I doubt this is even [CR1] but I guess it starts somewhere - 7D3 specs?

[jolyonralph]

I truly hope that they leave it at 20mp and give these pixels 5DIV quality...

If you're using the same pixels as on the 5DIV you'd only get a 12 megapixel sensor at APS-C size.


My guess is that Canon are going to put a newer, better, revision of the 24mpx sensor in the 7D III which will, with fewer focus points etc, eventually work its way down to the rest of the range (90D, M5 Mark II, Rebels, etc in approximately that order)

 

[monsieur_elegante]

30MP sensor
12 fps
No AA filter
1D X Mark II focusing

As a birder I'm super excited about these specs. I'm strongly of the opinion that AA filters are completely unnecessary (at least in nature photography). My basic understanding is that moire is more of an issue with man-made patterns -- but more than that, I photograph birds frequently with my cousin, who is a Nikon user (D810, no AA filter). He's never had a single bird picture with any problem with moire.

And FWIW, he also shoots events and weddings occasionally, and he's never felt the lack of an AA filter was a hindrance in any way.

Based on that alone i would very much welcome the benefits of removing the AA filter, with little to no reservation about the potential drawbacks that i personally have not seen in real-world usage (and certainly not in nature photography) .

 

[AlanF]

Moire is an insignificant problem with the 5DSR for my bird photography and the absence of an AA filter gives in my limited experience with telephoto lenses about a 10% boost in resolution.

 

[smithcon]

A 1.4x on top of a 1.6x is Canon's middle finger to the video community.

The D500 has a 15x crop on top of a 1.5x crop for 4K video. It's great for long lenses and wildlife. Not so much for anything else. Having noted that, people who complain about the crop on a 5D MkIV have never tried to shoot 4K video on a Nikon. Any Nikon. It's like having your nuts in a vice while someone is pulling out your fingernails. Not fun at all.

Video is definitely one area where Canon beats Nikon with an ugly stick.

Looks like Nikon has changed that around with the D850, according to many prominent reviewers on Youtube. Canon still has one big advantage in that dual-pixel AF is the only system out there considered good enough for continuous AF during video, but if you are not trying to AF during video, the D850 is earning pretty high video marks.

The 6D Mk2 is also unique with the full articulated screen, which would be another big advantage for shooting video. I wish Canon would get it's act together and back up that class-leading DPAF with some more camera development in both low-ISO DR and 4K. My lenses don't work on Nikons!

I've not been a video guy with my DSLRs, actually, although in the past few days my interest has shifted because of a series of projects and suddenly my long dormant video interests (I specialized in video for a decade in the pre-DSLR days) have been piqued. My mind is racing with all of the wonderful IQ advantages and DOF control a full frame video camera would present me with, but there is no camera in the Canon line-up right now that serves my (and many other still/4K hybrid shooters) interests well.

 

[JBSF]

I love my 7D2 and would be thrilled to see it updated with little more than the sensor from the 80D. 30mp sounds preposterously optimistic to me.

 

[Cthulhu]

I love my 7D2 and would be thrilled to see it updated with little more than the sensor from the 80D. 30mp sounds preposterously optimistic to me.

Yeahhh, no thanks. For 2k I'd me very upset if all it had was 2 year old sensor slapped on it. For things that really matter (high iso) the 7dmk2 still beats the 80d.

 

[Chaitanya]

30MP seems excessive, 24MP would be more than enough for sports/action. Also I hope the buffer gets a big bump up since Nikon D500 shoot upto 200frames in RAW.

 

[Phil Lowe]

30MP seems excessive, 24MP would be more than enough for sports/action. Also I hope the buffer gets a big bump up since Nikon D500 shoot upto 200frames in RAW.

The thing that makes the D500 so fast isn't just the size of the buffer, but the write speed of the XQD G-Series cards: 400MB/second! Even when I occasionally hit the buffer limit (I shoot raw + jpg), it's written to the card so fast that I can right back on the shutter release. Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind seeing a 7D3 with XQD cards in them.

 

[Sharlin]

30MP seems excessive, 24MP would be more than enough for sports/action. Also I hope the buffer gets a big bump up since Nikon D500 shoot upto 200frames in RAW.

The thing that makes the D500 so fast isn't just the size of the buffer, but the write speed of the XQD G-Series cards: 400MB/second! Even when I occasionally hit the buffer limit (I shoot raw + jpg), it's written to the card so fast that I can right back on the shutter release. Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind seeing a 7D3 with XQD cards in them.

CFast 2.0 can do 400MB/s as well. The 1DX2 top write speed appears to be around 250MB/s with a CFast 2 card.

 

[SteveM]

I am heavily invested in Canon with other bodies and lenses and reluctant to move elsewhere, however, with this 7D mklll image quality is really paramount now. Not hugely interested in the bells and whistles, I expect the quality of the final image to at least match that of the D500, if not I will have to seriously consider what I spend this slice of money on, I am not prepared to wait a further 5 yrs for a solid D500 competitor.

 

[privatebydesign]

I am heavily invested in Canon with other bodies and lenses and reluctant to move elsewhere, however, with this 7D mklll image quality is really paramount now. Not hugely interested in the bells and whistles, I expect the quality of the final image to at least match that of the D500, if not I will have to seriously consider what I spend this slice of money on, I am not prepared to wait a further 5 yrs for a solid D500 competitor.

Start divesting now then.

 

[tron]

I am heavily invested in Canon with other bodies and lenses and reluctant to move elsewhere, however, with this 7D mklll image quality is really paramount now. Not hugely interested in the bells and whistles, I expect the quality of the final image to at least match that of the D500, if not I will have to seriously consider what I spend this slice of money on, I am not prepared to wait a further 5 yrs for a solid D500 competitor.

I agree but I believe the only practical way to achieve this is to keep the mpixel count to 20 just like the D500 and implement the 5DIV sensor's technology. 30Mp and CFAST are totally BS. Fast CF UDMA 7 cards can handle the rate just fine (and maybe 4K is BS for what 7DIII is for).

 

[Sharlin]

I am heavily invested in Canon with other bodies and lenses and reluctant to move elsewhere, however, with this 7D mklll image quality is really paramount now.

I agree but I believe the only practical way to achieve this is to keep the mpixel count to 20 just like the D500 and implement the 5DIV sensor's technology.

Again, more pixels never makes the image quality worse, except with very old/small sensors where the overhead of wiring and microlens gaps is greater the smaller the photosites are.

 

[SteveM]

I am heavily invested in Canon with other bodies and lenses and reluctant to move elsewhere, however, with this 7D mklll image quality is really paramount now. Not hugely interested in the bells and whistles, I expect the quality of the final image to at least match that of the D500, if not I will have to seriously consider what I spend this slice of money on, I am not prepared to wait a further 5 yrs for a solid D500 competitor.

Start divesting now then.

Not necessary. I use one lens only for all my wildlife (not one of the big whites). That lens would be transferred to one of my full frame bodies. So if Canon can't hit the spot with the 7D mklll I would need one wildlife lens only from Nikon if that were the route I chose to take. I'm not particularly a 'birder' so I have options. The rest of my Canon gear is top drawer and fulfills it's respective job/s very well be they professional or fun.
I have high expectations in the gear I pay a lot of money for (which are always met). I expect Canon to meet these expectations in the 7D mklll.

 

[Chaitanya]

30MP seems excessive, 24MP would be more than enough for sports/action. Also I hope the buffer gets a big bump up since Nikon D500 shoot upto 200frames in RAW.

The thing that makes the D500 so fast isn't just the size of the buffer, but the write speed of the XQD G-Series cards: 400MB/second! Even when I occasionally hit the buffer limit (I shoot raw + jpg), it's written to the card so fast that I can right back on the shutter release. Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind seeing a 7D3 with XQD cards in them.

CFast and SD UHS-II(if Canon doesn't gimp on it) will certainly help alleviate the write speed issue of high-speed cameras(although compared to Sony both Nikons and Canon dont lock out while writing to card which is a big plus in field). Also both Nikon D500 and D5 have an artificial limit of 200 shots before camera locks out in order to save shutter from burning out. Most birders will be shooting in RAW and with 30MP, files are going to get huge and with 12fps amount of data to be written onto card will massive so a faster card interface would be a must(even with 24MP sensor). sadly Cameramemoryspeed hasn't yet reviewed the 1DX mk II in terms of CFast speed(or infact any CFast card for that matter) so we wont know how well the CFast works in these types of cameras.

 

[privatebydesign]

I am heavily invested in Canon with other bodies and lenses and reluctant to move elsewhere, however, with this 7D mklll image quality is really paramount now. Not hugely interested in the bells and whistles, I expect the quality of the final image to at least match that of the D500, if not I will have to seriously consider what I spend this slice of money on, I am not prepared to wait a further 5 yrs for a solid D500 competitor.

Start divesting now then.

Not necessary. I use one lens only for all my wildlife (not one of the big whites). That lens would be transferred to one of my full frame bodies. So if Canon can't hit the spot with the 7D mklll I would need one wildlife lens only from Nikon if that were the route I chose to take. I'm not particularly a 'birder' so I have options. The rest of my Canon gear is top drawer and fulfills it's respective job/s very well be they professional or fun.
I have high expectations in the gear I pay a lot of money for (which are always met). I expect Canon to meet these expectations in the 7D mklll.

They won’t. That was my point, the IQ will not match or better the D500 so get one now and be done with it if it is so important, if it isn’t so important who cares if you say you might buy this or that?

 

[tron]

I am heavily invested in Canon with other bodies and lenses and reluctant to move elsewhere, however, with this 7D mklll image quality is really paramount now.

I agree but I believe the only practical way to achieve this is to keep the mpixel count to 20 just like the D500 and implement the 5DIV sensor's technology.

Again, more pixels never makes the image quality worse, except with very old/small sensors where the overhead of wiring and microlens gaps is greater the smaller the photosites are.

They are pointless though if you cannot take advantage of cropping at 100% which is where a birding camera sometimes is used to. 5DsR can be taken advantage of this since it can be successfully cropped even at 100% with a little better IQ than 7D2 (and they have the same pixel pitch).

 

[SteveM]

I am heavily invested in Canon with other bodies and lenses and reluctant to move elsewhere, however, with this 7D mklll image quality is really paramount now. Not hugely interested in the bells and whistles, I expect the quality of the final image to at least match that of the D500, if not I will have to seriously consider what I spend this slice of money on, I am not prepared to wait a further 5 yrs for a solid D500 competitor.

Start divesting now then.

Not necessary. I use one lens only for all my wildlife (not one of the big whites). That lens would be transferred to one of my full frame bodies. So if Canon can't hit the spot with the 7D mklll I would need one wildlife lens only from Nikon if that were the route I chose to take. I'm not particularly a 'birder' so I have options. The rest of my Canon gear is top drawer and fulfills it's respective job/s very well be they professional or fun.
I have high expectations in the gear I pay a lot of money for (which are always met). I expect Canon to meet these expectations in the 7D mklll.

They won’t. That was my point, the IQ will not match or better the D500 so get one now and be done with it if it is so important, if it isn’t so important who cares if you say you might buy this or that?

REMOVED BY MOD

 

[Alejandro]

I'll do a realistic list:

24 Mpx (I'd say a polished 80D sensor).
12 fps. (14 would be a 1DX2 killer but...).
4k@30 fps. (Again, 4k@60 fps would be a 1DX2 killer but... it'll sell like hot bread)
FHD@120 fps.
I'd say 70/90% AF Point spread coverage. More than a few with -3 EV (If not all of them).
Dual Digic 7. (More than capable of handling 12 fps @ 24mpx).
DPAF (Of course).
CFast and CF Slots. (If not dual CFast if 4k@60).

 

[unfocused]

...the IQ will not match or better the D500...

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The 7DII is not that far behind the D500 as it is and as ISO climbs, the advantages of the D500 begins to fade. Even at lower ISO, the only significant difference is in dynamic range and given that Canon will certainly switch to on-chic ADC, that will narrow.

Perhaps the D500 will remain marginally better, but in terms of real-world use it may not make much difference, just as the differences between the 7DII and the D500 aren't all that significant today.