EOS 7D Mark II Talk [CR1]

[pedro]

<div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14476\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14476\">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Canon EOS 7D Mark II


</strong> 2014.</p>
<p></p>
<p>We’re also told any follow-up to the EOS 7D will get a new sensor and not use the 20.2mp sensor that is found in the EOS 70D.</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>

New sensor: what would that mean? techwise, nm-wise? any guesses?

 

[AvTvM]

New sensor: what would that mean? techwise, nm-wise? any guesses?

my guess: 24 MP, dual-pixel AF and IQ, DR, noise/banding ... like 70D and just a bit below next Nikon [D7200].

 

[pierlux]

Add me to the list of people sick of paying all that extra cash for a function I don't want.

How much extra cash do you think you're paying?

Exactly. Nearly nothing.

And let me say, just implementing the dual pixel CMOS AF, regardless of any other video feature which might be added to the 7DII, would suffice for considering it "more video oriented" than the current 7D. Anyway, Magic Lantern docet, there's plenty of functions Canon could introduce in the next bodies, if only they felt doing so does not impair their Cinema EOS cameras' sales.

Talking about sensor and pixel density, I'm still hoping for a (relatively) low MP count 7DII, in the range of 14 - 16. Let me explain. Today, the reasons for choosing an APS-C body are: price, compactness and reach. According to rumors, the 7DII is not going to be a cheap cam, it may even be a "baby 1DX" with integrated grip; if so, price and compactness are ruled out. Pricewise, a better choice could be either the 6D or the 5DIII. Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact. So, IQ-wise, I'm not going to spend as much money as the 5DIII costs on a hi-MP 7DII if I could not take advantage of the only advantage I'd care about: reach.

I'm hoping Canon to bring on a lo-MP, monster-framerate, good hi-ISO IQ, as-much-as-they-want-video-oriented (I don't care, but I know I'm not spending any extra cash on it), pro-grade weather sealed 7DII.

Cheers!

 

[Marsu42]

And let me say, just implementing the dual pixel CMOS AF, regardless of any other video feature which might be added to the 7DII, would suffice for considering it "more video oriented" than the current 7D.

You probably will change your mind because dual pixel (only usable in lv) af goes along with a touch screen, which might mean less weight will be put into the vf and phase af ...

... and since you're supposed to use the comfort of the touch screen, they could very well change the ergonomics like reducing the wheel size or less old-school buttons.

 

[pierlux]

And let me say, just implementing the dual pixel CMOS AF, regardless of any other video feature which might be added to the 7DII, would suffice for considering it "more video oriented" than the current 7D.

You probably will change your mind because dual pixel (only usable in lv) af goes along with a touch screen, which might mean less weight will be put into the vf and phase af ...

... and since you're supposed to use the comfort of the touch screen, they could very well change the ergonomics like reducing the wheel size or less old-school buttons.

Good points! You're perfectly right, nevertheless I don't see Canon dropping the dual pixel AF tech in any of their future cams, provided they are video capable, which means probably all of them. If your statement refers to the fact that I, like many others, don't care much about video, I'm with you on this one generally speaking, except that in the specific case of the 7DII I don't see both the situations you fear will occur. In particular,

...might mean less weight will be put into the vf and phase af ...

not necessarily, and certainly not in a classy 7DII as it is rumored to be. Since both the 70D viewfinder and phase AF have been improved with respect to the 60D, I can't imagine this not happening in the 7D --> 7DII transition also.

...they could very well change the ergonomics like reducing the wheel size or less old-school buttons.

I'm a little more concerned on this one because it's exactly what happened along the 50D-->60D-->70D pathway. It must be noticed, however, that the ergonomics change, and particularly the wheel size reduction, came together with a reduction of the overall body size; I'm not expecting a smaller 7DII, I'd rather expect it to grow in size and weight (maybe 100% wf and integrated grip), so I hope no change for the worse in the ergonomics.

 

[Lee Jay]

Add me to the list of people sick of paying all that extra cash for a function I don't want.

How much extra cash do you think you're paying?

The number is negative.

 

[Lee Jay]

Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.

It's not only not a fact, it's a fact that that fact is flat out wrong.

 

[Don Haines]

New sensor: what would that mean? techwise, nm-wise? any guesses?

my guess: 24 MP, dual-pixel AF and IQ, DR, noise/banding ... like 70D and just a bit below next Nikon [D7200].

My guess - greater than 22.1 megapixels. That gives you 3x1920 pixels across, allowing for easy bining of a 3x3 pixel block from the sensor into a single pixel of 1920x1080 video... add a few pixels to each side for video stabilization and the 24MP sensor looks very likely.

Tech wise, I think it's a given that it is dual-pixel technology... but I'd like to see Canon playing with the two halves and set them to different ISO for more DR... or even alternate between vertical and horizontal splits to improve the AF...

I'd like to see the mirror and shutter disappear so we have a truly digital DSLR, but I doubt that the technology is ready yet....that's for the future...

 

[Lee Jay]

My guess - greater than 22.1 megapixels. That gives you 3x1920 pixels across, allowing for easy bining of a 3x3 pixel block from the sensor into a single pixel of 1920x1080 video... add a few pixels to each side for video stabilization and the 24MP sensor looks very likely.

How is binning at 3x3 on a grid that repeats at 2x2 easy?

I'd like to see the mirror and shutter disappear so we have a truly digital DSLR, but I doubt that the technology is ready yet....that's for the future...

The shutter can go. I still need the mirror, and will continue to need it for the foreseeable future.

 

[Don Haines]

Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.

It's not only not a fact, it's a fact that that fact is flat out wrong.

Speaking from experience.... a 60D with a 70-200 gives better bird pictures than a 5DII with a 70-200.... and a 5DII with a 28F2.8 takes better landscape pictures than a 60D with a 28F2.8.... and I think that most of us would agree that a 7D is better than a 60D.

Blanket statements are usually wrong.

 

[Don Haines]

My guess - greater than 22.1 megapixels. That gives you 3x1920 pixels across, allowing for easy bining of a 3x3 pixel block from the sensor into a single pixel of 1920x1080 video... add a few pixels to each side for video stabilization and the 24MP sensor looks very likely.

How is binning at 3x3 on a grid that repeats at 2x2 easy?

It's easier than with ratios like 2.7..... (the 5184 pixels across of the 18M sensors), but 2 is super-easy.....

I wonder if that ratio has anything to do with reducing moire??????

 

[pierlux]

Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.

It's not only not a fact, it's a fact that that fact is flat out wrong.

Well... you're right. First because I wrote 5DII instead of 5DIII, which is the cam I was actually talking about, second because I missed to specify "at high ISOs", which is often the situation you're into when shooting fast action sports, birds or wildlife in general. I remember several threads, and some comparison sample pictures also, which appeared here on CR (and massively in some other forums) concerning this matter: not considering the loss of resolution, simply IQ-wise, hi-ISO FF crops looked better than uncropped APS-Cs to my eye. But, please, don't ask for links, I'm too lazy to look for old CR threads now, let alone other websites... I just want to mention what I always say, that a 8 MP clean image is better than a 18 MP noisy one. You can always apply NR, but then you lose detail, anyway.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Canon should ask ML how to make their products better. ML seems to be superior in creating firmwares

ML is just a few people working without documentation (a few more them and with full docs perhaps they might be better though). The Canon team could likely do better and even faster since they have full docs and more man power. It's Canon marketing and MBA droids who keep their engineers in the dungeon and restrict what they can do and have them cripple this that and everything else.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It all sounds good except Canon seems to be crippling the video capability on their DSLRs

There's a difference between "crippling" and "not implementing": removing features like afma 50d->60d, removing save sources on hdr/multlexpo 5d3->6d = crippling; not adding raw capability that has never been there is something else.

it is still crippling if it could've been implemeneted and marketing told them not too, now RAW is a bit of a tricky thing maybe you don't count that at the time since it needed ultra-fast cards etc. etc. but zebras/focus peaking/live 10x view boxes, intervalometers, etc. etc. is all crippling. And even just the video quality. Why is HDMI clean out mush compared to ML RAW? ok, maybe it might just be that digic is a really crappy image processor and it's not crippling, hard to say, it could be crippling, it might be poor design for digic (it is interesting ot note that they decided to use old video chips in the C100 line and not digic; but if digic is the problem, well they had a lot of years after the 5D2 to fix up digic but maybe marketing was like why bother we don't want it to compete with C100 and so on so then we are back to crippling once again)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.

It's not only not a fact, it's a fact that that fact is flat out wrong.

Yeah it's extremely flat out wrong. I've owned both and I even sold the 7D to buy a 5D3 so it's not like I'm biased in favor of the 7D because that is the one I own. 7D has better IQ per sensor area than the 5D2 (now it has a lot less sensor area so when NOT reach limited sure the 5D2 wins).

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

Canon should ask ML how to make their products better. ML seems to be superior in creating firmwares

ML is just a few people working without documentation (a few more them and with full docs perhaps they might be better though). The Canon team could likely do better and even faster since they have full docs and more man power. It's Canon marketing and MBA droids who keep their engineers in the dungeon and restrict what they can do and have them cripple this that and everything else.

I think Canon definitely helped ML with the latest raw video development. The timing with the "aha" moment is just too suspicious. But for the most part I think you are right about the Canon MBA droids.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.

It's not only not a fact, it's a fact that that fact is flat out wrong.

Well... you're right. First because I wrote 5DII instead of 5DIII, which is the cam I was actually talking about, second because I missed to specify "at high ISOs", which is often the situation you're into when shooting fast action sports, birds or wildlife in general. I remember several threads, and some comparison sample pictures also, which appeared here on CR (and massively in some other forums) concerning this matter: not considering the loss of resolution, simply IQ-wise, hi-ISO FF crops looked better than uncropped APS-Cs to my eye. But, please, don't ask for links, I'm too lazy to look for old CR threads now, let alone other websites... I just want to mention what I always say, that a 8 MP clean image is better than a 18 MP noisy one. You can always apply NR, but then you lose detail, anyway.

7D still does better when reach limited even at high ISO than the 5D2, it simply has a more efficient sensor per area

the 5D3 sensor is a little bit more efficient per area than the 7D so you do get a bit better SNR from the 5D3 in all cases but the extra density of the 7D still makes it better than the 5D3 for reach limited scenarios in most cases, even at ISO3200 I have some real world bird pics I took with both and I prefer the 7D versions

if you scaled the 7D reach limited subjects down to 5D3 size the SNR isn't THAT much different, although a bit worse, but they have less moire/de-bayer artifacts; if you keep them full res they show a lot more detail (for high contrast subjects not in the darkest parts of the frame even at ISO6400 they pull a lot more detail)

less contrasty, darker subjects in darker parts of the frame might come out worse overall at high iso with teh 7D than with the 5D3 though even when reach limited (when not reach limited 5D3 obviously better)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Canon should ask ML how to make their products better. ML seems to be superior in creating firmwares

ML is just a few people working without documentation (a few more them and with full docs perhaps they might be better though). The Canon team could likely do better and even faster since they have full docs and more man power. It's Canon marketing and MBA droids who keep their engineers in the dungeon and restrict what they can do and have them cripple this that and everything else.

I think Canon definitely helped ML with the latest raw video development. The timing with the "aha" moment is just too suspicious.

It was a bit curious that it occurred right at the same time that the official video firmware upgrade (which has been considered quite a let down) came out. It could be coincidence though, of course. But maybe it was some engineers frustrated and wanting to see their HW do what it could do and they tossed out hints without management knowing. Or maybe some in management let them to take heat off the video firwmare having taken ages and done so little. Who knows. Prob either engineers doing it on their own or coincidence.

 

[Marsu42]

I think Canon definitely helped ML with the latest raw video development. The timing with the "aha" moment is just too suspicious.

Of course I don't know, and the ml devs who might have gotten help won't tell (not that they've signed an nda, but they don't want to mess up the neutral stance with Canon) ...

... however: I doubt it. Don't underestimate what these ml people can do by careful reverse engineering, they're very able with the tools and if it's absolutely stunning how they've recreated the Canon api just by these means. They might be working for free, but not because they're incompetent, but because detective work and coding for a dslr also a lot of fun.

Canon can only "help" by speeding up the process, but sooner or later every capability of the digic and system will be found, it's not encrypted after all.

 

[Etienne]

What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?

Hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinder?
Faster frame rates below 1080p?
Higher resolution (4k)?
Smooth digital video zoom from full-frame to 1:1?
Quad pixel for 4-way AF sensors on every pixel?
Some sort of power zoom lens system?

A ton! No line skipping for FAR less aliasing and moire and better SNR. Focus peaking, live 10x focus box, RAW video recording, non-mangled up compressed video/HDMI out video, zebras, zoomed modes including 1:1, 4k, etc. etc.

I know it's popular if you are a still shooter to laugh off video, but seriously why not expand your creativity to new world. 5D3 ML RAW video is pretty stunning! Some things work better as video, just as some work better as stills and many work equally as well.

+1000

Dissing video means you are afraid of the future
It's here to stay.