What is missing from the 7DII specs

[iP337]

19 AF points?? No no no. We need some more!! And only one CF card slot? What the hell? Where's the SD slot like the 5D 3? And what was wrong with the weather sealing in the 7D?

I'd like to see a faster x sync speed and much better all round ISO performance. Especially ISO 100. It should be cleaner. I think wifi is more useful to me than gps. Now can you tether wirelessly to your laptop?? That would be cool.

Not that I was waiting for a 7D 2 as I only bought my 7D last year. No reason to upgrade really. The 6D got a lot of flak when we first heard about it and it turned out alrite. Maybe this will grow on us but theres nothin really ground breaking or exciting that has me jumping up and down with impatience.

Difference is the 6D had a neat low-light performance trick, what does this have? ...Oh wait 10fps is a neat trick, but only if it has the buffer and auto focus to keep up.

Hmmm the 6D is crap except for it's low-light, which is almost but not as good as the 1Dx.
These supposed 7D2 specs are crap except for the 10fps burst rate, which is also almost but not as good as the 1Dx.
Gasp! Could these specs be more real then we though?!!
No way! This must be an 8D or sumthin...

More AF points would be welcome, but even more important, make it a wider AF -area then on the 1DX.
That is my complain about the 1DX, I would love the AF-area more stretched. Imagine this area like a rectangle, then I'am missing some points in the outer corners. That is based on my experience in the field.

The 1D IV and 7D are about tied for the broadest spread in both dimensions (relative to frame size). The 1D X has the same lateral spread as the 1D IV and 7D, and slightly less spread in the vertical dimension (about half a row shorter).

Basically, the 1D X is giving nearly the same spread (only the two points at the top/bottom of the 7D center column extend beyond the 1D X coverage), both have a point at the 'rule of thirds' intersections, and the 1D X rectangle's corners extend beyond the 7D's coverage, with the 1D X covering a larger area with a far more dense array.

I,ve just returned from a trip to Kamchatka, Russia about three weeks ago. I was there to photograph the mighty Stellers Eagle. Often I place the subject in the upper part of the image and then I, am missing the row on top. Especially when using the AI-servo mode and a moving subject. I all the time select a focuspoint wich is best suitable for the composition. With the MARK4 the problem was less often there, but I'll like the much better quality of the 1DX. And I,ll try to avoid cropping as much as possible. I know I,am a bit cocky, but making the picture without optimizing it by cropping is the sport for me. It,s a bit like the Russians do, why make it easy when one can do it also in a difficult way????/

+1 to Jan van, I find a wider spread of cross-type points on the 7D easier to compose with (I use the 5D3 with only cross-type points on)

To the topic; I want 22.3mp so it can 3x3 pixel bind to 1080p with less morie like the 5D3 does, I don't see a point to push the sensor this far without hitting that sweet spot. Might as well leave them at 18, only a very small niche of pixel peepers would notice.

Other then that I expect better signal to noise ratios, something like the new Nikon/Toshiba APS-Cs but at least over a stop better than the 7D, right now I won't go over 1250 on my 7D but I'm ok pushing an NEX-5n to 1600, this just feels wrong as one of them cost double the other, now the GH3 is even better at 1600 (barely though). 7D2 (and 70D) NEEDS a clean 1600 and useable 3200 because there is no speed booster coming to save the EF mount and Nikon is right on the heals of a useable 3200.

I'm happy with everything else.

 

[Kristofgss]

At 10FPS, 2 Card slots would come in handy.

I am happy with my 7D so I won't really be disappointed if they don't significantly upgrade the 7DII.

I was thinking the same, looking at these specs, there really seems no reason to upgrade from a 7D to a 7 DII.

What I'd like:
- 2 card slots (one to store my pictures, one to switch to when my mum ask me to show what's on it
- in-camera HDR

 

[2n10]

A sense of perspective.

There are multiple test models in the field. Which means this model has no more than a 1 in however many test models chance of being the one. Also the rumor is a CR1 which means that it may be no better than a CR0.

Canon will give us what they deem to be the best for their pocketbook and maybe a best mix of what their market research shows that the target audience wants.

 

[Ladislav]

Another sci-fi like thread? My opinion:

The only missing information for the rumored spec was a price tag. How much do you want to pay for 7DII? The feature set will place the camera in current Canon's line up. If the camera will be incremental update specialized for wildlife and sport photographers with better IQ, better ISO processing and better AF (that doesn't necessary mean more AF points) or even better FPS (all compared to 7D) we can hope for price around 6D (another specialized camera).

Adding more features will only make the camera more expensive. Canon still needs to make FF as interesting upgrade because going with FF means for sport and wildlife photographers bigger investments into glass with longer focal lengths and Canon wants you to make these investments. So if Canon decides to put features from 5D3 to crop camera and make it awesome for sport, wildlife, stills, portraits, landscape, events, video and whatever else, it only means that camera will be far more expensive than 5D3 (guess something like $4k+) with still somehow worse IQ (I don't think they will beat technical advantage of FF sensor).

Of course there are features which makes sense for pro camera of any price tag - for example two card slots but we had only rumor about "some" test camera - not a real prototype of 7DII. Let's wait for the real announcement.

 

[Loswr]

Often I place the subject in the upper part of the image and then I, am missing the row on top. Especially when using the AI-servo mode and a moving subject. I all the time select a focuspoint wich is best suitable for the composition.

Below are the two AF point arrays scaled to the relative frame size and superimposed. There's no 'missing row' on top with the 1D X, just a single missing point in the center column of the 7D that's positioned about 1/2-row higher/lower.

If you look at the most lateral extent, the spread is the same, but where the 7D has just one point out that far, the 1D X/5DIII have a column of 5 points at that spread.

Personally, the extreme corner points (highlighted with arrows) are the ones that I find most useful from a composition standpoint, and they're placed more optimally for me than the 7D's points. The arrow-marked f/4 cross (magenta) is the one I have as the default point for landscape orientation, and the corresponding one at the bottom of that column is my default for portrait orientation.

 

[habitat]

-NEW dynmaic range sensor
-50 iso
-dual card slots
-10fps
-5d3 focus points
-built in flash - please!
-wifi/gps
-More compact/lighter body for traveling/hiking/concealment
-In camera HDR
-Multiple exposure special effect ability
-Dosent cost a million dollars to own!!
-And makes me breakfest....... ;D

 

[Dave_NYC]

I would like to see 2 CF card slots (puh-lease!), same AF and ISO performance as 5D MK III or 1DX, and a Klingon cloaking device.

I hope the first three are at least realistic.

 

[Zv]

Question - why are all camera AF points bunched around the middle. Even with a corner one selected I still end up doing some focus and readjustment. Why can't we have some points way oug in the corners? Is it not technically feasible? I seem to always end up cropping images to get eyes in that nice one thirds line area. Thats what I want - AF points spread way out.

 

[Marsu42]

Lots of discussion about this spec. WOndering how the camera (granted this is a rumor and the camera is not real) could be improved.

One important sensor property you didn't post for a vote is dynamic range - for my shots, I'd consider this almost as important as iso noise.

Nikon now has the decisive advantage at low iso dr, but I wish dr would be improved at all settings - ever tried to do action shots with a 18mp sensor in the snow? At high shutter / iso it's more like a b&w scene beyond recovery.

 

[Loswr]

Question - why are all camera AF points bunched around the middle. Even with a corner one selected I still end up doing some focus and readjustment. Why can't we have some points way oug in the corners? Is it not technically feasible?

It's not technically feasible. Since you asked... Canon EOS DSLR Autofocus Explained

The relevant part:

AF Point Coverage

For many people, this is a big issue in comparing cameras. While it would be wonderful to have AF points available over the entire extent of the frame, there are technical limitations on the spread of the AF points - at best, they can only occupy the middle area of the frame, because of simple geometry and optics. In a nutshell, there are four reasons for this limitation:

• Size of the secondary mirror. Light for AF passes through the semi-transparent part of the main mirror (most is reflected up to the viewfinder), then is reflected off the secondary mirror down to the AF sensor. There is limited space behind the main mirror, based on the necessary geometry (i.e. the main mirror has to be at a 45° angle to the incoming light, and the secondary mirror has to be behind the main mirror and at an angle of 90° to the main mirror, so it's length is limited by the distance between the main mirror and the image sensor).
• Distortion. With many lenses, the edges of the frame are subject to distortion (barrel/pincushion), and that reduces the accuracy of phase detect AF.
• Vingetting. The AF system needs a certain amount of light to work. Almost all lenses vignette to some degree, meaning there might not be enough light at the edges of the frame. For example, the EF 17-40mm f/4L has >2 stops of vignetting wide open at the wide end - that means at the edges of the frame, you're below f/5.6 and AF sensors would not have enough light to operate (i.e. in dim light you'd be below the EV sensitivity of the sensor).
• Temperature. Canon has stated that larger AF sensors are more susceptible to changes in temperature with the result that they change size, getting either larger or smaller as the temperature rises and falls. That reduces the accuracy of the AF system overall.

It's worth noting that none of these limitations apply to contrast detect AF, so using LiveView you can autofocus right out to the edge of the frame.

 

[bdunbar79]

Lots of discussion about this spec. WOndering how the camera (granted this is a rumor and the camera is not real) could be improved.

I undecided between more AF Points and a second card slot. Thus I am allowing 2 votes per person (plus I live outside Chicago were everyone votes early and votes often).

If those specs will be materialized the things that ''I will miss'' are:

1. (and most important) 2 card slots ( 1 SD and 1 CF)
2. integrated battery grip ( like 1D series)
3. APS-H sensor

Uh, might I suggest you check your car for an exhaust leak up into the passenger cabinet?

 

[Zv]

Question - why are all camera AF points bunched around the middle. Even with a corner one selected I still end up doing some focus and readjustment. Why can't we have some points way oug in the corners? Is it not technically feasible?

It's not technically feasible. Since you asked... Canon EOS DSLR Autofocus Explained

The relevant part:

AF Point Coverage

For many people, this is a big issue in comparing cameras. While it would be wonderful to have AF points available over the entire extent of the frame, there are technical limitations on the spread of the AF points - at best, they can only occupy the middle area of the frame, because of simple geometry and optics. In a nutshell, there are four reasons for this limitation:

• Size of the secondary mirror. Light for AF passes through the semi-transparent part of the main mirror (most is reflected up to the viewfinder), then is reflected off the secondary mirror down to the AF sensor. There is limited space behind the main mirror, based on the necessary geometry (i.e. the main mirror has to be at a 45° angle to the incoming light, and the secondary mirror has to be behind the main mirror and at an angle of 90° to the main mirror, so it's length is limited by the distance between the main mirror and the image sensor).
• Distortion. With many lenses, the edges of the frame are subject to distortion (barrel/pincushion), and that reduces the accuracy of phase detect AF.
• Vingetting. The AF system needs a certain amount of light to work. Almost all lenses vignette to some degree, meaning there might not be enough light at the edges of the frame. For example, the EF 17-40mm f/4L has >2 stops of vignetting wide open at the wide end - that means at the edges of the frame, you're below f/5.6 and AF sensors would not have enough light to operate (i.e. in dim light you'd be below the EV sensitivity of the sensor).
• Temperature. Canon has stated that larger AF sensors are more susceptible to changes in temperature with the result that they change size, getting either larger or smaller as the temperature rises and falls. That reduces the accuracy of the AF system overall.

It's worth noting that none of these limitations apply to contrast detect AF, so using LiveView you can autofocus right out to the edge of the frame.

Cool thanks for the info. I had a feeling about the lens problems, that makes sense. And I deffo know about the 17-40 vignetting and its bad enough trying to focus with an outer AF point on a 5D 2 as it is!

Hmmm I didn't know about the liveview thing. I need to give it a try!

 

[Marsu42]

It's not technically feasible. Since you asked... Canon EOS DSLR Autofocus Explained

Excellent article :-> ... though Nikon's d7100 has a crop mode so that the af spread covers the whole resulting shot, maybe Canon implements it too - it's just a firmware/digic gimmick so no harm done if you don't use it.

 

[paul13walnut5]

I wonder who vote for higher ISO ( if the native is 100 - 25600 and can be expanded to 100k) ????

Would anybody vote for lower ISO?

If the choice was between say a camera that could do ISO 25-6400 (+12'800 as CF)

I just don't have a use for these high iso's.

I'm happy if the technology means that the noise lower down the scale is better controlled, but really, I would have much more use for a few stops below 100, rather than anything above 3200.

 

[-Jarred-]

I'm fairly easy to please. What will make me upgrade my 7D is:

- Clean shots at up to ISO 1600
- Dual slots, both SD would be nice, but both CF is fine. Just not one CF/one SD
- 5D III AF. Although I'm happy with the current 7Ds AF, the thought of having even better perf would be sweeeet
- Same layout/ergo. If they change it too much I'll be unhappy, an integrated grip will be a deal breaker.

Not fussed about GPS/WiFi or a touchscreen or even an fps upgrade.

 

[captainkanji]

I'm a bit disappointed with the rumored number of AF points, but I was also disappointed with the 6Ds specs. I bought the 6D anyway, and am anything but disappointed. It would have to be a mini 1DX for me to consider getting another body. We will see ;D

 

[mkabi]

4K video @ 24p, 30p & 60p
1080p upto 120p >>> This alone will destroy the competition.

 

[Ewinter]

a big cup of Deal with it