Review: Sensor Performance of the 7D Mark II

[dtaylor]

1. an extra 2-3 stops over what Canon delivers now actually would make a big difference for a lot of the shots where it matters at all. It's exactly what you'd need to pull off many dappled forest scenes and such, even if it won't cover every single HDR shot.

It really isn't. That's why people struggle to produce meaningful real world examples whenever this debate comes up. It's easy to underexpose the corner of a bedroom by 5ev. Not so easy to produce a pair of publishable images where the Canon just had to have bracketing while the Sony did not.

2. those GNDs only work for a very, very few simple types of scenes. They are totally useless for most scenes including virtually any forest scene or any of the jrista interior type shots.

Why do you think this is a counter argument in the age of HDR?

3. multi-shot HDR can work in more scenarios, but it doesn't work out that nicely when there is motion be it from water, a breeze or subject's own motion.

It's rare that this is a problem. Extremely rare. Shooting through tall grass in the wind with the sun directly behind the grass rare. Except...Exmor cannot handle that in one frame either.

It also tends to require slow tripod work (you can sometimes do hand-held, but it tends to leave at least some weird artifacts here and there that can be a beast to clean up;

I don't know where you're getting this. Hand held is stupid easy with a fast DSLR, especially with IS.

LOL how typical. Every single thing the Canon is best at makes a real difference, but anything it's not absolutely doesn't matter expect just barely at all in the only the most extreme scenarios.

Nice strawman.

 

[dtaylor]

EVFs would have to have an advantage, which they don't except for video and manual focusing.

EVFs are awesome for exposure. You can shoot in M and reliably, consistently nail the exposures you want no matter how complex the scene or lighting. And you are a better judge of what you want then any AE algorithm.

 

[scyrene]

With all the astro talk and the full moon, I thought I'd mention my favorite new astro accessory - the Canon 10x42L IS. Those things are way better than I ever expected them to be.

I have the 18x50 IS binoculars and they exceeded my expectations too

 

[Lee Jay]

With all the astro talk and the full moon, I thought I'd mention my favorite new astro accessory - the Canon 10x42L IS. Those things are way better than I ever expected them to be.

I have the 18x50 IS binoculars and they exceeded my expectations too

I've tried all of them (literally). I have the 18x50s and 15x50s at work. The 10x42s just blow them all away, and my second favorite are the 12x36IIs.

 

[raptor3x]

8k, stereo, HDR, 120fps, extreme wide gamut EVF might get close; not feasible now, but I'd imagine it will be in time

Anyway, in some ways even what can be done now (although hasn't yet) could make an EVF bring quite some pluses over an OVF for some types of shooting (one thing to keep in mind is that most stills are still taken as 2D not 3D and the 3D OVF can give one a rather different impression of what the 2D shoot will look like just due to that alone) although in other cases yeah I'm not sure it would cut it.

For me, the most exciting aspects of the EVF are that they should be able to make them obnoxiously large (OM-1 size or even larger) and that I can imagine the potential to make "mirror" blackout almost imperceptible. I've been excited about the possibility of the gigantic VF ever since my first EVF in an ancient Canon S3 IS.

 

[Lee Jay]

For me, the most exciting aspects of the EVF are that they should be able to make them obnoxiously large (OM-1 size or even larger) and that I can imagine the potential to make "mirror" blackout almost imperceptible. I've been excited about the possibility of the gigantic VF ever since my first EVF in an ancient Canon S3 IS.

If a gigantic VF is what you want, buy a Hoodman Hoodloupe 3 and put in on your SLR's LCD. If you think a magnified 1/2" EVF is big, try a magnified 3".

 

[sdsr]

BTW, Sony fans, IBIS may be great for many commonly used focal length lenses, but it is severely challenged when using supertelephoto lenses.

Perhaps, but even if IBIS is less effective for longer lenses, it will surely be better than nothing (it will be nice to get some sort of stabilization for my Canon 135L). And if the lens has IS you can decide to use that instead, just as you can now when attaching Panasonic lenses to Olympus bodies (apparently Sony's IBIS works in conjunction with, rather than as an alternative to, the IS in Sony lenses).

 

[sdsr]

The A7s and r? They're just over grown compacts with large sensors. They should cost under $1k and be sold in the checkout line at Walmart.

I hope writing that made you feel better.

 

[fragilesi]

LOL how typical. Every single thing the Canon is best at makes a real difference, but anything it's not absolutely doesn't matter expect just barely at all in the only the most extreme scenarios. LOL. How typical.

This is a nutshell is where we're all going wrong. Everyone likes to play the victim on the Internet fora these days whenever someone disagrees with them and we end up with the sarcasm from other posts about "worship" of a brand or Marsu42's "laggard" stuff and Simpsons pictures - amusing as it was . Can't we just discuss these things? (And yes DRoners was a reverse example, I'm not suggesting it's one-sided)

I don't know how many times many of us have said it in terms of the DR question on the sensors. We get it, we understand why you want it. We are not belittling it. So let's just get that straight. We might not see it as the huge "game changer" that you do but we do see it. I would like it, there I said it . . . again.

All that said I do think that the 7dII is a fine achievement. I struggle to understand why putting an extra stop or two of DR in a camera at this price range makes it a "game changer" despite other obvious weaknesses while at the same time putting a professional grade AF system, improved metering, beast like FPS, flicker free lighting capability etc etc in a sport / action camera at that price level is not. How can that make any kind of sense?

Because I like action photography Canon has the right priorities for me but on top of that it looks like there will be full frame models in 2015. Let's see what they have been doing there before we judge. Some of the features on the 7dII were not even guessed at and even with these cameras it's obvious that Canon have been working on sensor tech albeit incrementally.

 

[Marsu42]

This is a nutshell is where we're all going wrong. Everyone likes to play the victim on the Internet fora these days whenever someone disagrees with them and we end up with the sarcasm from other posts about "worship" of a brand or Marsu42's "laggard" stuff and Simpsons pictures - amusing as it was . Can't we just discuss these things?

The term "laggard" is not sarcasm, it's social science and as "discussing things" as it goes! The diffusion of innovations is well researched, I should know, I wrote my diploma about it ... for the basics see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations

It's about different kinds of people adopting new technology and trickling down this information via social channels - the very thing that's happening right now right here. Innovation can stop at any time, not everything is adopted or replaces the old tech entirely.

Unsurprisingly, this Canon forum follows the Canon brand design - it's rather conservative and definitely isn't a stronghold of innovators or even early adopters. This is neither a "good" or "bad" thing, just an observation and it explains the reluctance about new camera designs. Heck, even Magic Lantern isn't widespread among Canon users even if its features beats most other camera systems out there.

As for the comics: Well, I can't help it, discussions on CR aren't exactly a serious issue for me and some situations simply remind me of a Simpsons scene. Though I hope they help to lighten the mood a bit

 

[dtaylor]

Unsurprisingly, this Canon forum follows the Canon brand design - it's rather conservative and definitely isn't a stronghold of innovators or even early adopters. This is neither a "good" or "bad" thing, just an observation and it explains the reluctance about new camera designs. Heck, even Magic Lantern isn't widespread among Canon users even if its features beats most other camera systems out there.

Another place where debate goes wrong is when one side tries to explain the other side's disagreement as something other then honest and reasoned disagreement. You see this in politics all the time when side A declares side B is against XYZ because B is evil.

No one here has ever said they are against more low ISO DR. They just don't feel the difference is as large or meaningful as those who continually ask for it.

 

[meywd]

This is a nutshell is where we're all going wrong. Everyone likes to play the victim on the Internet fora these days whenever someone disagrees with them and we end up with the sarcasm from other posts about "worship" of a brand or Marsu42's "laggard" stuff and Simpsons pictures - amusing as it was . Can't we just discuss these things?

The term "laggard" is not sarcasm, it's social science and as "discussing things" as it goes! The diffusion of innovations is well researched, I should know, I wrote my diploma about it ... for the basics see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations

It's about different kinds of people adopting new technology and trickling down this information via social channels - the very thing that's happening right now right here. Innovation can stop at any time, not everything is adopted or replaces the old tech entirely.

Unsurprisingly, this Canon forum follows the Canon brand design - it's rather conservative and definitely isn't a stronghold of innovators or even early adopters. This is neither a "good" or "bad" thing, just an observation and it explains the reluctance about new camera designs. Heck, even Magic Lantern isn't widespread among Canon users even if its features beats most other camera systems out there.

As for the comics: Well, I can't help it, discussions on CR aren't exactly a serious issue for me and some situations simply remind me of a Simpsons scene. Though I hope they help to lighten the mood a bit

Yeah took a course on start-ups at a start-up incubator and they talked about this chart, though you can't apply it to magic lantern because it is not a complete product, if it was a company with a dedicated team and there was support and a stable product then it would spread more, btw both my cameras has ML and i love it, but living on the bleeding edge is not easy, if i didn't try it on the 600D i would never risk trying it on the 5D III, and still i searched the ML forums for a bit of assurances that although its not a guarantee most of it is stable before i installed it.

As for the sarcasm, i agree its better to tone it down in general, however i do enjoy your posts

 

[scyrene]

With all the astro talk and the full moon, I thought I'd mention my favorite new astro accessory - the Canon 10x42L IS. Those things are way better than I ever expected them to be.

I have the 18x50 IS binoculars and they exceeded my expectations too

I've tried all of them (literally). I have the 18x50s and 15x50s at work. The 10x42s just blow them all away, and my second favorite are the 12x36IIs.

Fair enough! I like how the 18s have a similar field of view to my camera at 1000mm, gives me a good idea what to expect.

 

[AvTvM]

if ML was fully endorsed by Canon, a much higher percentage of Canon owners would probably install it on their Canon cameras.

I for one would never put unsupported third-party firmware on any electronic device. Especially not, when I am told by the manufacturer that it voids warranty on the product. And I also do not open iPhones oder disassemble Canon cameras physically. I am not Roger Cicala .. I would not get it back together and working again. ;D

And I guess the majority of Canon users handles it the same way.

 

[scyrene]

if ML was fully endorsed by Canon, a much higher percentage of Canon owners would probably install it on their Canon cameras.

I for one would never put unsupported third-party firmware on any electronic device. Especially not, when I am told by the manufacturer that it voids warranty on the product. And I also do not open iPhones oder disassemble Canon cameras physically. I am not Roger Cicala .. I would not get it back together and working again. ;D

And I guess the majority of Canon users handles it the same way.

I'm sure others can confirm this, but I thought Canon explicitly said installing ML does not void warranties?

 

[Don Haines]

if ML was fully endorsed by Canon, a much higher percentage of Canon owners would probably install it on their Canon cameras.

I for one would never put unsupported third-party firmware on any electronic device. Especially not, when I am told by the manufacturer that it voids warranty on the product. And I also do not open iPhones oder disassemble Canon cameras physically. I am not Roger Cicala .. I would not get it back together and working again. ;D

And I guess the majority of Canon users handles it the same way.

Personally, I laugh at "no serviceable parts inside" stickers.... and yes, I have opened cameras and iPhones and replaced parts.... but then, that's part of what I do for a living and there are microscopes and surface mount soldering stations in the lab

 

[Marsu42]

I for one would never put unsupported third-party firmware on any electronic device. Especially not, when I am told by the manufacturer that it voids warranty on the product.

You're not speaking of ML, are you? Canon has never stated ML voids the warranty (and even if they'd have a hard time actually enforcing it), and there has not been any case of Canon service bitching that ML is installed when repairing a camera. Btw you can uninstall ML at any time.

And I guess the majority of Canon users handles it the same way.

Your bad, but on the other hand, that makes fewer Canon users with 14+ ev dynamic range, and me the only Canon shooter on the planet with working flash + auto iso (stock fw locks iso to 400) and ec in m outside the 1dx :->

 

[meywd]

Your bad, but on the other hand, that makes fewer Canon users with 14+ ev dynamic range, and me the only Canon shooter on the planet with working flash + auto iso (stock fw locks iso to 400) and ec in m outside the 1dx :->

Can you explain please, locks iso to 400?

 

[Marsu42]

Can you explain please, locks iso to 400?

1. set camera to auto iso ("A")
2. look at iso display - varies with lighting
3. enable flash
4. look at iso display - stuck at 400 (at least w/ all Canon cameras I came across)

 

[meywd]

Can you explain please, locks iso to 400?

1. set camera to auto iso ("A")
2. look at iso display - varies with lighting
3. enable flash
4. look at iso display - stuck at 400 (at least w/ all Canon cameras I came across)

You are correct ???