Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review

[Loswr]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

 

[Tinky]

Not everyone is reporting on the olympics, and those who are just get a 1dx+600L from their newspaper or buy one themselves.

I've not long got out of newspapers. Not as a photographer, I would clarify, although I worked with them extensively. Saw the staff tog number dropin our region alone from 12 to 2 in the time I was there, we would have folk in Afghanistan, at all the soccer games, by the end up our staffers did the studio pics for features, everything else was bought in. The guys with the 1dx & 600's are with corbis or getty, not with the newspapers, not these days.

 

[Don Haines]

I haven't used the 7D2 yet, but I hear echos of when the 7D came out. Folk wowed by the specs and then underwhelmed by the images.

I got my 7D around 6 months after launch (let the beta testers break theirs first, save a third) and I quickly came to the conclusion that those not getting decent AF hadn't bothered setting up the AF system, particularly the Ai Servo preferences, and those who were getting too much noise were either shooting jpeg or messing up their RAW workflow.

I was, and remain happy with results up to 3200 with careful post processing, but as with all APS-C cameras, the lower the ISO the better.

I wonder how many people buy something like the 7D or 7D2 and expect it to work brilliantly out of the box?
Thats what the 70D class of camera is for, and would probably suit reviewers like Ron a bit better.

I was about 4 weeks in having shot speedway, soccer etc before I had my 7D tuned to work in line with my shooting methods. It wasn't a frustrating experience as I could feel the keeper rate improving and the camera getting better and better at tracking.

The headline spec changes of the 7D2 aren't enough to tempt me just yet. Besides I want to see what Canon come up with in terms of 4K.

+1

When I first got my hands on the 7D2, I had a poor keeper rate due to autofocus problems..... The more I use it, the better the rate gets. I can do stuff now that the old camera could not handle, and I am still learning.

 

[Marsu42]

The guys with the 1dx & 600's are with corbis or getty, not with the newspapers, not these days.

So I hear. Unless you've got the right connections

I sold some shots to a local homeless people project newspaper for a really minor fee, doing the right thing, you know? But when I saw their office is stuffed with the latest Macintosh systems and the boss carries a 1dx+24-70L2 for starters, I felt kind of underpaid.

However, the local guys working for news agencies (selling to the newspapers in turn) all have to buy their own gear, and they're happy if they can afford a 7d1 with a half-decent lens at all. But as I wrote, the agencies are just fine with the 7d1 iq, it's not like they'd produce wall-mount posters with it.

Working as a pj pro is soooooooo different from amateur enthusiast photography - if you're trying to gather your rent, you just want your darn gear to work and deliver what you want. And in this department, Canon imho is the best brand to use and the 7d2 is a dream camera.

 

[candc]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

 

[monkey44]

Here's my struggle with the 7D2 -- MAKE a list of things this camera was NOT designed to do, and then complain because it doesn't do them.

coming from a 7D, I find this 7D2 a huge improvement ... it does exactly what i bought it to do, and very successfully. If you take any piece of equipment - set it up beyond its abilities and then complain about the camera, when you should be complaining about yourself ...

Go out on a field sometime, and look at a bar set at 22 feet, then go get a pole and see if you can "pole vault" over that bar. Well, you can't - whose fault is that? The bar, the pole, or the person who set that bar? Choose one !

You all should quit squabbling about what the 7D2 can't do, and start figuring out what it can do -- you might be surprised once you actually get it in the field and off the mathematical chalk board.

 

[Tinky]

the agencies are fine with anything they can sell. always. sometimes content is more important than technical attributes. but if it will sell, they'll sell it for you, for a modest commission of course.

I saw the way circulation was going, around a quarter of where we were 15 years ago... the money was on the table, so I took it and ran.

Not a great business model giving all your content away free online.

Imagine describing a newspaper to Aliens... "So you can either get them free on a device that you have in your pocket anyway and have already paid for, or you somebody can chop down a tree, print on the pulp, drive it from the printers to a shop, you can spend money on this bulky object that will cut your fingers and leave then covered in newsprint, that you have to carry around with you, is to big to open on the commute, and then you have to recycle it".

But as my Dad pointed out, "ipads are great, but my bic biro scratches the glass when I try and do the soduko puzzles"

 

[Go Wild]

Hello everyone.

First of all, let me give you my congratulations to everyone, it´s my first post, but i follow this forum for quite a while, and i really like to read your opinions either i agree, or not. I´m sorry for any mistake in writing, i speak better english than i write.

My name is Peter i am a wildlife photographer in Portugal and i really feel the need to write in this post, because i own the new 7D markII for a couple of days and i tested it in a very harsh environment with fog and in almost no light.

And the camera went in a superb response! Auto focus is incredible even in very dificult conditions, and ISO gave me very good photos at iso 2000. I am not a pixel peeper, i don´t make comparisons, i don´t study at the minimun detail pixels or IQ, first of all i need to get the picture!! And in that field the 7D markII is superb.

I also own a 5D markIII so i was kind of expecting this behavior, but it really pleasured me.

I think some people are being very infair reviewing this camera. First of all, let´s not forget, it´s a 1600$ camera! Expensive? I think it has a quite reasonable price for what it delivers. But i think people is demanding things to this camera tha you can achieve in a 6000$ camera...Not real! And most part of the people who criticizes want everything in a 1600$ camera. They want an aps-c with 40MP, with iso capability of 25000, they want the camera to fly, they want the camera to be perfect...and that´s not possible...at least at this price.

And then, there ar very people who´s talking bad of this camera because they didn´t understand what is the target of this camera! If i want a Wedding camera i take my 5D markIII! If I want a low light camera, or a landscape camera I take a Canon 6D, or a 5D markIII. 7D markII it´s NOT a walkaround camera. His purpose is to get the photo in fast action! It is made for wildlife and sports!!

I heard some talks about softness in image in this camera. So let me say again...if you are putting side by side canon 1D X or canon 5d markIII sharpness although it´s unfair, yes it may be not so sharp. But if i put you 2 photos side by side in good light conditions, of 5d markIII ad 7D markII without 100% zooms without all those tests you´ll never figure what the machine took the photo!! And that´s real world photo!

What concern´s me a little bit is it seems Canon is loosing something for Nikon and Sony in Image quality overall...that´s a real concern.

So this post is not scientific, nor trying to prove anything, it´s just my opinion that people are being unfair reviewing this camera. Yes, it´s not perfect, but for wildlife or sports? It´s awesome and if you don´t get the shot it´s your fault!

BTW - If you use ISO 2000 and you make a 50% crop, Of course you´ll get noise, but that´s not camera fault!!

"If you're pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough" - Robert Capa


Thank you everyone and please continue, i really apreciate all off your posts!

 

[Marsu42]

Not a great business model giving all your content away free online.

Smart move to run, given the outlook. Problem is that falling fees for photogs or journalists in general change the content, 7d2 or 7d1.

One of my recent jobs was organizing a congress dealing with this: if ads get out of print newspapers, there's no budget left for investigative or quality journalism and you depend more and more on ready-made stories you copy/paste from lobby organizations.

As you pointed out, people loading content on the devices they own aren't prepared to pay for it, esp. if it's more convenient than trying to unwrap an old-school newspaper in a subway train.

With very good photogrphy gear becoming more accessible (even to me!) and even iphones producing decent pictures, there's only one way it'll go, as you described: A small team buying content and duplicating it to every media channel, while everything else is outsourced.

I just happened to see the movie "all the president's men" yesterday with the old-school newsroom, oh my, those were the days :-o

 

[miah]

Hello everyone.

First of all, let me give you my congratulations to everyone, it´s my first post, but i follow this forum for quite a while, and i really like to read your opinions either i agree, or not. I´m sorry for any mistake in writing, i speak better english than i write.

My name is Peter i am a wildlife photographer in Portugal and i really feel the need to write in this post, because i own the new 7D markII for a couple of days and i tested it in a very harsh environment with fog and in almost no light.

And the camera went in a superb response! Auto focus is incredible even in very dificult conditions, and ISO gave me very good photos at iso 2000. I am not a pixel peeper, i don´t make comparisons, i don´t study at the minimun detail pixels or IQ, first of all i need to get the picture!! And in that field the 7D markII is superb.

I also own a 5D markIII so i was kind of expecting this behavior, but it really pleasured me.

I think some people are being very infair reviewing this camera. First of all, let´s not forget, it´s a 1600$ camera! Expensive? I think it has a quite reasonable price for what it delivers. But i think people is demanding things to this camera tha you can achieve in a 6000$ camera...Not real! And most part of the people who criticizes want everything in a 1600$ camera. They want an aps-c with 40MP, with iso capability of 25000, they want the camera to fly, they want the camera to be perfect...and that´s not possible...at least at this price.

And then, there ar very people who´s talking bad of this camera because they didn´t understand what is the target of this camera! If i want a Wedding camera i take my 5D markIII! If I want a low light camera, or a landscape camera I take a Canon 6D, or a 5D markIII. 7D markII it´s NOT a walkaround camera. His purpose is to get the photo in fast action! It is made for wildlife and sports!!

I heard some talks about softness in image in this camera. So let me say again...if you are putting side by side canon 1D X or canon 5d markIII sharpness although it´s unfair, yes it may be not so sharp. But if i put you 2 photos side by side in good light conditions, of 5d markIII ad 7D markII without 100% zooms without all those tests you´ll never figure what the machine took the photo!! And that´s real world photo!

What concern´s me a little bit is it seems Canon is loosing something for Nikon and Sony in Image quality overall...that´s a real concern.

So this post is not scientific, nor trying to prove anything, it´s just my opinion that people are being unfair reviewing this camera. Yes, it´s not perfect, but for wildlife or sports? It´s awesome and if you don´t get the shot it´s your fault!

BTW - If you use ISO 2000 and you make a 50% crop, Of course you´ll get noise, but that´s not camera fault!!

"If you're pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough" - Robert Capa


Thank you everyone and please continue, i really apreciate all off your posts!

Welcome to CR, Go Wild; your post hit the nail right on the head.

 

[Loswr]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

Sorry, but you're being rather naïve. A FF sensor is bigger...a lot bigger. That means a bigger mirror assembly. A bigger sensor means a bigger AF sensor, a bigger pentaprism, a bigger metering sensor, etc. Oh, you still want 10 fps? Ok, that's the 1D X's mirror assembly. Willing to have a somewhat lower frame rate, say...6 fps? That's the 5DIII. But you want it for $1800?

Me dear ol' dad, who hailed from the Emerald Isle (by way of Chicago) used to say, "Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up fastest."

Oh, and by the way what you call greed, Canon would call trying to generate the maximum value for shareholders – and that's their legal obligation as a publicly traded corporation.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

Just forgot a detail ... Put a larger sensor in a body 7D Mark II, maintaining 10 frames per second performance would require:

A larger mirror box also capable of high speed.
A larger shutter, still capable of high speed.
A larger pentaprism.
A better heat dissipation.
A larger battery consumption.
A larger AF sensor with focus points covering a larger area.

I think that exists and is called 5D Mark iii.

EDIT: Neuro replied before me.

 

[Lee Jay]

Uhh, the 'conclusion'

"Ultimately I can’t recommend this camera. Canon sports shooters with a big lens investment would be better served investing in a used 1D Mark IV which will outperform this camera both in terms of image quality and performance, and everyone else should consider a D750 (or a D4s if you can afford it). Sure you’ll get less frames per second on the Nikon, but nearly all of them will be in focus and you’ll have killer image quality too!"

Whoever this guy is, he probably flunked second grade a few times.

I looked into switching to Nikon once. Selling my Canon lenses and buying similar Nikon ones was going to cost me $8,000 and get me lenses that were worse than what I already have with one exception. They were also bigger and heavier.

The very last Canon camera I'd buy if I weren't going to buy a 7DII would be a 1DIV. I hate the 1D bodies (too big, lousy ergonomics, don't like the non-removable grip) and I want a high pixel density camera. The 1DIV is a failure on both counts. I'd buy a 70D or a 60D before a 1DIV.

Having compared raw and JPEG test images, feature set and cost, I'd say the 7DII is the best crop camera on the market for shooting any sort of action, and second place is the 70D.

This guy is just too dumb to get it.

 

[candc]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

Sorry, but you're being rather naïve. A FF sensor is bigger...a lot bigger. That means a bigger mirror assembly. A bigger sensor means a bigger AF sensor, a bigger pentaprism, a bigger metering sensor, etc. Oh, you still want 10 fps? Ok, that's the 1D X's mirror assembly. Willing to have a somewhat lower frame rate, say...6 fps? That's the 5DIII. But you want it for $1800?

Me dear ol' dad, who hailed from the Emerald Isle (by way of Chicago) used to say, "Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up fastest."

Oh, and by the way what you call greed, Canon would call trying to generate the maximum value for shareholders – and that's their legal obligation as a publicly traded corporation.

i am not being naive. i know exactly what canon is doing. not every company practices this way. mesa boogie is a good example. they put out the best product they can make and sell it at a reasonable price. i don't agree with the business strategy of artificially inflating the price of a product just because they can. i understand it is their choice to do so but i don't have to agree with or defend that choice.

 

[Lee Jay]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

I'd rather have the 7DII than the 6D sensor in the 7DII - by far. One of my main reasons for wanting this camera is that I'm often left with 100% crops for my final image on my 20D (even at 400mm) and I want more pixels on the target. The 6D sensor would leave me with fewer pixels, not more.

 

[candc]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

I'd rather have the 7DII than the 6D sensor in the 7DII - by far. One of my main reasons for wanting this camera is that I'm often left with 100% crops for my final image on my 20D (even at 400mm) and I want more pixels on the target. The 6D sensor would leave me with fewer pixels, not more.

i like the 7dii as well. i guess there is the 5diii. the price on it is down around $2400 nowadays. that seems reasonable in comparison to the the 7dii i suppose. i think it was $3600 for a long time. i might get one now.

 

[Loswr]

i really like the 7dii for the af, buffer, and speed but it does make me a bit irritated to think about how canon could put the 6d sensor in the 7dii body, sell it for $1800...

Yeah, and I bet you're irritated that Chevy didn't put a Big Block V8 into the Camero instead of that piddly little 3.6L V6 and sell it for the price of a Cruze, too. Because that would be just so feasible... :

it is not like the analogy you are referring to which would be physically difficult and expensive to produce. the sensor in the 6d is not expensive and it would not be difficult to put it in a 7dii body.

to me its greed. i don't mind paying a fair price for a product but i don't like getting ripped off.

Sorry, but you're being rather naïve. A FF sensor is bigger...a lot bigger. That means a bigger mirror assembly. A bigger sensor means a bigger AF sensor, a bigger pentaprism, a bigger metering sensor, etc. Oh, you still want 10 fps? Ok, that's the 1D X's mirror assembly. Willing to have a somewhat lower frame rate, say...6 fps? That's the 5DIII. But you want it for $1800?

Me dear ol' dad, who hailed from the Emerald Isle (by way of Chicago) used to say, "Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up fastest."

Oh, and by the way what you call greed, Canon would call trying to generate the maximum value for shareholders – and that's their legal obligation as a publicly traded corporation.

i am not being naive. i know exactly what canon is doing. not every company practices this way. mesa boogie is a good example. they put out the best product they can make and sell it at a reasonable price. i don't agree with the business strategy of artificially inflating the price of a product just because they can. i understand it is their choice to do so but i don't have to agree with or defend that choice.

Well, I had meant the naïve part in reference to your suggestion that Canon 'just pop the 6D sensor into the 7DII body' like it was no big deal and basically cost-neutral.

But apparently you're a bit naïve as far as business acumen, as well. Mesa Boogie is a privately held company, not legally accountable to shareholders. If they want to give their products away for free, that's their choice.

 

[papa-razzi]

If you don't want to upgrade to ff Imo the 7d2 is defiently worth the upgrade. Is it a perfect camera? No. It's very good though. Everyone has there expectations and that's fine but I think some people have unrealisitic expectations. I wouldn't let one persons review sway you after you saw so many favorable reviews.

I have a 6D, so the 7D is my sports camera

Personally, if I were looking to upgrade and existing Canon camera (and I am), I would wait until the next round of upgrades and hope that they got off their a** and delivered a worthy product. Or, what is more likely to happen, upgrade to a camera with some other logo on the head plate.

All my sports shooting is of my children. They grow up pretty fast. So, unfortunately waiting indefinitely is not an option. If the differences are real, I can sell my 7D and the remaining difference in paying for the 7DII would be worth it. I'd almost do it for the extra 2fps and AF without any other improvements. The improved high ISO, even if marginal, is a bonus.

Thanks everyone for your comments. They are helpful, as this is a community of people far more knowledgeable and experienced than I am.

Another slightly off topic question - should I sell the 7D now, or wait until the spring/summer. I'm really down to football season where I would need the upgrade. I wouldn't buy the 7DII until next summer regardless.

 

[Lee Jay]

If you don't want to upgrade to ff Imo the 7d2 is defiently worth the upgrade.

Full-frame is not always an upgrade. I've had both crop and full-frame cameras for nearly a decade now, and each is better at some things.

Full-frame is better in low light and produces naturally sharper images when you are not focal length limited.

Crop cameras tend to be faster and produce superior images when you are focal length limited.

I see myself owning one of each for the foreseeable future.

 

[Khalai]

i am not being naive. i know exactly what canon is doing. not every company practices this way. mesa boogie is a good example. they put out the best product they can make and sell it at a reasonable price. i don't agree with the business strategy of artificially inflating the price of a product just because they can. i understand it is their choice to do so but i don't have to agree with or defend that choice.

Problem is, Canon is not alone out there. Do you think, they somehow make up pricings? They face a rather stiff competition, so they have to price their products accordingly. Just because you don't agree with the price for the 7D mk2 doesn't make that price wrong. If the price was too much, nobody would buy that camera.

P.S.: 6D sensor IS expensive. Sensor prices rises steeply with the size of a final sensor (less leeway for bad pieces from a wafer, those also account into price, not just the good ones). In my country (EU based), service centers charge around 700 USD just to replace the sensor if somehow damaged. They charge about half the price for the crop ones...