EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
What I wonder as on sensors is this new Nokia 1020 phone camera, its 41mp. And the sensor size is small I can't find out how small. I wonder on how good it is my guess it's about 1/8th the size of an aps-c if it was a amazing sensor and they made it aps-c size it would be like 328mp..wowzers...only if.
Upvote
0
Lee Jay said:
I have to disagree with you here, it's not just the cost of the pentaprism, you have to factor in the whole mirror mechanism as well as the seperate af senor and its submirror and the light meter; none of these are required for mirrorless/EVF designs.
Lee Jay said:
As I stated previously, using an EVF allows you to remove the mirror, which in turn allows lens designers to use this space for lens elements, especially when the EF mount is used for a crop frame sensor -there is no need to remove the mirror box entirely. Early ultra wide angle SLR lenses require the use of mirror lock-up and external finders.
Lee Jay said:
Others might find the information useful, you're not their only customer, and as you state, you can turn it off. I find manually focussing fast lenses difficult with modern viewfinders and autofocus isn't always reliable at large apertures (and changing focussing screens is a PITA).
Lee Jay said:
Fair comment, but I don't think it's a deal breaker. Battery technology moves on.
Lee Jay said:
So cheaper to produce to isn't a valid reason? For a mass market producer, I would say it was the most valid of reasons. I'm not saying that there will not be a market for traditional DSLR technology, just that the mass market will no longer be willing to pay the price premium.
Upvote
0
Lee Jay said:
Shoot an actual blue sky, the kind you get in Montana or Wyoming (not the pollution-choked skies over big cities or suburbs), and get back to me.
Upvote
0
L
Lichtgestalt
Guest
jbooba said:
how many people will have 4k able displays in 2 years?
4k is just another marketing gimmick to pull money from the noobs.
in my opinion you need a 60+ inch display or 4k is useless.
or maybe it is just me?
but from normal viewing distance i would hardly see a difference on a 46 inch display.
i have tested this in our local high end hifi/tv store.
nice read:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57491766-221/why-4k-tvs-are-stupid-still/
Upvote
0
I am glad to hear that Canon may pro-grade weather-seal the 7D II. What I am looking for basically would be like a 1D X body except with a APS-C sensor -- I would love it if they would build in the vertical grip rather than making us buy an attachment. If Canon offered a pro-body with a 1.6x sensor as well as the full framer, that would be ideal. I like having both a 1.6 and full frame when shooting sports but the 7D isn't rugged enough. I do love my 7D, but I can't believe it's 4 years old already. I wish Canon would go a little faster.
Upvote
0
jbooba said:
Maybe. But if it's a pro-oriented camera, I think decent codecs would go farther than some kind of ultra-compressed 4K. If you acquire in 4K with the intent of downsizing to 1080p, you can get some of the advantages a better 1080p codec might have provided, even if the 4K source file isn't ideally compressed-- but you can't fully compensate for the real deal.
Rumors a while back talked about 60fps RAW bursts, which would be "innovative" in a Canon body, and would serve, within limitations, to offer both a 4K+ spec and a RAW video spec, with some slow-motion applications adding to the appeal. That sounds intriguing, but I think both Panasonic and Sony are going to continue to up the ante in the $2000-$5000 range, so hopefully there's more.
If the Cinema EOS line is upgraded at some point in early 2014, that opens the door for a 7D Mark II with relatively fewer artificially crippled functions. The C500 mk ii will probably remain Canon's only RAW option for real 4K and slow-motion recording, but the C300 follow-up could get 4K with a good codec to CF cards, and more frame rate options; and the C100 successor might get 4K with a lesser codec, or maybe 2K output with the original C300's broadcast-ready codec, and 4K available to an external recorder. All of that seems reasonable. It's conservative enough to fit Canon's attitude but aggressive enough to remain broadly competitive with more spec-rich options from RED, Sony and even Black Magic.
That might open up the 7D Mark II to real 1080p recording-- e.g. sample the whole sensor, put it in a 10-bit codec, etc. That would leave 4K to the Cinema cams but provide a C300-level HD image on a DSLR-- something Canon doesn't come close to providing now in the regular pro DSLRS, and that it only comes sort of close to even with the 1D-C. If it included a 60fps RAW burst, 1080p with a great codec and sampling, 1D-series frame rate and AF and a great build... I'd probably pay $2500 even if the still quality is only on par with Canon's other APS-C sensors. If it's actually a stop better, I'd be pumped. Granted, I'm someone who shoots both stills and video, so my video zeal is surely swaying my enthusiasm.
Upvote
0
hpaton said:
+10. Mini 1Dx would be ideal. It is frustrating to back and forth between 2 camera bodies with different controls.
The APS-H (1.3 crop) was an excellent compromise between added reach and reduced sensor size (noise). Too bad they killed that line
Upvote
0
L
Lichtgestalt
Guest
Lee Jay said:
did you read my posting before making that lame comment?
i guess not.
oh so you are filming for your PC monitor... that does not have 4k resolution either.
and i thought most of these high-end, high-res videos will be watched on TV.
but yes when i, one day, have the bandwith i may enjoy 4k youtube files on my 30 inch 4096×2304 pixel monitor... from 50 cm away.
if... NEC or EIZO will make a 4k 30 inch monitor that doesn´t cost 8000 euro. ;D
still.. 4k will be useless for the majority.
in the link i posted the author describes why.. better then i could with my broken english.
Upvote
0
A
AdamJ
Guest
Several things in the rumoured spec list don't look right to me, leading me to suspect it's guesswork again.
- 20MP or 24MP sensor with Dual Pixel CMOS AF
- Auto-Focus system similar to the EOS 5D Mark III (61 points), possibly the same as 5D3
- High frame rate, 10-12 fps
- “High grade” weather sealing, like Canon’s professional DSLRs
- Dual Digic V+ processor
- Single card slot
- WiFi & GPS
- Innovative video features
- Price around $2000
- Very good ISO performance
Upvote
0
brad-man said:"Very good ISO performance" Ahhh. Now I can rest easy
*snigger* this reminds me of the "new and enhanced sensor" of the 6d - which turned out to be about the same as the 5d3. Unless there are some hard facts about what's new about this sensor, I'd say this is marketing gibberish and the current ff generation will keep being about 2 iso stops above crop.
AdamJ said:
Indeed - looking at the Canon innovations since the 5d2 it's very hard *not* to be innovative, beyond the dual pixel af that is - maybe they've Magic Lantern installed and got some new ideas
... ... or the innovation is no moire and a fast sd/cf card slot, then mail the specs to the ML team and let them code the raw shooting and all other video related features
Upvote
0
L
Lichtgestalt
Guest
Lee Jay said:
you mean eizo?
if im not wrong that is a 36 inch for ~23000 euro.
well i guess 4k is a must have then.
still.... "DOA if not 4K" seems bit like a stretch to me.
if you shot 4k video because you want to make prints later you are still a minority i guess.
not many households with 4k TV´s, expensive PC monitors, the performance you need for editing, storage space.
nah.. i don´t see a bright future for 4k outside circles who can make real use of it.
geeks will still love it, sure.
Upvote
0
Lichtgestalt said:Lee Jay said:
you mean eizo?
if im not wrong that is a 36 inch for ~23000 euro.
well i guess 4k is a must have then.
still.... "DOA if not 4K" seems bit like a stretch for me.
Yes. Not sure if that came from autocorrect or what.
I don't want to get stills from video but I also don't know why I should accept poorer frames for video than I do for stills.
if you shot 4k video because you want to make prints later you are still a minority i guess.
Upvote
0
L
Lichtgestalt
Guest
Lee Jay said:
because the additional quality is wasted anyway?
you have no TV or monitor at home that can display all the glory, right?
even with a 50inch 4k display you will hardly see a difference from normal viewing distances.
the human eye is not able to resolve that good.
but you will have to store the files and editing will need more resources.
Upvote
0
