How does the reveal of the final 7D2 specs make you feel?

[Xero]

NO TOUCHSCREEN. OK..... HOW DOES THE DPAF WORK? How do we pick focal points? Why have it at all? No flippable lcd? Why? If you don't like it you don't have to move it.... Um a headphone jack, thats a plus except it should have been in EVERY camera from DAY 1. Sensor improvements or not, was hoping for a bridge from 70d to Mk3, what I got was a boat with no oars stuck up a shitty creek.

 

[Loswr]

HOW DOES THE DPAF WORK? How do we pick focal points?

EYE CONTROLLED AF!!!.

 

[3kramd5]

NO TOUCHSCREEN. OK..... HOW DOES THE DPAF WORK? How do we pick focal points?

Same way you do with most every Canon SLR, I imagine. I doubt each one will be selectable; rather they'll be used to assist tracking (when you wouldn't be selecting anyway).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Exactly! OMG we have that 18Mpx sensor in lowest model. Does Canon want to pretend that two more megapixels and some AF upgrades and circuity for these is normal after 5 or more like nearly 8 years of that sensor tech birth?, DOH....

canon is not about invention. these times are long gone.

and no... on sensor PDAF was not first in a canon.

Yes, Canon is only in the top 5 of companies awarded U.S. patents each year. They don't invent at all. And yes, Nikon had the PDAF in the J1/V1 first, but how well did those sell??? Besides the 70D's dual pixel AF is far more advanced than sticking some PDAF sensors on a sensor (like Apple is now doing).

I think you might want to give Canon a bit more credit.

Many patents are useless. And what good is a useful patent if the CEOs won't let them build new fabs that enable them to produce sensors using the patents or if marketing says we need to hold it all back for the future?

 

[jrista]

Exactly! OMG we have that 18Mpx sensor in lowest model. Does Canon want to pretend that two more megapixels and some AF upgrades and circuity for these is normal after 5 or more like nearly 8 years of that sensor tech birth?, DOH....

canon is not about invention. these times are long gone.

and no... on sensor PDAF was not first in a canon.

Yes, Canon is only in the top 5 of companies awarded U.S. patents each year. They don't invent at all. And yes, Nikon had the PDAF in the J1/V1 first, but how well did those sell??? Besides the 70D's dual pixel AF is far more advanced than sticking some PDAF sensors on a sensor (like Apple is now doing).

I think you might want to give Canon a bit more credit.

Many patents are useless. And what good is a useful patent if the CEOs won't let them build new fabs that enable them to produce sensors using the patents or if marketing says we need to hold it all back for the future?

I think Don is probably right on the fab situation. Canon could save a bundle by letting P&S sensor load wind down, then they could shift larger format sensors over to that existing fab. The P&S market contracted over 30% last year alone, though...so you would figure they would already have some free capacity.

I really hope Chipworks tears the 7D II apart and figures out whats REALLY inside it...I want to know exactly, with certainty, what kind of process and fundamental design Canon is using.

 

[ahsanford]

Woohoo! 100+ responses to the poll!

Nice work, everyone.

- A

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

he major difference with the A7s is the massive increase to SNR...it's about double or so compared to even the vaunted 1D X, on top of the huge DR increase (6.6 stops 1D X, 8.8 stops A7s, at ISO 51200). THAT is HUGE for high ISO IQ. Massively huge. It means a literal one-stop or greater improvement in noise, which I didn't even think was possible (and I still don't know how they did it....other than the fact that their sensor just seems to suck up light like it was candy.)

To be fair, the 6D scores, using NORMALIZED ;D results (I will give you that you are not a fanboy though as you stick to no normalization for DR whether it makes any particular brand look better or worse, but I think if you looked at normalized results you might be a touch less puzzled over how they pulled it off, because, IMO, SONY didn't really pull off something to the degree you think they did in this case) gives 6.93 at ISO51,200 and Sony A7S gives 8.19 so the difference is 1.26 stops not 2.2 stops (which, maybe you'll agree is an improvement that is easier to fathom, it's still a nice improvement though, 1.26 stops is hardly nothing and compared to the 5D3 we are talking 6.29 vs 8.19 or 1.9 stops, a pretty decent bit more. So it has like 2 stops better DR at very high ISO and about the same at low ISO (it actually fairs a bit poorly compared to other Exmor sensors for low ISO DR though). It's large pixels make the grain larger than the 6D or 5D3 though.

Also, I think you accidentally used the 21,560 info instead of 51,200?? Not that it matters.

 

[Steve]

I should have clarified, my biggest beef is with noise. I can be standing next to someone shooting a Nikon and they're at IS01600, meanwhile I'm at 200 because even 400 starts to show way too much noise. I'm thinking it's the same sensor (at least tech wise) since it's the EXACT same mp amount. VERY fishy. I guess we'll see

Wait. What? You're shooting sports at 200? Ok first thing - those dudes are shooting 1600 because no one really cares about noise for sports. Freeze the action, in focus, get a face and a ball and worry about noise some other day. Second, I've shot a lot with a 40D and 7D and yeah they get noisy but not really noticeably bad until 800 at least. I gotta wonder if you might be expecting too much. Also, are you shooting with short lenses and cropping real deep? Because that'll amplify noise like crazy.

 

[jrista]

he major difference with the A7s is the massive increase to SNR...it's about double or so compared to even the vaunted 1D X, on top of the huge DR increase (6.6 stops 1D X, 8.8 stops A7s, at ISO 51200). THAT is HUGE for high ISO IQ. Massively huge. It means a literal one-stop or greater improvement in noise, which I didn't even think was possible (and I still don't know how they did it....other than the fact that their sensor just seems to suck up light like it was candy.)

To be fair, the 6D scores, using NORMALIZED ;D results (I will give you that you are not a fanboy though as you stick to no normalization for DR whether it makes any particular brand look better or worse, but I think if you looked at normalized results you might be a touch less puzzled over how they pulled it off, because, IMO, SONY didn't really pull off something to the degree you think they did in this case) gives 6.93 at ISO51,200 and Sony A7S gives 8.19 so the difference is 1.26 stops not 2.2 stops (which, maybe you'll agree is an improvement that is easier to fathom, it's still a nice improvement though, 1.26 stops is hardly nothing and compared to the 5D3 we are talking 6.29 vs 8.19 or 1.9 stops, a pretty decent bit more. So it has like 2 stops better DR at very high ISO and about the same at low ISO (it actually fairs a bit poorly compared to other Exmor sensors for low ISO DR though). It's large pixels make the grain larger than the 6D or 5D3 though.

Also, I think you accidentally used the 21,560 info instead of 51,200?? Not that it matters.

I was going off of this data:

http://sensorgen.info/SonyA7S.html
http://sensorgen.info/CanonEOS-1D_X.html

DXO's site is EXCESSIVELY slow for me these days...it takes forever for each page to load, and then, when they do, you have to wait longer for the tabs to organize properly so you can click on them. So I pretty much rely on sensorgen.info's data these days...which is where I got the 8.8 stops DR and twice the signal power for the A7s:

1DX ISO 51200: Max Signal 163e-, RN 1.7e-, DR 6.6 stops
A7S ISO 51200: Max Signal 322e-, RN 0.7e-, DR 8.8 stops

I don't know what the normalized results are, since sensorgen just lists the raw measurements. However, since even the A7s would need to be downsampled to the DXO "Print DR" size, I can only imagine it's results get better as well...I'd expect about a 1.2x improvement in noise (and, sure, DR) with the A7s downsampled to 8mp. I'd expect around a 1.5x improvement in noise & DR for the 1D X downsampled to 8mp. There is still going to be a fairly massive gap between the two, even if it isn't a full 2.2 stops.

 

[Richard8971]

I'm pretty sure the 7D2 will be a good camera but I'm not going to just dump my current 7D and go out and buy a 7D2. UNLESS the high ISO performance is outstanding (which I am not expecting for really ANY crop sensor body, Canon or otherwise) I am not going to buy one.

My current 7D is fast and takes great pictures, it does everything I ask it to do. If anything ever happens to my 7D, I will probably upgrade to a 5D3 or better yet a used 1D4. Hell, by that time the market is going to be flooded with tons of lightly used 7D's, I might just go ahead and buy another 7D!

D

 

[RodS57]

Price point for me will be the deciding factor. The specs look reasonable, especially the potential for good AF. Although I enjoy BIF, this type of shot (fast action) isn't my prime concern. Right now ISO performance is a big consideration. With this in mind, the 6D is a contender. Now, not to start a war, with price and specs considered (based on Internet reviews) the D7100 is also in the running. Two bodies, brand doesn't matter, would be nice: one with short lens and one with long. My kit isn't to the point of vendor lock-in yet.

 

[Richard8971]

Wait. What? You're shooting sports at 200? Ok first thing - those dudes are shooting 1600 because no one really cares about noise for sports. Freeze the action, in focus, get a face and a ball and worry about noise some other day. Second, I've shot a lot with a 40D and 7D and yeah they get noisy but not really noticeably bad until 800 at least. I gotta wonder if you might be expecting too much. Also, are you shooting with short lenses and cropping real deep? Because that'll amplify noise like crazy.

+1 I couldn't agree more. I do a lot of wildlife shooting, especially hummingbirds and sometimes I get into the 1600-2000 (even 3200) ISO range with my 7D. I could care less about noise. Once I have processed the RAW file and make a print (even up to 11 x 14) noise is not an issue. The reason I have a camera is to capture a moment in time and to be able to share it with others. My 7D allows me to do that and nobody in the past 5 years of my taking photos have complained about "noise".

Grab your camera and go take some pics...

D

 

[icassell]

I'm pretty excited but still trying to decide whether to buy one or to buy a used 1D Mk IV. It will be interesting next week to see what the REAL final specs are and what the price will be.

 

[Richard8971]

Now, not to start a war, with price and specs considered (based on Internet reviews) the D7100 is also in the running.

Just FYI, my wife shoots Nikon and she has the D7000 and D7100 and she LOVES her D7100. It is an amazing camera and I love the image quality that it produces. Only three things keep me from switching from Canon to a Nikon D7100.

1) I already have thousands invested in Canon that I can't get a good enough return on...

2) I don't care for Nikon's ergonomics with the D7100, I don't like the way it feels in my hands. The 7D fits my hands perfectly and...

3) The buffer on the D7100 is unfortunately small. You are limited to about 7-8 shots in RAW vs the 23-25 shots I get with my 7D.

But IF I had to decide on image quality alone between the 7D and the D7100, I would choose the D7100 any day.

D

 

[Don Haines]

I should have clarified, my biggest beef is with noise. I can be standing next to someone shooting a Nikon and they're at IS01600, meanwhile I'm at 200 because even 400 starts to show way too much noise. I'm thinking it's the same sensor (at least tech wise) since it's the EXACT same mp amount. VERY fishy. I guess we'll see

Wait. What? You're shooting sports at 200? Ok first thing - those dudes are shooting 1600 because no one really cares about noise for sports. Freeze the action, in focus, get a face and a ball and worry about noise some other day. Second, I've shot a lot with a 40D and 7D and yeah they get noisy but not really noticeably bad until 800 at least. I gotta wonder if you might be expecting too much. Also, are you shooting with short lenses and cropping real deep? Because that'll amplify noise like crazy.

You can go pretty deep into the high ISO range and still get a decent picture....

60D, ISO12800 (as high as the camera goes) 1/30th second exposure, lens wide open, and the lighting is a mix of tungsten and fluorescent.... conditions about as bad as they get.... The only processing is to adjust white balance and the noise slider in lightroom....

and yes, I would love it if the 7D2 had less noise, but honestly, I find focusing issues to be far more important (at least for the way I shoot) than noise issues. However you slice it, the 7D2 should be better at both than my 60D and that is why I plan on upgrading.

 

[jrista]

I should have clarified, my biggest beef is with noise. I can be standing next to someone shooting a Nikon and they're at IS01600, meanwhile I'm at 200 because even 400 starts to show way too much noise. I'm thinking it's the same sensor (at least tech wise) since it's the EXACT same mp amount. VERY fishy. I guess we'll see

Wait. What? You're shooting sports at 200? Ok first thing - those dudes are shooting 1600 because no one really cares about noise for sports. Freeze the action, in focus, get a face and a ball and worry about noise some other day. Second, I've shot a lot with a 40D and 7D and yeah they get noisy but not really noticeably bad until 800 at least. I gotta wonder if you might be expecting too much. Also, are you shooting with short lenses and cropping real deep? Because that'll amplify noise like crazy.

You can go pretty deep into the high ISO range and still get a decent picture....

60D, ISO12800 (as high as the camera goes) 1/30th second exposure, lens wide open, and the lighting is a mix of tungsten and fluorescent.... conditions about as bad as they get.... The only processing is to adjust white balance and the noise slider in lightroom....

and yes, I would love it if the 7D2 had less noise, but honestly, I find focusing issues to be far more important (at least for the way I shoot) than noise issues. However you slice it, the 7D2 should be better at both than my 60D and that is why I plan on upgrading.

Just to point out, and please don't take this as any kind of diss of your photography, it's not: You can clearly see the effects of rather extreme NR in that photo. The woman's face is practically devoid of any kind of features. I think I might actually opt for a little bit of noise if it meant maintaining some skin features.

However, it would also be much better if you simply had a higher SNR to start with, and ideally lower RN, so that you didn't have to make the decision about whether to push NR so much that you lose facial features, or hold back and suffer the noisy consequences. It isn't "necessary" to have that, to have more SNR and less noise...but it's still better. It still improves the results in the end...and allows you to achieve those improved results with less effort (and fewer choices.)

 

[Don Haines]

I should have clarified, my biggest beef is with noise. I can be standing next to someone shooting a Nikon and they're at IS01600, meanwhile I'm at 200 because even 400 starts to show way too much noise. I'm thinking it's the same sensor (at least tech wise) since it's the EXACT same mp amount. VERY fishy. I guess we'll see

Wait. What? You're shooting sports at 200? Ok first thing - those dudes are shooting 1600 because no one really cares about noise for sports. Freeze the action, in focus, get a face and a ball and worry about noise some other day. Second, I've shot a lot with a 40D and 7D and yeah they get noisy but not really noticeably bad until 800 at least. I gotta wonder if you might be expecting too much. Also, are you shooting with short lenses and cropping real deep? Because that'll amplify noise like crazy.

You can go pretty deep into the high ISO range and still get a decent picture....

60D, ISO12800 (as high as the camera goes) 1/30th second exposure, lens wide open, and the lighting is a mix of tungsten and fluorescent.... conditions about as bad as they get.... The only processing is to adjust white balance and the noise slider in lightroom....

and yes, I would love it if the 7D2 had less noise, but honestly, I find focusing issues to be far more important (at least for the way I shoot) than noise issues. However you slice it, the 7D2 should be better at both than my 60D and that is why I plan on upgrading.

Just to point out, and please don't take this as any kind of diss of your photography, it's not: You can clearly see the effects of rather extreme NR in that photo. The woman's face is practically devoid of any kind of features. I think I might actually opt for a little bit of noise if it meant maintaining some skin features.

However, it would also be much better if you simply had a higher SNR to start with, and ideally lower RN, so that you didn't have to make the decision about whether to push NR so much that you lose facial features, or hold back and suffer the noisy consequences. It isn't "necessary" to have that, to have more SNR and less noise...but it's still better. It still improves the results in the end...and allows you to achieve those improved results with less effort (and fewer choices.)

I took the identical picture with a 5D2 a couple moments later.... It was definitely a better picture. A better sensor will definitely give you a better picture, but unlike an earlier poster's claim, ISO200 is not the point of no return.

And yes, I hope that they do improve the noise on the 7D2 beyond what we have come to expect from Canon... We should find out in a week

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

"or those expecting 4K video in a DLSR will be very disappointed. Canon sees no reason for this in a consumer camera yet. They told my boss only about 10% of people buy a 5D III for it's video capabilities. They are focusing on cinema market and want you to pay big dollars for the C300/500 or 1DC if you must have a DSLR with 4K. 5D IV will not get it IMO and at best we will see 1080p @ 60fps."

Great so they want to go from a lot buying the 5D2 for video to 10% for the 5D3 to 0.1% for the 5D4. Brilliant.

If this is true (and I still find it hard to believe that Canon could conceive of leaving 4k out of the 5D4, even as much as marketing droids have totally taken over, I still feel it will have 4k) and no Exmor-low ISO.... maybe Canon really and truly has lost the plot.
We'll see next year.

 

[wickidwombat]

How are you feeling?

I feel excited/fine because it's exactly what I expect from Canon and it doesn't obsolete the cameras I have :->

this exactly

however later when the prices drops down or there are some bargains around i'll probably grab one and stick it on the tamron 150-600 i think the 7D2 AF is gonna be killer

 

[Richard8971]

I took the identical picture with a 5D2 a couple moments later.... It was definitely a better picture. A better sensor will definitely give you a better picture, but unlike an earlier poster's claim, ISO200 is not the point of no return.

And yes, I hope that they do improve the noise on the 7D2 beyond what we have come to expect from Canon... We should find out in a week

I would never try and compare any crop sensor body next to a full frame body of similar resolution. They both have their advantages and disadvantage over each other. The primary advantage of crop is lower cost and usually speed (fps) compared to the FF counterpart.

This really isn't about FF vs crop. It's been proven again and again that FF sensors perform much better.

What does this mean? Well for me it means that I will buy the best camera I can afford for what I need to use it for and use the hell out of it until it breaks.

This is kind of like comparing cars against one another... each model offers something the other lacks and to get both advantages be ready to pay out the nose for it.

Cameras are no different. Not everyone can afford a 5D3 or 1DX. My opinion? Quit putting other people down because YOU own a 5D3 and brag how "superior" it is to a 7D or Rebel. Instead, show them how to use the camera to the best of the bodies ability and let them upgrade later if they feel like it.

Some of my best photos (to date) were taken by my VERY humble XTi and "non-L" 70-300. I still outsell some of those photos over what I have shot with my 7D and with my 5D2...

A true professional does not put others down because they have a "lesser" camera. Instead they teach the "newbie" HOW to learn to use his or her equipment and to learn it well.

D