Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?

[jrista]

Latest rumor suggests that the big new sensor tech for 7D2 is all about a radically improved dual pixel AF that will be completely revolutionary but was also 100% silent on any talk of actual image quality improvements (an earlier rumor hinted that the next FF might be the one to focus on also improving IQ). But who knows, these sources may all be garbage.

I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)

Sounded like they were hinting at way upping the speed and making it not focus hunt at all and perform super well for real time tracking and focusing during video.

But who knows.

That still doesn't sound revolutionary or anything like that. It's just expected evolutions on the existing DPAF. I think the patent that covers increasing sensitivity could cover a lot of that, as all PDAF is is a bunch of highly sensitive strips of pixels that can be used to detect a phase offset. Current dedicated PDAF sensors use pixels in the strips that are huge compared to current image sensor pixels...increasing the sensitivity of the photodiodes would allow DPAF to perform at a more competitive level, and by consequence become more useful for realtime focus and focus tracking during video.

Still...it just, if that's ALL Canon does with the 7D II sensor...wow. FLOP. I think Canon is smarter than that...

 

[zim]

I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)

Are you suggesting that the people here are representative of Canon's customer base? I see lots of clamoring for better IQ on forums but until the 70D, the 7D remained a strong seller. I'd bet a 7DII with 41ish AF points and 10 fps, and a 24 MP DPAF sensor similar in IQ to the 70D, would sell quite well.

I think that's going to turn out to be pretty accurate as it's going to get reamed in these forums for that but a 7D as is with those additional specs is actually going to be a superb camera, as a nice to have I would like to see touch screen, not swivelly tilty thing though. Well that's what I'm expecting anyway.

 

[Aglet]

What's your evidence for that? Current Foveon sensors are crap at high ISO. For example, the LL review of the DP2M cites 'poor IQ above ISO 400...with current Canon sensors, ISO 800 isn't even 'high ISO'.

Old info.
Latest Sigma Quattro has made significant ISO performance improvements, especially considering how few iterations of such a sensor have been produced.
edit: arghhh.. was just looking at samples of it and, despite better ISO performance above base, it's got far too much vertical banding for my liking. Unfortunate, as detail is crisp and color on object edges is more like I'd prefer.

Seems like your understanding of these concepts is about as astute as your comprehension of the sensor design for DPAF, i.e. very poor:

Why do you punctuate your flawed argument with an disparaging personal remark?
seems your understanding of acceptable social behavior may be comparably flawed

 

[ahsanford]

Regarding touch and tilty-swively screens...

(this is long, but perhaps has merit re: screen preferences)

I design things for a living -- medical devices, not cameras. In my line of work, when we run into preference proliferation where you have intractable 'camps' of users that must be satisfied all the time. We size it up pretty simply.

Scenario 1: The value proposition of the product we have in mind is good enough (on aggregate) to overcome the loss of that the one critical feature, i.e. the product is so slick, powerful, intuitive, effective that someone will willingly go against their core / gut beliefs to get their hands on the product. In this case, we just offer that one great product and tell folks to take it or leave it.

Scenario 2: The product isn't so compelling that people will go against a 'must' desire of theirs, but that camp of users is large enough to warrant a sister product / alternate version / new SKU that has the feature they want. i.e. Despite the time / cost / difficulty to satisfy this camp, it's worth it to do so, and we spin up the people to get it done.

Scenario 3: Scenario 2 with a smaller group that doesn't warrant standalone products to scratch their itch. Wiser companies drive around these battles and chase more lucrative targets. Smaller / more desperate companies to swoop in and fill the needs of these under-served customers.

Scenario 4: There are enough Scenario 3 groups that we entertain a modular solution to the problem. One core product is designed with 2, 3, 4, etc. versions of a single critical subsystem. Either you offer all of them to the market and the user assembles them, we kit them into different standalone SKUs, or we only offer one but design in this modularity as future proofing for a future Scenario 2 situation (i.e. if the market changes). Once that group gets large enough, we're glad we have a flexible enough platform to bolt on what they need as a new SKU.

I'm just wondering what the market segmentation is on touchscreens and/or tilty-flippy screens. I assume that the former is simple like/dislike preference, but the latter is a potential win for ergonomics at the cost of robustness (drops, hinge mechanism reliability, etc.) and weather sealing. (I'll post a poll on this to mine where this group stands, just for fun.)

Question for this thread is: would Canon ever go all 'mirrorless external viewfinder/grip/etc.' on this problem and make the LCD a kit-like selection of standard / touch / touch+swivel or (gasp) something users could interchange themselves?

- A

 

[jrista]

I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)

Are you suggesting that the people here are representative of Canon's customer base? I see lots of clamoring for better IQ on forums but until the 70D, the 7D remained a strong seller. I'd bet a 7DII with 41ish AF points and 10 fps, and a 24 MP DPAF sensor similar in IQ to the 70D, would sell quite well.

It may sell, but I think it would still hurt Canon's reputation. To date, they actually have a very good track record of listening to their customers and delivering on their customers demands. Both the 1D X and 5D III are excellent examples of that...Canon pretty much NAILED both on the head, delivering exactly what their customers wanted.

It's very clear that their customers want a better sensor in the 7D II. If Canon was to make it some big video DSLR, and completely ignore their still photography customer demands, I just think that would hurt Canon's reputation as a company that listens to their customers, and delivers meaningful improvements in IQ. As much as the 1D X and 5D III did not improve low ISO IQ to the same degree as the D800, both improved high ISO IQ considerably, and people are quite happy with them.

All I've heard, for the last several years, from people all over the net, is they want Canon to deliver better DR. Regardless of whether more DR is nearly as meaningful or important as people seem to think it is, it's still by far the single loudest demand that Canon customers, as a gigantic mob, have been demanding. I think it would be damaging to Canon's reputation to completely ignore that demand, and not only that, but completely ignore still photography demands overall and just focus in the video stuff (which is what LTRLI's posts seemed to indicate whatever rumors he read said.)

One of the things I like most about Canon is they've listened to their customers, for decades now, they have delivered new products based directly on customer feedback. I remember for years the "fewer megapixels, better pixels" demand of pro photographers who were sick of the endless megapixel race. I remember the AF system of the 5D II being one of the biggest complaints about that camera. I remember the lack of f/8 AF in anything but the 1D line being another sticking point. Canon directly addressed all of those things, and other key issues their customers had. If they ignore the sensor IQ/DR thing...they are ignoring a BIIIG issue their customers have. It doesn't matter if it matters, it doesn't matter if low ISO DR isn't as important as some of the Canon naysayers and die-hard Nikon fans insist...all that really matters is Canon's low ISO DR is most definitely at the top of a very significant number of Canon users complaint lists. They have to respond to it...some how, some way...they can't simply ignore it.

 

[ahsanford]

Annnnnnd, here's a poll on LCD screen preferences I ginned up:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK65Z2Y

I'd appreciate everyone's thoughts. It's a classic example of an engineer channeling his inner marketing guy, but please, indulge me. I am truly curious.

Sorry to take the question outside of CR, but I wanted follow up questions that the CR Forum poll doodad will not allow.

- A

 

[zim]

Annnnnnd, here's a poll on LCD screen preferences I ginned up:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK65Z2Y

I'd appreciate everyone's thoughts. It's a classic example of an engineer channeling his inner marketing guy, but please, indulge me. I am truly curious.

Sorry to take the question outside of CR, but I wanted follow up questions that the CR Forum poll doodad will not allow.

- A

My answers didn't appear in the results, a well that's marketing for you :

 

[ahsanford]

Annnnnnd, here's a poll on LCD screen preferences I ginned up:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK65Z2Y

I'd appreciate everyone's thoughts. It's a classic example of an engineer channeling his inner marketing guy, but please, indulge me. I am truly curious.

Sorry to take the question outside of CR, but I wanted follow up questions that the CR Forum poll doodad will not allow.

- A

My answers didn't appear in the results, a well that's marketing for you :

Homer: Bad helper monkey! Bad Mojo!

Sorry. This link works for me (even when I am logged out), but you may have to have filled out the survey to see it:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s_thankyou.aspx?sm=Ws7JK%252bcabzvEcxXxJcXkq45j8D7iDKRGz0nakT9q9A0%253d

If that doesn't work, I'll post a summary of the results in 24 hours.

- A

 

[johnnyblues]

I chose the 7D over the 5dm2 because of its (at the time) better AF. While it was great at what I was using it for, I was always dismayed at images over 1600 ISO; L lenses and shooting in raw helped a bit. What would excite me on this next iteration? Great ISO 3200 images and acceptable ISO 6400 pics (little NR needed).

That and a $1500 price tag. 8)

 

[NancyP]

How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.

 

[ahsanford]

How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.

You nailed it. The middle group should be willing to pay anything for the 7D2 (I'm not kidding: $3-4k!) because it saves them from having to go all Great White, which costs much, much more. I continue to rep for these people as the 7D2 represents (for them) is the best single possible upgrade they can make for longer BIF/wildlife/sports/racing shooting in the pricey but not impoverishing $2k-ish investment. (That... or possibly the new 100-400 if it is really solid.)

The size of that middle group is the question. If it's big enough, I think Canon should make the 7D2 that crop-sized 1DX and pro-it-up with best in class features, and ask north of $2k for it. Let the 70D be the premium APS-C rig and the 7D2 be the exotic long-range specialists' super-tool.

But there is a legitimate point folks make that Canon needs a $1,500-$1,700 or so crop body and the 7D2 must be it. That would speak to your third group being wooed with something clearly better than the 70D (for more than just framerate: I'd think the AF, build quality, pixel count, etc. would all be improved) and not for twice as much.

The first group buying a 7D2 will happen if it's 'pro' enough. Not having to lug as heavy a Great White into the bush is a weight-related win, and it's like a built-in 1.6x T/C without an AF performance or sharpness hit for those who do want to lug their big lenses and net even longer shots. So I could see 1DX users picking up a 7D2 as a second or third body, sure.

- A

 

[garyknrd]

How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.

I can afford a Idx, and I would not buy one for birding even at half the price. I tried one and tried the 5D III. Those are not birding cameras IMO. Or at least not for me.
After the new big whites came out with the new FF cameras. My friends that I shoot with changed very quick. And just raved. I have been looking at there photos for the last two years. The detail and quality of there photos have gone downhill. And not just by a little. All of them also bought the new 600 to go with the new cameras.

If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html

 

[jrista]

How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.

I can afford a Idx, and I would not buy one for birding even at half the price. I tried one and tried the 5D III. Those are not birding cameras IMO. Or at least not for me.
After the new big whites came out with the new FF cameras. My friends that I shoot with changed very quick. And just raved. I have been looking at there photos for the last two years. The detail and quality of there photos have gone downhill. And not just by a little. All of them also bought the new 600 to go with the new cameras.

If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html

The fact that your friends bird photo quality went downhill is not indicative of the equipment, it's indicative of their own skill. I'd wager that they are having a harder time with the larger, heavier equipment, but that is something that can be dealt with via practice.

Big name, long time pros use the 1D X and the 5D III, and they make phenomenal bird photos with both. There are also some pros that use the 7D and 100-400, and their work is still excellent. It's a matter of skill, really. There is certainly the IQ benefit if you can get closer with a bigger frame and a longer lens...more pixels on subject and more light gathered. If you know how to use a 7D and a smaller lens, and use it in good light, it is extremely difficult to tell the difference.

I think the 7D line with the 100-400 and Tammy 150-600 really fill the growing market of budget birders, who can't spend $20,000 on a 1D X and 600/4 II, or who simply refuse to/can't justify it, don't want the big heavy equipment, whatever reason.

I use a 7D and 5D III with a 600/4 II myself. There is no question that the 7D has the reach, but I've got the skill...and more importantly the patience, to get close. The large frame of the 5D III definitely gets the better IQ if and when I fill the frame. Assuming the 7D II get a good still photography IQ boost and gets a much-improved AF system, I'll probably get one to replace the 7D at some point in the future. If instead the 7D II hits as a "big time" DSLR video camera, I'll skip it.

 

[garyknrd]

How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.

I can afford a Idx, and I would not buy one for birding even at half the price. I tried one and tried the 5D III. Those are not birding cameras IMO. Or at least not for me.
After the new big whites came out with the new FF cameras. My friends that I shoot with changed very quick. And just raved. I have been looking at there photos for the last two years. The detail and quality of there photos have gone downhill. And not just by a little. All of them also bought the new 600 to go with the new cameras.

If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html

The fact that your friends bird photo quality went downhill is not indicative of the equipment, it's indicative of their own skill. I'd wager that they are having a harder time with the larger, heavier equipment, but that is something that can be dealt with via practice.

Big name, long time pros use the 1D X and the 5D III, and they make phenomenal bird photos with both. There are also some pros that use the 7D and 100-400, and their work is still excellent. It's a matter of skill, really. There is certainly the IQ benefit if you can get closer with a bigger frame and a longer lens...more pixels on subject and more light gathered. If you know how to use a 7D and a smaller lens, and use it in good light, it is extremely difficult to tell the difference.

I think the 7D line with the 100-400 and Tammy 150-600 really fill the growing market of budget birders, who can't spend $20,000 on a 1D X and 600/4 II, or who simply refuse to/can't justify it, don't want the big heavy equipment, whatever reason.

I use a 7D and 5D III with a 600/4 II myself. There is no question that the 7D has the reach, but I've got the skill...and more importantly the patience, to get close. The large frame of the 5D III definitely gets the better IQ if and when I fill the frame. Assuming the 7D II get a good still photography IQ boost and gets a much-improved AF system, I'll probably get one to replace the 7D at some point in the future. If instead the 7D II hits as a "big time" DSLR video camera, I'll skip it.

Yea, that is why I do not get a full frame. My buds, with the extra bulk, it is killing them. Skill level? Sure, you can sneak up closer, and in a hide it is a big plus.
IMO, FF Canon bodes are a bust for all around birding, But Canon does not have a good crop sensor camera either. Canon shooters do not have much of an option.
The new Nikon 810 FF might change my mind shooting FF. I cannot wait until pics start coming in.

Just not there yet IMO.

 

[bdunbar79]

How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.

I can afford a Idx, and I would not buy one for birding even at half the price. I tried one and tried the 5D III. Those are not birding cameras IMO. Or at least not for me.
After the new big whites came out with the new FF cameras. My friends that I shoot with changed very quick. And just raved. I have been looking at there photos for the last two years. The detail and quality of there photos have gone downhill. And not just by a little. All of them also bought the new 600 to go with the new cameras.

If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html

Good thing in your post you put "IMO."

 

[jrista]

If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html

Informal indeed. Your ignoring a lot of IQ factors. IQ is not solely about shadow lifting ability (which is what your referring to when you say DR) or sharpness. I prefer all of the 7D shots in your comparison. Why? Framing and background blur! Every one of the 7D shots has VASTLY superior background blur, and superior dynamic range. Yup, I said it. LTRLI will be happy about this post.

The K3 suffers in the depth of field and overall noise areas. These are critical IQ factors. They affect the overall aesthetics of the photo. Because you had to stop down with the K3, you lost light, which either required you to use a higher ISO or do more lifting in post. The Sony sensors may have more shadow lifting ability, but there is absolutely no alternative to gathering more light. None whatsoever. Its the total quantity of light that actually affects dynamic range...and by that, I mean real dynamic range...not just shadow lifting. Dynamic range affects the entire signal, from the shadows right up through the peak signal. More total light, less noise in general throughout the entire image.

Add in the wider aperture, which allowed for a thinner DOF which blurred out the background more...and you have a much better camera system overall. The 7D images are less noisy because you gathered more light...that means the 7D images actually have better dynamic range. The SENSOR may not be as good as the sony sensor, but the CAMERA setup allowed you to get better photos with the Canon setup than with the Pentax setup. That's really what matters in the end...the final outcome, the end IQ. It might be possible to find a lens for the Pentax that performs as well at f/2.8 as the lens you used on the 7D...maybe. Canon's glass is largely unsurpassed these days, with a few exceptions here and there (like the Otus and a few wide angle Sigmas). Canon, despite their older sensor technology, still has a better overall camera system...and it shows.

It shows even when people try to prove the opposite...which is so ironic.

 

[garyknrd]

How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.

I can afford a Idx, and I would not buy one for birding even at half the price. I tried one and tried the 5D III. Those are not birding cameras IMO. Or at least not for me.
After the new big whites came out with the new FF cameras. My friends that I shoot with changed very quick. And just raved. I have been looking at there photos for the last two years. The detail and quality of there photos have gone downhill. And not just by a little. All of them also bought the new 600 to go with the new cameras.

If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html

Good thing in your post you put "IMO."

LOL, yea,, I knew this was coming...
The ISO performance is much better also. But, everyone has there own views..

Cheers, and chill out.

 

[NancyP]

Well, I started with the 60D, got into birding, bought the 400mm f/5.6L, center point AI Servo, and have enjoyed the mobility and ease of use of this set-up in hiking to spot of interest, shooting birds in flight. I might have bought the 7D a year ago, but I kept putting it off - "7D2 coming soon". : I will keep using my beloved 400 5.6 on the 7D2, and will be working on saving for the 600 II. (My main purchase recently has been a "landscape and wildife support vehicle", otherwise known as my Subaru Forester commuting and camping car.) I don't have to be in a hurry - I like what I have now, and am learning fieldcraft.

 

[Menace]

Well, I started with the 60D, got into birding, bought the 400mm f/5.6L, center point AI Servo, and have enjoyed the mobility and ease of use of this set-up in hiking to spot of interest, shooting birds in flight. I might have bought the 7D a year ago, but I kept putting it off - "7D2 coming soon". : I will keep using my beloved 400 5.6 on the 7D2, and will be working on saving for the 600 II. (My main purchase recently has been a "landscape and wildife support vehicle", otherwise known as my Subaru Forester commuting and camping car.) I don't have to be in a hurry - I like what I have now, and am learning fieldcraft.

Well done in getting transport sorted for hard to get areas - 7d2 with the 600 II should be an awesome combination.

 

[Yeye]

Birthday wish list for a new version of the Canon 7D

Histogram in the view finder
Magic Lantern functionality like - Auto-ETTR, Dual-ISO, zebra stripes, RAW histogram, RAW Blinkies, Auto-Dot-Tune, intervalometer
Programmable buttons like the depth of field preview
A really high quality 3.2 inch electronic viewfinder or a hybrid electronic viewfinder or optical viewfinder
Auto Focus at f/8
Control button layout like a 5DIII
Dual CF card slots
Built in GPS
Radio control for speedlights
Wireless tethering app for iOS and Android
Small pro-grade weather-sealed body with a integrated grip
Pop up flash
Updated metering system
Image quality better than 70D
Noise performance as the 5DIII
Auto focus like 5DIII
61 auto focus points
Dual Pixel CMOS AF
Superior low light ( high iso ) performance
Dynamic range to 13 stops
24 MP sensor
10 fps
Giant buffer, 30 RAW at 10 fps
1/8000 shutter speed
100% viewfinder
Able to use same batteries as my 7D
No AA filter

APS-H 1.3x crop mode but possible to crop to APS-C 1.6

Cost less than my car that is below $2 500

Video stuff