Ron Martinsen Blasts the 7DII in his review

[fragilesi]

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.

Your dear ol' dad was clearly a wise man, that's a brilliant quote!

 

[fragilesi]

I'd say kudos to Ron for his obvious achievements.

However, there is a long way to go from being a talented photographer to being a good reviewer and I think he proves it in spades with this. Retaining objectivity is paramount and to be fair to him he makes it completely clear in his review that he is far from objective about the 7DI and 7DII.

I find it more than a little odd that someone with his apparent knowledge and experience can't get well-focused pictures in those situations despite the incredible display of ego around the comment about his picture being the best a Canon sports shooter could expect from it . . . Just a quick look around other reviews should have told him that others are not having the same difficulties he had and should have made him think again before hitting that publish button.

As he didn't this just comes across as an ill-considered rant based on a previous failed attempt with the 7dI which, if he is as good as is being suggested, is a shame because I don't plan to read anything else by him after that. I just hope I get that Tony Northrup box set for Christmas to set me right again .

 

[Orangutan]

the incredible display of ego around the comment about his picture being the best a Canon sports shooter could expect from it . . . Just a quick look around other reviews should have told him that others are not having the same difficulties he had and should have made him think again before hitting that publish button.

I think you've touched on the key here: so many photographers hold up their own personal experience (anecdotes) as examples of what can be done and what can't, what should be done and what should not, and forget that their personal experience may not match the experiences of others. While personal taste is appropriate for the artistic component of photography, it's more an exercise in engineering to decide how to use the equipment to collect the most and best data from each click of the shutter.

 

[Don Haines]

the incredible display of ego around the comment about his picture being the best a Canon sports shooter could expect from it . . . Just a quick look around other reviews should have told him that others are not having the same difficulties he had and should have made him think again before hitting that publish button.

I think you've touched on the key here: so many photographers hold up their own personal experience (anecdotes) as examples of what can be done and what can't, what should be done and what should not, and forget that their personal experience may not match the experiences of others. While personal taste is appropriate for the artistic component of photography, it's more an exercise in engineering to decide how to use the equipment to collect the most and best data from each click of the shutter.

I guess this is the difference with the scientific community.... peer review.... Do your tests, compare them with others, and if there is a discrepancy, try to figure out why...

 

[c.d.embrey]

If he didn't shoot cereal boxes in his kitchen, then his tests are not valid ( a reference to an internet expert with a large following) There are too many people who don't shoot, what I shoot, the way I shoot it, trying to tell me what I need. In other words their Real World is not my Real World. Therefore I find "tests" by internet experts to be less than useless -- and I don't waste my time reading them.

The best test, is your own test. Rent a camera, shoot with it for 1-3 days. Is it better than your present camera, then buy it. If you see no/little difference, then don't. Simple as that

 

[sanj]

I happen to be friends with Ron and have worked with him for some time. While I do not always agree with his reviews, he's pretty straight up. One thing is he has always stated what he thought about products - even when it wound up pissing off his sponsors. Keep in mind that the majority of big review sites out there have to temper their disappointments in order to not suffer financially.

In terms of his review on the 7D2, I happen to agree with it. \

so you recommend that someone who is not using the 7D MK II for wildlife or sports buy a D4s? A D4s won't do sports or wildlife? What is he on??

From his review I gather that he is recommending the 1D4 over the 7D2. As a primary camera this makes sense. Personally this is one area where I do not agree. I find a 5D3 + 7D2 to be a better combination.

In terms of the D4s I know he loves this camera because he found the AF to be superior to the 1Dx in his review. That being said he is a Canon shooter. This is one area where I do not entirely agree with him. Personally for wildlife I cannot justify the price difference of the 1Dx over the 5D3.

Personally I can. Absolutely.

 

[Jens_T]

Lucky you, or you'd be wrong in an enthusiast dslr forum discussing the newest toys. Quoting a famous German phrase from the early 20th century Weihmar Republic: "Wer hat uns verraten? Sozialdemokraten"!

Sorry to get off-topic but this quote was coined by the nationalistic / conservatives that happily joined the big war and then, when the social democratic government had to exit it were looking for a scapegoat. If you disagree with Tinky at least don't bring that right wing nationalistic slogan.

Throwing Social-Democrats and communists into one pot shows a lack of understanding how the social democratic party (especially in Germany) developed.

 

[Loswr]

I happen to be friends with Ron and have worked with him for some time. While I do not always agree with his reviews, he's pretty straight up. One thing is he has always stated what he thought about products - even when it wound up pissing off his sponsors. Keep in mind that the majority of big review sites out there have to temper their disappointments in order to not suffer financially.

In terms of his review on the 7D2, I happen to agree with it. \

so you recommend that someone who is not using the 7D MK II for wildlife or sports buy a D4s? A D4s won't do sports or wildlife? What is he on??

From his review I gather that he is recommending the 1D4 over the 7D2. As a primary camera this makes sense. Personally this is one area where I do not agree. I find a 5D3 + 7D2 to be a better combination.

In terms of the D4s I know he loves this camera because he found the AF to be superior to the 1Dx in his review. That being said he is a Canon shooter. This is one area where I do not entirely agree with him. Personally for wildlife I cannot justify the price difference of the 1Dx over the 5D3.

Personally I can. Absolutely.

So could I...but I don't need to justify it to anyone.

 

[Marsu42]

If you disagree with Tinky at least don't bring that right wing nationalistic slogan.

You're dead wrong about the origin, but never mind. Concerning mixing communism & socialism: that was a joke, sorry you didn't pick it up - It was too tempting after the op elaborating how he's a socialist. I'm not going for anything really political on CR, just the occasional pun ... but at least he's got it:

The old dichotomy of gemeinschaft and gesellschaft is at work I grant you.

seems your're a 1/2 generation older than me, when I studied Sociology the professor who taught about Tönnies for all his life just had retired. Seems I'm stuck with being a happy consumer :->

Personally for wildlife I cannot justify the price difference of the 1Dx over the 5D3.

Well, there has been the argument that the shutter of a 1d is sturdier, so you have to calculate at least a 5d3 shutter replacement into the equation if you do machine gun photography. Personally, I wish I'd have the money, esp. for wildlife in the great, rainy outdoors shooting with the 1dx metering, faster af and build quality has to be a dream come true.

 

[Tinky]

seems your're a 1/2 generation older than me, when I studied Sociology the professor who taught about Tönnies for all his life just had retired. Seems I'm stuck with being a happy consumer :->

I think it's also a cultural thing here too, the old Kailyard attitude, eschewing excess and conspicuous consumption.

There was a brilliant documentary on through the week about a 17 year old girl who won £1'000'000m on the lottery in her first ever go.

Now the girl was almost your typical teenager, wanting to party, wanting to treat her mates, go holidays etc.. but she came from a very socially deprived area of Edinburgh, both her parents had been heroin addicts and she had been raised by her Grandparents and Aunties. Turned out well despite the start, old head on young shoulders, heart and head in roughly the right places. If anybody deserved a turn of good fortune it was this girl, and she was shouldering the responsibility fairly well, buying herself a modest house, taking her pals to maguluf, no humvees or blatant excess, but her wee granny was all doom and gloom, instiling guilt and 'what about all the poor people?' etc etc.

The girl deserved a bit of lick in her life, and she wasn't being crassany more than any other 17 year old, but bezt of all she wasn't for apologizing fir failing to meet expectations that she never set for herself.

That just sums our culture up, an embarrassment of riches, we secretly covet consumer goods but want to be the stoic red clydesiders of old, we want the big white lenses but would be embarrassed to be seen flaunting the wealth on a hobby... that kind of thing.

On the 1dx subject, I've spent far more on a camera, but its been a video camera and for work, I never felt I had to justify anything to anybody. Some folk smoke. Some folk have big fancy cars, some folk play golf, some folk go scuba diving or ski-ing. I guess I'm seeking approval from clients every time I submit work, but I never seek it for my photography (only a hobby for me, I say only, it has a treasured pace in my life, but I regard it very much as my own and for me)

 

[kurtj29]

I happen to be friends with Ron and have worked with him for some time. While I do not always agree with his reviews, he's pretty straight up. One thing is he has always stated what he thought about products - even when it wound up pissing off his sponsors. Keep in mind that the majority of big review sites out there have to temper their disappointments in order to not suffer financially.

In terms of his review on the 7D2, I happen to agree with it. \

so you recommend that someone who is not using the 7D MK II for wildlife or sports buy a D4s? A D4s won't do sports or wildlife? What is he on??

From his review I gather that he is recommending the 1D4 over the 7D2. As a primary camera this makes sense. Personally this is one area where I do not agree. I find a 5D3 + 7D2 to be a better combination.

In terms of the D4s I know he loves this camera because he found the AF to be superior to the 1Dx in his review. That being said he is a Canon shooter. This is one area where I do not entirely agree with him. Personally for wildlife I cannot justify the price difference of the 1Dx over the 5D3.

Personally I can. Absolutely.

So could I...but I don't need to justify it to anyone.

It's interesting that the comparison is made between the 5D3 and 1DX. I am a sports shooter and found the 5D3 extremely wanting. Great AF but with 6 fps - it makes the 5D3 kind of a half way there camera - not a good sports camera- it just misses too many shots. I sold the 5D3 and purchased a used 1D4 and was very happy to find the IQ was better IMO than the 5D3. 1D4s are selling cheaper than used 5D3's. As usual I will wait for the 1DX to come down to under $3,000 and then pick one up - until then the king for under $3,000 DSLR has to be the 1D4.

In some ways I feel that Canon did the same with the 7DII - blessed it with everything a sports shooter would want but then left great IQ on the table. Another "half way there" camera. The 1D4 has the IQ and AF of the 5D3 and the fps of the 7DII for about the same price of either. The only downside is the size and weight.

 

[Marsu42]

On the 1dx subject, I've spent far more on a camera, but its been a video camera and for work, I never felt I had to justify anything to anybody. Some folk smoke. Some folk have big fancy cars, some folk play golf, some folk go scuba diving or ski-ing.

Right, and that makes discussions on CR generally friendly - even the "rich" 1dx+600L folk don't put more money into it than your average neighbor drooling about their newest flat screen tv and middle class car. And going for photography means you intent to actually produce something and share it, even if "only" with your family - which is inherently different from pure throw-away consumption.

Last not least, people buying stuff is much better than stashing away $$$ on a bank account, at least consumption pays taxes (vat). Even in the department "planned obsolescence" a dslr probably is not so bad at generating junk heaps, plenty of folks around using older gear and esp. older lenses.

That just sums our culture up, an embarrassment of riches, we secretly covet consumer goods but want to be the stoic red clydesiders of old, we want the big white lenses but would be embarrassed to be seen flaunting the wealth on a hobby... that kind of thing.

You got me there - I admit I'm kind of embarrassed walking about even with my mediocre gear and "cheapest possible" white 70-300L which is only painted white for marketing purposes (other than say the 70-200L). But I'm currently improving a bit on that attitude, it's really about how you carry and handle your gear, not about the actual value.

 

[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!

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

Thank you very much miah!

 

[ScottyP]

This guy may not be one of the well-known experts on photography, but that just frees him up to innovate and break important new ground.

I am pretty sure, for example, he is the first one ever to discover the helpful descriptive power of the word "diarrhea" in describing image quality.

 

[greger]

Most reviews have been positive. I have found one review that has complained about focusing on the 7Dll and now this guy. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I read negative reviews about the 7Dl. I bought it based on the positives for it. It still makes me smile when I review pics. The 7Dll will sell well taking over where the 7Dl left off for as many years as Canon wants before a version lll is announced.

 

[Tugela]

@Tuglea - I want a cup of coffee and the 7DII won't brew one for me. Therefore, it fails to meet MY needs and it's a crappy camera. So I guess we agree.

: : :

I didn't say the 7D2 was a bad camera, I said that it was a disappointing camera because it is 2012 technology, but was released in 2014 when the world has moved on. If they had built it from current tech instead of old tech it would have been so much more than it actually is now. My old T3i is a good camera too, but I wouldn't buy it now because there are so many much more capable options available now.

But, if you are cool with buying the latest and greatest made from old stuff from a few years back, then more power to you. I am sure that Canon greatly appreciates customers like you because your expectations are so undemanding, they can cobble anything together and you will buy it with a grateful smile.

Me - I have watched Canon do this same trick for the last few years where they re-wrap old tech into a new shell annually, and have become increasingly unimpressed by it. I once bought into the hype that they were a great innovative company and would deliver any day now, but the "any day" became years and still the same old old. But no more. If they want to impress me now they have to do it by delivering cutting edge stuff, not recycled last years products. As I see it the 7D2 is a recycled last years product. And yet so many drool over it as though it is the second coming. It boggles the mind!

 

[weixing]

@Tuglea - I want a cup of coffee and the 7DII won't brew one for me. Therefore, it fails to meet MY needs and it's a crappy camera. So I guess we agree.

: : :

I didn't say the 7D2 was a bad camera, I said that it was a disappointing camera because it is 2012 technology, but was released in 2014 when the world has moved on. If they had built it from current tech instead of old tech it would have been so much more than it actually is now. My old T3i is a good camera too, but I wouldn't buy it now because there are so many much more capable options available now.

But, if you are cool with buying the latest and greatest made from old stuff from a few years back, then more power to you. I am sure that Canon greatly appreciates customers like you because your expectations are so undemanding, they can cobble anything together and you will buy it with a grateful smile.

Me - I have watched Canon do this same trick for the last few years where they re-wrap old tech into a new shell annually, and have become increasingly unimpressed by it. I once bought into the hype that they were a great innovative company and would deliver any day now, but the "any day" became years and still the same old old. But no more. If they want to impress me now they have to do it by delivering cutting edge stuff, not recycled last years products. As I see it the 7D2 is a recycled last years product. And yet so many drool over it as though it is the second coming. It boggles the mind!

Hi,
Hmm... 7D2 is 2012 old tech?? Don't need to compare 2012 DSLR, just compare to 2014 camera:
1) How many DSLRs in 2014 had 65 cross AF points?
2) How many DSLRs in 2014 can shoot 10fps??
3) How many DSLRs in 2014 can focus as fast as 7D2?

The sensor in 7D2 might not performing as good as others, but you need to remember it's 40.4 million photodiodes meaning it's basically a 40.4MP APS-C sensor.

Anyway, a good sensor cannot make a camera and cannot take a photo by itself... you need a good lens to produce a high IQ image on the sensor and a good AF system to focus the image sharply as fast as possible. You also need a image processing unit to process all those otherwise meaningless data from the sensor to produce the image and you also need good ergonomic to help camera user to capture the moment. All those add up will make a camera.

Have a nice day.

 

[Lee Jay]

@Tuglea - I want a cup of coffee and the 7DII won't brew one for me. Therefore, it fails to meet MY needs and it's a crappy camera. So I guess we agree.

: : :

I didn't say the 7D2 was a bad camera, I said that it was a disappointing camera because it is 2012 technology, but was released in 2014 when the world has moved on.

The camera you described would be utterly unable to shoot about 90% of the shots I shoot. And your hands must be as small as a child's if the 7D2 is too big. My hands are positively tiny and the 7D2 is a perfect fit. My T2i is way too small and the new mirrorlless cameras are generally much worse.

The world hasn't moved on - my hands are the same size they were two years ago and my targets aren't getting any slower. In fact, they're getting faster. We just have more cameras available now that are uncomfortable to use and are incapable of capturing fast moving targets, while also having horrible battery life and lousy supporting systems.

I expect the 7D2 to be my crop camera for the next 10 years.

 

[J.R.]

@Tuglea - I want a cup of coffee and the 7DII won't brew one for me. Therefore, it fails to meet MY needs and it's a crappy camera. So I guess we agree.

: : :

I didn't say the 7D2 was a bad camera, I said that it was a disappointing camera because it is 2012 technology, but was released in 2014 when the world has moved on. If they had built it from current tech instead of old tech it would have been so much more than it actually is now. My old T3i is a good camera too, but I wouldn't buy it now because there are so many much more capable options available now.

Wouldn't that depend on what "capability" you are looking for? If you are looking for a weather sealed camera shooting at 10fps with the best AF system on the market today, the 7D II would be a perfectly capable camera. However, if you are going to shoot landscapes or fashion photography, a 7D II wouldn't make any sense, a 6D would.

BTW, what "current tech" are you on about? The 7D II is the best all round budget sports camera you can get in the market today. That said, it is pretty much clear that Canon isn't offering any new tech insofar as the sensors are concerned. So if your complaint with the 7D II is indeed about sensor performance, Canon is a dead end at the moment and you should look elsewhere.

 

[Marsu42]

I didn't say the 7D2 was a bad camera, I said that it was a disappointing camera because it is 2012 technology, but was released in 2014 when the world has moved on.

This demonstrates a lack of understanding about both "tech" and development.

The 7d2 indeed has up to date tech (sensor dpaf, phase af system), other than say the 6d which is just a recycled 5d2. And the world didn't "move on", it's still about producing the best pictures possible - and with the af coverage and fps of the 7d2, for some applications it's a great tool.

As for "2012" tech - you think dslr tech is replaced like a mobile phone, going from symbian to ios just like that? This dslr line is about is evolution, or you could actually say the 7d2 is 2000 tech (digital sensor) or 1950 tech (mirrored slr).

But, if you are cool with buying the latest and greatest made from old stuff from a few years back, then more power to you. I am sure that Canon greatly appreciates customers like you because your expectations are so undemanding, they can cobble anything together and you will buy it with a grateful smile.

In that case, Canon isn't your brand, and that's just fine and what a market system takes care of. Try shooting Sony and enjoy the newest mirrorless evf gadgets, no question that's the future.

But for people wanting their camera to simply work and pay their rent with the shots they produce, or simply care about the picture than what-year-is-the-tech again, the 7d2 happens to be a good product. And I'm saying this as an otherwise very verbal critic of "cripple your own cameras, double the lens price or go buy the 50/1.8" Canon.