# Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2014)

I'd thought we'd start the week looking _forward _to something. What features / performance levels would get you *excited *about the 7D2? 

I want a _positive _statement from you about what would legitimately fire you up to own a 7D2. No snarky "APS-C is not for me so I'll say 'A 50 MP FF sensor', ha ha" stuff. Seriously, what would get you excited when the 7D2 announcement comes?

- A

_Disclaimer: I'm not trying poke fun at Ivan's original thread so much as build some excitement around a release. Mondays need positive thoughts because they are, in fact, Mondays._


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 7, 2014)

It would be very difficult to interest me. Any new features or sensor technology will also appear in a FF body, and it will be much better IQ wise.

Maybe is it were priced under $1000?


----------



## mackguyver (Jul 7, 2014)

I would only be excited if it can top the DxOMark sensor rankings


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> It would be very difficult to interest me. Any new features or sensor technology will also appear in a FF body, and it will be much better IQ wise.
> 
> Maybe is it were priced under $1000?



I think the value proposition certainly changes for current FF users.

What would get me excited was if I could get the same IQ & noise performance as I do with my 5D3, only at the 1.6x length that crop brings. But this entire forum would rise up and throttle me because (a) that's not going to happen for technical reasons and (b) if Canon somehow could do that, _they never would_ as it would eat into FF and supertele sales.

So I'll say this, I'd like a second body, and it could be a crop body if it was _90%_ as good as my 5D3 for IQ & noise. I would get excited about that. I'd use my 70-200 F/2.8 IS II on it and net great shots at distance without the drawbacks of a T/C or having to buy bigger/heavier/pricier lenses.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 7, 2014)

I'll get excited if the 7DII has substantially better IQ... AND that sensor gets used in the next EOS M!


----------



## Zv (Jul 7, 2014)

I'll be excited just to see this mythical beast announced! I have no interest (or money) to buy the thing but very very curious to see what direction Canon is headed in with their APS-C line and this is the big pappa of them all, supposedly! 

Maybe once they stick DPAF in the 7D2 and later on a rebel or two we might, just might, perhaps see that tech in an EOS M3. So hurry up 7D2!


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 7, 2014)

If it was everything we expect, _but_ had a 16mp sensor with superior low light ( high iso ) performance, best possible 'IQ' from a crop sensor, in a small, tough, pro grade body, with NO pop up flash, and priced just below the (original) price of the 6D, then yes, I'd be excited !


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 7, 2014)

There are several things that would get me excited...

It's time 4K video showed up on Canon DSLRs.....

A decent great AF system that had the ability to recognize and track items.....

The ability to automatically AFMA lenses at a decent range of distances and focal lengths.....

A really high quality EVF or a hybrid EVF/OVF.....

Massively parallel A/D on sensor and the speed/noise benefits that it would bring.....

Some tricks with setting the two sides of DPAF to different gains and thereby increasing DR to 16 stops or better.....


----------



## LJ3Jim (Jul 7, 2014)

Focusing that is as good as the 5D3 (or better) would be great. I'd probably order for that alone. 1-stop better low-light handling would be the icing on the cake. And I'd get really excited if they announced a 100-400 F/4L (not F/3.5 - 5.6) at the same time!


----------



## AvTvM (Jul 7, 2014)

I will preorder the 7d ii if it has
* af like 5d 3
* iq better than nikon d7100 at low and hi isos
* eye control af v2.0
* working wifi implementation + fully featured wireless tethering app for ios and android
* canon RT radio flash commander built-in
* price like 7d at launch ... € 1649 MSRP

If it comes with the same performance and features but in a compact mirrorless version with top notch evf and ef-m mount ... I'd be willing to pay up to € 2.500


----------



## henrywang (Jul 7, 2014)

4k video pls ^_^
it's a longshot


----------



## NancyP (Jul 7, 2014)

16 to 24 MP, but FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST (10 fps) and with 1 stop improvement in low light ability (I judge that the 6D has a 2 stop advantage over the 60D of the same sensor vintage). Small pro-grade weather-sealed body, under 900 grams. Giant buffer, 30 RAW at 10 fps. 1DX/5D3 focusing system, fewer points, perhaps, but similar algorithms. AF at f/8. Costs the same or less than the 6D.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2014)

NancyP said:


> 16 to 24 MP, but FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST (10 fps) and with 1 stop improvement in low light ability (I judge that the 6D has a 2 stop advantage over the 60D of the same sensor vintage). Small pro-grade weather-sealed body, under 900 grams. Giant buffer, 30 RAW at 10 fps. 1DX/5D3 focusing system, fewer points, perhaps, but similar algorithms. AF at f/8. Costs the same or less than the 6D.



I've seen some cost comments from folks. _ I know that this is a thread about positivity_, but sub $2k, sub 6D pricing may be a tough get depending on how 'pro' this body is designed.

As I've said many times in this forum, for some people, the reach of APS-C is vital to what they do (BIF people come to mind). To those folks, crop is a really high-quality 1.6x T/C without the T/C headaches of AF responsiveness or significantly lessened IQ. To those folks, the length upside lets them _not have to buy a $10k+ lens to get their shots_ or for those who do have that money, it lets those great lenses reach even further. To _*those *_folks, Canon could _eeeeeeasily _get above $2k for this new body.

I don't want to be a pessimist, but I kind of want this thing to be so good it's _worth _over $2k. I'll say it: if it's a $1,599 camera, it probably won't be so compelling performance wise for me.

- A


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 7, 2014)

(1) IQ which is far beyond that of a 40D or 600D
(good colors, soft transitions / good contrast to show textures correctly)
(2) control button layout which is close to e.g. the 40D (mustn't be the same) which gives
fast access to functions. A ring arount the lens mount to set the aperture would be great.
and a "shoulder" display like 40D and 7D
(2a) well implemented video with very good quality and operability (in terms of hardware 
controls)
(3) a hybrid view finder which makes video in bright light a joy and helps to validate critical 
exposure settings in bright light
(4) reliable, reliable, reliable and fast AF with a wider field of AF sensors compared to the
ancient 9 point AF of my cameras


(1), (2) and (2a) are a MUST, (3) would be a great option and (4) would be very helpful.

At the moment I rely on the great operability of the 40D and the video quality / features(with Magic Lantern) of the 600D but my dream is to have ...

2 identical bodies which are well designed for photography and video

Just my 2 ct. - Michael


----------



## eos650 (Jul 7, 2014)

The 7D Mark II will have to be something really special for me to get excited about it. Had it come out a year ago, with some of the rumored features, I would most certainly have one by now. I may be a bit envious of some of the new features VS. my 7D Mark I, but not enough to splash the cash. At least, not any time soon.

I have since shifted up stream with a 1DX, 5D3 and still have my 7D Mark I and have added some better glass. There are many good light situations where the additional reach comes in handy and I pull out the 7D Mark I, however as soon as the light starts to go, the 7D goes in the bag.

I expect the 7D Mark II will have several desirable improvements, but I don't believe it will even begin to come close to the full frame bodies, in low light, which has been my biggest nemesis.

Of course if I was made of money, I would have them all


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 7, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > 16 to 24 MP, but FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST (10 fps) and with 1 stop improvement in low light ability (I judge that the 6D has a 2 stop advantage over the 60D of the same sensor vintage). Small pro-grade weather-sealed body, under 900 grams. Giant buffer, 30 RAW at 10 fps. 1DX/5D3 focusing system, fewer points, perhaps, but similar algorithms. AF at f/8. Costs the same or less than the 6D.
> ...



I think if the new 7DII was anything like approaching the price of the 5DIII it would lose it's whole raison d'etre. When sitting in a range with FF cameras - especially fast ones like the 5DIII - crop has to be cheaper, otherwise it loses it's ace card. I suppose it could be marketed a little more expensive than the 6D without upsetting the range, as the two will be completely different cameras. Personally I still think it will (eventually) sit just under the 6D price.


----------



## lol (Jul 7, 2014)

There's one killer feature for me: updated AF/metering system. 1D X equivalent or better (no, the 5D3 doesn't cut it). Everything else is distantly secondary.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 7, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > 16 to 24 MP, but FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST (10 fps) and with 1 stop improvement in low light ability (I judge that the 6D has a 2 stop advantage over the 60D of the same sensor vintage). Small pro-grade weather-sealed body, under 900 grams. Giant buffer, 30 RAW at 10 fps. 1DX/5D3 focusing system, fewer points, perhaps, but similar algorithms. AF at f/8. Costs the same or less than the 6D.
> ...


I agree.

If the camera is not much better than a 70D, then it isn't worth getting one.... but if it is way better, then it would be worth the higher price tag. My hope is that it "comes fully loaded" and if it does, I expect $2300 or so for it.....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 7, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> Personally I still think it will (eventually) sit just under the 6D price.



I think at launch it'll be priced under the 6D, likely $1599. That's true even if it's 'fully loaded'. Only way it could top $2K would be as a mini-1D X, integrated grip, etc., and that's just not going to happen. My 2¢.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> I think if the new 7DII was anything like approaching the price of the 5DIII it would lose it's whole raison d'etre. When sitting in a range with FF cameras - especially fast ones like the 5DIII - crop has to be cheaper, otherwise it loses it's ace card. I suppose it could be marketed a little more expensive than the 6D without upsetting the range, as the two will be completely different cameras. Personally I still think it will (eventually) sit just under the 6D price.



I'm not saying that price will be there that long. I could see (if loaded feature-wise) the 7D2 starting at $2299 for early adopters and then dropping sub-$2k quickly thereafter. 

Regarding the notion '6D will never cost less than a 7D2', consider:


Serious 7D shooters are not necessarily amateurs on tight budgets. I still contend that serious crop-shooters (lovingly clinging to their original 7D bodies) have invested far far far far far more dollars in glass and other gear than 6D shooters, so outpricing the 6D (even considerably) is not unreasonable.

The 6D is a nice rig but it's an entry-level FF rig that lacks a lot of bells and whistles. The 7D2 likely will not. It's a pro crop body. If that sentence seems a contradiction to some folks, they may not understand the notion that crop is a _strength _and not a weakness to some shooters. These folks pay great money for reach.


The 6D continues to steadily drop in price. It could be down around $1600-1700 by the time the 7D2 is announced.


I'm not throwing the gauntlet down and saying the 7D2 must cost a fortune, but if it's the camera some folks want -- the birding camera that lets you just bring the 400 prime instead of a 1Dx and a 600 prime, 10 FPS with 2 stops better low light performance, etc. -- you could imagine it commanding a high price.

But they may just offer a 7D2 that's an original 7D with better AF and one stop better in low light. That camera will be cheaper than a 6D for sure.

- A


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 7, 2014)

Really high performance AF system, including f/8 AF point(s)
Hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinder (for shooting video)
Good video features (focus assist, good focus performance, continuous windowing/zoom)
High pixel density sensor
High quality sensor
100-400L II designed for use on this camera with a 1.4x TC while still preserving outstanding optics and AF


----------



## bosshog7_2000 (Jul 7, 2014)

I bought the 7D when it was first released and I had two impressions....One: I LOVED the ergonomics and control layout over the 5D2. Two: I was majorly disappointed in the quality of the files out of the camera....just too mushy for my taste. One year later I sold the thing.

to even consider a 7D2 it would need to have a 24mp sensor with no AA filter and much better dynamic range.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 7, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Serious 7D shooters are not necessarily amateurs on tight budgets. I still contend that serious crop-shooters (lovingly clinging to their original 7D bodies) have invested far far far far far more dollars in glass and other gear than 6D shooters, so outpricing the 6D (even considerably) is not unreasonable.



Many 'serious crop shooters' also own a full frame body to overcome the limitations of the crop sensor. The 7D plus 5DII was a well-liked combination. The 5DIII combined the best of both, obviating the need.



ahsanford said:


> The 6D is a nice rig but it's an entry-level FF rig that lacks a lot of bells and whistles. The 7D2 likely will not. It's a pro crop body. If that sentence seems a contradiction to some folks, they may not understand the notion that crop is a strength and not a weakness to some shooters. These folks pay great money for reach.



The 1D series with APS-H sensors were 'pro crop' bodies. The 1.3x sensor offered a compromise between cost, frame rate and image quality, with the latter being significantly better than 1.6x. The 1D X combined FF image quality with the speed of the 1D series, for a cost slightly lower than the 1DsIII – again, the best of both worlds.

The bottom line is that the only real advantage of APS-C is that the sensors and the cameras that contain them are cheaper.



ahsanford said:


> ...the birding camera that lets you just bring the 400 prime instead of a 1Dx and a 600 prime, 10 FPS with 2 stops better low light performance, etc.



Sounds great for consumers. I'm not so sure it would sound great to the bean counters at Canon HQ.

2 stops better lowlight performance? That loud buzzing sound you hear is your alarm clock, time for the dream to end….


----------



## jrista (Jul 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> I'll get excited if the 7DII has substantially better IQ... AND that sensor gets used in the next EOS M!



Better IQ _and _much higher performing AF, and used in the next EOS M. I'd be interested in that. I want a more capable ILC for days when I generally can't bring my big DSLR kit...something with high resolution, fast focus, and good IQ (across the board, including better DR) would be nice to have. I could use it for wildlife/birds and landscapes.


----------



## l_d_allan (Jul 7, 2014)

I'd have mixed feelings, but overall positive if Canon 'bit the bullet' and "swallowed their pride" and used a Sony sensor with 24 mpx with high DR of 14 stops. That might bode well for Canon using a similar sensor to the Nikon 810 / A7r in an upcoming full-frame.
Foveon-like technology with great high-ISO, great DR, and fast frame-rate performance, which hints that Canon is well along on the learning curve for a full-frame with really ground-breaking competition for the Sony ff sensor.
4k video with dual-pixel for video follow focus
Kit lens at great bundle price like an EF-S 16-70mm f2.8 IS STM (about equiv to 24-100mm with fixed fast aperture)
Native MagicLantern-like Dual-ISO for much greater DR
Lots of capabilities "borrowed" from MagicLantern, like Auto-Dot-Tune AF micro adjustment, Auto-ETTR, RAW histogram, RAW Blinkies, more flexible Bulb, intervalometer, more flexible HDR, etc.
Better AF, although my impression is that the 7d AF is quite good
Touch screen with tilting mount


----------



## jrista (Jul 7, 2014)

l_d_allan said:


> I'd have mixed feelings, but overall positive if Canon 'bit the bullet' and "swallowed their pride" and used a Sony sensor with 24 mpx with high DR of 14 stops. That might bode well for Canon using a similar sensor to the Nikon 810 / A7r in an upcoming full-frame.



Not gonna happen, as Canon prides themselves too much on their "in house, fully integrated" approach. 



l_d_allan said:


> Native MagicLantern-like Dual-ISO for much greater DR



You want both a Sony Exmor sensor...and ML Dual ISO? How much DR do you want?  Unless Canon is moving to a 16-bit ADC, which if they used an Exmor is impossible (since Exmor includes the ADC), then having both is moot. You can only get 14 stops of DR out of a camera with a 14-bit ADC.

If Canon natively improves their own sensors DR, which is more than possible, it isn't like Sony has an exclusive right on high dynamic range sensor technology, then having ML Dual ISO is again moot. If Canon tops 13 stops of DR, they would be comparable to the D800/600/810, which all get around 13.2-13.3 stops (as far as editing latitude/shadow lifting goes). Adding ML Dual ISO to that wouldn't really offer any benefit...as to achieve that kind of DR in the first place, ISO 100 would have to have as low read noise as ISO 800 anyway.[/list]


----------



## lol (Jul 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Many 'serious crop shooters' also own a full frame body to overcome the limitations of the crop sensor. The 7D plus 5DII was a well-liked combination. The 5DIII combined the best of both, obviating the need.


I own such a combination, but to me, the 5D series is no replacement. If I had unlimited funds and said I could only have one camera body, I'd still pick the existing 7D over the 5D3 without hesitation. About the only way I might put up with full frame is once pixel densities get more reasonable. The Nikon D800 would be adequate as a starting point for such a hypothetical body, if you could get it to 8fps and focus well at the same time.

I hate to do this, but I might start sounding like a microFourThirds fanboy at this point. The arguments for choosing crop over full frame are similar to those thrown by MFT to APS-C. For a given "reach", the crop sensor is just better optimised. On full frame you'd need silly big (and expensive) lenses. Even if people could afford them, they wouldn't want to carry it! Why not ever smaller? I have to say the Nikon 1 with native 70-300 lens sounds like an interesting reach combination, but I'm not sold on its overall performance.

Full frame serves a single niche of shallow(er) depth of field. If you're not after that, smaller sensors make more sense. Side note: why not continue my own argument and get smaller sensors? Because mirrorless tracking AF is still a long way off even a basic DSLR.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > ...the birding camera that lets you just bring the 400 prime instead of a 1Dx and a 600 prime, 10 FPS with 2 stops better low light performance, etc.
> ...



Neuro, I'm not saying we're going to get _all _those nice things in the 7D2, but some combination of them might occur to keep the price up.

And I'm not _ever _saying a crop with lens X is going to deliver the same IQ as a contemporary FF sensor and a 1.6X lens attached. But if it were _close_, I'd see people sizing up the 'half the total cost / half the total weight' argument and _possibly _staying in the crop universe.

Again, I represent such a niche piece of Canon's business that I wonder why I even stick up for them -- heck, I'm not even one of them! I'm not a wildlife / birder guy at all, but I have friends who shoot sports and wildlife who make camera acquisitions in much more modest chunks, like $1-3k additions at a time. Climbing Mount Full-Frame / Supertele is a mountain they will never climb, so a 7D2 (or Pentax?) is their big opportunity to improve their world in a reasonably sized one-off spend.

I just think value propositions are more than just IQ and cost, and crop has an interesting duckbill platypus of a value proposition at the whacko long end of focal lengths. Some folks live and die by it.

- A


----------



## l_d_allan (Jul 7, 2014)

jrista said:


> You want both a Sony Exmor sensor...and ML Dual ISO?



I meant to convey "either / or", not both. But it seems technologically possible ... much better sensor DR that incorporates Dual-ISO approach. I think a 14-bit ADC would be sufficient, as my understanding is that the Dual-ISO approach interleaves ISO 100 and a higher ISO like 800, 1600, 3200, etc. The ML approach costs some resolution. My speculation is that such an approach by Canon engineers would be even better as "native" rather than a brilliant hack by the ML dev team (thanks A1ex).



> How much DR do you want?



Lots. I shoot plenty of panos with 6d + 14mm Samyang or Samyang fish-eye. Panos, especially at night, tend to have lots of DR. As I use ML's Dual-ISO more and more, I use HDR less and less. However, I consider use of Dual-ISO to be a "hold-your-nose-work-around" to the relatively modest native DR of the 6d.

FWIW: the Nikon D800(e) had an ad ... something like ... "you're gonna want to re-shoot lots of your pictures". I often feel that way, especially on long road trips at 2:00 am in the morning, freezing my tail off ... "wish I'd rented a Sony A7r with EF adapter as long as I've gone to all this trouble."


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2014)

lol said:


> I hate to do this, but I might start sounding like a microFourThirds fanboy at this point. The arguments for choosing crop over full frame are similar to those thrown by MFT to APS-C. For a given "reach", the crop sensor is just better optimised. On full frame you'd need silly big (and expensive) lenses. Even if people could afford them, they wouldn't want to carry it! Why not ever smaller? I have to say the Nikon 1 with native 70-300 lens sounds like an interesting reach combination, but I'm not sold on its overall performance.



Forget fanboyism -- this is a debate that has raged for ages. How much do you want to spend / lug around versus how nice you want your shots to come out is an ancient debate in these forums.

And you're not alone in wanting to have a specific sweet spot of sensor size / gear size / cost to IQ. Heck, APS-H guys are like the folks who used to sleep in bed with their Amiga computers after they were discontinued. _Love is not love which alters when it alteration finds. _ 

I just think the argument has sublimed above basic forum back and forth and become one of those religiously held beliefs we won't ever sway on, like to use / not use UV filters, the value of IS on wide angle lenses, etc.

- A


----------



## Tugela (Jul 7, 2014)

16 MP is fine for my purposes, anything more would be nice but it would have zero effect on the image in the formats I use. So I don't really care about that.

Improved sensitivity would be interesting.

Accurate tracking (with accurate focus) would be a very interesting, especially with a touch screen so that you can rapidly select what you want tracked (this would need to be a toggled ability, since you don't want random things tracked just because you brushed the screen). 

Being able to select multiple points on the screen (touch for flexibility) to create a focus matrix that the camera would try to encapsulate would be useful.

What would make the camera really interesting however would be 4K video, along with robust recording options. I think that alone will be a deal maker.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 7, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Serious 7D shooters are not necessarily amateurs on tight budgets.



Not everyone can afford to spend significant amounts of money on a camera body, or indeed lenses, yet they may wish or really _need_ to have a given performance. Many people who earn their living from photography cannot afford 'the best' or 'the latest'. I was at a large function recently where the official photographer was using two Nikon D200 s, 2005 tech. ( With its CCD the D200 was, and still is, a fine camera). 

When I was at the London Olympics I was surprised to see so many of the official photographers with ringside access using 7D s. I think someone on a 7DII thread here on CR recently said they were surprised at how many 'non gripped' Canons with pop up flash were in use at such a big event as the World Cup, so one would assume they were 7D s.  

For the images that these people are producing there will be no perceivable difference between FF or crop; no one will know the difference. That situation will change in low light sports though. Will this situation change; will Canon _want_ it to change ? This may be one reason why the new 7DII won't be 16 mp. It is one thing to offer a cheaper, credible alternate to those that cannot afford a 1Dx, but quite another to allow that cheaper alternative to compete in every sphere !

So as I have said before, the 7DII has to be significantly cheaper than a 5DIII.

The 7D is far from being a cheap camera anyway, so someone who is really 'budget minded' would be splashing out on one. However if the 7D and the 5DIII were the same price I think the 7D only be a very small percent of purchases.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 7, 2014)

bosshog7_2000 said:


> I bought the 7D when it was first released and I had two impressions....One: I LOVED the ergonomics and control layout over the 5D2. Two: *I was majorly disappointed in the quality of the files out of the camera*....just too mushy for my taste.



Agreed. Especially the bold part. The 7D had the worst IQ of any Canon product I have used. It was especially weak in crepuscular light, which is where most big-game wildlife shooting occurs. 

I'll be staying away from anything with the 7D name, no matter the amount of enticing gadgets. I found the 70D to be a far superior camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 7, 2014)

lol said:


> Full frame serves a single niche of shallow(er) depth of field. If you're not after that, smaller sensors make more sense.



Not if you care about image quality and shoot in anything other than bright light...




ahsanford said:


> And I'm not _ever _saying a crop with lens X is going to deliver the same IQ as a contemporary FF sensor and a 1.6X lens attached. But if it were _close_, I'd see people sizing up the 'half the total cost / half the total weight' argument and _possibly _staying in the crop universe.
> ...
> 
> I just think value propositions are more than just IQ and cost, and crop has an interesting duckbill platypus of a value proposition at the whacko long end of focal lengths. Some folks live and die by it.



I still maintain the _real_ advantage to APS-C is lower cost. But for the sake of full clarity, APS-C has an advantage IF you are using the longest lens you can afford/carry AND IF you're shooting at low ISOs (less than 800-1600, give or take), AND IF you are printing at sizes larger than 16x24"/A2. If ALL of those apply to your typical shooting needs, then you should be looking forward to the 7DII. You might also be looking forward to the 7DII if you can't afford a 5DIII (or 1D X). Else, you should stop waiting for the 7DII and just buy a 5DIII.


----------



## jrista (Jul 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> bosshog7_2000 said:
> 
> 
> > I bought the 7D when it was first released and I had two impressions....One: I LOVED the ergonomics and control layout over the 5D2. Two: *I was majorly disappointed in the quality of the files out of the camera*....just too mushy for my taste.
> ...



Aye, low light is definitely the 7D's weak point. I had a real tough time with the 7D and the 100-400mm lens, things beyond ISO 1600 were unusable, and 1600 itself was borderline. I will say, however, that with the EF 600mm f/4 II lens, the 7D is a remarkable performer, even in lower light. I've taken some amazing shots in extremely low light with the 7D and 600/4, such as this:







7D, 600/4, ISO 3200. Taken well after sunset, as blue hour was starting. With enough light and proper technique, even the "muddy" 7D could be made to perform quite well. 



MichaelHodges said:


> I'll be staying away from anything with the 7D name, no matter the amount of enticing gadgets. I found the 70D to be a far superior camera.



The past IQ of the original 7D doesn't mean the 7D II will have the same problems. For Canon to succeed with the 7D line, the 7D II MUST have better IQ and overall performance than the 70D. It would just be a flop if it did not. If the 7D II does end up being a superior performer to the 70D...would you still adhere to the above statement? (Just curious...personally I find it odd when one single bad experience with one single product permanently taints a person's opinion of something...to me, every product generation is a chance for a new start, a chance for a company to reinvent itself, reinvigorate itself, or if necessary redeem itself (not that Canon needs redeeming, but they do need some reinvigoration in some areas.))


----------



## nc0b (Jul 7, 2014)

I have two APS-C bodies and two FF bodies. At least 80% of the time I grab a FF body, be it a 5Dc or 6D. Nothing wrong with my 40D or 60D, and for small birds they are a good choice. I doubt I will ever buy another crop body simply because the focal length of my lenses work better with FF. I need more pixels like a hole in the head. For me it is how my 24-105 f/4 IS and 70-200 f/4 IS & f/2.8 IS II work for general shooting. Include the Zeiss 18mm f/3.5, and I generally want the option of wider angle shots with full frame.


----------



## luckydude (Jul 7, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> I've seen some cost comments from folks. _ I know that this is a thread about positivity_, but sub $2k, sub 6D pricing may be a tough get depending on how 'pro' this body is designed.
> 
> As I've said many times in this forum, for some people, the reach of APS-C is vital to what they do (BIF people come to mind). To those folks, crop is a really high-quality 1.6x T/C without the T/C headaches of AF responsiveness or significantly lessened IQ. To those folks, the length upside lets them _not have to buy a $10k+ lens to get their shots_ or for those who do have that money, it lets those great lenses reach even further. To _*those *_folks, Canon could _eeeeeeasily _get above $2k for this new body.



Yup. I'm on record as saying I'd pay $3-4K for a 5DIII in crop factor form and no ISO/image quality penalty. I have a 7D and a 5DIII and the 7D sits unused, the 5D is that much better.

Don't get me wrong, the 7D is a capable camera, I think it gets beat up a bit too much on the forums. It's just that the 5D is better. I'm really hoping that the 7DII is like a 5DIII w/ a 1.6x TC that doesn't take a stop of light and doesn't drop the image quality. That would be worth a lot to anyone who does wildlife, especially birds.


----------



## henrywang (Jul 7, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> bosshog7_2000 said:
> 
> 
> > I bought the 7D when it was first released and I had two impressions....One: I LOVED the ergonomics and control layout over the 5D2. Two: *I was majorly disappointed in the quality of the files out of the camera*....just too mushy for my taste.
> ...



With the supposed redesigned sensor of the new 7D, I would think the IQ would be far superior to the original, and also improved from any other crop body.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2014)

luckydude said:


> Yup. I'm on record as saying I'd pay $3-4K for a 5DIII in crop factor form and no ISO/image quality penalty. I have a 7D and a 5DIII and the 7D sits unused, the 5D is that much better.



HA! I knew you people were out there. 




luckydude said:


> Don't get me wrong, the 7D is a capable camera, I think it gets beat up a bit too much on the forums. It's just that the 5D is better. I'm really hoping that the 7DII is like a 5DIII w/ a 1.6x TC that doesn't take a stop of light and doesn't drop the image quality. That would be worth a lot to anyone who does wildlife, especially birds.



But I think you realize the madness of Canon were they to offer it. Even if they could pull off a 'crop 5D3' with the same IQ, to do so would damage their FF body sales _and_ the sale of their superteles. People could simply do more (on the long end) with less gear. Canon probably does not want that. 

Further, I'm not sure a crop sensor_ can actually beat_ a relatively contemporary FF sensor like the 5D3 or 6D. 

So the question becomes, _how close _does the 7D2 IQ have to be to that of the 6D or 5D3 to have you opt for that instead of FF? 

- A


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 8, 2014)

luckydude said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I've seen some cost comments from folks. _ I know that this is a thread about positivity_, but sub $2k, sub 6D pricing may be a tough get depending on how 'pro' this body is designed.
> ...



Probably the only way an APS-C sensor could match the ISO quality of the 5D3 would be to double the QE and that's just not going to happen. Likely, it won't even be close. I would have liked to have seen them continue on with a 1D Mark V, APS-H sensor, but that went away.


----------



## luckydude (Jul 8, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> luckydude said:
> 
> 
> > Yup. I'm on record as saying I'd pay $3-4K for a 5DIII in crop factor form and no ISO/image quality penalty. I have a 7D and a 5DIII and the 7D sits unused, the 5D is that much better.
> ...



I'm already deep into big glass, 200 f2, 400 DO, 600 f4 II, so Canon has extracted most of that pound of flesh. Though there are times I'm tempted by the 300/400 f2.8.

I do care about sharpness, I'd want the 7D II to keep up with the 600. AF and tracking would be a draw if they are better, both the 7D and the 5DIII hunt more than I'd like for hawks.

For me it will never be FF or crop, it would be crop for reach, FF for most other things. I'm annoyed I didn't move to FF sooner, the images are better.

On the other hand, you guys shouldn't listen to me, I'm an idiot with enough money that my wife lets me buy this stuff, I'm nowhere near as good as the guy who had that awesome pic of the heron taken w/ the 7D & 600mm (or any of the rest of you, some amazing talent here).


----------



## unfocused (Jul 8, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> I just think the argument has sublimed above basic forum back and forth and become one of those religiously held beliefs we won't ever sway on, like to use / not use UV filters, the value of IS on wide angle lenses, etc.
> 
> - A



Very True.



Sporgon said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Serious 7D shooters are not necessarily amateurs on tight budgets.
> ...



Very True, also.

We are only weeks away from knowing, but I'll risk it by repeating my prediction.

I am expecting that the 7DII will be about 24mp. The sensor will perform better in low light and high ISO than the 70D, but it's not going to go into 5D, 1DX or 6D territory. (Physics is a stubborn thing). 

Like all modern DSLRs, it will be a fine, all-purpose camera. But, it's greatest strength will be in taking advantage of the benefits of the APS-C sensor size. It will have autofocusing capabilities equal to or exceeding the 5DIII and with f8 autofocusing, daylight sports, bird and wildlife photographers will be able to mount the new 100-400 zoom with a 1.4 III tele-extender to go to an effective 900 mm before cropping. With 24mp, they can crop away half the image and still have excellent results (1,800 mm anyone?)

Canon very specifically targeted the 5DIII to wedding and event photographers and it was a huge success. People need to understand how target marketing works in this case. By having a specific market in mind for the 5DIII, Canon has a guaranteed user base that it could build off of. Doesn't mean it's not a great camera for others – I own one and I would shoot myself before I would shoot a wedding. It just means they had a base of customers in mind when they released it and it worked well for them.

With the 7DII they will target it to birders, wildlife and sports shooters. People who either need it for their living (sports shooters) or who have disposable income to spend on their hobby (bird and wildlife photographers). Just as the 5DIII became the "must have" camera for wedding photographers, the 7DII will be a "must have" for these folks.



ahsanford said:


> luckydude said:
> 
> 
> > Don't get me wrong, the 7D is a capable camera, I think it gets beat up a bit too much on the forums. It's just that the 5D is better. I'm really hoping that the 7DII is like a 5DIII w/ a 1.6x TC that doesn't take a stop of light and doesn't drop the image quality. That would be worth a lot to anyone who does wildlife, especially birds.
> ...



The only point I disagree with is that I don't think Canon is worried about the sales of their super-telephotos in this way. They aren't stupid. They know that only the tiniest fraction of their customer base can ever afford anything more than the 100-400 zoom and even that is pushing it for most customers. 

If they can sell a hundred 7DIIs with a 100-400 zoom for every one $10,000 super telephoto, they'll happily do that and it's probably not at all unrealistic. 

Bottom line -- if you are looking for a crop sensor that performs as well in low light as a 1Dx at a fraction of the price you can start writing your whining posts now, because it isn't going to happen. 

I repeat a core premise: DSLR manufacturers need to expand their market. They can do so by finding new buyers, but that's getting more and more difficult. A much more realistic strategy is to turn their existing customers into two-body customers. *They want us all to buy a full frame body for low light performance and an APS-C body for reach and resolution. *


----------



## vjlex (Jul 8, 2014)

A sub-$2000 7DII doesn't sound realistic to me. Cheaper than the 6D? Why would they do that? Those 2 cameras seem targeted at quite different users. 6D is the entry-level full frame for people who want to get their feet wet; 7D is the top-of-the-line crop body for people who want to shoot quick action and have some built in reach. I'm much more inclined to believe Canon will do to the 7DII pricing what they did to the 5DIII pricing- add on $1000 bucks to the price of the predecessor.

$2499 at start.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2014)

shunsai said:


> I'm much more inclined to believe Canon will do to the 7DII pricing what they did to the 5DIII pricing- add on $1000 bucks to the price of the predecessor.
> 
> $2499 at start.



They raised the 5-series price substantially, which left a gap to be filled by the 6D. With what will Canon fill the $1500 gap between the $1K 70D and your proposed 250% higher-priced 7D? There may be quite a few 7D owners who would upgrade to a 7DII...but there's a far larger customer base of Rebel/xxxD and xxD owners that Canon would like to see upgrade, and a >$1800 7DII will preclude most of that. 

$1699 at launch.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 8, 2014)

shunsai said:


> A sub-$2000 7DII doesn't sound realistic to me. Cheaper than the 6D? Why would they do that? Those 2 cameras seem targeted at quite different users. 6D is the entry-level full frame for people who want to get their feet wet; 7D is the top-of-the-line crop body for people who want to shoot quick action and have some built in reach. I'm much more inclined to believe Canon will do to the 7DII pricing what they did to the 5DIII pricing- add on $1000 bucks to the price of the predecessor.
> 
> $2499 at start.



Agree. Reasonable guess assuming solid specs are announced.

Some folks can't wrap their heads around how a crop could *ever* cost more than a relatively contemporary FF camera. But consider the delta in cost between the 6D and 5D3. Think about what _features_ drive that difference:


5D3's much more comprehensive AF system, taken from the 1DX
5D3 can perform shots at 1/8000 shutter speed
5D3 has a 100% viewfinder
5D3 has +1.5 fps

And, just for the sake of argument, let's say the _entire_ difference in price between the 5D3 and 6D -- some $1500 -- was due to _just_ those feature differences above. 

Now ask yourself, really crudely: how many of the above categories -- AF system, max shutter speed, VF coverage and burst rate -- will the 7D2 fall on the 5D3 side versus the 6D side? My money on the 7D2 will be that all four of those will be on the high end, i.e. the on the +$1500 camera side of things.

Now replace 5D3 with 7D2, and replace 6D with 70D and re-run the value proposition. Looks like the 7D2 would represent a comprehensive upgrade over the 70D. _Then_ it's easy to see the 7D2's asking price climbing to new heights.

Granted, the math doesn't work exactly work that way (and a $1500 delta in the crop world is a bit crazy), but surely you get my point. Not all the cost/value of the body is in the sensor. AF systems, burst rate, etc. differentiate the product lines and provide value to shooters. They, in turn, _want that_ and will pony up the bucks for it. 

So I could easily see the 7D2 price eclipse the 6D price, eclipse $2k, etc.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 8, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> shunsai said:
> 
> 
> > I'm much more inclined to believe Canon will do to the 7DII pricing what they did to the 5DIII pricing- add on $1000 bucks to the price of the predecessor.
> ...



Neuro, you're right on the key question -- _is this the step-up body for the Rebel masses, or is this the super high end crop tool sports/wildlife people want?_

If it's the former, I think they'll nerf the camera from getting all of the 5D3's hand-me-down upgrades from the 1Dx (perhaps have a nicer-but-not-1DX/5D3-nicer AF system) and keep the price low like you said.

But if it's the latter, it could be a "crop 5D3" with the great 1DX/5D3 AF system and a higher burst rate. _That_ camera will be north of $2k.

- A


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 8, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> I'd thought we'd start the week looking _forward _to something. What features / performance levels would get you *excited *about the 7D2?
> 
> I want a _positive _statement from you about what would legitimately fire you up to own a 7D2. No snarky "APS-C is not for me so I'll say 'A 50 MP FF sensor', ha ha" stuff. Seriously, what would get you excited when the 7D2 announcement comes?
> 
> ...



...A 50MP APS-C sensor... Seriously, the pixel density on that would be amazing.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 8, 2014)

9VIII said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I'd thought we'd start the week looking _forward _to something. What features / performance levels would get you *excited *about the 7D2?
> ...



I was _going_ to say "No requests for APS-H" but then I knew everyone would ask for it. 

We forum dwellers do not like to color within the lines, do we? 

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> Now ask yourself, really crudely: how many of the above categories -- AF system, max shutter speed, VF coverage and burst rate -- will the 7D2 fall on the 5D3 side versus the 6D side? My money on the 7D2 will be that all four of those will be on the high end, i.e. the on the +$1500 camera side of things.



Compared to the 6D, the _current_ 7D has better AF, 1-stop faster max shutter (1/8000 s, same as 5DIII), better VF coverage (100%), and faster burst rate (8 fps, actually 33% faster than the 5DIII). How do those features justify a >$2K price? At launch the 7D was less than current rebated pricing on the 6D, and today the 7D costs the same as a 70D. What the 7D doesn't have – and nor will the 7DII – is a FF sensor.

I do understand lots of people _on this forum_ want an APS-C version of the 5DIII. I think that's what they'll get, for the most part...as far as features go, but _not even close_ on IQ. But Canon likely knows what lots of people _in the real world _ (a number several orders of magnitude larger than this microcosm) want, and I really doubt the majority want a $2500 APS-C camera.


----------



## sdsr (Jul 8, 2014)

If it were mirrorless w EVF & IBIS, both at least as good as Olympus OMDs', and had image quality that's significantly better than an SL1's, I might be interested (not excited, though, barring some technological revolution that makes it as good as FF for image quality). Chances of any such combination showing up strike as being as close to zero as makes no difference, however, so for APS-C purposes I'll stick with my SL1 & Sony a6000 for a while longer. I'm afraid my reaction to dslr announcements is "oh, not again"....

(If I only shot APS-C, regularly photographed herons-catching-fish, and didn't have FF my response might be a bit different, I suppose.)


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 8, 2014)

Clearly, it will not have the AF system of the 1Dx and will not have nearly the IQ of the 5D3. And I don't get why people keep putting the AF system of the 1Dx/5D3. The 1Dx and 5D3 do not have the same AF system.


----------



## vjlex (Jul 8, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> They raised the 5-series price substantially, which left a gap to be filled by the 6D. With what will Canon fill the $1500 gap between the $1K 70D and your proposed 250% higher-priced 7D? There may be quite a few 7D owners who would upgrade to a 7DII...but there's a far larger customer base of Rebel/xxxD and xxD owners that Canon would like to see upgrade, and a >$1800 7DII will preclude most of that.
> 
> $1699 at launch.



For a while, the original 7D will fill in that gap. Then will eventually come along the 80D.

I would love to believe you're right- I'm not a fan of Canon's current pricing scheme. But I was personally gobsmacked by the $3500 price tag of the 5D3. I would love to believe that that was an isolated case and that Canon still engages in sensible pricing when it comes to upgrades, but I'm not inclined to believe that Canon is that principled. They will charge what they think they can get for it, not based on how neatly it fits into a pricing tier.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2014)

shunsai said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > They raised the 5-series price substantially, which left a gap to be filled by the 6D. With what will Canon fill the $1500 gap between the $1K 70D and your proposed 250% higher-priced 7D? There may be quite a few 7D owners who would upgrade to a 7DII...but there's a far larger customer base of Rebel/xxxD and xxD owners that Canon would like to see upgrade, and a >$1800 7DII will preclude most of that.
> ...



The original 7D is now the same price as the 70D, and when the $100 rebate on the 70D expires next month, the 7D will be cheaper. It's not going to be filling any gaps, sorry.


----------



## gsealy (Jul 8, 2014)

It seems to me that the 7D line is about a camera that is rugged and can take extreme conditions, such rain and snow, heat and cold. I expect it to stay that way. So it appeals to people who are out in the wild or at sporting events who take massive amounts of photos seeking to get that one special shot. We can expect a 150-200K shutter count rating. I expect we'll see faster and better AF, maybe 12 FPS, better low light performance, and higher resolution than in the current 7DI. Given we have video pervasiveness, the 7DII will likely have clean HDMI out that can be stored in a recording device. 4K is very possible. Is it exciting for me? No, only because I have a 5DIII and other cameras. I would be thinking about a new 7DI though at a very cheap price. I do like work horses, and the 7DI is one.


----------



## can0nfan2379 (Jul 8, 2014)

I'd like the 7D2 to fill the place of the 1D4....essentially I'd like a 1 series APC weather sealed, wildlife monster.

I would spend 3000-3200 on that in a heart beat and I'm sure many other wildlife / sports guys would also. For other stuff I'll hold onto my 5D3.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 8, 2014)

jrista said:


> The past IQ of the original 7D doesn't mean the 7D II will have the same problems. For Canon to succeed with the 7D line, the 7D II MUST have better IQ and overall performance than the 70D. It would just be a flop if it did not. If the 7D II does end up being a superior performer to the 70D...would you still adhere to the above statement? (Just curious...personally I find it odd when one single bad experience with one single product permanently taints a person's opinion of something...to me, every product generation is a chance for a new start, a chance for a company to reinvent itself, reinvigorate itself, or if necessary redeem itself (not that Canon needs redeeming, but they do need some reinvigoration in some areas.))




I battled a 7D for three years and it was never repaired properly. The customer service on top of it was the worst I've experienced. On the first day of using the camera, it misfocused badly at telephoto. I should have just returned it, but instead I decided to let Canon do the right thing. Big mistake. I really wasted a ton of time on the issue.

I've never had a problem with a Canon body before that, or with the two bodies I bought after. I have no interest in pursuing a 7DII at all, because the 70D is stunning, and I already have a full frame to go with it.

The Mark IV and 7D, IMHO, focused poorly with certain telephotos, and shared the AI Servo II algorithms and AF CF settings.

Sure, the 7DII could use different algorithms, but I'm just staying away. Bad karma. I came pretty close to defecting over the 7D issue.

If you need an upgrade over the 7D, get the 70D. Why? Better sharpness at RAW (I'd say 30-45%), better color at RAW, much more reliable focus and almost as fast. I had both cameras side by side for a month.


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 8, 2014)

I just can't get excited for iq less than 5DIII with less AF ability, and less low light performance. I don't want to settle for less fps either, so this will not be a camera for me. I will eagerly wait to see what it offers. I hope it satisfies the nay sayers.

sek


----------



## luckydude (Jul 8, 2014)

can0nfan2379 said:


> I'd like the 7D2 to fill the place of the 1D4....essentially I'd like a 1 series APC weather sealed, wildlife monster.
> 
> I would spend 3000-3200 on that in a heart beat and I'm sure many other wildlife / sports guys would also. For other stuff I'll hold onto my 5D3.



+1  

My thoughts as well.


----------



## slclick (Jul 8, 2014)

Not excited, it's just a thing.


----------



## Twostones (Jul 8, 2014)

In addition to what others have desired, I would get excited if it has a price I can afford in a full size weather sealed body like the 7D or 5DIII with Eye control, 24 megapixel sensor or better and in Canon White. My 7D gets very hot when shooting in the sun, hot enough that I am considering painting it white.


----------



## Botts (Jul 8, 2014)

Twostones said:


> My 7D gets very hot when shooting in the sun, hot enough that I am considering painting it white.



My 7D did that too!

I'd be excited if I could get this list:

- Great High ISO performance. (Think Sony a7s) I'd trade high MPs for low noise all day long.
- 5D3 Auto-Focus
- GPS
- More than 10 FPS
- Weather sealing as good or better than the 7D
- 7D Ergonomics


----------



## tapanit (Jul 8, 2014)

What I'd want is IQ better than the 5Dmk3 cropped 1.6x (i.e., in focal-length-limited situations) even at (moderately) low light with a good enough lens. That is, the "crop factor advantage" would have to be actually realized. I don't think that's an impossible wish - FF bodies would still beat it hands down in low light when there's no need to crop.
Besides that, I'd want better movement-tracking AF (at least 5Dmk3 level, preferably better) and speed (I could live with 8 fps, but I'd want a big buffer - that's my only real gripe with the 5Dmk3 as compared to the 7D).
Otherwise I don't care much - GPS, WiFi, dual card slots would be nice but not important, video I don't care about.


----------



## dslrdummy (Jul 8, 2014)

I want a faster frame rate and a little more reach for field sports and wildlife. If the light goes down I'll use my 5Diii. I wouldn't use a 7Dii above 1600 iso with my 300 f/2.8 anyway so if it can give me low noise images at that iso I'll be buying next year after the reviews are out. I'm assuming sensor and AF wise it will be a significant upgrade on the current 7d. After 5 years it should be.


----------



## dslrdummy (Jul 8, 2014)

tapanit said:


> Besides that, I'd want better movement-tracking AF (at least 5Dmk3 level, preferably better) and speed (I could live with 8 fps, but I'd want a big buffer - that's my only real gripe with the 5Dmk3 as compared to the 7D).


Yeah, I forgot to mention the buffer gripes me too.


----------



## that1guyy (Jul 8, 2014)

Honestly if they gave me a 7d with a stop better noise and dynamic range improveed and high quality video I would buy it. But knowing Canon, the video will again be crippled and I'll be disappointed.


----------



## Ivan Muller (Jul 8, 2014)

Bigger sensor
24mp
less shadow noise
Joystick
WIFI
GPS
3.2 inch touchscreen LCD or bigger
Heck while were at it electronic viewfinder...Canon has to get in the game at some stage!
2 axis spirit level
100% viewfinder
radio control for speedlights
Intervalometer
MF aids like zebra stripes etc


----------



## Ivan Muller (Jul 8, 2014)

_Disclaimer: I'm not trying poke fun at Ivan's original thread so much as build some excitement around a release. Mondays need positive thoughts because they are, in fact, Mondays._
[/quote]

No sweat, this is all fun and games anyway. But it would be great if anyone senior at Canon actually read this stuff! Personally I am erring on the side of caution to avoid disappointment!


----------



## crashpc (Jul 8, 2014)

It would be exciting if it could be called (as mentioned) "D7100 killer" (IQ wise).


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jul 8, 2014)

dslrdummy said:


> I want a faster frame rate and a little more reach for field sports and wildlife. If the light goes down I'll use my 5Diii. I wouldn't use a 7Dii above 1600 iso with my 300 f/2.8 anyway so if it can give me low noise images at that iso I'll be buying next year after the reviews are out. I'm assuming sensor and AF wise it will be a significant upgrade on the current 7d. After 5 years it should be.



I think you really want a 1D-x....but for 7D money, good luck with that!


----------



## dslrdummy (Jul 8, 2014)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I think you really want a 1D-x....but for 7D money, good luck with that!


You think so? If the 7Dii doesn't give lower noise at up to 1600 they may as well not bother.


----------



## mustafa (Jul 8, 2014)

I'll wait for the MkIII.


----------



## AvTvM (Jul 8, 2014)

I will preorder the 7d ii if it has
* af like 5d 3
* iq better than nikon d7100 at low and hi isos
* eye control af v2.0
* working wifi implementation + fully featured wireless tethering app for ios and android
* canon RT radio flash commander built-in
* price like 7d at launch ... € 1649 MSRP

If it comes with the same performance and features but in a compact mirrorless version with top notch evf and ef-m mount ... I'd be willing to pay up to € 2.500


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jul 8, 2014)

dslrdummy said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > I think you really want a 1D-x....but for 7D money, good luck with that!
> ...



With that complete list, yes it's a 1D-x requirement. But if you take a single spec in isolation...no it's not too much to ask. But I really can't see a 7DII having a faster frame rate than 8pfs....happt to be proved wrong though.


----------



## dslrdummy (Jul 8, 2014)

GMCPhotographics said:


> dslrdummy said:
> 
> 
> > GMCPhotographics said:
> ...


You should re-read my original post. I didn't compile a list of specs. I just said I wanted slightly more reach, a faster frame rate than my 5D and low noise at up to 1600 iso. That doesn't come close to being a cheap 1DX. Of course, if I had the money for a 1DX I'd probably buy one, but ….


----------



## pwp (Jul 8, 2014)

I'm hoping for souped up video functionality...starting with the blindingly obvious 4k (internally recorded unlike A7s) and focus peaking. If it goes this way it's to have to be good. I've just dropped around $3.5k on the completely awesome 4k Panasonic GH4 with assorted MFT glass. For video (under 3200 iso) this just blows the 5D3 out of the water. I'm not the only one looking at leaving Canon for video work.
http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/gh4-review/
http://dslrvideoshooter.com/panasonic-gh4-review-video/
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_GH4/

Either the 7D2 will be pitched as a great action stills performer with modest video functions (so as not to cannibalize Canon Cinema sales) or a game changing video front runner. Either way, it's something to look forward to.

-pw


----------



## Tugela (Jul 8, 2014)

pwp said:


> I'm hoping for souped up video functionality...starting with the blindingly obvious 4k (internally recorded unlike A7s) and focus peaking. If it goes this way it's to have to be good. I've just dropped around $3.5k on the completely awesome 4k Panasonic GH4 with assorted MFT glass. For video (under 3200 iso) this just blows the 5D3 out of the water. I'm not the only one looking at leaving Canon for video work.
> http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/gh4-review/
> http://dslrvideoshooter.com/panasonic-gh4-review-video/
> http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_GH4/
> ...



None of Canon's consumer cameras will cannibalize Cinema EOS sales, that is a completely different market aimed primarily at professionals who have different needs. Cameras such as the 7D and 5D will be aimed at what the competition in the high end consumer market are putting out. If those competitors have high end video functions, chances are that new Canon products in the market sector will as well. Whatever the Cinema EOS cameras have is irrelevant. And in any case, major updates in those cameras are likely imminent as well, so why would Canon cripple new products that will be expected to compete for three years, so that they don't interfere with sales of other products that are nearing the end of their market life? 

People keep on making this argument as though it makes sense, but it is an insane approach from a business point of view, and I don't think that Canon is stupid.


----------



## that1guyy (Jul 8, 2014)

Apparently Canon's cinema line will be updated with Mark ii versions of the C500 and C300. Hopefully those get a huge improvement. 4k RAW and crazy DR? High frame rates?

If Canon is planning that for their cinema line, then maybe we shall get compressed 4k on the 7D and 60p 1080p. Hopefully at the very least its not the soft mush like the past several models.


----------



## TAF (Jul 9, 2014)

The only thing that would interest me would be a much higher video frame rate.

Give me full HD at 1200 frames per second for less than $2K and I'm there.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 9, 2014)

Tugela said:


> pwp said:
> 
> 
> > I'm hoping for souped up video functionality...starting with the blindingly obvious 4k (internally recorded unlike A7s) and focus peaking. If it goes this way it's to have to be good. I've just dropped around $3.5k on the completely awesome 4k Panasonic GH4 with assorted MFT glass. For video (under 3200 iso) this just blows the 5D3 out of the water. I'm not the only one looking at leaving Canon for video work.
> ...


agreed!
The money is in the lower models.... If Canon is going to do something to protect a DSLR, that DSLR would be the T31....


----------



## keriboi (Jul 9, 2014)

can0nfan2379 said:


> I'd like the 7D2 to fill the place of the 1D4....essentially I'd like a 1 series APC weather sealed, wildlife monster.
> 
> I would spend 3000-3200 on that in a heart beat and I'm sure many other wildlife / sports guys would also. For other stuff I'll hold onto my 5D3.



Yes but that would kill sales on the long lens and idx. Canon do need to bring this out, but as a 3D and simlar price to the 1D x


----------



## TAF (Jul 9, 2014)

keriboi said:


> can0nfan2379 said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like the 7D2 to fill the place of the 1D4....essentially I'd like a 1 series APC weather sealed, wildlife monster.
> ...




It would only kill the sales of long lens and the 1dx if they make the sensor much better. A long lens and a FF frame still beat a APS-C.

as an aside, I doubt very much if Canon will bring out any camera with a 3D marking that isn't, well, a 3-D camera. Too high a likelihood of consumer confusion and complaints.

Perhaps the 4D or 8D, but not the 3.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 9, 2014)

It's simple for the 7D2 to become a hit.

-10 fps
-24mp apsc
-61 Point AF

Everything else is secondary. Call it in canon and start trucking in the money.


----------



## Menace (Jul 9, 2014)

If the IQ is good enough for my needs, I might consider it marrying it to my 400 2.8 II instead of using 1.4x (as a third body).


----------



## WillThompson (Jul 9, 2014)

A 1D? Body with 1.6 APS-C sensor.

(A cross between a 1DX & 70D, 1DX body with 70D sensor)

At a 1DX price ok too.

A total kick-ass camera!


Will T.


----------



## KacperP (Jul 9, 2014)

I suspect/hope for:
- 5 layer sensor with phase AF capability APS-C w/o AA filter
- 20-24 Mpix
- ca. 10 fps
- VF with >1 magnification, I doubt on hybrid/EVF
- VF AF somewhere between 70D and 5D3

Multilayer sensor technology alone should have two stops of IQ advantage over bayer matrix, plus additional sharpness without AA.
I guess I would be perfectly happy for quite some time with 70D clone featuring multi layer sensor.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jul 9, 2014)

KacperP said:


> Multilayer sensor technology alone should have two stops of IQ advantage over bayer matrix, plus additional sharpness without AA.



I don't understand this statement....are you saying that the extra two stops of exposure latitude will improve per pixel sharpness? I'm not sure I quite understand?


----------



## KacperP (Jul 9, 2014)

GMCPhotographics said:


> KacperP said:
> 
> 
> > Multilayer sensor technology alone should have two stops of IQ advantage over bayer matrix, plus additional sharpness without AA.
> ...


 ???
And I don't understand where did you get yours. Let's repeat: MULTI LAYER sensor.
Better sharpness will not come from better ISO performance. Sharpness and ISO performance will come together from multi-layer sensor. Do I have to explain HOW?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 9, 2014)

KacperP said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > KacperP said:
> ...



You might start by explaining WHAT you mean by 'two stops of IQ advantage'. Two stops more DR? Two stops less noise? Able to SHOUT TWO STOPS LOUDER? 

As for sharpness, while it's true that a multilayer sensor wouldn't need the blurring caused by an AA filter to avoid color moiré, that blurring is predictable and thus highly correctable with sharpening in post, so the true gain in sharpness is minor at best.


----------



## RGF (Jul 9, 2014)

three things. First two are would get be close to buying. 3rd is nice.


1. 1Dx -like build, controls, electronics
2. DR and S/N greatly improved
3. APS-H sensor (1.3 crop) with 18 to 24 MP

Final buy decision will be based upon what they deliver at what price


----------



## EOS rebel (Jul 10, 2014)

I'm hoping for:

- DPAF and touchscreen
- AF with f/8 max aperture like the 1D series
- 10FPS
- 30-40 shot RAW buffer
- improved noise performance so that ISO 6400 is comparable to what I currently see for ISO 1600 on my T3i
- 1DX or 5D3 AF tracking system
- price below $2200CAD for body only

I know some are unlikely and others may not be physically possible but I'm hoping Canon will surprise us all. A man can dream after all...


----------



## KacperP (Jul 10, 2014)

[quote author=neuroanatomist]You might start by explaining WHAT you mean by 'two stops of IQ advantage'. Two stops more DR? Two stops less noise?[/quote]
Too late. You should have asked about 'ISO performance' 
A: Two stops less noise.

[quote author=neuroanatomist]Able to SHOUT TWO STOPS LOUDER?[/quote]
If capital letters are 'shouting', then what exclamation marks are for?
Aren't you triggering "troll alert"?

[quote author=neuroanatomist]As for sharpness, while it's true that a multilayer sensor wouldn't need the blurring caused by an AA filter to avoid color moiré, that blurring is predictable and thus highly correctable with sharpening in post, so the true gain in sharpness is minor at best.[/quote]
Not true. "No AA" picture can still be corrected/sharpened better than picture "with AA". Multilayer without AA can be sharpened/"regenerated" even further.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 10, 2014)

KacperP said:


> neuroanatomist]You might start by explaining WHAT you mean by 'two stops of IQ advantage'. Two stops more DR? Two stops less noise?[/quote]
> Too late. You should have asked about 'ISO performance' ;)
> A: Two stops less noise.
> [/quote]
> ...


----------



## NancyP (Jul 10, 2014)

At this point, any announcement would be exciting. Just think, no more speculation threads! Cue in the "whining" threads instead. :


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 10, 2014)

KacperP said:


> If capital letters are 'shouting', then what exclamation marks are for?



Exclamations. Shouting in text is pretty much established now, in some environments people get fired for typing in all caps.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 10, 2014)

KacperP said:


> I suspect/hope for:
> - 5 layer sensor with phase AF capability APS-C w/o AA filter
> - 20-24 Mpix
> - ca. 10 fps
> ...



On another forum someone claiming to know a tester insists that the 7D replacement will use the 70D sensor, he won't say/doesn't know anything else.

He seems like a poster who has been a credible type, but I guess we will find out whether he really is or not.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 10, 2014)

KacperP said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > KacperP said:
> ...



Actually yes please ;D. How does going to multi-layer give two stops better SNR????? (and even more consider some Bayer are already at least 60% efficient)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 10, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> KacperP said:
> 
> 
> > I suspect/hope for:
> ...



OOPS, people misinterpreted his post. He was actually talking about the next Rebel when he said that and not about the 7D2. He has no info on the 7D2 sensor at all. It is the next Rebel that will have the same exact sensor as the 70D.


----------



## alex_c (Jul 10, 2014)

What would be exciting: 
Same ergonomics as current 7D (stupid Canon makes them bodies smaller all the time and impossible to held - see 70D) + 
same build (yes, would be excited if they do not dumb down!) + 
better IQ: no mushy image, better high ISO + 
touch screen with good control + 
articulated screen. 
Wi-Fi, GPS don't matter. Flash and flash control yes! 
All under 6D.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 10, 2014)

KacperP said:


> [quote author=neuroanatomist]As for sharpness, while it's true that a multilayer sensor wouldn't need the blurring caused by an AA filter to avoid color moiré, that blurring is predictable and thus highly correctable with sharpening in post, so the true gain in sharpness is minor at best.


Not true. "No AA" picture can still be corrected/sharpened better than picture "with AA". Multilayer without AA can be sharpened/"regenerated" even further.
[/quote]

All the practical evidence from people who have two cameras identical other than with, or without AA filter, ie. Nikon D800/800e and Pentax K5II/n (or whatever it's called) is that there is no perceivable difference after applying suitable un-sharp mask.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 10, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> KacperP said:
> 
> 
> > [quote author=neuroanatomist]As for sharpness, while it's true that a multilayer sensor wouldn't need the blurring caused by an AA filter to avoid color moiré, that blurring is predictable and thus highly correctable with sharpening in post, so the true gain in sharpness is minor at best.
> ...



All the practical evidence from people who have two cameras identical other than with, or without AA filter, ie. Nikon D800/800e and Pentax K5II/n (or whatever it's called) is that there is no perceivable difference after applying suitable un-sharp mask.
[/quote]

no AA is still a touch crisper, but also with false 'detail' and more issues
I don't think sensor densities are high enough yet for no AA filter to be wise.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 11, 2014)

*Specifications:*
16.9 Megapixel (5040 x 3360) DPAF CMOS
11fps (rated to 300,000 cycles)
36 image RAW buffer
41pt AF (all cross-type)
5D-III Menu system
Rate Button (customizable)
CFast 2.0
Built-in Wifi for remote shooting, fie transfers and video
Built-in Speedlite Radio Transmitter

*Video Features:*
Clean HDMI out
Headphone jack
Live Video Monitoring via Wifi 
WXGA proxy recording via Wifi (5m radius)

*Video resolutions:*
FHD - 1920x1080 at 120p, 60p, 30p, 24p, Timelapse
WXGA - 1280x720 at 120p, 60p, 30p, 24p
FHD-HDR - 1920x1080 at 30p, 24p

*Crop-Mode video resolutions: *
DCI 4K- 4096x2160 at 30p, 24p, Timelapse (at 1.2xCrop)
1920x1080 (at 2.6xCrop, 1.3xCrop)
1280x720 (at 4xCrop, 2xCrop, 1.3xCrop)


----------



## jrista (Jul 11, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > KacperP said:
> ...



no AA is still a touch crisper, but also with false 'detail' and more issues
I don't think sensor densities are high enough yet for no AA filter to be wise.
[/quote]

Aye, removal of the AA results in false detail, which really just shows up as harsh noise a lot of the time, aliasing and more at others. I don't know that sensor densities will ever be high enough that we could ever really do away with AA filters. I mean, if the Otus does resolve somewhere in the realm of 400lp/mm wide open, then we would need a bayer sensor capable of resolving over 550mp in order to be able to drop the AA filter. That would be pixel sizes around 1.25µm. Not infeasible from a fabrication standpoint...probably infeasible from a data transfer rate standpoint (the file sizes at 14 bit, assuming around 7% increase in pixel count for masked border pixels, would be about 1.1GB in size, each...the only things that move that much data per second are high powered GPUs and CPUs, both if which require massive amounts of power (even i7 Intel Haswells still draw a lot of power when moving that kind of data per second.)


----------



## fotonunta (Jul 11, 2014)

Will sell my Canon 6D and buy the new Canon 7D Mark II - better AF points ... but we will see 
__________________________________________________________

Foto Nunta Brasov | Fotograf Nunta | Foto video nunta


----------



## NancyP (Jul 15, 2014)

Will convert the old 60D to a full-spectrum camera....conversion of Canon Rebels costs about 350 bucks if you supply the camera, and the 60D conversion ought to be similar in price.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 15, 2014)

Latest rumor suggests that the big new sensor tech for 7D2 is all about a radically improved dual pixel AF that will be completely revolutionary but was also 100% silent on any talk of actual image quality improvements (an earlier rumor hinted that the next FF might be the one to focus on also improving IQ). But who knows, these sources may all be garbage.


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Latest rumor suggests that the big new sensor tech for 7D2 is all about a radically improved dual pixel AF that will be completely revolutionary but was also 100% silent on any talk of actual image quality improvements (an earlier rumor hinted that the next FF might be the one to focus on also improving IQ). But who knows, these sources may all be garbage.



I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)


----------



## that1guyy (Jul 16, 2014)

I am almost certain the 7D2 will get the DPAF system but I suspect that's not all that Canon will put in the camera. Like you said, they must know if that's all they're doing they're going to lose the good will of their customers.

Besides DPAF what else can Canon do to make sure customers are satisfied?

1. A new sensor that improves DR, noise, and sharpness. That's a no brainer and judging by recent rumors there is a good chance the 7D2 will have new sensor technology that will make its way to the 5D IV and so on.

2. Faster regular AF system. This camera is well suited for action photographers so an Af system that at least matches the 5D III in both speed and accuracy is an obvious inclusion.

3. Wifi and/or GPS. This seems like one of those things that Canon simply has to do in order check a box off ("we have it now too!"). It's pretty much standard now in other brands. 

4. Video features. Hate it or love it video is here to stay on DSLRs. Canon has to protect their cinema line now so we can't expect 4k raw obviously on the 7D ii. However, I have a belief Canon will decide not to cripple the video on the 7D II as they have on the 70D and other cameras. The C300 and C500 are due for updates so I suspect those cameras will introduce much higher specs that will significantly widen the gap between cinema line and DSLR, which allows Canon to give their DSLRs better video functionality. 

What will it be? I can only guess but I suspect we will finally see sharp 1080p footage on a Canon. No more mush. We'll get a better codec, such as Prores, possibly 10 bit data, and a better method of down sampling that will get rid of moire and aliasing. I also expect higher frame rates, namely 60p at full HD and 120p at 720p. It is also possibly, though unlikely, we will get 4k recording, probably at 8 bit 4:2:0 if it does happen. Maybe Magic Lantern can work on that in the future!

A camera with similar specs to these will probably make some splashes yet seems within the realm of possibility, and is in line with the rumors.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 16, 2014)

jrista said:


> I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)



Are you suggesting that the people here are representative of Canon's customer base? I see lots of clamoring for better IQ on forums but until the 70D, the 7D remained a strong seller. I'd bet a 7DII with 41ish AF points and 10 fps, and a 24 MP DPAF sensor similar in IQ to the 70D, would sell quite well.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 16, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)
> ...


Personally, if the 7D2 came with:
7DII with 41ish AF points 
10 fps
24 MP DPAF sensor similar in IQ to the 70D, or slightly less pixels and slightly more IQ....
and WiFi/touchscreen

I'd buy one.

Right about now, the biggest thing they can do to improve IQ is to move the A/D onto the sensor, and if they do that plus the above, I'd pre-order it.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 16, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



Better add f8 autofocus. A 24mp 7D coupled with a new 100-400 f5.6 zoom and a 1.4III converter would be very tempting.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 16, 2014)

that1guyy said:


> 4. Video features. Hate it or love it video is here to stay on DSLRs. Canon has to protect their cinema line now so we can't expect 4k raw obviously on the 7D ii. However, I have a belief Canon will decide not to cripple the video on the 7D II as they have on the 70D and other cameras. The C300 and C500 are due for updates so I suspect those cameras will introduce much higher specs that will significantly widen the gap between cinema line and DSLR, which allows Canon to give their DSLRs better video functionality.



I think Canon has a delicate line to walk here. I think they will push more 'pro' / top end video options down the line to non-Cinema bodies _because they have to_ to some extent -- competitors without the high-end Cinema rigs in their portfolio will simply take that business from Canon if they don't. Consider:

https://www.slrlounge.com/gh4-sales-roof-panasonic-doubles-production/

So I won't prognosticate the specifics (I keep seeing thousands of wrinkles on formats / speeds / clean output, etc.), but Canon can't leave high-end video out of their non-high-end bodies for too long.

- A

Disclaimer on this opinion: I don't shoot video unless I lost a bet or owe someone a really big favor.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 16, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Better add f8 autofocus. A 24mp 7D coupled with a new 100-400 f5.6 zoom and a 1.4III converter would be very tempting.



Good call. That would be a great add. I'm surprised in a thread about the 'future king of crop', the length-mad 7D user base didn't flag this need sooner. 

I'm also surprised no one offered their dream of creating a 4000mm setup with T/Cs, duct tape and love. 

- A


----------



## NancyP (Jul 16, 2014)

I am pretty sure that I mentioned f/8 phase autofocus sometime earlier in this thread, being the owner of a 400mm f/5.6L and a 1.4x TC II.  Image quality is still pretty good with the 1.4x TC, and the set-up is so light, it would be worthwhile for BIF if the camera did f/8 phase AF. I haven't made the jump to a Big White yet. I REALLY want better high ISO performance as well.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 16, 2014)

unfocused said:


> Better add f8 autofocus. A 24mp 7D coupled with a new 100-400 f5.6 zoom and a 1.4III converter would be very tempting.



+1


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 16, 2014)

that1guyy said:


> 4. Video features. Hate it or love it video is here to stay on DSLRs. Canon has to protect their cinema line now so we can't expect 4k raw obviously on the 7D ii. However, I have a belief Canon will decide not to cripple the video on the 7D II as they have on the 70D and other cameras. The C300 and C500 are due for updates so I suspect those cameras will introduce much higher specs that will significantly widen the gap between cinema line and DSLR, which allows Canon to give their DSLRs better video functionality.
> 
> What will it be? I can only guess but I suspect we will finally see sharp 1080p footage on a Canon. No more mush. We'll get a better codec, such as Prores, possibly 10 bit data, and a better method of down sampling that will get rid of moire and aliasing. I also expect higher frame rates, namely 60p at full HD and 120p at 720p. It is also possibly, though unlikely, we will get 4k recording, probably at 8 bit 4:2:0 if it does happen. Maybe Magic Lantern can work on that in the future!



No line skipping seems to be a pretty important thing to include. I'd personally love to see 720p at 120Hz and 640x480 at 240Hz, at least, for high speed modes.

Another thing I'd love is a smooth continuous windowing feature from full-frame down to 1:1 at whatever size you're shooting, possibly with one of those compact-camera-style sliders around the shutter release.


----------



## photo212 (Jul 16, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> I'd thought we'd start the week looking _forward _to something. What features / performance levels would get you *excited *about the 7D2?
> 
> I want a _positive _statement from you about what would legitimately fire you up to own a 7D2. No snarky "APS-C is not for me so I'll say 'A 50 MP FF sensor', ha ha" stuff. Seriously, what would get you excited when the 7D2 announcement comes?
> 
> ...


<$1800
9+ cross autofocus spots.
>18MP
3-5 fps
Would love to see if Canon integrates in the Magic Lantern's Dual ISO option or their own version of the same.
no wifi, no gps - don't need. don't want to pay for them.
I do want a battery grip - whether integral or screw-on

pretty simple. A small step is all I need to get me to upgrade from my 40D/50D combo. Never thought the 7D was that much improved. Some thought so. I decided to skip a camera, and never in my wildest nightmares did I think it would take this long. Saved a lot of cash over this years.


----------



## garyknrd (Jul 16, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)
> ...



Unfortunately, and depressing as it sounds. I agree.
With the quality of glass Canon has. It is just depressing. For the first time in years I am starting to leave my Canon gear at home, and using other brands because of it. But, honestly I know I am in the minority. I love APS-C cameras. 

Still got my hopes up though. 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/avianphotos
http://www.birdsthatfart.com


----------



## noncho (Jul 16, 2014)

If we have 70D for base(NO fixed screen):

THE BEST APS-C sensor!
Optimised AF + F8 at all crossed points.
8-10 FPS with large and fast buffer. 
Dual SD card slot with latest UHS-3 Support.

- -
Something like EF-S 40-120 2.8
Less than 6D price.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 16, 2014)

jrista said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > Latest rumor suggests that the big new sensor tech for 7D2 is all about a radically improved dual pixel AF that will be completely revolutionary but was also 100% silent on any talk of actual image quality improvements (an earlier rumor hinted that the next FF might be the one to focus on also improving IQ). But who knows, these sources may all be garbage.
> ...



Sounded like they were hinting at way upping the speed and making it not focus hunt at all and perform super well for real time tracking and focusing during video.

But who knows.


----------



## geonix (Jul 16, 2014)

I guess that canon has to move with market on video specs. If Nikon and all others make 1080p 60fps a standard in their cameras canon cannot stay behind. Regardless of any wish to protect their C-Models or any other pro cameras. 
With the technological evolution in video to 4k beeing that fast it would be a desaster if the 7D replacement would still offer no better video functions than the 5D III (resolution and fps wise). 
Nikon made the move and came out with the D810 because they saw the D800 need an upgrade to remain top level technology. 
Canon was once famous for its video capabilities in their DSLRs (namely the 5D III), Nikon, Sony and Panasonic are now not only at level but are already overtaking canon. The GH-4 is a good example.


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2014)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



That still doesn't sound revolutionary or anything like that. It's just expected evolutions on the existing DPAF. I think the patent that covers increasing sensitivity could cover a lot of that, as all PDAF is is a bunch of highly sensitive strips of pixels that can be used to detect a phase offset. Current dedicated PDAF sensors use pixels in the strips that are huge compared to current image sensor pixels...increasing the sensitivity of the photodiodes would allow DPAF to perform at a more competitive level, and by consequence become more useful for realtime focus and focus tracking during video.

Still...it just, if that's ALL Canon does with the 7D II sensor...wow. FLOP. I think Canon is smarter than that...


----------



## zim (Jul 16, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)
> ...



I think that's going to turn out to be pretty accurate as it's going to get reamed in these forums for that but a 7D as is with those additional specs is actually going to be a superb camera, as a nice to have I would like to see touch screen, not swivelly tilty thing though. Well that's what I'm expecting anyway.


----------



## Aglet (Jul 16, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> What's your evidence for that? Current Foveon sensors are crap at high ISO. For example, the LL review of the DP2M cites 'poor IQ above ISO 400...with current Canon sensors, ISO 800 isn't even 'high ISO'.



Old info.
Latest Sigma Quattro has made significant ISO performance improvements, especially considering how few iterations of such a sensor have been produced.
edit: arghhh.. was just looking at samples of it and, despite better ISO performance above base, it's got far too much vertical banding for my liking. Unfortunate, as detail is crisp and color on object edges is more like I'd prefer.



neuroanatomist said:


> Seems like your understanding of these concepts is about as astute as your comprehension of the sensor design for DPAF, i.e. very poor:



Why do you punctuate your flawed argument with an disparaging personal remark?
seems your understanding of acceptable social behavior may be comparably flawed


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 16, 2014)

Regarding touch and tilty-swively screens...
_
(this is long, but perhaps has merit re: screen preferences)_

I design things for a living -- medical devices, not cameras. In my line of work, when we run into preference proliferation where you have intractable 'camps' of users that _must_ be satisfied all the time. We size it up pretty simply.

Scenario 1: The value proposition of the product we have in mind is good enough (on aggregate) to overcome the loss of that the one critical feature, i.e. the product is _so_ slick, powerful, intuitive, effective that someone will willingly go against their core / gut beliefs to get their hands on the product. In this case, we just offer that one great product and tell folks to take it or leave it.

Scenario 2: The product _isn't_ so compelling that people will go against a 'must' desire of theirs, but _that camp of users is large enough_ to warrant a sister product / alternate version / new SKU that has the feature they want. i.e. Despite the time / cost / difficulty to satisfy this camp, it's worth it to do so, and we spin up the people to get it done.

Scenario 3: Scenario 2 with a smaller group that _doesn't_ warrant standalone products to scratch their itch. Wiser companies drive around these battles and chase more lucrative targets. Smaller / more desperate companies to swoop in and fill the needs of these under-served customers.

Scenario 4: There are enough Scenario 3 groups that we entertain a modular solution to the problem. One core product is designed with 2, 3, 4, etc. versions of a single critical subsystem. Either you offer all of them to the market and the user assembles them, we kit them into different standalone SKUs, or we only offer one but design in this modularity as future proofing for a _future_ Scenario 2 situation (i.e. if the market changes). Once that group gets large enough, we're glad we have a flexible enough platform to bolt on what they need as a new SKU.

I'm just wondering what the market segmentation is on touchscreens and/or tilty-flippy screens. I assume that the former is simple like/dislike preference, but the latter is a potential win for ergonomics at the cost of robustness (drops, hinge mechanism reliability, etc.) and weather sealing. (I'll post a poll on this to mine where this group stands, just for fun.)

Question for this thread is: would Canon ever go all 'mirrorless external viewfinder/grip/etc.' on this problem and make the LCD a kit-like selection of standard / touch / touch+swivel or (gasp) something users could interchange themselves?

- A


----------



## jrista (Jul 16, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I dunno. I've read the subsequent DPAF patents, and there isn't anything remotely revolutionary in there. Mostly just using different sized photodiodes for the AF part, and a means of increasing sensitivity for AF without reducing IQ. If that's all Canon's got for the 7D II, they are going to take a HUGE reputation hit...and they HAVE to know that... (If they don't, then they've totally lost touch with their customer base, and I am seriously hoping that's not the case.)
> ...



It may sell, but I think it would still hurt Canon's reputation. To date, they actually have a very good track record of listening to their customers and delivering on their customers demands. Both the 1D X and 5D III are excellent examples of that...Canon pretty much NAILED both on the head, delivering exactly what their customers wanted.

It's very clear that their customers want a better sensor in the 7D II. If Canon was to make it some big video DSLR, and completely ignore their still photography customer demands, I just think that would hurt Canon's reputation as a company that listens to their customers, and delivers meaningful improvements in IQ. As much as the 1D X and 5D III did not improve low ISO IQ to the same degree as the D800, both improved high ISO IQ considerably, and people are quite happy with them.

All I've heard, for the last several years, from people all over the net, is they want Canon to deliver better DR. Regardless of whether more DR is nearly as meaningful or important as people seem to think it is, it's still by far the single loudest demand that Canon customers, as a gigantic mob, have been demanding. I think it would be damaging to Canon's reputation to completely ignore that demand, and not only that, but completely ignore still photography demands overall and just focus in the video stuff (which is what LTRLI's posts seemed to indicate whatever rumors he read said.)

One of the things I like most about Canon is they've listened to their customers, for decades now, they have delivered new products based directly on customer feedback. I remember for years the "fewer megapixels, better pixels" demand of pro photographers who were sick of the endless megapixel race. I remember the AF system of the 5D II being one of the biggest complaints about that camera. I remember the lack of f/8 AF in anything but the 1D line being another sticking point. Canon directly addressed all of those things, and other key issues their customers had. If they ignore the sensor IQ/DR thing...they are ignoring a BIIIG issue their customers have. It doesn't matter if it matters, it doesn't matter if low ISO DR isn't as important as some of the Canon naysayers and die-hard Nikon fans insist...all that really matters is Canon's low ISO DR is most definitely at the top of a very significant number of Canon users complaint lists. They have to respond to it...some how, some way...they can't simply ignore it.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 16, 2014)

*Annnnnnd, here's a poll on LCD screen preferences I ginned up:*

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK65Z2Y

I'd appreciate everyone's thoughts. It's a classic example of an engineer channeling his inner marketing guy, but please, indulge me. I am truly curious.

Sorry to take the question outside of CR, but I wanted follow up questions that the CR Forum poll doodad will not allow.

- A


----------



## zim (Jul 16, 2014)

ahsanford said:


> *Annnnnnd, here's a poll on LCD screen preferences I ginned up:*
> 
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK65Z2Y
> 
> ...




My answers didn't appear in the results, a well that's marketing for you :


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 16, 2014)

zim said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > *Annnnnnd, here's a poll on LCD screen preferences I ginned up:*
> ...



Homer: Bad helper monkey! Bad Mojo!

Sorry. This link works for me (even when I am logged out), but you may have to have filled out the survey to see it:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s_thankyou.aspx?sm=Ws7JK%252bcabzvEcxXxJcXkq45j8D7iDKRGz0nakT9q9A0%253d

If that doesn't work, I'll post a summary of the results in 24 hours.

- A


----------



## johnnyblues (Jul 17, 2014)

I chose the 7D over the 5dm2 because of its (at the time) better AF. While it was great at what I was using it for, I was always dismayed at images over 1600 ISO; L lenses and shooting in raw helped a bit. What would excite me on this next iteration? Great ISO 3200 images and acceptable ISO 6400 pics (little NR needed).

That and a $1500 price tag. 8)


----------



## NancyP (Jul 18, 2014)

How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 18, 2014)

NancyP said:


> How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.



You nailed it. The middle group should be willing to pay _anything_ for the 7D2 (I'm not kidding: $3-4k!) because it saves them from having to go all Great White, which costs much, much more. I continue to rep for these people as the 7D2 represents (for them) is the best single possible upgrade they can make for longer BIF/wildlife/sports/racing shooting in the pricey but not impoverishing $2k-ish investment. (That... or possibly the new 100-400 if it is _really_ solid.)

The _size_ of that middle group is the question. If it's big enough, I think Canon should make the 7D2 that crop-sized 1DX and pro-it-up with best in class features, and ask north of $2k for it. Let the 70D be the premium APS-C rig and the 7D2 be the exotic long-range specialists' super-tool.

But there is a legitimate point folks make that Canon needs a $1,500-$1,700 or so crop body and the 7D2 must be it. That would speak to your _third_ group being wooed with something clearly better than the 70D (for more than just framerate: I'd think the AF, build quality, pixel count, etc. would all be improved) and _not_ for twice as much. 

The first group buying a 7D2 will happen if it's 'pro' enough. Not having to lug as heavy a Great White into the bush is a weight-related win, and it's like a built-in 1.6x T/C without an AF performance or sharpness hit for those who do want to lug their big lenses and net even longer shots. So I could see 1DX users picking up a 7D2 as a second or third body, sure.

- A


----------



## garyknrd (Jul 18, 2014)

NancyP said:


> How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.



I can afford a Idx, and I would not buy one for birding even at half the price. I tried one and tried the 5D III. Those are not birding cameras IMO. Or at least not for me. 
After the new big whites came out with the new FF cameras. My friends that I shoot with changed very quick. And just raved. I have been looking at there photos for the last two years. The detail and quality of there photos have gone downhill. And not just by a little. All of them also bought the new 600 to go with the new cameras.

If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.

http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html


----------



## jrista (Jul 18, 2014)

garyknrd said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.
> ...



The fact that your friends bird photo quality went downhill is not indicative of the equipment, it's indicative of their own skill. I'd wager that they are having a harder time with the larger, heavier equipment, but that is something that can be dealt with via practice.

Big name, long time pros use the 1D X and the 5D III, and they make phenomenal bird photos with both. There are also some pros that use the 7D and 100-400, and their work is still excellent. It's a matter of skill, really. There is certainly the IQ benefit if you can get closer with a bigger frame and a longer lens...more pixels on subject and more light gathered. If you know how to use a 7D and a smaller lens, and use it in good light, it is extremely difficult to tell the difference.

I think the 7D line with the 100-400 and Tammy 150-600 really fill the growing market of budget birders, who can't spend $20,000 on a 1D X and 600/4 II, or who simply refuse to/can't justify it, don't want the big heavy equipment, whatever reason.

I use a 7D and 5D III with a 600/4 II myself. There is no question that the 7D has the reach, but I've got the skill...and more importantly the patience, to get close. The large frame of the 5D III definitely gets the better IQ if and when I fill the frame. Assuming the 7D II get a good still photography IQ boost and gets a much-improved AF system, I'll probably get one to replace the 7D at some point in the future. If instead the 7D II hits as a "big time" DSLR video camera, I'll skip it.


----------



## garyknrd (Jul 18, 2014)

jrista said:


> garyknrd said:
> 
> 
> > NancyP said:
> ...



Yea, that is why I do not get a full frame. My buds, with the extra bulk, it is killing them. Skill level? Sure, you can sneak up closer, and in a hide it is a big plus. 
IMO, FF Canon bodes are a bust for all around birding, But Canon does not have a good crop sensor camera either. Canon shooters do not have much of an option. 
The new Nikon 810 FF might change my mind shooting FF. I cannot wait until pics start coming in. 

Just not there yet IMO.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 18, 2014)

garyknrd said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > How big is the birding/ wildlife photography base for a high end crop camera? I know that the bird/ wildlife pro photographers trend toward 1DX, but there are some very well respected pros using 7D and the Big Whites. Amateurs with this interest are grouped into "money no object (already own a Big White)", "value for money, middling budget (using a Little White 400, 100-400, or a Tammy, planning on upgrading to Big White eventually)", and "bargain basement / don't plan to invest in a Big White, will stick with Little White". I am in the middle group and am a good sales target for a high end crop camera. The last group will be reluctant to pay a premium over the 70D for a higher frame rate. The first group? I have to say that I have not seen many 1DXs in the hands of amateur bird/wildlife photographers locally, with the exception of a very few tripod/blind shooters.
> ...



Good thing in your post you put "IMO."


----------



## jrista (Jul 18, 2014)

garyknrd said:


> If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.
> 
> http://www.birdsthatfart.com/1/post/2014/07/pentax-k-3-sigma-300mm-f28-lens-vs-canon-1d-mark-iv-7d-300mm-f28-ii.html



Informal indeed. Your ignoring a lot of IQ factors. IQ is not solely about shadow lifting ability (which is what your referring to when you say DR) or sharpness. I prefer all of the 7D shots in your comparison. Why? Framing and background blur! Every one of the 7D shots has VASTLY superior background blur, and superior dynamic range. Yup, I said it. LTRLI will be happy about this post. 

The K3 suffers in the depth of field and overall noise areas. These are critical IQ factors. They affect the overall aesthetics of the photo. Because you had to stop down with the K3, you lost light, which either required you to use a higher ISO or do more lifting in post. The Sony sensors may have more shadow lifting ability, but there is absolutely no alternative to gathering more light. None whatsoever. Its the total quantity of light that actually affects dynamic range...and by that, I mean real dynamic range...not just shadow lifting. Dynamic range affects the entire signal, from the shadows right up through the peak signal. More total light, less noise in general throughout the entire image.

Add in the wider aperture, which allowed for a thinner DOF which blurred out the background more...and you have a much better camera system overall. The 7D images are less noisy because you gathered more light...that means the 7D images actually have better dynamic range. The SENSOR may not be as good as the sony sensor, but the CAMERA setup allowed you to get better photos with the Canon setup than with the Pentax setup. That's really what matters in the end...the final outcome, the end IQ. It might be possible to find a lens for the Pentax that performs as well at f/2.8 as the lens you used on the 7D...maybe. Canon's glass is largely unsurpassed these days, with a few exceptions here and there (like the Otus and a few wide angle Sigmas). Canon, despite their older sensor technology, still has a better overall camera system...and it shows. 

It shows even when people try to prove the opposite...which is so ironic.


----------



## garyknrd (Jul 18, 2014)

bdunbar79 said:


> garyknrd said:
> 
> 
> > NancyP said:
> ...



LOL, yea,, I knew this was coming...
The ISO performance is much better also. But, everyone has there own views..

Cheers, and chill out.


----------



## NancyP (Jul 18, 2014)

Well, I started with the 60D, got into birding, bought the 400mm f/5.6L, center point AI Servo, and have enjoyed the mobility and ease of use of this set-up in hiking to spot of interest, shooting birds in flight. I might have bought the 7D a year ago, but I kept putting it off - "7D2 coming soon". : I will keep using my beloved 400 5.6 on the 7D2, and will be working on saving for the 600 II. (My main purchase recently has been a "landscape and wildife support vehicle", otherwise known as my Subaru Forester commuting and camping car.) I don't have to be in a hurry - I like what I have now, and am learning fieldcraft.


----------



## Menace (Jul 18, 2014)

NancyP said:


> Well, I started with the 60D, got into birding, bought the 400mm f/5.6L, center point AI Servo, and have enjoyed the mobility and ease of use of this set-up in hiking to spot of interest, shooting birds in flight. I might have bought the 7D a year ago, but I kept putting it off - "7D2 coming soon". : I will keep using my beloved 400 5.6 on the 7D2, and will be working on saving for the 600 II. (My main purchase recently has been a "landscape and wildife support vehicle", otherwise known as my Subaru Forester commuting and camping car.) I don't have to be in a hurry - I like what I have now, and am learning fieldcraft.



Well done in getting transport sorted for hard to get areas - 7d2 with the 600 II should be an awesome combination.


----------



## Yeye (Jul 18, 2014)

Birthday wish list for a new version of the Canon 7D 

Histogram in the view finder
Magic Lantern functionality like - Auto-ETTR, Dual-ISO, zebra stripes, RAW histogram, RAW Blinkies, Auto-Dot-Tune, intervalometer
Programmable buttons like the depth of field preview 
A really high quality 3.2 inch electronic viewfinder or a hybrid electronic viewfinder or optical viewfinder
Auto Focus at f/8
Control button layout like a 5DIII
Dual CF card slots
Built in GPS
Radio control for speedlights
Wireless tethering app for iOS and Android
Small pro-grade weather-sealed body with a integrated grip
Pop up flash
Updated metering system
Image quality better than 70D
Noise performance as the 5DIII
Auto focus like 5DIII
61 auto focus points
Dual Pixel CMOS AF
Superior low light ( high iso ) performance
Dynamic range to 13 stops
24 MP sensor
10 fps
Giant buffer, 30 RAW at 10 fps 
1/8000 shutter speed
100% viewfinder
Able to use same batteries as my 7D
No AA filter

APS-H 1.3x crop mode but possible to crop to APS-C 1.6

Cost less than my car that is below $2 500

Video stuff


----------



## Menace (Jul 18, 2014)

Yeye said:


> Birthday wish list for a new version of the Canon 7D
> 
> Histogram in the view finder
> Magic Lantern functionality like - Auto-ETTR, Dual-ISO, zebra stripes, RAW histogram, RAW Blinkies, Auto-Dot-Tune, intervalometer
> ...



Very interesting wish list. Will there be space for dual CF cards in a 7D size body?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2014)

garyknrd said:


> If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.



Interesting that Art Morris (of who's website your URL is seemingly a parody, and who actually shoots birds instead of posed pooches) uses the 1D X and 5DIII with Canon 500/600 II lenses and delivers impressive images. 

I must say, your opinion smells like birds that fart. :-X


----------



## jrista (Jul 18, 2014)

Yeye said:


> Birthday wish list for a new version of the Canon 7D
> 
> Histogram in the view finder *<-- +1000000*
> Auto Focus at f/8 *<-- +100000*


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 19, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> garyknrd said:
> 
> 
> > If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.
> ...


When I got my Tamron 150-600 I rushed outside to take some bird pictures.. I finally had a long enough lens that I could shoot tiny birds, and using it on a crop camera increased the equivalent focal length to 960mm. All serious birders know the you need long long long lenses and there is no substitute.

I came back from my walk with lots of pictures of Chickadees taken with a wide angle lens at 20mm


----------



## NancyP (Jul 19, 2014)

Here is a very good and well respected pro bird photographer who uses a 7D:
http://www.glennbartley.com/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> When I got my Tamron 150-600 I rushed outside to take some bird pictures.. I finally had a long enough lens that I could shoot tiny birds, and using it on a crop camera increased the equivalent focal length to 960mm.



I put a 2x TC behind my 600 II on my 1D X, then I cropped the image to 25% which increased the equivalent focal length to 2400mm. If I mounted an iPhone behind the 600 II + 2x, that would increase the equivalent focal length to 9600mm. Where does it stop?

The _crop_ factor ("equivalent focal length" is just cropping) is only an advantage IF you're shooting at low ISO *and* IF printing larger than 16x24"/A2. 

There is no crop factor advantage if taking pictures of chickadees eating from your hand...


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 19, 2014)

IMHO the 7D shouldn't be mentioned with any of these cameras.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 19, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > When I got my Tamron 150-600 I rushed outside to take some bird pictures.. I finally had a long enough lens that I could shoot tiny birds, and using it on a crop camera increased the equivalent focal length to 960mm.
> ...


the picture could not have been taken with a 600II and a 1DX as the birds were closer than the length of the lens ...

The point being, don't fixate on gear. Technique beats gear every time. One of the best techniques to learn in bird photography is to be slow and quiet..... although that said, I would not refuse a 1DX and a 600II if it were offered


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2014)

NancyP said:


> Here is a very good and well respected pro bird photographer who uses a 7D:
> http://www.glennbartley.com/



Indeed. However, he states:

_Canon 1DX
If money was no object for me I would definitely own this camera. The file quality is amazing and the autofocus superb. At this point for me though the price is not justified. Furthermore I like to use crop bodies._

I think many people say they prefer crop bodies because money *IS* an object. 

He also goes on to say:

_The result of these smaller sensors is increased focal magnification. For example, if a camera has a 1.6x crop factor a 100mm lens will become a 160mm lens or a 300mm lens will become a 480mm lens._

The crop factor is just that - cropping. The fact that he seems to think it's a 'magical physics-defying focal length increasing factor' indicates he doesn't have a very good grasp of the relevant technical details.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> The point being, don't fixate on gear. Technique beats gear every time. One of the best techniques to learn in bird photography is to be slow and quiet..... although that said, I would not refuse a 1DX and a 600II if it were offered



_My_ point is that good technique plus excellent gear is better than good technique plus decent gear.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> The point being, don't fixate on gear. Technique beats gear every time. One of the best techniques to learn in bird photography is to be slow and quiet..... although that said, I would not refuse a 1DX and a 600II if it were offered



_My_ point is that good technique plus excellent gear beats good technique plus decent gear.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> The point being, don't fixate on gear. Technique beats gear every time. One of the best techniques to learn in bird photography is to be slow and quiet..... although that said, I would not refuse a 1DX and a 600II if it were offered



Location > gear

Time spent at location > gear

I'd rather shoot with a Canon S2 in Yellowstone for a year than a high end camera and lens combo for two weeks.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 19, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > The point being, don't fixate on gear. Technique beats gear every time. One of the best techniques to learn in bird photography is to be slow and quiet..... although that said, I would not refuse a 1DX and a 600II if it were offered
> ...


agreed! I'd take a year in Yellowstone with an iPhone over the high end combo for two weeks...


----------



## jrista (Jul 19, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > The point being, don't fixate on gear. Technique beats gear every time. One of the best techniques to learn in bird photography is to be slow and quiet..... although that said, I would not refuse a 1DX and a 600II if it were offered
> ...



I bet if I had a 1D X and a 600/4 II I'd create 100x more great photography in two weeks than you would with your Canon S2 in a year.  I have absolutely zero doubt, as a matter of fact.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 19, 2014)

Technique beats gear EVERY TIME?

You're telling this to someone who shot in dark gyms with a 1D4 and a 7D then switched to a 1Dx. Technique hardly beats gear every time. I highly doubt my "technique" increased my keeper rate by about 150% and gave me tons and tons of clean images at ISO 6400.

I'd rather shoot NCAA D2 basketball with a 1Dx and 70-200 f/2.8L II IS combo than an NBA game with a 7D, that is for absolute sure.

I swear sometimes you guys just argue to argue.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 19, 2014)

bdunbar79 said:


> Technique beats gear EVERY TIME?
> 
> You're telling this to someone who shot in dark gyms with a 1D4 and a 7D then switched to a 1Dx. Technique hardly beats gear every time. I highly doubt my "technique" increased my keeper rate by about 150% and gave me tons and tons of clean images at ISO 6400.
> 
> ...


point taken.... how about technique USUALLY beats gear


----------



## jrista (Jul 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Technique beats gear EVERY TIME?
> ...



I think you have it a bit inverted. *Gear compliments technique.* 

It doesn't matter how good your technique is, if your running into a limitation of the gear, your limited. You may be the most skilled photographer in the world...but a 7D w/ 100-400 is always going to result in noisier images, more missed shots due to it's AF jitter, and missed frames relative to a 1D X with a 600/4. 

A skilled photographer will make the most of BOTH setups, which means the better setup is...well, still better. 

Don't get me wrong...I still love my 7D. I use it whenever I need the reach. I also use it when I need a smaller image scale for astrophotography (which is basically a fancy way of saying I need smaller pixels.) No matter the benefits of any given piece of equipment, though, there are always limitations. And there are always better pieces of gear, and in the hands of a photographer with good technique, better gear always wins.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > Technique beats gear EVERY TIME?
> ...


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 19, 2014)

jrista said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



The odds of getting truly great photographs in nature increase exponentially based on time in the field, not what gear you have.

First, you have to get out there. Second, you have to stay out there in all conditions. Then you need to apply technique, and hopefully a bit of luck will come your way, but don't count on it.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> agreed! I'd take a year in Yellowstone with an iPhone over the high end combo for two weeks...



Absolutely. 8)


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 19, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > agreed! I'd take a year in Yellowstone with an iPhone over the high end combo for two weeks...
> ...


I'd take a year in Yellowstone with NO camera over the high end combo for two weeks....


----------



## garyknrd (Jul 19, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> garyknrd said:
> 
> 
> > If interested here is a quick informal test I did yesterday. Crop cameras are the best birding cameras IMO beating a FF pretty handily. Especially with the new crop sensors from sony.
> ...



Non sense. I personally do not like his pics that much, but many do. Many others that use Canon equipment I like much better. 
Just went to your site. Looks like you use the 1dx and 5D III & 600 II. Birding photography, you are not very good IMO. Very poor. Jrista, on the other hand is very talented IMO. But, I don't have to agree with him for sure. 

Great hobby though.... all the best.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2014)

garyknrd said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > garyknrd said:
> ...



Thanks again for sharing your opinion. You already know what I think of it...

Enjoy your hobby!


----------



## garyknrd (Jul 19, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> garyknrd said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Same here.


----------



## Menace (Jul 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



I'll happily take a year at Yellowstone with just the gear that I currently own - which one of you is going to pay my expenses?


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 19, 2014)

Right now I'm having flashbacks of a prior thread where people were debating the best technique to get an equivalent shot of exotic water foul using a 50mm lens instead of 600mm.

I think it involved snorkeling while holding a camera just above the water for a couple of years.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 19, 2014)

garyknrd said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > garyknrd said:
> ...



Good job man. You should be proud of yourself.


----------



## jrista (Jul 19, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...



Time can be a factor, but gear is not immaterial. If I wanted to get a shot of bears, I'd much rather have a 1DX/5D III and a 600/4 + 2x TC, or a 7D and 600/4, than anything else.


----------



## jrista (Jul 19, 2014)

garyknrd said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > garyknrd said:
> ...



It doesn't really matter if you like his personal style or not. That isn't what's up for discussion. The simple fact of the matter is, Morris' technique is largely unsurpassed, especially for shorebirds and waders. The point is, he makes effective use of a 1D X, 5D III, and the 300/2.8, 500/4, 600/4 (all with TCs) and 200-400. The gear, the gear you said hurt your friends photography and therefor must not be very good, is not the problem. In the hands of a talented photographer, that gear can be put to use creating photography of exquisite quality. Quality...not necessarily art, you don't have to like it...but you can't deny the quality of Morris' work.

Talent doesn't trump gear. Gear compliments talent.


----------



## jrista (Jul 19, 2014)

9VIII said:


> Right now I'm having flashbacks of a prior thread where people were debating the best technique to get an equivalent shot of exotic water foul using a 50mm lens instead of 600mm.
> 
> I think it involved snorkeling while holding a camera just above the water for a couple of years.



LOL...yeah, sadly, that actually WAS a debate.


----------



## fragilesi (Jul 19, 2014)

jrista said:


> Time can be a factor, but gear is not immaterial. If I wanted to get a shot of bears, I'd much rather have a 1DX/5D III and a 600/4 + 2x TC, or a 7D and 600/4, than anything else.



Think I'd go for a helicopter first myself ;D


----------



## Skulker (Jul 19, 2014)

fragilesi said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Time can be a factor, but gear is not immaterial. If I wanted to get a shot of bears, I'd much rather have a 1DX/5D III and a 600/4 + 2x TC, or a 7D and 600/4, than anything else.
> ...



You wimps! ;D

taken at 140mm these are full frame, there was nothing between us and him, just talking quietly so as not to scare him, as he hadn't spotted us until he looked up. 

I've put in one cropped cos I like the look in his eye. I think he was a bit pi$$ed that some one got in his way. 8)


----------



## Skulker (Jul 19, 2014)

To get back on topic ;D

You can't beat good skills and good gear.  Unless you have talent as well. :-[


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 19, 2014)

jrista said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...


I joke about my tamron 150-600 being my polar bear lens because that's as close as I want to get to one. Yes, I could use a 50f1.8 to take the shot, but when you show the picture and say "see that pixel, it's a polar bear" they are not impressed  There are definitely times when you can not get close, or do not want to get close. For those times, there is no substitute for gear. As someone who has shot with the Tamron and the 600F4, there are times when neither is long enough. At least the 600F4 plays well with teleconverters.... Don't bother with the Tamron. 

That said, I still believe that most of the time technique beats gear. It's when we are at the limits that the gear becomes truly important and most people never get that far. People like Jrista are not typical. His bird portraits are at a level where great technique and great gear are needed to get that level of shot. Myself, I am still learning and only occasionally reach the limits of my gear, and to keep things in perspective, remember that most cameras are left in program or "green box" mode. For all those people, technique is far more important than gear.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 19, 2014)

A bit odd, this. Of course both technique and gear matter. Who could argue otherwise? The level of gear you want, and the amount of time you devote to using it, is a matter of personal preference and circumstance. And whether one decides to upgrade a camera body or a lens, or try and push their current gear further by taking it out more or to new places - that too is personal.

The Yellowstone thing is a bit of a red herring. Most people can't go to the top places for wildlife on a regular basis - and that expense might be just as worthwhile put into better gear used locally. I've got (especially bird) photos I'm proud of in my local area - many of which would not have been possible without the equipment I used. Of course I could take an iPhone to a beauty spot and get a nice photo in good conditions - but if I took a 1Dx and 600L I'd get even better photos of certain things.

I like walking round knowing the only impediment in 99% of situations is me. In the past I used less able equipment, and it was frustrating. Now I can think, if I go out more, go to more places, polish my fieldcraft, then nothing can stop me except bad luck. Some people might want to do it the other way round - but it's not either/or.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 20, 2014)

jrista said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



I wouldn't recommend a 7D at all for bears. In fact, I'd choose a 50D and a 40D over it for our ursine friends.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> I wouldn't recommend a 7D at all for bears. In fact, I'd choose a 50D and a 40D over it for our ursine friends.



Would you recommend a 7D for anything? Perhaps a paperweight or doorstop? It's truly unfortunate that you seem to have gotten a lemon, but properly functioning 7Ds (which are the vast majority of them) are very good cameras.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Jul 20, 2014)

9VIII said:


> Right now I'm having flashbacks of a prior thread where people were debating the best technique to get an equivalent shot of exotic water foul using a 50mm lens instead of 600mm.
> 
> I think it involved snorkeling while holding a camera just above the water for a couple of years.



Damn it, now I have coffee on my keyboard! ;D


----------



## sagittariansrock (Jul 20, 2014)

The question of gear VS technique only comes up if you cannot afford the gear. If you CAN afford the gear and buy it, what is stopping you from improving your technique?
As Jrista said, the two complement each other. Use the best gear you can afford and spend time on your technique.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 20, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > I wouldn't recommend a 7D at all for bears. In fact, I'd choose a 50D and a 40D over it for our ursine friends.
> ...




Sure, I'd recommend the 7D for situations where you control the lighting (fashion shoots, etc). Or for shooting brightly-colored sports jerseys or race cars.

I used several 7D's over the years, and found them all to have focus consistency issues on grizzly bears and ungulates with L telephoto lenses. On top of this, these animals come closer during crepuscular hours, and the 7D just falls flat here with noisy, rough RAW files.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> On top of this, these animals come closer during crepuscular hours, and the 7D just falls flat here with noisy, rough RAW files.



I found the AF somewhat more consistent, but I absolutely agree the 7D is a good light camera. I cringed when the ISO went above 800. I barely blink when my 1D X hits ISO 6400.


----------



## jrista (Jul 20, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> That said, I still believe that most of the time technique beats gear. It's when we are at the limits that the gear becomes truly important and most people never get that far. *People like Jrista are not typical. His bird portraits are at a level where great technique and great gear are needed to get that level of shot.* Myself, I am still learning and only occasionally reach the limits of my gear, and to keep things in perspective, remember that most cameras are left in program or "green box" mode. For all those people, technique is far more important than gear.



Well, thanks.  I guess it kind of debunks my argument, but thanks.


----------



## jrista (Jul 20, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...



LOL, sorry, but I find that completely illogical. It's also an unqualified statement...so I have to ask. WHY, in very specific terms, would you choose the 50D or 40D over the 7D for bears (or anything, for that matter)? 

Technologically, while the 7D is not as advanced as some competitors today, at the time of it's release (after both of those other cameras), it was one of the best cameras on the market. It had a top of the line sensor for the times, and all the other features trounced pretty much anything else...it sat in a fairly unique spot among DSLRs with the high frame rate and pro-grade features.


----------



## jrista (Jul 20, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > On top of this, these animals come closer during crepuscular hours, and the 7D just falls flat here with noisy, rough RAW files.
> ...



Not just the 1D X. I shot these at ISO 12800 in at-sunset/post-sunset light on the 5D III (I have to say, I was blown away by the fact that these came out as well as they did...people who complain about the 5D III, it's dynamic range, or its overall performance haven't put one through it's paces):


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 20, 2014)

jrista said:


> LOL, sorry, but I find that completely illogical. It's also an unqualified statement...so I have to ask. WHY, in very specific terms, would you choose the 50D or 40D over the 7D for bears (or anything, for that matter)?





First, I'm not sure if you just had chocolate or a Red Bull, but chill a little bit. 

I've owned all of these cameras, and filmed ursine and ungulates in crepuscular conditions. Photographing a brown bear running on a brown hillside is much different than filming a sporting event with brightly colored subjects.

In these low light, low contrast conditions, I found the 40D and 50D to simply have superior auto focus consistency with L telephoto lenses. On top of the auto focus, the 40D and 50D also seemed to have less substantial AA filters, which required less processing. The 7D RAW files also feel significantly more "rough", and require more processing all around than even my 40D. The 7D's colors appear drab compared to my 40D and 70D.

My keeper rate plunged significantly with the 7D's I used. Blue channel noise is disturbing on the 7D, even at low ISO's. AI Servo, when combined with high speed burst mode seems to be especially problematic, getting focus, then not, then getting it again.

These numerous issues combined to make unpleasant RAW files. Sure, the 7D has a beautiful build and is a joy to hold and operate. And some of the features are nice. But who cares if the files are weak?

When I compare the 7D files to my 50D, 40D, 70D, 6D, and 5DIII, I simply shake my head. They're a mess.

When you're out shooting the Bob Marshall Wilderness for a month, and you have these cameras side by side over thousands of images, its easy to see what camera can hack the conditions and what does not. Once in a while, when conditions were perfect and everything went right, the 7D really came to life. But that can be said for any cheap smart phone, too. The real test of a camera is how it does when conditions are crap.


----------



## jrista (Jul 20, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > LOL, sorry, but I find that completely illogical. It's also an unqualified statement...so I have to ask. WHY, in very specific terms, would you choose the 50D or 40D over the 7D for bears (or anything, for that matter)?
> ...



So, given the specificity...YOU personally got what sounds like a bad copy of a 7D, so you diss it at every opportunity Additionally, IF you are photographing a brown bear running down a brown hill in low light...the 50D or 40D is better. Thanks!  (I don't actually believe that Canon's 9pt AF system was actually better finding a brown subject with zero contrast against a brown background was any better...EVERY camera on earth would have problems with that particular scenario, because there is no contrast for the camera to lock onto...) 

BTW, you might want to read this, from a guy who uses nothing but the 7D and 100-400 for bird photography (in all sorts of light, if you look at his web site):

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2012/09/18/how-dan-cadiuex-masters-canon-eos-7d-image-files/

I used the same trick for NR with the 7D as Dan does: NR the entire image, and history-brush the subject (or in my case, mask the subject and NR the rest.) With PSCS6 or newer, it takes only about a minute to mask off the subject with the quick selection tool, so this doesn't add much to the image processing workflow. I use Topaz DeNoise 5 and/or Nik Dfine 2 for NR (both have debanding.) It's possible to use very high ISO and get extremely clean results with the 7D in VERY low light (this is about as crepuscular as it gets...dusk with cloud cover):







ISO 3200, however the image was lifted fairly heavily in post (+1 full stop exposure, additional lifting to shadows and blacks), so effective ISO is higher than ISO 6400. Autofocused, through foreground reeds, in light that, to me, was nearly black darkness, with the last bits of twilight behind me showing through dark clouds. I could barely see the bird myself. This was with the 7D and 600/4 L II, so the max aperture was limited to f/4 (which means the 7D was NOT at it's best, and was unable to use the higher sensitivity capabilities of the central double-cross type AF point.)


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2014)

jrista said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...



Those are lovely, especially the first one. And they demonstrate one thing a longer lens and greater subject distance gives you (with caveats) - a nicer background. People arguing one must get close for good photos ignore this aspect. Those bear shots further up the thread were good, but the background was nowhere near as blurred. Obviously the distance of the subject from the background is a determining factor, but assuming it's the same, a longer lens from a greater distance will blur things better than a wider-angle lens from a closer distance (I mean, I *suppose* one could try and use a really wide aperture lens like the 200 f/2 to even things out, but I still find the best blurred backgrounds are produced by the longest focal lengths - 1000mm f/10 beats 100mm f/2.8, except maybe at macro distances).


----------



## Vossie (Jul 20, 2014)

I would fancy a 7D2 that could nicely complement my 5D3. For me this means:
- more reach due to the crop factor (and thus similar MP count)
- faster framerate (>8 )
- while having comparable AF and decent low light performance (usable pictures at ISO 3200)

nice to haves would be:
- dual card (same as 5D3)
- in camera flash RT control/trigger
- same battery as 5D3 

If such camera would come at an attractive price (€ 1500-1800 / for reference, a 7D1 is about €1100-1200 over here, a 5D3 about €2700, and a 6D about €1600), I would probably buy one as a 2nd body.


----------



## jrista (Jul 20, 2014)

scyrene said:


> Those are lovely, especially the first one. And they demonstrate one thing a longer lens and greater subject distance gives you (with caveats) - a nicer background. People arguing one must get close for good photos ignore this aspect. Those bear shots further up the thread were good, but the background was nowhere near as blurred. Obviously the distance of the subject from the background is a determining factor, but assuming it's the same, a longer lens from a greater distance will blur things better than a wider-angle lens from a closer distance (I mean, I *suppose* one could try and use a really wide aperture lens like the 200 f/2 to even things out, but I still find the best blurred backgrounds are produced by the longest focal lengths - 1000mm f/10 beats 100mm f/2.8, except maybe at macro distances).



Aye, long lenses really are a bonus from an aesthetics standpoint. They give you a decent working distance, as well...you can get close-ish to your subjects, but you don't have to get so close that you scare them off or risk being mauled by a bear. ;P I like the working distance. But it isn't just the longer lens, there are a few factors that go into getting shots like these. To Don's point, technique is key. I dress myself up like an idiot, at the very least in camo, if not in this funky light mesh outfit with leaf-shaped cutouts, all camo-colored, that slip over my clothes. The deer know I'm not a strange looking bush, but they are comfortable enough to get close. 

The other two critical things are aperture and frame size. The f/4 aperture and large front element can't be ignored for boke quality, the entrance pupil is huge, and smooths things out nicer than say the Tammy 150-600, with it's f/6.3 max aperture and smaller front element, would. Second is the frame size. The 7D did well enough, especially with a 1.4x TC (840mm f/5.6), but to really get a nice background, I was actually as close to the deer as I am with the 5D III. That usually meant body shots or even head shots. With the 5D III, the full frame is nice in that you can get the deer and some surrounding landscape, and still achieve that nice, creamy boke effect. 

With something like a M4/3 camera, I would have an even harder time than with the 7D getting shots with this kind of wide field and creamy boke. The frame is a lot smaller, so your forced to be farther away/use shorter lens to get the same framing. (The more square format doesn't help either...I like having more negative space on the side of my subject than above and below...the 4/3rd format doesn't lend itself to that kind of composition, not unless you put yourself even farther from the subject and from to a 2/3rd form.) Even worse, go down to a 1" or 2/3" sensor, and you have to be even farther away or use even wider lenses, and your DoF and beautiful boke end up drifting farther and farther from the ideal.

It doesn't matter how good the underlying technology gets...I will probably never give up my big, heavy gear. It isn't even so much about noise or shadow lifting ability (those are certainly nice to haves). There is just an aesthetic quality that you get from larger frames like APS-C and FF that you simply cannot get with smaller form factors, even M4/3, and certainly not compacts or cell phones. So, as I said...if I had the option of a year in Yellowstone with a small mirrorless/compact/smartphone camera, or two weeks with my current gear...I'd take the two week option, hands down, no question. I wouldn't be able to photograph every corner of the park...but I've been there a few times in the past, I know the area and I know where to find interesting wildlife and birds. I'd plan the trip, pick a single area to spend my time in, and make the most of that one location. And I KNOW the photography I'd be able to create in that short time would meet my expectations. Even if I ended up with only one great shot...if it was at least as good as the first deer shot here...I'd be pretty satisfied with that trip.


----------



## dgatwood (Jul 21, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> That said, I still believe that most of the time technique beats gear. It's when we are at the limits that the gear becomes truly important and most people never get that far. People like Jrista are not typical. His bird portraits are at a level where great technique and great gear are needed to get that level of shot. Myself, I am still learning and only occasionally reach the limits of my gear, and to keep things in perspective, remember that most cameras are left in program or "green box" mode. For all those people, technique is far more important than gear.



On the contrary. I would argue that for those people, gear is more important than technique. The gear has to be good enough to take a decent shot without the photographer giving it any hints at all. Among other things, that means that its maximum usable ISO has to be pretty high so that it won't need too long an exposure when shooting moderately moving subjects in poorly lit rooms. For people who shoot in auto all the time, the gear is most critical. For people who actually know how to use all those manual and semi-manual modes, the gear matters less (except when we're being lazy).


----------



## NancyP (Jul 21, 2014)

We have run into the better vs. best (budget vs. money-no-object) argument once more. There ain't no way of solving this. Yes, equipment matters. Yes, fieldcraft matters. Yes, technique matters. Next question?

Well, MY next question is how many of us wear ghillie suits like Jrista describes vs. just plain camo vs. blind vs. no blind and no camo? How many people use camo covers on their lenses ("Lens Coat" or other)? How many use products that claim to suppress human odors?


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 21, 2014)

NancyP said:


> Well, MY next question is how many of us wear ghillie suits like Jrista describes vs. just plain camo vs. blind vs. no blind and no camo? How many people use camo covers on their lenses ("Lens Coat" or other)? How many use products that claim to suppress human odors?



A lot of my waterfowl photography is from a bright red canoe... so camo clothing is lost on me.... stay silent and move slowly while paddling on the far side of the canoe and not lifting the paddle out of the water and you are less scary... You can also paddle upstream/upwind and gently drift back....

For small bird photography I bring a chair, good book, and lots of sunflower seeds.... after you stay still for a while the lure of the food seems to overcome the fear of the human.


----------



## Steve (Jul 22, 2014)

NancyP said:


> Well, MY next question is how many of us wear ghillie suits like Jrista describes vs. just plain camo vs. blind vs. no blind and no camo? How many people use camo covers on their lenses ("Lens Coat" or other)? How many use products that claim to suppress human odors?



Depends on what I'm trying to shoot. Some birds, like warblers or shorebirds for example, don't really care about humans at all so camo and hides aren't necessary. For waterfowl, I'll throw some camo cloth over me and just lay there quietly. For a lot of other species, a hide and water/food are almost necessary to get decent shots. I'll camo up if I'm planning on hiking around some wilderness without a specific setup location in mind.

Boats and canoes are cool too. Birds don't seem to recognize people in boats as a threat. Its kind of like shooting from a car.

edit: On topic - I would be _excited_ about the 7DII if it was a 1D Mark V


----------



## scyrene (Jul 22, 2014)

NancyP said:


> We have run into the better vs. best (budget vs. money-no-object) argument once more. There ain't no way of solving this. Yes, equipment matters. Yes, fieldcraft matters. Yes, technique matters. Next question?
> 
> Well, MY next question is how many of us wear ghillie suits like Jrista describes vs. just plain camo vs. blind vs. no blind and no camo? How many people use camo covers on their lenses ("Lens Coat" or other)? How many use products that claim to suppress human odors?



Maybe wildlife in the UK is more used to people - I've never felt the need for camouflage gear. I did get a portable bird hide, but it's too bulky to carry along with my camera gear, so I never use it. I tend to photograph whatever birds I encounter - only going after particular species occasionally - so it's more a matter of walking miles and hoping to bump into something good.

Species vary a lot, of course. Woodpigeon are common around people, but maybe because they're a legal quarry here, they tend to fly off the moment you point a big lens at them. Other tiny birds, like goldcrests, don't seem to care even if you get within a few feet.

I'm sure mammals require more effort (staying downwind, etc), but I've never attempted to photograph them.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 22, 2014)

scyrene said:


> I'm sure mammals require more effort (staying downwind, etc), but I've never attempted to photograph them.



Mammals can be easy. They let you get nice and close sometimes. Just make sure any bunnies you try to take pictures aren't from Caerbannog...


----------



## ppritchett (Jul 22, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure mammals require more effort (staying downwind, etc), but I've never attempted to photograph them.
> ...



It's just a rabbit!


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 22, 2014)

Jackson_Bill said:


> Skulker said:
> 
> 
> > fragilesi said:
> ...


Last year, one of the locals was hospitalized by a female deer. People have been attacked by groundhogs and squirrels... Ospreys are a very real threat when climbing towers at work.... even small birds like redwing blackbirds will attack if you get near the nest. Chipmunks can be nasty! If you get too close to any animal, particularly if the animal feels trapped, you don't know what is going to happen.

Bambi's mother might look cute and docile, but she has the ability to break your bones in an instant if you push things. I like long lenses.....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 22, 2014)

ppritchett said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



Well, that's no ordinary rabbit! That rabbit's got a vicious streak a mile wide! It's a killer!


----------



## NancyP (Jul 22, 2014)

Hey, I have been buzzed by hummingbirds! And it worked - once I identified the two things zipping by an inch from my ear as hummingbirds, I figured that I must have been close to a nest (not visible) which the hummingbirds had been unwise enough to put close to a hiking trail. I scooted away to let them have some peace. 

Even non-aggressive large domesticated animals can do some damage if panicked. I used to have a horse, and have healthy respect for the damage a normally docile 900 pound animal can cause. What is it with these people who get out of their cars to photograph rutting elk?

I tend not to wear camo for birding in warm weather, I just wear subdued colors and sit around, conspicuously "not paying attention" most of the time. I have a camo jacket and cap for cooler weather. I have never worn a ghillie suit, maybe because I would have a hard time not laughing at myself. Yes, the ghillie suits are in the stores around here, but I don't know who buys them - turkey hunters, maybe? The "no-smell" long underwear seems to sell well, and it is never on sale. The number one hunting target locally is the deer, #2 is ducks and geese (all legal species), #3 is the turkey. Thank God for hunters - without the deer season, there would be a lot more road collisions with deer. Also, hunters are a very strong lobby in state government, and thus the MO conservation department tends to be less subject to cuts than other departments, and the parks in MO are numerous.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 22, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> ppritchett said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


that's the most foul, cruel, and bad tempered rodent you ever set eyes on.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 22, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> ppritchett said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Run away!


----------



## Steve (Jul 22, 2014)

NancyP said:


> Even non-aggressive large domesticated animals can do some damage if panicked. I used to have a horse, and have healthy respect for the damage a normally docile 900 pound animal can cause. What is it with these people who get out of their cars to photograph rutting elk?



People occasionally get killed by beavers and mountain goats, too. Humans think animals exist purely for our own amusement and forget that interactions with animals can be deadly. 



NancyP said:


> Thank God for hunters - without the deer season, there would be a lot more road collisions with deer. Also, hunters are a very strong lobby in state government, and thus the MO conservation department tends to be less subject to cuts than other departments, and the parks in MO are numerous.



You know what else keeps deer populations in check? Wolves and mountain lions. Those same hunting groups lobby to kill large predators for trophies. Wolves are almost extinct in the US now, outside of Yellowstone, Glacier and a couple other small, protected pockets due to hunting.


----------



## Phil L (Jul 22, 2014)

Jackson_Bill said:


> A bit off topic, but...
> Like most tourists, I don't think you understand how quickly things can go bad in the wild. Sure, black bears seem more timid than grizzlies but many animals may look quite docile and then the situation changes in a heartbeat.



Yes I've heard those rumors.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 22, 2014)

Phil L said:


> Jackson_Bill said:
> 
> 
> > A bit off topic, but...
> ...


I must say that I am very happy to not have crocs, alligators, and large or poisonous snakes where I live...


----------



## jrista (Jul 22, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> Phil L said:
> 
> 
> > Jackson_Bill said:
> ...



Hmm, I'd love to have them where I live. Crocs and Alligators make excellent, very detailed subjects. Poisonous snakes often tend to be the most beautiful as well. You just have to take care when around these animals, give them their proper, respectful distances, and you will usually be fine.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 22, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sure mammals require more effort (staying downwind, etc), but I've never attempted to photograph them.
> ...



I'm afraid I had to look up that reference :-[

I have done rabbits, actually. They used to forage in front of a fixed bird hide at my local nature reserve. Feral British rabbits always seen very timid otherwise, though.


----------



## Old Sarge (Jul 22, 2014)

scyrene said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...


You won't believe that if you watch this: Holy Grail - Killer Bunny

Reference is to Monty Python and the Holy Grail.


----------



## Phil L (Jul 22, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> Phil L said:
> 
> 
> > Jackson_Bill said:
> ...



Aww... they're fun, you would love 'em!


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 23, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> Phil L said:
> 
> 
> > Jackson_Bill said:
> ...


That's what they want you to believe...


----------



## MichaelHodges (Jul 23, 2014)

Steve said:


> You know what else keeps deer populations in check? Wolves and mountain lions. Those same hunting groups lobby to kill large predators for trophies. Wolves are almost extinct in the US now, outside of Yellowstone, Glacier and a couple other small, protected pockets due to hunting.




Thumbs up on this post.


----------



## jrista (Jul 23, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> Steve said:
> 
> 
> > You know what else keeps deer populations in check? Wolves and mountain lions. Those same hunting groups lobby to kill large predators for trophies. Wolves are almost extinct in the US now, outside of Yellowstone, Glacier and a couple other small, protected pockets due to hunting.
> ...



Ditto. It's so sad, the near total loss of certain species of NATURAL wildlife in this country. Significant parts of our prairies used to be very much akin to the Serengeti, with massive herds of Bison, wild cats and wolves, Pronghorn and other ungulates...now, it's all just a pale shadow of a shadow of what it once was...


----------



## NancyP (Jul 23, 2014)

The enemies of cougars and wolves are ranchers and dairy farmers. The typical hunter, at least in MO, is after good meat, or a large perfect rack for making a taxidermy head to show off on the living room wall. We do have rare cougar sightings in southern MO Ozarks land. I am sure that the MO Conservation Department folks would appreciate a few extra cougars to help with the feral pig problem. Deer - there's enough deer for cat and man, with plenty left over. I would like to spot a cougar or black bear in MO.


----------



## jrista (Jul 23, 2014)

NancyP said:


> The enemies of cougars and wolves are ranchers and dairy farmers. The typical hunter, at least in MO, is after good meat, or a large perfect rack for making a taxidermy head to show off on the living room wall. We do have rare cougar sightings in southern MO Ozarks land. I am sure that the MO Conservation Department folks would appreciate a few extra cougars to help with the feral pig problem. Deer - there's enough deer for cat and man, with plenty left over. I would like to spot a cougar or black bear in MO.



The worst thing is that there is still a lot of government sanctioned killing of wolves, coyotes, beavers, you name it. Wisconsin, for example, started a program to wipe out beavers due to lobbying from the trout fishing industry. The claim was maid that beavers and trout were "evolutionarily incompatible". Turns out, the beavers were ESSENTIAL for the health of the small tributaries in wisconsin wetlands that contained all the trout in the first place. Beavers were nearly wiped out, and the wetlands and tributaries dried up. No, of course, the scramble is on to reintroduce beavers and restore what government and man destroyed in their "infinite wisdom". 

Similar problems have occurred with coyote capture and killing in many states, there have been obvious problems with the removal of wildcats from many regions. That's what bugs me the most...when man gets it in his head that he knows better, and government takes unilateral action to destroy the natural order and wipe out species, only to the destruction of natural habitats (usually to the detriment of humanity in the process) and even resulting in the opposite outcome they thought they were going to get.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 25, 2014)

Here's hoping they have a much simplified mode dial on the 7D2....

Could I suggest the following layout.....


----------



## jrista (Jul 25, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> Here's hoping they have a much simplified mode dial on the 7D2....
> 
> Could I suggest the following layout.....



Add C1-5, and I'd be happy.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 25, 2014)

jrista said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Here's hoping they have a much simplified mode dial on the 7D2....
> ...


Even better!


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 25, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Wow....that would make it essentially useless for fast-moving subjects in fast-changing light.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 25, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...


all depends on what you set your custom settings to......


----------



## jrista (Jul 25, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Exactly!  And with five custom settings, you'ed pretty much be set for...anything.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 25, 2014)

jrista said:


> Exactly!  And with five custom settings, you'ed pretty much be set for...anything.



I guess I've never used the custom settings so I don't know what they can do. Not having them on my cameras could be the root cause.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 25, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



M mode with Auto ISO is great for fast-moving subjects in fast-changing light! You pick the shutter speed to freeze or show motion, the aperture to give you the DoF you need, and the camera picks ISO for a metered exposure. On the 1D X, you can bias the metered exposure by setting EC.


----------



## jrista (Jul 25, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Exactly!  And with five custom settings, you'ed pretty much be set for...anything.
> ...



They let you choose...pretty much any setting, such as AF settings, metering settings, etc. including mode (Av, Tv, M, B), save it to a custom user mode profile. You can then switch to that profile simply by moving the mode dial to C1-N (some cameras only have C1, some have C1-3). I guess technically speaking, you would still need some way of choosing Av, Tv, M or B so you could save it when saving a custom user mode...that could be on the mode dial.

If you had a bunch of custom modes, though, you could then set up several Av modes with different AF settings...one for slower moving subjects, one for fast moving subjects, one for erratically moving subjects, one for still landscapes, and one other for say portraiture. Then it would be a simple matter of switching to the right custom mode to instantly change all the camera settings for whatever it is your shooting. The 7D, 5D III, and 1D X all have C1-3. I believe the 6D only has one custom mode.


----------



## jrista (Jul 25, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Aye. In the case of bird photography, the primary means of setting exposure is shutter when in manual mode. The shutter is pretty much the only thing you change once you have set ISO and aperture for a given light. For still subjects, you usually use a lower ISO, like 800. For fast subjects, you usually use a higher ISO, like 2000-6400. Whenever the light changes, you generally want to "reset" anyway, and rebase your exposure for the different light (and that can occur if you simply point the camera in a different direction.) Manual mode is pretty awesome once you know how to use it...it's infinitely flexible.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 25, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Yes! (but make it six, just in case)
Such a thing might even take the steam out of my desire for a Fuji.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 25, 2014)

9VIII said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



Yes but how would you guys remember what your five or six custom settings actually are ? I have trouble remembering which one of three to use.


----------



## jrista (Jul 25, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



I agree with that. Canon should add the ability to name them, and when you switch to a custom user mode, it should display the name on the LCD readout, and if it's on, the background LCD display, for a few seconds.


----------



## ecka (Jul 25, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



I would trade the mode dial for something useful.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 25, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> M mode with Auto ISO is great for fast-moving subjects in fast-changing light! You pick the shutter speed to freeze or show motion, the aperture to give you the DoF you need, and the camera picks ISO for a metered exposure. On the 1D X, you can bias the metered exposure by setting EC.



I would never do that. I like a group of shots from a single event to have a consistent "look" which means a roughly consistent amount of noise from shot to shot. Many of these shoots have exposures varying by four stops or so. I usually shoot at ISO 200 and f/6.3 at these, but if I chose this approach, I'd end up shooting from ISO 200 to 3200, and I wouldn't want that.


----------



## Skulker (Jul 25, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



that's my most used mode these days. Works a treat and I just adjust aperture and speed as needed.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 25, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > M mode with Auto ISO is great for fast-moving subjects in fast-changing light! You pick the shutter speed to freeze or show motion, the aperture to give you the DoF you need, and the camera picks ISO for a metered exposure. On the 1D X, you can bias the metered exposure by setting EC.
> ...



Your original comment was 'useless for fast-moving subjects in fast-changing light.' Useless _to you_ would have been a better way to phrase it. Birds in flight consitiute such a subject that I commonly shoot. The minimum shutter speed is generally 1/1600 s to freeze wing motion, allowing relatively little flexibility in shutter speed (2.33 stops before hitting 1/8000 s). Likewise, one generally needs at least f/6.3 to f/8 for sufficient DoF, further limiting flexibility (often the lens is f/5.6 anyway – 600/4 + 1.4x – and stopping down too far isn't wise). Given that, neither Av nor Tv are really ideal for that situation (although usable on a 1-series body, where it's possible to set min/max for both aperture and shutter speed...and assign them to a C# user setting). But for BIF, M mode with Auto ISO is pretty close to ideal.


----------



## Steve (Jul 26, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> But for BIF, M mode with Auto ISO is pretty close to ideal.



That might be the case for the 1Dx but I can attest that full manual with a fixed ISO is better for BIF with a 1DIV or 7D. AutoISO is pretty wonky on those bodies. Also, unless I'm missing something, theres no exposure comp and shots against a bright sky will give you a very dark bird. I'm usually metering the sky and bumping between 1 and 2 full stops to get a proper exposure if I've got sky as a background. I guess you could spot meter, but its pretty tough keeping that center point on a moving bird.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 26, 2014)

Steve said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > But for BIF, M mode with Auto ISO is pretty close to ideal.
> ...



True. Also, 1-series bodies can link spot metering to the active AF point, so I can spot meter on the bird as AI Servo is tracking it (I usually use the 1+8 expansion point selection).


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 26, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Steve said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


I was also gonna to mention AF-linked spot-metering as well... . I hope it makes it into the 7D-II, and EC in manual mode. (Nikon has them and RGB metering in lower-than-pro-level bodies.) Then it's all down to how well you track the bird: large smooth-flyers easier, small erratic buggers not-so-easy. Ah well, nobody ever said BiF was gonna be easy.


----------

