EOS 80D to be Announced in February [CR2]

[Etienne]

This is more exciting than the 1DX II ... it's a camera I might buy if the video quality is good and the AF works well in video.

The 70D has the best video AF in a DSLR in my opinion, and being that it is unlikely Canon will take a step backward, the 80D should be excellent assuming it is a successor to the 70D. Now, as to all out video quality...compared to higher end options, I doubt it will be better in output. Market segmentation as the apologists call it. They aren't going to give it better video than a camera costing 3-4x as much.

The touch screen + DPAF makes the difference. That is why I don't consider the 7D2 good for video, while it can focus as well or better, video AF is in big part dependent on the user controlling it. The 70D has the right interface for maximizing video quality.

Thus, short of going full frame pro cameras mounted to shoulder rigs with manual focus assist devices (grips and whatnot) - and being good with manually focusing ...the 70D is king. There's no in between.

Sure, you can get better video recording on better cameras - but that to me is all down the drain when the AF is not smooth, accurate and professional. No one cares one bit about the detail or resolution, when during a video they see a horrible transition in focus or an outright miss. It's a big eye sore and turn off.

In my view, it is DPAF + Touchscreen or go home. The pros are going to spend a lot and get what they need. At the enthusiast and consumer level, there's no competition for it.

Nice interface, great AF, but too much moire and aliasing.
They should fix the moire and aliasing and add 4K

 

[nhz]

Just when I let a relative buy the 70D...

put a '80D' sticker on it and nobody notice the difference ;-)

sounds like another big YAWN from Canon.

 

[CapturingLight]

Oh no! I feel a GAS attack coming on. I swore I would wait for the 80D before making a buy. I don't even know the spec list yet and I want it...

 

[Sporgon]

I wonder if they'll get the size right down to Pentax K 3 dimensions. I'd really like a small, fast crop camera that was well made with a mag alloy body and decent sized pentaprism. No pop up flash for me (Nikon finally got the message on the D500). Touch and flip screen sure. So the new Rebels like the 760D take over where the old xxD line left off and the new 80D offers something a bit different.

 

[9VIII]

Just when I let a relative buy the 70D...

Did they get it for $700?
The 80D is going to cost a fair bit more for the first year or so. Comparing the price of a 760D and 70D, I'll take the 70D.

 

[roxics]

Hope for full frame 4k. By full frame I mean 4K using the entire sensor width without line skipping.
Would be great to have a really fast SD slot in there as well so the Magic Latern team can do their work.

 

[ritholtz]

This is more exciting than the 1DX II ... it's a camera I might buy if the video quality is good and the AF works well in video.

The 70D has the best video AF in a DSLR in my opinion, and being that it is unlikely Canon will take a step backward, the 80D should be excellent assuming it is a successor to the 70D. Now, as to all out video quality...compared to higher end options, I doubt it will be better in output. Market segmentation as the apologists call it. They aren't going to give it better video than a camera costing 3-4x as much.

The touch screen + DPAF makes the difference. That is why I don't consider the 7D2 good for video, while it can focus as well or better, video AF is in big part dependent on the user controlling it. The 70D has the right interface for maximizing video quality.

Thus, short of going full frame pro cameras mounted to shoulder rigs with manual focus assist devices (grips and whatnot) - and being good with manually focusing ...the 70D is king. There's no in between.

Sure, you can get better video recording on better cameras - but that to me is all down the drain when the AF is not smooth, accurate and professional. No one cares one bit about the detail or resolution, when during a video they see a horrible transition in focus or an outright miss. It's a big eye sore and turn off.

In my view, it is DPAF + Touchscreen or go home. The pros are going to spend a lot and get what they need. At the enthusiast and consumer level, there's no competition for it.

It records decent sound as well. I always want to try 6d. I am spending lot of time on photography and lugging around camera with 2 lens. I just as well spend this time with FF. Only thing stopped me to go to 6D is, 70d video features. Hopefully, we see camera with mix between 6D2 in 70D soon from Canon.

 

[Schmave]

This is more exciting than the 1DX II ... it's a camera I might buy if the video quality is good and the AF works well in video.

The 70D has the best video AF in a DSLR in my opinion, and being that it is unlikely Canon will take a step backward, the 80D should be excellent assuming it is a successor to the 70D. Now, as to all out video quality...compared to higher end options, I doubt it will be better in output. Market segmentation as the apologists call it. They aren't going to give it better video than a camera costing 3-4x as much.

The touch screen + DPAF makes the difference. That is why I don't consider the 7D2 good for video, while it can focus as well or better, video AF is in big part dependent on the user controlling it. The 70D has the right interface for maximizing video quality.

Thus, short of going full frame pro cameras mounted to shoulder rigs with manual focus assist devices (grips and whatnot) - and being good with manually focusing ...the 70D is king. There's no in between.

Sure, you can get better video recording on better cameras - but that to me is all down the drain when the AF is not smooth, accurate and professional. No one cares one bit about the detail or resolution, when during a video they see a horrible transition in focus or an outright miss. It's a big eye sore and turn off.

In my view, it is DPAF + Touchscreen or go home. The pros are going to spend a lot and get what they need. At the enthusiast and consumer level, there's no competition for it.

Nice interface, great AF, but too much moire and aliasing.
They should fix the moire and aliasing and add 4K

That would be really nice. Like others have said, the things I really like with my 70D are AF + touchscreen for video, and pretty solid photo features. The one thing I don't like about the video is moire and aliasing (which they apparently got rid of on the 7D2). If they could get rid of the moire and aliasing by using the full sensor readout and downsampling it would be ideal.

Now, it would be awesome if they also added 4K. However, I don't think they can add 4K and maintain their "product segmentation" strategy for 4K video on only high end ($$$) devices. Maybe they will realize that there are other cameras out there in the same price range that shoot 4K and add it. I would be pleasantly surprised but I won't hold my breath.

 

[Don Haines]

This is more exciting than the 1DX II ... it's a camera I might buy if the video quality is good and the AF works well in video.

The 70D has the best video AF in a DSLR in my opinion, and being that it is unlikely Canon will take a step backward, the 80D should be excellent assuming it is a successor to the 70D. Now, as to all out video quality...compared to higher end options, I doubt it will be better in output. Market segmentation as the apologists call it. They aren't going to give it better video than a camera costing 3-4x as much.

The touch screen + DPAF makes the difference. That is why I don't consider the 7D2 good for video, while it can focus as well or better, video AF is in big part dependent on the user controlling it. The 70D has the right interface for maximizing video quality.

Thus, short of going full frame pro cameras mounted to shoulder rigs with manual focus assist devices (grips and whatnot) - and being good with manually focusing ...the 70D is king. There's no in between.

Sure, you can get better video recording on better cameras - but that to me is all down the drain when the AF is not smooth, accurate and professional. No one cares one bit about the detail or resolution, when during a video they see a horrible transition in focus or an outright miss. It's a big eye sore and turn off.

In my view, it is DPAF + Touchscreen or go home. The pros are going to spend a lot and get what they need. At the enthusiast and consumer level, there's no competition for it.

It records decent sound as well. I always want to try 6d. I am spending lot of time on photography and lugging around camera with 2 lens. I just as well spend this time with FF. Only thing stopped me to go to 6D is, 70d video features. Hopefully, we see camera with mix between 6D2 in 70D soon from Canon.

Try an external mic..... I don't think anyone makes a half-decent internal mic....

 

[LesC]

Nearly got the 70D when it first came out but all the talk of AF problems put me off it. Eventually went FF with the 6D & got a 100D (SL1) as a back up or for when I want to travel light.

One thing I really like on the 6D is built in GPS - wouldn't be without it. Now if the 80D has GPS & a tilting touch screen I'd be interested

 

[roxics]

Now, it would be awesome if they also added 4K. However, I don't think they can add 4K and maintain their "product segmentation" strategy for 4K video on only high end ($$$) devices. Maybe they will realize that there are other cameras out there in the same price range that shoot 4K and add it. I would be pleasantly surprised but I won't hold my breath.

I think at this point Canon needs to start going 4K with all of their cameras. Resolution is not the only factor to good image quality or video capability. There are plenty of reasons to still continue buying their cinema series of cameras, even if all their DSLRs go 4K. The biggest of which is ergonomics, built in ND filters, XLR audio, etc. So I don't buy into the whole "Canon will cannibalize their own cinema cameras by releasing 4K DSLRs" argument that some people make. At this point there are even two year old smartphones on the market that shoot 4K and plenty of new 4K TVs being sold, so 4K is at least a good place to start when it comes to improving video quality on their DSLRs.

Also with 2-4 year release cycles for their cameras, I think it would be a mistake to skip 4K again for another 2-4 years. It would put them behind their competitors such as Sony, Panasonic and even Nikon who is now starting to go 4K with their D5 and D500 and probably the rest fo their lineup in short time.

So while I wouldn't put it past Canon to skip 4K again, I think it would be an incredibly stupid move at this point in time and I fully expect even the next Rebel to have that ability.

 

[Schmave]

I think at this point Canon needs to start going 4K with all of their cameras. Resolution is not the only factor to good image quality or video capability. There are plenty of reasons to still continue buying their cinema series of cameras, even if all their DSLRs go 4K. The biggest of which is ergonomics, built in ND filters, XLR audio, etc. So I don't buy into the whole "Canon will cannibalize their own cinema cameras by releasing 4K DSLRs" argument that some people make. At this point there are even two year old smartphones on the market that shoot 4K and plenty of new 4K TVs being sold, so 4K is at least a good place to start when it comes to improving video quality on their DSLRs.

Also with 2-4 year release cycles for their cameras, I think it would be a mistake to skip 4K again for another 2-4 years. It would put them behind their competitors such as Sony, Panasonic and even Nikon who is now starting to go 4K with their D5 and D500 and probably the rest fo their lineup in short time.

So while I wouldn't put it past Canon to skip 4K again, I think it would be an incredibly stupid move at this point in time and I fully expect even the next Rebel to have that ability.

+1. I completely agree with everything you said. They need to have 4K in their cameras from now on since most of their competition has 4K in their newer cameras. I'm trying to think like a Canon product line manager though. If they add 4K to the 80D, the 5D4 better have 4K. I'm not sure if they would want to announce 4K in an 80D before they announce the 5D4 though.

The other thought I had with regards to 4K is the storage format for this camera. I'm going to assume they will keep using SD cards in the XXD line. If they did add 4K video they might have to have a requirement to at least use UHS-I cards. I also wonder what codec they would use for 4K in a consumer DSLR.

 

[roxics]

I'm not sure if they would want to announce 4K in an 80D before they announce the 5D4 though.

The other thought I had with regards to 4K is the storage format for this camera. I'm going to assume they will keep using SD cards in the XXD line. If they did add 4K video they might have to have a requirement to at least use UHS-I cards. I also wonder what codec they would use for 4K in a consumer DSLR.

They've done similar things in the past. When the 7D was announced the 5DmkII didn't have 720p at 60fps among a few other features. The argument then was that the spec of the 7D was better than the 5DmkII for video.

The 70D also got DPAF long before other higher end cameras. It's also their highest end camera with a flip out screen which is ideal for video. So it wouldn't surprise me to see an 80D with 4K before a 5DmkIV. The only other key element I would ask for on the 80D is a headphone jack.

 

[jebrady03]

Agree with all of the comments about 4K being a smart move on Canon's part, to implement. Especially when you think about it like this... The 5D Mark II (which was announced almost 7.5 years ago) introduced HD video recording to DSLR's. Given that the 90D will likely come out 10 years after that announcement, can, or SHOULD Canon wait 10 years to have 4K video across their lineup? I think not.

That said, right now, I don't even have a computer that is, in a realistic time frame, capable of working with 4K video, and I doubt most consumers do either. Neither do most consumers have a TV capable of playing it in full resolution, or a BluRay player for that matter. I think once TV stations begin broadcasting in 4K regularly, THEN we'll see wide scale adoption of 4K. Until then, probably not. And I'm basing that statement on history with HD broadcasts.

 

[Don Haines]

A lot of forum members quote the twin mantras of "you can't introduce features in a lower model" and "you can't have higher performance in a lower model". If you followed the logic through to the end, ten the only time something new could be introduced would be with the 1DX, then the 1DX2, and in about 5 or 6 years time, the 1DX3..... This obviously does not happen.

Digic 6 introduced in a p/s camera.....
dual pixel in the 70D....
WiFi.....
GPS....
Touch screens....
and every new crop (or FF) camera seems to have a bit more IQ than the last one released before it...

and the 1DX does not have "green box" mode while every other Canon camera has it!

 

[tcmatthews]

Agree with all of the comments about 4K being a smart move on Canon's part, to implement. Especially when you think about it like this... The 5D Mark II (which was announced almost 7.5 years ago) introduced HD video recording to DSLR's. Given that the 90D will likely come out 10 years after that announcement, can, or SHOULD Canon wait 10 years to have 4K video across their lineup? I think not.

That said, right now, I don't even have a computer that is, in a realistic time frame, capable of working with 4K video, and I doubt most consumers do either. Neither do most consumers have a TV capable of playing it in full resolution, or a BluRay player for that matter. I think once TV stations begin broadcasting in 4K regularly, THEN we'll see wide scale adoption of 4K. Until then, probably not. And I'm basing that statement on history with HD broadcasts.

For the video guy at work 4K video recording is not 4k output. He uses 4k to ensure sharp HD. It gives him the ability to crop in or downsample as needed. Most of his workflow is in standard HD the software is setup to render the 4k video in HD for the editing. It is not until the end that the video is actual checked in 4K before he downsamples the video.

As for 4K video viewing current intel I7 processors are capable of 4k playback. Depending on the encoding the I5's can also playback 4k. That is with the terrible built in intel video processors. As for GoPro's offering 4k it is a gimmick. The standard lenses on the units are not good for even 1080p output. DSLR have lenses that are actually capable of resolving 4k.

 

[OddieCZ]

Just when I let a relative buy the 70D...

put a '80D' sticker on it and nobody notice the difference ;-)

sounds like another big YAWN from Canon.

Nah, 70D has a better ring to it. But maybe a Mark II sticker?)

 

[OddieCZ]

Just when I let a relative buy the 70D...

Did they get it for $700?
The 80D is going to cost a fair bit more for the first year or so. Comparing the price of a 760D and 70D, I'll take the 70D.

They got a deal for the continent they're on. My "fear" is the price of the 70D dropping. You are correct though that the 80D would not have gone for the price the 70D just did)

 

[K]

This is more exciting than the 1DX II ... it's a camera I might buy if the video quality is good and the AF works well in video.

The 70D has the best video AF in a DSLR in my opinion, and being that it is unlikely Canon will take a step backward, the 80D should be excellent assuming it is a successor to the 70D. Now, as to all out video quality...compared to higher end options, I doubt it will be better in output. Market segmentation as the apologists call it. They aren't going to give it better video than a camera costing 3-4x as much.

The touch screen + DPAF makes the difference. That is why I don't consider the 7D2 good for video, while it can focus as well or better, video AF is in big part dependent on the user controlling it. The 70D has the right interface for maximizing video quality.

Thus, short of going full frame pro cameras mounted to shoulder rigs with manual focus assist devices (grips and whatnot) - and being good with manually focusing ...the 70D is king. There's no in between.

Sure, you can get better video recording on better cameras - but that to me is all down the drain when the AF is not smooth, accurate and professional. No one cares one bit about the detail or resolution, when during a video they see a horrible transition in focus or an outright miss. It's a big eye sore and turn off.

In my view, it is DPAF + Touchscreen or go home. The pros are going to spend a lot and get what they need. At the enthusiast and consumer level, there's no competition for it.

Nice interface, great AF, but too much moire and aliasing.
They should fix the moire and aliasing and add 4K

Do remember that not long ago, it was on sale via authorized dealers for $650 with a printer. That's a lot of video performance and quality for $650. Overall, at that sale price which I imagine will come along again - the 70D is by far the absolute best value DSLR on the planet.

Moire and aliasing...sure. I'll take that any day over unusable AF.

I think once a user starts worrying about the amount of moire and aliasing, they're starting up the realm of professional level video.

 

[greger]

There's a rumour that there won't be an upgrade to the 7Dii, which is hard to believe as there wasn't supposed to be a 7Dii. The 70D's replacement will be the best APSC Canon you can buy. It will have the articulating screen,7Dii Body, next generation dual processors, WIFI and GPS, dual card slots same as 7Dii, f8 centre point focus and a few more features taken from both the 7Dii and 70D. It will be priced the same as the 7Dii. It won't be coming out this February. It will be a few more years till we see an upgrade. If it took 5 years to upgrade the original 7D then this will be the time that Canon needs to get it ready to be released. I write this as my prediction and my thoughts only.