I like your photos
Yeah, it's absolutely awful at ISO 3200, f/2.8, 1/800, isn't it?
View attachment 192552
View attachment 192553
View attachment 192554
But the age and performance of the 2014 7D Mark II is beside the point.
The existing 32MP APS-C sensor in the 90D and M6 Mark II is better than the 7D Mark II in similar lighting. Presumably a 32MP version of the roughly 80MP sensor expected in the predicted R5s would be even better than that.
This would be a more significant improvement over the 7D Mark II than a 17.8MP APS-C version of the FF 45MP sensor found in the R5.
Many of us who want a 7D Mark II replacement would be perfectly happy with an R7 that uses the existing 32MP sensor found in the 90D/M6 Mark II combined with the DiG!C X processing pipeline and an APS-C version of the 500,000 cycle shutter in the R5 (or even the 300,000 rated shutter of the R6) in a magnesium alloy body with weather sealing comparable to the R5.
Just for comparative purposes, the 2014 $1,799 7D Mark II had a 200,000 cycle rated shutter at the same time the 2012 $3,499 5D Mark III and the 2016 $3,499 5D Mark IV had shutter ratings of 150,000.
Upvote
0