Imaging Resource has studio samples 7D ll all ISO'S

It looks to be maybe 1/8 stop better than the 70D, even at ISO 25600, and 1:1, they are very close. The 5D MK III is noticeably better at ISO 26500, I'll not try to determine the number of stops advantage, but its going to be considerable. A FF sensor has a huge light gathering advantage.
 
Upvote 0
Well, it betters the Sony A77 and the Pentax K3 at 3200iso nicely, makes the 7D look very bad old too.

As has been said, FF really shows the differences on things like this, the 1DX at 3200 is remarkable by comparison.
 
Upvote 0
Thanks for the post. It's always nice to have a look using the comparometer. Good to see the successor ought to be good for another stop. FF is still the low light king though. A good raw conversion on the 7D2 should make anyone upgrading happy with this camera. I wonder, with Adobe in the cloud, will their support come quicker than it used to?
 
Upvote 0
drjlo said:
Since 7D II RAW images are unlikely supported yet, are we basically looking at the difference between in-body JPEG engines?

Yeah. The image quality differences between 7D/70D could very well be due solely to greater processing power. We won't know anything, really, until we get RAWs.

That said, I compared it to the 1DIV and the jpegs look very similar, with the edge going to the larger sensor. It definitely looks better than the D7100. The A6000 looks better, as does the Fuji XTrans. I've always thought that Fuji's real strength was in their jpeg engine and this is pretty solid proof of that for me. The 7DII should be just fine for a high end crop but the sensor doesn't seem to be much more than a slightly juiced 70D sensor.
 
Upvote 0