24-105mm zoom. 7D users simply cannot get to comparable wide focal lengths without purchasing at least one new lens).

That's a entry price that only a tiny fraction of the market can or is willing to bear. So, all of those who smugly declare that 7D users should just switch to a 5DIII...well...that's not possible or practical or desirable for the majority of 7D owners.

The 6D may be a slightly more affordable option, but it still comes with a heavy cost of entry, the same lens costs and is a significant step down from the 7D in everything but sensor size. The 6D may be a good replacement for the 60D, but it falls short as a good replacement for the 7D (Supplement, yes. Replacement, no).

My interests in photography are eclectic. I shoot portraits for starving actors, I shoot birds and other wildlife for the challenge, nature to soothe my soul and the streets to document the world I live in. The 7D offers the flexibility to do that. The 5DIII may be a better option, but I simply can't justify the cost of entry.

Too many times, on this forum, we pretend that people should be so dedicated to the craft to be willing to pay any price for the best tools, but the reality is, very few consumers can or will make that choice.

I am certain Canon understands that and that is why they will refresh the 7D with new features and options at a price that the market will bear. I am happy for all of those on this forum who can afford to invest in the 5DIII and hope that eventually, I may be able to as well. But, let's not pretend it's an option for most photographers.

Does anyone here actually need a 7D2? What would be the distinguishing feature of a 7D2? Just high fps? Is the jump from 8-10 fps noticeable? Am asking because I haven't tried 10fps.

It could be that Canon made the original 7D so good that they are finding it hard to improve upon. Sure, it's not perfect but in over 4 years there hasn't really been a need for a replacement.

I shoot with a 60D. I have outgrown the focus system and wish to upgrade. The 70D is better, but I am really looking for the 7D2. I really don't use high iso's a lot, so high iso performance, while nice, is not critical to me. I am far more interested in more pixels on the target. I can spend $2000 on a 7D2 and $1200 on a 400F5.6, or I can spend $3000 on a 5D3 and $10,000 on a 600F4. Yes, the 5D3 combo takes better pictures, but I can not afford the extra $10,000 to do so...... There's the 7D2 market in a nutshell.

Also, I take my 60D and 400F5.6 with me on canoe trips. It is a lot easier to carry than a 5D3 and a 600F4..... There another reason for the 7D2.....

 

[jrista]

Its funny that the rumor initially states that the specs for the 7D II are no where near finalized, then rather concretely states it will have the same 20.2mp sensor from the 70D.

Good thing it is just a rumor, however if it does get the "same old sensor" (registered trademark of Canon! ), then it better have some particularly compelling features otherwise (really good AF, deep frame buffer, 10fps, etc.) Even if the sensor was only 18mp, it should really demonstrate some significant technological improvement over Canon's previous sensors. Having used the 600/4 II on the 7D, its noise performance is really poor from ISO 1600 on...I wouldn't want to see the 7D II get "the same old sensor tech" with any pixel density.

With the release date push, it looks like I'll be getting a 5D III within the next few months.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Does anyone here actually need a 7D2? What would be the distinguishing feature of a 7D2? Just high fps? Is the jump from 8-10 fps noticeable? Am asking because I haven't tried 10fps.

It could be that Canon made the original 7D so good that they are finding it hard to improve upon. Sure, it's not perfect but in over 4 years there hasn't really been a need for a replacement.

Well the low ISO DR is pretty far out of date. For those who only have aps-c that could be a huge deal (and it's not like Canon has anything that does all that much better in FF in that regard anyway). We are talking like 3 stops out of current tech and that is very easily noticeable (for scenes that contain a lot of DR that you desire to be captured only of course).

The AF while it is faster and has more points than the xxD line and can be a bit more precise is still very clearly not to to 5 or 1 series level precision and the tracking, other than seemingly for surfing, is a far cry from 5 or 1 series IMO, especially for stuff like soccer and football where it seems to be a lot closer to the old xxD levels than 5 or 1 series levels. And yet this is supposed to be a body focusing on AF and action so it really could use their top level AF and not a souped up but clearly based on low tier AF.

The dual-phase AF thing would be neat.

Most copies tend to suffer from varying degrees of vertical gain banding and it has a heavily green split CFA so debayer makes it a bit softer per pixel than it otherwise would need be.

While the high ISO on it is pretty good for APS-C, if they used 1DX/6D tech in it it could pick up an admittedly minor maybe a trace more than 1/3 stop SNR and a more noticeable 1+ stops of DR at high ISO.

The movie mode is pretty poor by current standards, aliasing, moire, very soft, low DR, poor SNR, poor usability features. Now ML does get around some of the usability and ML RAW might get around the softness and some of the poor DR and a tiny bit if the poor SNR, but it won't fix the aliasing and moire. So for those wanting to use a 7 series for movies it could be improved a lot.

Going 8 to 10-12fps could help a little bit in that you might go from a near two guaranteed key frames per action sequence to neat two guaranteed ideal key frames per action sequence (and at times you might get a third at 12fps) and since AF does miss at times and what not it gives more chance that at least one key frame is in perfect focus (you hope).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Short-sighted and even worse, annoying for their users.

Annoying to you and a few other forum DRones who represent a tiny minority of Canon's user base (actually even that's an exaggeration - many of the CR DRones aren't even Canon users, they're just here to DRum up rancor).

And many who do care don't even post in forums or barely at all since they aren't into tech discussion or rumors.

But let me get this straight - focusing on selling more cameras than the competition is short-sighted? Tell me, what are you doing with your Betamax tapes? And are you enjoying the plethora of new movies being released in the HD-DVD format?

Not directly related and complicated factors there (in blu-rays case it had better tech and better everything across the board) of course if they were to improve their sensors Canon sales would surely plummet!! More DR. blech!!!! We don't want that!! NO SALE!!!

AF designed for video use. Pro video shooters use AF? That would be news to me, and to Canon as well. Fast video AF is a consumer-oriented feature, and quite frankly will likely be a very attractive feature to Rebel/xxxD owners, the likely target demographic of the 70D.

It depends, mostly not for serious movie movie shooting where you spend 30 minutes setting each scene and using marks, etc. For run and gun video news reporter pros?? It surely could help in some cases to get better wildlife/macro wildlife footage even for pros. Even in general, since it really works well, it could help pros even more traditional scenarios given that Canon doesn't see fit to give the 7D movie mode any usability tools at all, no hires HDMI out, no magic focus box, no focus peaking, etc. A great many users would likely also use it in scenarios were they are not going to be doing professional focus pulling too. I'm sure, from what I've seen, it could help produce more pro level video footage for sports like surfing.