Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II

[WillT]

A crop sensor is a very valuable addition to any wildlife shooters kit.

I was not trying to say that crop sensors are bad, I have one. I was just saying the 7d MK ii has suspect IQ through the ISO range. I also found the focus system to be ok at best when tracking birds using all the AF points. Tracking people, boats, large objects and such it nailed them!

I was really excited to try out the AF system as I thought that even if the pictures were somewhat soft I would get more keepers. I ended up going back to selecting the points I want and shooting they way I have on every other camera. Also I thought the IR would mean better low light tracking and it did not :/

The 7D2 is a tricky bit of kit no doubt about it. If you have a good one, and you put the time in to get the AF under control, I think you will get some great results. But, it's not for everybody.

Using all the AF points for BIF is probably not going to work. You need to limit to 15 pt small zone or one of the expanded point modes. You'll never keep a flying bird in critical focus using all 65 pts. That's just not realistic. If you lock onto a bird using 15 pts it will stay locked on for a while even if it gets out from under those points. It still anticipates where the bird is if you follow me. I'd try that and see how you make out. You're going to have to meet the AF halfway if you want good results.

I agree, I was just under the impression that the AF system was revolutionary or a game changer. I more than likely had to high of expectations for the AF system Here is an example of it failing in broad day light. http://imgur.com/a/VAgAa I found the AF system to be similar to the 1Dx and 5d3. Great Eagle shot!

 

[Marauder]

Still haven't had enough many cups of caffeine poured into me eyelids, but I see Digital PReview mentioning that it's disappointing that we had to wait so long for the 7D Mark II.
Now they know how many of us feel about their reviews of the Canon 1D X and Nikon D4s and a few other bodies...
(A rumour says that it's a Mr Godot that's carrying out those reviews. We just have to wait a little longer.)

Also, it looks like the primary "cons" they've found are such that I wouldn't consider them to be top priority for what I believe to be the typical buyer of 7D's. Softish video, lacking touch screen and other items seemingly more important for those shooting via LiveView. Perhaps their overall conclusion and score is fair, but as I read it I would expect a slightly higher total score. How they weigh the numbers from their test results are perhaps the same kind of mystery as it is with DxO's sensor testing.

I though it was generally fair. I wouldn't have put so much space into the low ISO DR testing since the results were to be expected and didn't reflect the 7D2's intended High speed/High ISO/ Long Lens use. But that's what passes for IQ testing these days so no surprise there. You need a little DR "blood in the water" to attract the trolls.

The article hinted at some interesting information regarding high ISO Noise management in Canon sensor's but stated that would be covered in a later article. That would actually have been more valuable information than the usual "shadows when pushed 5 stops" tests. Interested to read the follow up on that. Kudos to the Sony sensor's though. They are amazing.

edit...I just checked and as of today I've shot nearly 5000 frames with the 7D2 and I can only find 6 at base ISO. All of those will require additional contrast to achieve a nice looking image and none have any clipping. I suppose there are folks for whom base ISO DR on the 7D2 will be critical but so far I don't seem to be one of them.

I concur. I liked the review. I think they spent a bit more time dwelling on low ISO noise than was probably warranted for the target market. I'm firmly in the target market and I really don't care about that "issue." Or the lack of a touch screen or soft video.

On the other hand, I see the trolls have already been pooping in the thread. No surprise there--it's all they do! Gravitated to the few negatives and tried to spin the entire review as negative--probably hoping they could discourage the gullible from reading the review at all, or just aiming them at the portions with "issues." Decidedly ridiculous and childish--but very predictable.

The primary difference between DPReview and DXO Mark is that DPReview works very hard to present a balanced assessment. Like DXO Mark, they still gravitate towards an issue that matters more to them than to me--low ISO DR. But unlike DXO Mark, they look at the entire package when they make their assessment. Overall I liked the review. And, in spite of the spin doctoring that has gone on in this thread trying to convince the reader that this review proves that the 7D Mark II is minimal upgrade, the reality is that DPReview's conclusion is that: "It would be easy to write off the EOS 7D Mark II as just an incremental upgrade to the original 7D, but that would be a serious mistake." And it would be a mistake--but it's a mistake the trolls and DRones would love to continue to foster!

 

[Marauder]

A crop sensor is a very valuable addition to any wildlife shooters kit.

I was not trying to say that crop sensors are bad, I have one. I was just saying the 7d MK ii has suspect IQ through the ISO range. I also found the focus system to be ok at best when tracking birds using all the AF points. Tracking people, boats, large objects and such it nailed them!

I was really excited to try out the AF system as I thought that even if the pictures were somewhat soft I would get more keepers. I ended up going back to selecting the points I want and shooting they way I have on every other camera. Also I thought the IR would mean better low light tracking and it did not :/

The 7D2 is a tricky bit of kit no doubt about it. If you have a good one, and you put the time in to get the AF under control, I think you will get some great results. But, it's not for everybody.

Using all the AF points for BIF is probably not going to work. You need to limit to 15 pt small zone or one of the expanded point modes. You'll never keep a flying bird in critical focus using all 65 pts. That's just not realistic. If you lock onto a bird using 15 pts it will stay locked on for a while even if it gets out from under those points. It still anticipates where the bird is if you follow me. I'd try that and see how you make out. You're going to have to meet the AF halfway if you want good results.

I posted this to the BIF thread earlier today. Center 15pt small zone AF. I have a sequence of about a dozen of these and they are all sharp despite some very erratic movement. The AF works great if you put the effort into it. It took a while for me to get it dialed in.

That is an awesome shot!!!

 

[Ryan85]

Still haven't had enough many cups of caffeine poured into me eyelids, but I see Digital PReview mentioning that it's disappointing that we had to wait so long for the 7D Mark II.
Now they know how many of us feel about their reviews of the Canon 1D X and Nikon D4s and a few other bodies...
(A rumour says that it's a Mr Godot that's carrying out those reviews. We just have to wait a little longer.)

Also, it looks like the primary "cons" they've found are such that I wouldn't consider them to be top priority for what I believe to be the typical buyer of 7D's. Softish video, lacking touch screen and other items seemingly more important for those shooting via LiveView. Perhaps their overall conclusion and score is fair, but as I read it I would expect a slightly higher total score. How they weigh the numbers from their test results are perhaps the same kind of mystery as it is with DxO's sensor testing.

I though it was generally fair. I wouldn't have put so much space into the low ISO DR testing since the results were to be expected and didn't reflect the 7D2's intended High speed/High ISO/ Long Lens use. But that's what passes for IQ testing these days so no surprise there. You need a little DR "blood in the water" to attract the trolls.

The article hinted at some interesting information regarding high ISO Noise management in Canon sensor's but stated that would be covered in a later article. That would actually have been more valuable information than the usual "shadows when pushed 5 stops" tests. Interested to read the follow up on that. Kudos to the Sony sensor's though. They are amazing.

edit...I just checked and as of today I've shot nearly 5000 frames with the 7D2 and I can only find 6 at base ISO. All of those will require additional contrast to achieve a nice looking image and none have any clipping. I suppose there are folks for whom base ISO DR on the 7D2 will be critical but so far I don't seem to be one of them.

I concur. I liked the review. I think they spent a bit more time dwelling on low ISO noise than was probably warranted for the target market. I'm firmly in the target market and I really don't care about that "issue." Or the lack of a touch screen or soft video.

On the other hand, I see the trolls have already been pooping in the thread. No surprise there--it's all they do! Gravitated to the few negatives and tried to spin the entire review as negative--probably hoping they could discourage the gullible from reading the review at all, or just aiming them at the portions with "issues." Decidedly ridiculous and childish--but very predictable.

The primary difference between DPReview and DXO Mark is that DPReview works very hard to present a balanced assessment. Like DXO Mark, they still gravitate towards an issue that matters more to them than to me--low ISO DR. But unlike DXO Mark, they look at the entire package when they make their assessment. Overall I liked the review. And, in spite of the spin doctoring that has gone on in this thread trying to convince the reader that this review proves that the 7D Mark II is minimal upgrade, the reality is that DPReview's conclusion is that: "It would be easy to write off the EOS 7D Mark II as just an incremental upgrade to the original 7D, but that would be a serious mistake." And it would be a mistake--but it's a mistake the trolls and DRones would love to continue to foster!

+1!

 

[Ryan85]

Great eagle shot GraFax!! What lens did you have paired to the the 7d2?

 

[Ryan85]

Thanks. I was guessing you used the 400 5.6. It's a great lens. I use it with the 5d3 and I just got the 7d2 tonight. I'm looking forward to trying that combo this weekend!

 

[MichaelHodges]

I posted this to the BIF thread earlier today. Center 15pt small zone AF. I have a sequence of about a dozen of these and they are all sharp despite some very erratic movement. The AF works great if you put the effort into it. It took a while for me to get it dialed in.

Really nice capture but the noise is quite high.

 

[MichaelHodges]

Generalize much? That statement could not be less true. Many of the worlds best wildlife photographers were still using 7D's as recently as a month ago, That was when they switched to 7D2's. You should get out more or find some new "professional" wildlife photographers to shoot with.

I've been shooting with the world's best in Montana the last three months, and none of them would use a 7D or 7DII as a doorstop.

The sensor is ancient tech.

Canon's high MP, APS-C cameras are great for situations where you control the light, such as fashion or portrait. But when filming wild animals during winter inversions, they're just not up to the task. FF is.

 

[MichaelHodges]

I though it was generally fair. I wouldn't have put so much space into the low ISO DR testing since the results were to be expected and didn't reflect the 7D2's intended High speed/High ISO/ Long Lens use.

The 7DII isn't intended for high ISO use. That's the 6D and 5DIII. Oh, and the 7DII isn't intended for low ISO, low noise landscape use either, that's intended for the 6D and 5D III.


See where this is going?

I concur. I liked the review. I think they spent a bit more time dwelling on low ISO noise than was probably warranted for the target market.

A $1900 DSLR market isn't interested in low ISO noise levels?

 

[Ryan85]

Generalize much? That statement could not be less true. Many of the worlds best wildlife photographers were still using 7D's as recently as a month ago, That was when they switched to 7D2's. You should get out more or find some new "professional" wildlife photographers to shoot with.

I've been shooting with the world's best in Montana the last three months, and none of them would use a 7D or 7DII as a doorstop.

The sensor is ancient tech.

Canon's high MP, APS-C cameras are great for situations where you control the light, such as fashion or portrait. But when filming wild animals during winter inversions, they're just not up to the task. FF is.

Really? The 7d & 7d2 not even as a door stop? Everyone has a option whether they prefer to crop a ff image or use a crop sensor for the extra reach. Both ways work it's personal prefrence. FF is not the end all be all and isn't the only tool the "pro's" use. There are plenty of wildlife photographers who make there living shooting a crop sensor.

 

[Ryan85]

Thanks. I was guessing you used the 400 5.6. It's a great lens. I use it with the 5d3 and I just got the 7d2 tonight. I'm looking forward to trying that combo this weekend!

Awesome! I don't think you'll be disappointed. I thought the learning curve was a bit steep in the beginning, even coming from the 5D3. You'll love it with the 400 5.6 but it needs a lot of light for the best results. I haven't been able to get out since last weekend due to poor weather. Have fun!

Thanks I will! The 400 5.6 does need lots of light but it's a great lens for its price and what I could afford when I got it. I'll be trying my 70-200 2.8 is 2 with the 7d2 as well.

 

[Ryan85]

Hey Ryan85 - Too funny dude. Like I said in the other thread. There is always one.

Yep lol My thoughts exactly. Maybe all the pros who use crop sensors were in colarodo since all the pros he was with in Montana were shooting FF. Good grief.

 

[Marauder]

I though it was generally fair. I wouldn't have put so much space into the low ISO DR testing since the results were to be expected and didn't reflect the 7D2's intended High speed/High ISO/ Long Lens use.

The 7DII isn't intended for high ISO use. That's the 6D and 5DIII. Oh, and the 7DII isn't intended for low ISO, low noise landscape use either, that's intended for the 6D and 5D III.


See where this is going?

I concur. I liked the review. I think they spent a bit more time dwelling on low ISO noise than was probably warranted for the target market.

A $1900 DSLR market isn't interested in low ISO noise levels?

That must be why Arthur Morris won't touch one. Oh wait, he IS using one! But he hates it because its so noisy. Oh, wait...hmm...seems like he LOVES it for wildlife and loves the results at fairly high ISO's! Oh, and pros won't touch it---except there are innumerable reviews of professional wildlife and sports photographers who are using, are loving it and say it's an amazing camera!

See where this is going? 8)

 

[Ryan85]

Lol

 

[Ryan85]

I though it was generally fair. I wouldn't have put so much space into the low ISO DR testing since the results were to be expected and didn't reflect the 7D2's intended High speed/High ISO/ Long Lens use.

The 7DII isn't intended for high ISO use. That's the 6D and 5DIII. Oh, and the 7DII isn't intended for low ISO, low noise landscape use either, that's intended for the 6D and 5D III.


See where this is going?

I concur. I liked the review. I think they spent a bit more time dwelling on low ISO noise than was probably warranted for the target market.

A $1900 DSLR market isn't interested in low ISO noise levels?

That must be why Arthur Morris won't touch one. Oh wait, he IS using one! But he hates it because its so noisy. Oh, wait...hmm...seems like he LOVES it for wildlife and loves the results at fairly high ISO's! Oh, and pros won't touch it---except there are innumerable reviews of professional wildlife and sports photographers who are using, are loving it and say it's an amazing camera!

See where this is going? 8)

but....but....but...... my "professional photographer" friends say....crop sensor bad...full frame good.... ;D

LMAO!

 

[Marauder]

I though it was generally fair. I wouldn't have put so much space into the low ISO DR testing since the results were to be expected and didn't reflect the 7D2's intended High speed/High ISO/ Long Lens use.

The 7DII isn't intended for high ISO use. That's the 6D and 5DIII. Oh, and the 7DII isn't intended for low ISO, low noise landscape use either, that's intended for the 6D and 5D III.


See where this is going?

I concur. I liked the review. I think they spent a bit more time dwelling on low ISO noise than was probably warranted for the target market.

A $1900 DSLR market isn't interested in low ISO noise levels?

That must be why Arthur Morris won't touch one. Oh wait, he IS using one! But he hates it because its so noisy. Oh, wait...hmm...seems like he LOVES it for wildlife and loves the results at fairly high ISO's! Oh, and pros won't touch it---except there are innumerable reviews of professional wildlife and sports photographers who are using, are loving it and say it's an amazing camera!

See where this is going? 8)

but....but....but...... my "professional photographer" friends say....crop sensor bad...full frame good.... ;D

LOL It's like a series of parrots from the bad side of town.

"GAWK--Full frame!"
"GAWK--Exmor!"
"GAWK--Mirrorless!"
"GAWK--*whistle* Nikon!!!"

:

 

[MichaelHodges]

Really? The 7d & 7d2 not even as a door stop?

That was a quote from the best wildlife photographer in the Rockies, not mine.

 

[MichaelHodges]

Canon's high mega-pixel APS-C cameras fair poorly in crepuscular conditions, which are usually the best time to film the charismatic mega-fauna found in the Northern Rockies.

I went out with an open mind the last two years, shooting Canon crop and FF in the same conditions. The results speak for themselves.

But I agree, use what works for you.

If you are shooting birds in brightly lit beach environments or using flash, grab the 7DII. If you are unable to control the light and shoot in crepuscular conditions, go FF.

And apparently, the target market for the 7DII is those who don't care about image quality. Interesting rationalization.

 

[Ryan85]

And apparently, the target market for the 7DII is those who don't care about image quality. Interesting rationalization.


[/quote]

say that out loud to yourself. Not a smart comment or a way to make your point and add to the discussion. Makes you look petty that not everyone agrees with your point. Not one person who buys that camera thinks that. I get sarcasm but come on. The 7d2 is a very good camera. Is it a 1DX? No but its a very good camera at a fraction of the price. Look at some of the images people have posted on this site or other sites and you'll see it's very capable of taking very good photos which have good image quality. It's a addition to a wildlife shooters kit imo and can complement a ff.

 

[MichaelHodges]

I think it's fair comment when people are reduced to excusing away low ISO noise and DR quality.