# 21mp Sensor in the 7D Mark II? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 19, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13361"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13361">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>21mp APS-C Sensor?


</strong>I received a very detailed email today about the future of the APS-C line at Canon. According to this person, Canon is prepping a 21mp (we’ve also heard 24mp) sensor for the 7D Mark II, and that sensor <em>COULD </em>also appear in the EOS 70D. The email detailed that Canon was going to launch the 70D with the same 18mp sensor as the EOS SL1, but is having second thoughts. Various prototypes and configurations of cameras tend to exist during R&D.</p>
<p>The issue is mass production of the 21mp sensor has not been finalized. This is delaying any announcement for a new APS camera that would use the 21mp sensor. Canon would prefer to announce a camera and have availability within 30 days of that announcement.</p>
<p>Both the EOS 70D and EOS 7D Mark II exist, there’s no surprises coming in that regard.</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## pwp (Apr 19, 2013)

A 21 Mp 7DII sounds fine to me. But it's the rest of the hardware package that holds the greatest interest, along with a release date! 

-PW


----------



## GaryJ (Apr 19, 2013)

If only Canon would announce they had a 21mp sensor with the same or better low light high ISO low noise capabilities as that other mob, That would be worth hearing.


----------



## RGF (Apr 19, 2013)

Agree that 21 MP is nice but what goes with it? AF and S/N is critical. 

Perhaps Canon marketing is listening to our cries of fowl about recycling the old 18MP.

Of course there is always is a trade off between new and innovative vs time to market (and price)


----------



## JPAZ (Apr 19, 2013)

My 15.1mp Canon 50d was awfully noisy. This sensor would have to do better.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 19, 2013)

18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.


----------



## chauncey (Apr 19, 2013)

I'm probably gonna pick one up to go with my 1Ds3...provided noise, et al. is up to par.


----------



## wrlphoto (Apr 19, 2013)

They need to hurry up! I can only wait so long as my 40D's resolution isnt cutting it for me anymore and that d7100 from nikon looks amazing.


----------



## hmmm (Apr 19, 2013)

wrlphoto said:


> They need to hurry up! I can only wait so long as my 40D's resolution isnt cutting it for me anymore and that d7100 from nikon looks amazing.



If the 70D does have 21MP we will have the d7100 to thank.


----------



## barracuda (Apr 19, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.



+1

Exactly.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 19, 2013)

So lets see if I understand this... The 7D2 MIGHT be 21 megapixels, or it MIGHT be 24, or it could possibly be 18. And the 70D MIGHT have one of those sensors.... or it could be something else.....

I'll sleep better tonight knowing that....


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 19, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > So lets see if I understand this... The 7D2 MIGHT be 21 megapixels, or it MIGHT be 24, or it could possibly be 18. And the 70D MIGHT have one of those sensors.... or it could be something else.....
> ...


I'm sure that Canon knows exactly what they are doing.... they just aren't telling...


----------



## unfocused (Apr 19, 2013)

GaryJ said:


> If only Canon would announce they had a 21mp sensor with the same or better low light high ISO low noise capabilities as that other mob, That would be worth hearing.



I'd sure like to know what "other mob" you are referring to. I think I've looked at virtually every reputable test site I could find and have yet to see any evidence that the new generation sensors being used by Nikon offer any noticeable improvement in high ISO low noise performance. 

I too am hoping that Canon's next generation of APS-C sensors has better high ISO performance, but it's not like the current 18mp sensor is significantly worse than the current Nikon offerings.


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 19, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...


My gut says it won't be 18mp. But what does my gut know?


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 19, 2013)

barracuda said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.
> ...


+10 Absolutely! I hope it is so!


----------



## pierceography (Apr 19, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.



+1

Better high ISO performance is a must. Usable ISO at and above 3200 is key... I have the ISO max on my 7D set at 1600. Anything higher I have to render in B&W to be usable.

Things I don't care about: Megapixels, GPS, Wifi, Touchscreen, FPS, AF (current 7D AF and FPS are fine).

Things I do care about: ISO, price.

Otherwise, my current 7D will remain as my backup camera.


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 19, 2013)

pierceography said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.
> ...


I feel very much the same about my 7D. As I've said many times in different topics, it's still a relevant camera and tool in my bag...


----------



## RGF (Apr 19, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



+1 Basically field testing different combinations of attributes and trying to decide which combination in the current environment of other Canon, NIkon and to a less degree Sony, ... bodies (current and near future) will have the greatest incrementality to the brand. Plus factor in manufacturing and supply challenges, and you will begin to understand their decision process.

Too advanced and manufacturing challenges reduce capacity and may cut into pro level cameras. Not enough improvements, current customers may switch to Nikon or trade down a level.

Anyone else from Marketing / General Management here?


----------



## sfunglee (Apr 19, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.



+1

I owned 2 units of 7D, sold the old &for a new 7D for extra zoom & overall built =) , but I can't bear to wait the new 7DII for several reason... If no ISO improvement really feel upset...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 19, 2013)

I wonder if it will be a new process with modern levels of low ISO DR or not.
If not, then I'd be fearing for even the 5D4  to get such a sensor.


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 19, 2013)

sfunglee said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.
> ...


They've been listening to everyone gripe about the high ISO performance of the 7D for the last 3 years. I'd have to admit if they didn't work on that and give us at least 1 stop better performance on the Mk II, why would there really be any enticement to upgrade? 10fps over 8fps? Not for me... 

More superb AF system, something on the 5D3 level or close? That may do it but after working with my 7D for the last several years, I pretty much can nail AF using technique that has improved with time and the 7D in my hands... We are often one, the 7d and I... 

Even yet, the real seller for me is going to be very improved high ISO performance... that's the other shoe waiting to drop... ???


----------



## Zv (Apr 19, 2013)

I wonder will we see DIGIC 6, or dual fives in the 7DII? Not sure how adding more pixels to either camera will improve anything. I guess it's not a huge jump though I can't see the high ISO looking any better than it does now on a 7D. Wish they'd stick with 18mp and just aim at improving image quality but then where's the marketing strategy? Numbers sell.


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 19, 2013)

Zv said:


> I wonder will we see DIGIC 6, or dual fives in the 7DII? Not sure how adding more pixels to either camera will improve anything. I guess it's not a huge jump though I can't see the high ISO looking any better than it does now on a 7D. Wish they'd stick with 18mp and just aim at improving image quality but then where's the marketing strategy? Numbers sell.


They could pull it off with the Dual Digic 5plus.. that wouldn't be bad. Dual Digic 6 may be a screamer though! Looking forward to some Cr2 rumors!


----------



## jebrady03 (Apr 19, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > So lets see if I understand this... The 7D2 MIGHT be 21 megapixels, or it MIGHT be 24, or it could possibly be 18. And the 70D MIGHT have one of those sensors.... or it could be something else.....
> ...



I love it when this site gets interpreted as if the url is canonfacts.com

ALL OF THIS STUFF IS SPECULATION PEOPLE. HEAR SAY. ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. A DUMPING GROUND FOR PROTOTYPE SPECS THAT WILL NEVER SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY. THIS SITE IS FOR YOUR ENTERTAINMENT - THAT'S IT. STOP BASING YOUR HAPPINESS OFF OF WHAT YOU READ HERE.


----------



## siegsAR (Apr 19, 2013)

Krob78 said:


> They could pull it off with the Dual Digic 5plus.. that wouldn't be bad. Dual Digic 6 may be a screamer though! Looking forward to some Cr2 rumors!



They might use dual 5+ again this time, but I still have my hopes up for Digic 6.

A considerable delay on a model could mean they've put Digic 6 on it.

FWIW, I bet we're gonna be seing 2x 5+ on the 7dmk2, and digic 6 on the 70D.


----------



## Etienne (Apr 19, 2013)

I could use a crop body just for some reach at times, but this is going to have to offer something with an awfully big WOW effect to entice me. The 5DIII does everything pretty darn well as it is. 

I hope it has something enticing, because I like new stuff. As it is, I can get a T3i for $500 for the occasional bit of reach.


----------



## Stone (Apr 19, 2013)

For me to buy a 7DII, sensor performance will need to be greatly improved. I don't care about being able to push an underexposed shot 5-stops, it's just not the way I shoot. I do want better tonal transitions and cleaner low and high ISO performance. The thing that stands out to me is how "durable" APS-H and FF Canon raw files seem to be compared to APS-C files. My 7D files require more sharpening and more overall PP compared to FF raw files, and that's understood, but when I do PP aggressively, the images start to fall apart pretty fast. If that can be improved, I'll stick with APS-C because I'm still reach limited, otherwise, I'll keep my 7D and add a FF body....


----------



## East Wind Photography (Apr 19, 2013)

Actually I'd like to pull it back 5 stops and keep the highlights intact. The rest is just an empty bank account.



Stone said:


> For me to buy a 7DII, sensor performance will need to be greatly improved. I don't care about being able to push an underexposed shot 5-stops, it's just not the way I shoot. I do want better tonal transitions and cleaner low and high ISO performance. The thing that stands out to me is how "durable" APS-H and FF Canon raw files seem to be compared to APS-C files. My 7D files require more sharpening and more overall PP compared to FF raw files, and that's understood, but when I do PP aggressively, the images start to fall apart pretty fast. If that can be improved, I'll stick with APS-C because I'm still reach limited, otherwise, I'll keep my 7D and add a FF body....


----------



## Zv (Apr 19, 2013)

Stone said:


> For me to buy a 7DII, sensor performance will need to be greatly improved. I don't care about being able to push an underexposed shot 5-stops, it's just not the way I shoot. I do want better tonal transitions and cleaner low and high ISO performance. The thing that stands out to me is how "durable" APS-H and FF Canon raw files seem to be compared to APS-C files. My 7D files require more sharpening and more overall PP compared to FF raw files, and that's understood, but when I do PP aggressively, the images start to fall apart pretty fast. If that can be improved, I'll stick with APS-C because I'm still reach limited, otherwise, I'll keep my 7D and add a FF body....



I agree the RAW files from the 5D II can be pushed a lot more than the 7D ones. I also find myself using the NR sliders a lot more when using 7D files! Even after correcting images that are shot at ISO 100 they start to look noisy. Just an extra annoying pp step i would like to avoid.


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 19, 2013)

siegsAR said:


> Krob78 said:
> 
> 
> > They could pull it off with the Dual Digic 5plus.. that wouldn't be bad. Dual Digic 6 may be a screamer though! Looking forward to some Cr2 rumors!
> ...


I agree, that's my best guess as well, I can't see them not having dual Digic whether 5+ or 6... That's a huge part of what made the 7d the 7d!


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 19, 2013)

Regardless of MP count I would buy it (probably during Christmas time) ... 3 features I care about are:
a. better ISO performance
b. in-built HDR
c. ability to do at least 5 bracketed shots.


----------



## garyknrd (Apr 19, 2013)

Depends for me. I will wait two years and see what Nikon and Canon have to offer in the crop sensor line of cameras. I picked up a Mark IV and will use it two years. Then if Canon has a good crop camera that is not crippled with AF and IQ. I will buy it. Or move to Nikon if they have a good camera for my needs. I want the DR that Nikon cameras offer. At this point I am willing to give up there excellent telephoto lenses for a better camera. I have a friend that shoots Nikon with the 500 mm lens and the cameras from Nikon are really giving him room to improve. Even if my lens is sharper it is not noticeable. And there sensors are better IMO for birding and wildlife in general.

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


----------



## jrista (Apr 19, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > So lets see if I understand this... The 7D2 MIGHT be 21 megapixels, or it MIGHT be 24, or it could possibly be 18. And the 70D MIGHT have one of those sensors.... or it could be something else.....
> ...



Actually, it DOES! Really! You don't just crank out a any old new sensor because you have some competition. You prototype, experiment, test a few models, tweak & refine, and eventually produce a solid, stable, final product that consumers will be happy purchasing. Canon had multiple prototype 1D X models out in the field for nearly a year (and quite probably more than a year, if they had them out before the paper announcement) before they finally settled on one. If they are trying to make the 7D line a higher grade professional line, it is NOT surprising if they are testing multiple prototypes with multiple sensor designs.

That said...these ARE just RUMORS. Canon has not actually announced ANYTHING! Regardless of how many rumors people fling about, no one even knows for sure what Canon is actually doing. *So, dilbert..you can't really apply the "chaos" you are trying to use AGAINST Canon as their ACTUAL mode of operation, now can you?*


----------



## jrista (Apr 19, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> I wonder if it will be a new process with modern levels of low ISO DR or not.
> If not, then I'd be fearing for even the 5D4  to get such a sensor.



I would expect the Big MP camera to get the DR boost. The 7D has always been an action photography camera, and with a bump up to 10fps and a better AF system (crosses fingers), I suspect it will attract even more action shooters. We tend to shoot at higher ISO rather than lower ISO, so I can see Canon focusing on that end of things more than high performance low ISO DR. At least, for this particular sensor.

That said, I agree, I do hope this is Canon's first 180nm process sensor. Would be nice to see some real-world evidence they are ready to move to a new process, and start making more efficient use of their silicon (i.e. larger light-sensitive photodiode area -> greater full well capacity -> lower noise/better SNR at high ISO.)


----------



## jrista (Apr 19, 2013)

Stone said:


> For me to buy a 7DII, sensor performance will need to be greatly improved. I don't care about being able to push an underexposed shot 5-stops, it's just not the way I shoot. I do want better tonal transitions and cleaner low and high ISO performance. The thing that stands out to me is how "durable" APS-H and FF Canon raw files seem to be compared to APS-C files. My 7D files require more sharpening and more overall PP compared to FF raw files, and that's understood, but when I do PP aggressively, the images start to fall apart pretty fast. If that can be improved, I'll stick with APS-C because I'm still reach limited, otherwise, I'll keep my 7D and add a FF body....



The biggest factor there is the simple fact that larger sensors gather more light at each photodiode, thanks to larger photodiode area. Area is the the thing that really matters, and FF sensors have quite a bit more. An improvement in quantum efficiency would help as well. Canon sensors have reached around 47% or so, however other manufacturers have been well into the 50% range, some even pushing 60%, over the last few years. If Canon could improve Q.E., and apply some active cooling to control dark current noise, the tiny pixels of 20-25mp APS-C sensors could become significantly more efficient, resulting in much better high ISO noise performance.


----------



## M.ST (Apr 19, 2013)

I know two different prototypes. But no one has a Digic 6 in it.

It´s time that Canon reduces the price of the 5D Mark III around 2000 bucks and put a FF camera between the 5D Mark III and 1D X on the market that is worth the money you pay for it. I need a better IQ in the range ISO 50 to ISO 800.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 19, 2013)

M.ST said:


> It´s time that Canon reduces the price of the 5D Mark III around 2000 bucks


 ??? "5D Mark III around 2000 bucks"? ... ain't gonna happen! at least not until MK IV shows up


----------



## Peerke (Apr 19, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.



+1. And it better be more .


----------



## whothafunk (Apr 19, 2013)

CR1 should be forbidden.


----------



## photogaz (Apr 19, 2013)

I'm sorry things like this never sit with me.

I don't believe articles like this for 2 reasons:

1. If a camera is due for release in the next six months, they wouldn't be making decisions about what is going to be in the camera. They know already and have already made that decision. If they haven't then the camera will take longer than 6 months to come to market.

2. Unless you're somebody in the Canon R&D department, you're not going to know details like this.


----------



## Albi86 (Apr 19, 2013)

M.ST said:


> I know two different prototypes. But no one has a Digic 6 in it.
> 
> It´s time that Canon reduces the price of the 5D Mark III around 2000 bucks and put a FF camera between the 5D Mark III and 1D X on the market that is worth the money you pay for it. I need a better IQ in the range ISO 50 to ISO 800.



A price drop in the 5D3 would be most welcome.

However, a new sensor would make the 70D a very interesting proposition.


----------



## Apop (Apr 19, 2013)

Don't care about the megapixels, better iso performence would be nice ( and maybe better buffer still)

Most important is the autofocus, im so bummed my 1dmkiv only used 1 out of it's 39 cross type sensors on my f4 lenses :s 

so better iso/buffer/autofocus and priced a bit under the 6d hehe


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 19, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care



You just don't understand what matters to Canon  ... the 5d3 with 22mp is *better* than the 20mp 6d because it has 2mp more, and that gives Canon the freedom to put the 21mp 7d2 where they want it to be in (automated) tech comparisons: Between the pro 5d3 and the amateur 6d. Maybe the 70d will have 19mp? 



M.ST said:


> It´s time that Canon reduces the price of the 5D Mark III around 2000 bucks and put a FF camera between the 5D Mark III and 1D X on the market that is worth the money you pay for it. I need a better IQ in the range ISO 50 to ISO 800.



Amen to that, esp. since you know the Canon gear. But of course it won't happen now that the 6d is out, or Canon gets really bold and prices the full frame 60d where it should belong - at say €1300.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Apr 19, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...




Did anyone else hear that?


----------



## DzPhotography (Apr 19, 2013)

M.ST said:


> I know two different prototypes. But no one has a Digic 6 in it.
> 
> It´s time that Canon reduces the price of the 5D Mark III around 2000 bucks and put a FF camera between the 5D Mark III and 1D X on the market that is worth the money you pay for it. I need a better IQ in the range ISO 50 to ISO 800.


Couldn't agree with you more. Over here in Belgium, the 5DMkIII is still 3,000€ and the D800 now about 2,300€... : Really beginning to contemplate whether or not to get a D800...


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 19, 2013)

A 21mp sensor makes more sense than 24, since Canon's crop sensors have been, and likely will continue to be, the underdog from a technical standpoint, relative to the competition's crop sensors (which are all slightly larger in surface area...1.5x vs. 1.6x...besides having better measured performance).


----------



## Diko (Apr 19, 2013)

GaryJ said:


> If only Canon would announce they had a 21mp sensor with the same or better low light high ISO low noise capabilities as that other mob, That would be worth hearing.



Agree!



JPAZ said:


> My 15.1mp Canon 50d was awfully noisy. This sensor would have to do better.



What should I say with my 40D... :-(



unfocused said:


> ...
> I too am hoping that Canon's next generation of APS-C sensors has better high ISO performance, but it's not like the current 18mp sensor is significantly worse than the current Nikon offerings.



Who confirmed you that the will have next generation sensor? So far we know that 70D & 7D2 will have own CMOS, but it is NOT 100% that it will be Next Gen. :-( I am sorry for telling you that. I myself am expecting nothing less than the best... but so far everyone state that 7D2 will be with DIGIC5 and NOT DIGIC6, although it exist in another camera from Canon already.


pierceography said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.
> ...



Finally someone like me. I would ADD Dynamic Range improvment to the ISO. I don't care about VIDEO at all.
Although having in mind that current camera have 25K ISO... 



Krob78 said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder will we see DIGIC 6, or dual fives in the 7DII? Not sure how adding more pixels to either camera will improve anything. I guess it's not a huge jump though I can't see the high ISO looking any better than it does now on a 7D. Wish they'd stick with 18mp and just aim at improving image quality but then where's the marketing strategy? Numbers sell.
> ...



If higher ISO - definetely dual Digic6. If better Dynamic Range - better CMOS.



siegsAR said:


> They might use dual 5+ again this time, but I still have my hopes up for Digic 6.
> A considerable delay on a model could mean they've put Digic 6 on it.
> FWIW, I bet we're gonna be seing 2x 5+ on the 7dmk2, and digic 6 on the 70D.



Interesting idea. ;-) But not likely, because - 7D2 is the flagship for APS-C.



Rienzphotoz said:


> Regardless of MP count I would buy it (probably during Christmas time) ... 3 features I care about are:
> a. better ISO performance
> b. in-built HDR
> c. ability to do at least 5 bracketed shots.



Good idea indeed. With 7D2 with dual DIGIC6 and in-built HDR bracketing with OUTPUT in RAW. That would be fascinating.



photogaz said:


> 1. If a camera is due for release in the next six months, they wouldn't be making decisions about what is going to be in the camera. They know already and have already made that decision. If they haven't then the camera will take longer than 6 months to come to market.



True about marketing - however marketing needs time to make research and make decisions. Parallel to them - R&D need time to create and prepare for a final release a model - that is why different prototypes meanwhile are made. Then Marketing makes the call. A call that would be most recent and adequate to the current market. ;-) That simple it is.



Chosenbydestiny said:


> jebrady03 said:
> 
> 
> > ALL OF THIS STUFF IS SPECULATION PEOPLE. HEAR SAY. ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. A DUMPING GROUND FOR PROTOTYPE SPECS THAT WILL NEVER SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY. THIS SITE IS FOR YOUR ENTERTAINMENT - THAT'S IT. STOP BASING YOUR HAPPINESS OFF OF WHAT YOU READ HERE.
> ...


NOPE 8)


----------



## MichaelHodges (Apr 19, 2013)

I'd need to see improved noise and dynamic range at low ISO to consider moving to a 7D II. I really don't care about the megapixels. 15 was plenty for me on the 50D (which was consistently sharper with the same lenses than my 7D).


-----------

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/


----------



## DzPhotography (Apr 19, 2013)

MichaelHodges said:


> I'd need to see improved noise and dynamic range at low ISO to consider moving to a 7D II. I really don't care about the megapixels. 15 was plenty for me on the 50D (which was consistently sharper with the same lenses than my 7D).
> 
> 
> -----------
> ...


same here. For me they can even drop down to 12MP. : HTC is doing it also


----------



## docsmith (Apr 19, 2013)

Peerke said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.
> ...


For most, price point will also matter. I know Nikon is typically considered Canon's competition, but in this case, I think Canon's own 5DIII is giving the hypothetical 7DII a lot of competition as the prices get closer. Canon had either get the 7DII specs (or an improved spec, such as DR) closer to the 5DIII if they want to price the 7DII >$2,200 or shoot for the 1 stop improvement and be sub $2,000 with the 7DII. 

What would get my interest is the "mini-1DX" rumor with new sensor tech, 1.5-2 stop ISO performance, the finer grain noise of the 5DIII, and improved DR. That said, it is seems more and more likely that the 7DII will be more of a nice but modestl upgrade (1 stop ISO improvement, modest new sensor tech, 10 fps, hopefully better AF) but be priced at $1,600-$1,700. That would be a great camera for a lot of people, just not one I'll buy.


----------



## pedro (Apr 19, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> I wonder if it will be a new process with modern levels of low ISO DR or not.
> If not, then I'd be fearing for even the 5D4  to get such a sensor.


Well, if you passed the 5D3 and stayed with the MKII I can relate to that. I went FF from a 30D. So the 5DIII to me is an awesome step up. I am courious what a 5DIV may hold sensorwise and for ultra high ISO 51k and beyond.
I will wait out a 5DV...just because the 5DIII is plenty of camera for me. Only reason to buy a new one will be improved ultra high ISO IQ...So I just wonder what my 25k ISO will look like by 2017 8)


----------



## stefsan (Apr 19, 2013)

I'm still saving the money to buy a 5DIII and the glass to match it (24-105 and 16-35 II). But if Canon puts out a 7DII with better DR, good high ISO capabilities (i.e. pictures without ugly banding noise up to ISO 6400), AF system, frame rate and weather sealing at least as good as the one of the 7D I would gladly take one. Even if the body would be more expensive than the original 7D I would take it because I would not have to spend anything on new lenses.


----------



## aj1575 (Apr 19, 2013)

If we put the pieces of information we have together, then it seems like it is better to wait for the 70D / 7DII, than having it now. Why? It really looks like Canon is planing a bigger step in the sensor design, but it seems they are behind schedule. So especially for the 70D there seem to be two posibilities, the old 18MP or a new 21-24MP sensor. The longer we have to wait, the higher seems the posibility that we get the new sensor (depending on the problems Canon has with the new sensor).

I still have hopes that Canon will introduce the 70D with the new sensor, even though we heard different rumors recently. Why would Canon introduce a new senor in a lower end camera (100D, SL1), and not bring the 70D alongside the 700D, and then bring the SL1 some weeks later. And why didn't they bring the 70D already, since it is overdue after 2 1/2 years, when Canon has all the stuff they need (including sensor) ready. It looks to me (and I hope so), that they are delaying the 70D so they can introduce it with the new sensor.


----------



## pedro (Apr 19, 2013)

aj1575 said:


> If we put the pieces of information we have together, then it seems like it is better to wait for the 70D / 7DII, than having it now. Why? It really looks like Canon is planing a bigger step in the sensor design, but it seems they are behind schedule. So especially for the 70D there seem to be two posibilities, the old 18MP or a new 21-24MP sensor. The longer we have to wait, the higher seems the posibility that we get the new sensor (depending on the problems Canon has with the new sensor).
> 
> I still have hopes that Canon will introduce the 70D with the new sensor, even though we heard different rumors recently. Why would Canon introduce a new senor in a lower end camera (100D, SL1), and not bring the 70D alongside the 700D, and then bring the SL1 some weeks later. And why didn't they bring the 70D already, since it is overdue after 2 1/2 years, when Canon has all the stuff they need (including sensor) ready. It looks to me (and I hope so), that they are delaying the 70D so they can introduce it with the new sensor.



Breaking news of a new and improved Canon sensor-design approach will be the best news to me! As I am a slow upgrader (30D to 5D3: 5 years) there will be quite some development in the meantime till I possibly buy another (5D) body in about 5 years from now. Looking forward to these news...!


----------



## jebrady03 (Apr 19, 2013)

aj1575 said:


> And why didn't they bring the 70D already, since it is overdue after 2 1/2 years, when Canon has all the stuff they need (including sensor) ready. It looks to me (and I hope so), that they are delaying the 70D so they can introduce it with the new sensor.



Who said it was overdue and/or that they're delaying the 70D? Internet expectations? Or Canon? Perhaps Canon believes they're ahead of schedule. Because other than some not-so-vague comments from Canon employees who were put on the spot, I don't recall reading/hearing anything about the 70D or the 7D2 especially in regards to an impending announcement or due date.

So again, are these YOUR expectations from reading a RUMORS site, or are these missed deadlines that Canon has self-imposed? Obviously a rhetorical question...

Talk on this website has REALLY gone from "rumors" to "if _____ doesn't fit my personal expectations then it's ______ (fill in the blank with negative thoughts)."


----------



## gecko (Apr 19, 2013)

All this just makes me wonder how long it will be before some innovative company comes along and 'Black Magics' Canon, with an EF mount body having something like 1DX performance at a 70D price.


----------



## aj1575 (Apr 19, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> aj1575 said:
> 
> 
> > And why didn't they bring the 70D already, since it is overdue after 2 1/2 years, when Canon has all the stuff they need (including sensor) ready. It looks to me (and I hope so), that they are delaying the 70D so they can introduce it with the new sensor.
> ...



If you would have takeen yourself more time to read, then you would have probably realized, that I wrote "It looks to me", so it was not even a rethorical question you wrote, it was just not a very intelligent question, because it just showed, that you did not read what I wrote.


----------



## drjlo (Apr 19, 2013)

gecko said:


> All this just makes me wonder how long it will be before some innovative company comes along and 'Black Magics' Canon, with an EF mount body having something like 1DX performance at a 70D price.



Makes me smile just thinking about it 8) Especially if that "Black Magic" body incorporated the Sony/D800 type FF sensor and came with the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 as kit lens, but in full frame version. One can dream..


----------



## Albi86 (Apr 19, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> aj1575 said:
> 
> 
> > And why didn't they bring the 70D already, since it is overdue after 2 1/2 years, when Canon has all the stuff they need (including sensor) ready. It looks to me (and I hope so), that they are delaying the 70D so they can introduce it with the new sensor.
> ...



Have you ever heard about competition?

Canon is deciding on the sensor while the D7100 has been shipping and making people happy for a while. That's what makes Canon look late. They're not the only player in the game, and the show goes on with or without them.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 19, 2013)

Diko said:


> GaryJ said:
> 
> 
> > If only Canon would announce they had a 21mp sensor with the same or better low light high ISO low noise capabilities as that other mob, That would be worth hearing.
> ...


Diko ... WOW, 9 quotes in one post ... Impressed. Man I struggle with just a couple of quotes, screwing up and modifying my posts most of the time.


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 19, 2013)

High ISO noise is a priority, I want a nice clean ISO800, but as long as they can achieve those goals at the same time I'll take as many Megapixels to go along with it as they can give me.
Eventually I want to be using a 40MP crop sensor, but for now I'd be happy with something like 28. Anything less than 21 would be disappointing.


----------



## ddashti (Apr 19, 2013)

pwp said:


> A 21 Mp 7DII sounds fine to me. But it's the rest of the hardware package that holds the greatest interest, along with a release date!
> 
> -PW



I couldn't agree more with that statement!


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 19, 2013)

9VIII said:


> Eventually I want to be using a 40MP crop sensor, but for now I'd be happy with something like 28. Anything less than 21 would be disappointing.


40MP on a crop sensor! ... hmm :-\


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 19, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Eventually I want to be using a 40MP crop sensor, but for now I'd be happy with something like 28. Anything less than 21 would be disappointing.
> ...



Scale up the sensor from the SX-50 and you get 115Mpixels on APS-C or 303Mpixels for FF..... 

Scale up an iPad sensor..... hmmmmm.... gigapixels!


----------



## Diko (Apr 19, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> Diko ... WOW, 9 quotes in one post ... Impressed. Man I struggle with just a couple of quotes, screwing up and modifying my posts most of the time.


What can I say? : I am furious with Canon. Photo-shooting is a hobby of mine and no work. 
I am currently on a 40D ONLY! I need a very urgent upgrade. 

I am far away from 1Dx :-( For all the rest of the devices only 6D seems "a little" OK. And yet far away from what I need. 

I am furious with Canon. 

I hope for the best about 7D2: new dual DIGIC 6 and new CMOS (NEW Technolgy, NOT the same CMOS as on 1DX, 5D3 edition customized for 7D2).


10x!


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 19, 2013)

Diko said:


> I hope for the best about 7D2: new dual DIGIC 6 and new CMOS (NEW Technolgy, NOT the same CMOS as on 1DX, 5D3 edition customized for 7D2).
> 
> 
> 10x!



No need to be "furious with Canon". And where did you read a rumor that the 7D2 would get "dual digic 6"? I must have missed that. Seems very unlikely to me, unless the price is more in the $3k+ range. Which would be absurd...a 1.6x crop sensor is a silly compromise in the first place (at least now in 2013). To attempt to sell one at such a high price, would be a disaster. 1.6x crop, is so very 2002...it's time to move on to something else, something bigger. I mean, if "reach" is all they care about, they might as well go smaller and make a micro 4/3 size, 3:2 sensor for the 7D2. But they won't.


----------



## rs (Apr 19, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Diko said:
> ...


TC?


----------



## rizenphoenix (Apr 19, 2013)

rs said:


> ankorwatt said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Those fit on crops too.


----------



## BrettS (Apr 19, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> you have not a clue what you are talking about



Mikael, I would suggest to you that you could contribute better by exercising more tact in your communications.


----------



## jrista (Apr 20, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> nothing will be better with a TC, and then we are not talking about the advantage of the smaller pixels and resolution and the same lens.
> 
> TC also on the APS- and then?



Sorry, but that is just plain wrong. If you slap a teleconverter on a lens, regardless of what sensor you are using,* you increase the focal length.* Your *OPTICAL *power has improved, and now you are putting _MORE PIXELS ON THE SUBJECT_. More pixels on subject is better regardless of how you achieve it. A teleconverter might introduce slight additional softening, but if it gets you significantly "closer" to your subject thanks to a greater magnification, that additional softness can't possibly be worse than having to crop significantly.

Adding a TC is valuable, be it with a low density FF or a high density APS-C....if you cannot physically get closer to your subject, you can't really do better than moving to a longer focal length. Getting closer is better, but it is not always an option, and when it is not an option, a teleconverter is often the cheapest, if not the only, option for increasing the size of your subject relative to the frame.

As a simple example, I'd happily go with a 300mm f/4 L IS + 1.4x TC rather than a 400mm f/5.6 L. Not because the 300mm has IS, but because with a 1.4x TC you get 420mm out of it. The extra focal length will offset the slight drop in IQ...you'll get more pixels on subject, not a lot, but enough to be useful, with the subject being 10% larger in the frame. Plus...you still have the IS, so its still better all around than the 400mm f/5.6 L as you won't also have softening due to camera shake. Similarly, I'd take a 600mm f/4 L + 1.4x TC on a 7D any day over the 800mm f/5.6 L on a 5D III...the 600/1.4/7D combo will pack on far more pixels than the 5D III setup. (As soon as f/8 AF is available on the 5D III, my sentiments there will likely change...600mm + 2x TC + 5D III would then become a better 1200mm setup with superior AF.)


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 20, 2013)

Diko said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > Diko ... WOW, 9 quotes in one post ... Impressed. Man I struggle with just a couple of quotes, screwing up and modifying my posts most of the time.
> ...



Not to be blunt...but...look in the quote....ugggg


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Diko said:
> 
> 
> > I hope for the best about 7D2: new dual DIGIC 6 and new CMOS (NEW Technolgy, NOT the same CMOS as on 1DX, 5D3 edition customized for 7D2).
> ...



If the 7D2 is going to shoot 21MP at 10FPS it's going to need dual Digic just as much as the 1Dx (I guess maybe they could just use a bigger buffer instead).

Crop sensors can be preferable to teleconverters since they don't lose any light, which would be very detrimental to AF on some lenses.

How much you want your sensor cropped is always a balance, APS-C is what people are used to on Canon so it wouldn't be terrible if they stick with it.


----------



## wickidwombat (Apr 20, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> 18 MP. 21 MP. 24 MP. Even 15 MP. Frankly, I don't especially care. If it does a full stop or more better in terms of high ISO noise performance for RAW images vs. the 7D, a 7DII will be interesting to me. If not, no interest.



+1 
but also base iso noise issues need to be resovled
if the noise follows recent trends of becoming more filmy than blocky digital noise it will help greatly
as the noise from the newer sensors responds alot better to NR than the current 18MP range do


----------



## gecko (Apr 20, 2013)

drjlo said:


> gecko said:
> 
> 
> > All this just makes me wonder how long it will be before some innovative company comes along and 'Black Magics' Canon, with an EF mount body having something like 1DX performance at a 70D price.
> ...


......and Magic Lantern supplying the software.

Would be a dream body.


----------



## Zv (Apr 20, 2013)

I think we can all safely agree that the next generation of DSLR from Canon really needs to be NEXT GENERATION for most of us to even want to upgrade! 

Personally I think neither 70D or 7D II will have ground breaking tech other than just "the latest version". 

It's what's in the pipeline after these two releases I'm interested in ....


----------



## mkabi (Apr 20, 2013)

Rumor or not.

Reality is... the t4i caught up with everything the 60D and 7D had to offer.

So there is a definite need for a serious upgrade, and weather sealing won't just cut it anymore.


----------



## Dart23 (Apr 20, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Diko said:
> 
> 
> > I hope for the best about 7D2: new dual DIGIC 6 and new CMOS (NEW Technolgy, NOT the same CMOS as on 1DX, 5D3 edition customized for 7D2).
> ...



Why would "dual digic 6" = $3k+ range? Doesn't the new SX280 with digic 6 come in at $320?


----------



## jebrady03 (Apr 20, 2013)

aj1575 said:


> jebrady03 said:
> 
> 
> > aj1575 said:
> ...



When choosing to question someone's intelligence, you should really proofread your own post for misspellings, proper grammar, and proper punctuation to insure you look as intelligent as possible.

Additionally, don't try to hide behind "it looks to me" - you know my comment applied perfectly to you (and many, MANY others on this forum so I'm not just singling you out - I just happened to quote your post) with or without the inclusion of that minimally applicable qualifier.

Finally, you should avoid insults and stick to facts. However I see from your acceptance of rumors as quasi-facts that this may be difficult for you.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 20, 2013)

Dart23 said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Diko said:
> ...



I see several reasons:
* Programming a firmware which uses two or more CPUs needs a lot of development to parallelize "jobs" on different CPUs
* PC board layout and thermal management has to be codeveloped/improved
* If there is a need for a 2nd CPU the hardware is more powerful (120point AF system, 40 MPix sensor) and this will increase the system cost.

A specialized camera will see a lower count of bodies produced so the development cost will be higher on a per-body-perspective.

My 2ct.


----------



## jrista (Apr 20, 2013)

mb66energy said:


> Dart23 said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



You do realize the current 7D Mark I already uses dual DIGIC 4 chips, right? It never cost $2000, let alone $3000. Making use of dual processors in a 7D II would be a no brainer, and would NOT require the creation of DIGIC 6. The 1D X already uses dual DIGIC 5+ chips, and repurposing that design in a cheaper body would be a hell of a lot cheaper for Canon than designing something completely new from scratch. It also proves that the firmware ALREADY supports parallel processing, so there really isn't any extra work there, either.


----------



## aj1575 (Apr 20, 2013)

jebrady03 said:


> aj1575 said:
> 
> 
> > jebrady03 said:
> ...



Sorry that english is only a second language to me.

But anyway, I still think you should read the post you are replying to correctly.

And by the way, I did not question your intelligence as such; I just said that this particular question/post was not very intelligent.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 20, 2013)

jrista said:


> mb66energy said:
> 
> 
> > [...]
> ...



You are essentially right. There exist four (?) models which use 2 CPUs and the EOS 1D X which uses 3 DIGICs - some basic development will be there. But never underestimate adaption of existing code for new CPUs with new (totally new?) additional components. And it depends on how you use the CPUs: Sharing load for different tasks is easy, but parallelizing one task is hard to do (except it is sth. like calculating noise reduction for different regions of the sensor).

My third point was perhaps the most important: If there is a need for a 2nd high power CPU the hardware will drive cost - extraordinary fps, a very advanced AF chip, etc. So the additional CPU will only add 100 or 200 EUR/USD but the things that made it necessary are really expensive (high speed mirror mechanism, shutter system, complex and specialized AF chip, ultra fast FADCs, etc,).


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 20, 2013)

mkabi said:


> Rumor or not.
> 
> Reality is... the t4i caught up with everything the 60D and 7D had to offer.
> 
> So there is a definite need for a serious upgrade, and weather sealing won't just cut it anymore.


t4i caught up with 7D? ... I am curious to know how ... also why "weather sealing won't cut it anymore"?


----------



## Zv (Apr 21, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> mkabi said:
> 
> 
> > Rumor or not.
> ...



I doubt people who say these things have ever used a 7D. If they had they would realize that the 7D is a full on assualt tank whearas the t4i is a water pistol in comparison. Let me see them capture a bird in flight with a t4i.


----------



## Rockets95 (Apr 21, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> if the noise follows recent trends of becoming more filmy than blocky digital noise it will help greatly
> as the noise from the newer sensors responds alot better to NR than the current 18MP range do



wickidwombat - I'm curious about the statement of noise becoming more filmy with new sensors. Can you point me to a place that I could find out more about this?


----------



## wickidwombat (Apr 21, 2013)

Rockets95 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > if the noise follows recent trends of becoming more filmy than blocky digital noise it will help greatly
> ...



the 5Dmk3 and 1Dx for example both have increadably visually appealing noise compared to older tech sensors
while the quantity is still there the smother more organic nature of this noise means 2 things
1) the noise responds much better to noise reduction and allows much higher effective isos without needing to go to plastacine levels of noise reduction (unfortunately the in camera processing is way too ham fisted with its NR)
or
2) leave a certain amount of noise in the image because it still works well

the older sensors the noise is more digital and rapidly falls apart at high iso that no amount of noise reduction can really help without ruining the image
i feel the same amount of noise reduction in lightroom achieves a similar image when a 5Dmk3 is at 16,000 iso vs 1600 iso of the current 18MP crop sensors and 3200 iso on the 18MP is really a maximum and that is assuming the exposure is absolutely spot on there is no room for error

so while perhaps the quantity of noise wont change too dramatically if the QUALITY (for want of a better term) of that noise becomes more like the noise out of the 5Dmk3 or the 1Dx then I can realistically see usable isos up to perhaps 8000 (all subect to an individuals tollerance to noise and ability to process it of course)
which would be pretty kick arse especially with this sigma 18-35 f1.8 lens coming out (personally i see the wider effective DoF while maintaing the 1.8 speed advantage as a positive for this system not a negative)
there is the potential for a really kick arse low light system.

So in summary my main concern is more about how that noise looks more than the quantity of it
i mean an unedited raw from a 5Dmk3 looks noisy as hell however once its processed well the images are very clean vs the 5Dmk2 which really the limit is somewhere between 3200 and 6400 depending on taste and at 6400 iso the mk2 is really quite digitally and blocky compared to the mk3


----------



## jrista (Apr 21, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> Rockets95 said:
> 
> 
> > wickidwombat said:
> ...



I totally agree with everything here. Noise quality is really what matters, not necessarily how much there is (although in my experience the amount of noise on both the 1D X and 5D III is considerably lower at much higher ISO settings than any of Canon's 18mp APS-C cameras.)

There is definitely a problem with the top two ISO settings on Canon's previous sensors, particularly the APS-C ones. Canon uses a secondary downstream amplifier to achieve the +/- 1/3rd stop settings, and it seems they use that for ISO 3200 and 6400 as well, which is not much better than simply digitally boosting ISO 1600 (with the exception that it seems to occur before the ADC...a digital boost will also amplify any ADC noise and quantization noise.)


----------



## ThomasN (Apr 21, 2013)

The technology is here. And the fact is, that that is the only thing we now.

See the sensor in 5D m3 with high ISO performance and good IQ, the 6D with WiFi and GPS, the 7D with fair weather sealing and high fps and several Canon cameras with video technology and the AF tech ass well and so on.

From a Canon board and share holder point of view the most important thing is to get as much money out us as possible. Period!

This means that we will get the new tech in small steps so we will buy a lot of cameras. 
ONLY the competition will give us a camera with all known tech in ONE camera. 

So pleeeeease Nikon, Sony, Panasonic and all you other great camera manufactors make dam good cameras in a dam hurry!


----------



## jrista (Apr 21, 2013)

ThomasN said:


> The technology is here. And the fact is, that that is the only thing we now.
> 
> See the sensor in 5D m3 with high ISO performance and good IQ, the 6D with WiFi and GPS, the 7D with fair weather sealing and high fps and several Canon cameras with video technology and the AF tech ass well and so on.
> 
> ...



Yay. Another troll. That's just...fantastic.


----------



## Stone (Apr 21, 2013)

ThomasN said:


> The technology is here. And the fact is, that that is the only thing we now.
> 
> See the sensor in 5D m3 with high ISO performance and good IQ, the 6D with WiFi and GPS, the 7D with fair weather sealing and high fps and several Canon cameras with video technology and the AF tech ass well and so on.
> 
> ...


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 21, 2013)

mb66energy said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > mb66energy said:
> ...



Mb66energy, excellent post! With that many autofocus points, it does sound like a lot of processing going on. This is the first I've ever seen speculation about so many points. However, that also seems like a bit of a stretch.

So...Canon is going to provide some sort of pioneering phase or hybrid autofocus system having twice as many points as the 1DX/5D3, within the fov of a 1.6x sensor having at least 21 MP resolution, with at least dual digic 5+, if not dual digic 6...(and likely require even more CPU's than this)...fire at 10 fps...all for a price that is closer to $2k than $3k...and the target market will purchase it in droves? All of this together seems unlikely, but maybe part of it will turn out to be true.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 21, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> .all for a price that is closer to $2k than $3k


CarlTN, stop scaring me with $3K price ;D lets not even go there ;D ... I want 7D II for around $1600 ... but if the 7D II is released in an APS-H sensor then I will gladly pay up $3K.


----------



## jrista (Apr 21, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > .all for a price that is closer to $2k than $3k
> ...



I really don't foresee a $3000+ 7D II. Logically, it just wouldn't fit within Canon's lineup. If Canon really is trying to restructure their DSLR offerings, returning the xxxD line to the entry-level realm in the sub-$1000 market, restoring the xxD line to semi-professional grade status in the $1500 market, and placing the 6D at the entry-level/prosumer FF market around $2000, then it seems logical that the 7D II would fill in the gap between the 6D and the 5D. 

I see it getting a reasonable feature update...a sensor in the 20-25mp range, 61pt AF (assuming that AF sensor will work for an APS-C crop frame...we might see something like a 41pt AF unit instead, which would still be fantastic!), a higher frame rate (10fps, keeping it in line with the 7D/1D IV ratio relative to the 1D X), better ISO thanks to some of the improvements that found their way into the 1D X, 5D III, and 6D (more translucent CFA and higher SNR) supporting ISO 25600 (and clean ISO 1600 output), and maybe a process shrink to 180nm (to demonstrate Canon is and will be a competitive force in the DSLR world going forward). 

I see the 7D II filling the gap at around $2500-$2700, smack dab in the middle between the 6D and 5D III official prices, with a reasonable featureset and capability upgrade to justify an $800-$1000 increase in price, justify Canon's statements about making the 7D II upgrade more "revolutionary" than "evolutionary", and also validate the xxD line's existence.


----------



## aj1575 (Apr 22, 2013)

Stone said:


> ThomasN said:
> 
> 
> > The technology is here. And the fact is, that that is the only thing we now.
> ...



ROFL

By the way, check this out: http://www.digitalrev.com/article/nikon-d7100-vs-canon-eos/OTM4MzUzOTY_A
The guys at digitalrev did a comparison of the new D7100 against the 4 year old 7D.


----------



## StepBack (Apr 22, 2013)

21 24 is that a lottery pick? I would be happy with a good AF like the 19 all x type rumored. But I would want some kind of zone selection similar to the 61 AF pt system in the 5D3. As far as the 6D I'm not in love with FF anymore than pretending a M9 is truly manual when it gives hints and tips and bells ring to tell u which way to move the switches. Results is what matters not the ad. Some 6D shots I saw on this site were very capable and generally equal to the color rendition of the big boy 5D3, but as for the claimed low light? These pics were taken in a bar and the photographer must have had a few because only a bit here and there was even resolved enough to see what was going on. I suspect the 7D2 will be priced closer to the 6D than the what is that thing Nikon makes the D7200? It's crazy that Nikon offers that for so much less. Strictly marketing. Canon reminds me of Sony back in the 80's and 90's. Priced too high so status seekers would buy it. If it costs too much it must be better.


----------



## aznable (Apr 22, 2013)

StepBack said:


> I suspect the 7D2 will be priced closer to the 6D than the what is that thing Nikon makes the D7200? It's crazy that Nikon offers that for so much less. Strictly marketing. Canon reminds me of Sony back in the 80's and 90's. Priced too high so status seekers would buy it. If it costs too much it must be better.



the competitor of 7DMkII would be the nikon D400


----------



## jrista (Apr 22, 2013)

StepBack said:


> 21 24 is that a lottery pick? I would be happy with a good AF like the 19 all x type rumored. But I would want some kind of zone selection similar to the 61 AF pt system in the 5D3. As far as the 6D I'm not in love with FF anymore than pretending a M9 is truly manual when it gives hints and tips and bells ring to tell u which way to move the switches. Results is what matters not the ad. Some 6D shots I saw on this site were very capable and generally equal to the color rendition of the big boy 5D3, but as for the claimed low light? These pics were taken in a bar and the photographer must have had a few because only a bit here and there was even resolved enough to see what was going on. I suspect the 7D2 will be priced closer to the 6D than the what is that thing Nikon makes the D7200? It's crazy that Nikon offers that for so much less. Strictly marketing. Canon reminds me of Sony back in the 80's and 90's. Priced too high so status seekers would buy it. If it costs too much it must be better.



Price is a matter of demand, not consumer desire for status. Canon has extremely high demand for their cameras, regardless of their technological status. The percentage of camera owners who care about the minutia of a manufacturers technology is extremely small relative to the total camera buying populace. High demand drives higher prices more than any other factor, with perhaps base commodity (materials) prices and import/export tariffs being close seconds.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 22, 2013)

A 21mp / 24mp sensor on the 7DII? Cool, so the users will have even more need of buying the best lenses in the Canon lineup to exploit the resolution. Two birds with one stone for Canon.

People not upgrading their lenses will ... well, whine again because the increased resolution is nothing if you pair it with cheap lenses!


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 22, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > .all for a price that is closer to $2k than $3k
> ...





J.R. said:


> A 21mp / 24mp sensor on the 7DII? Cool, so the users will have even more need of buying the best lenses in the Canon lineup to exploit the resolution. Two birds with one stone for Canon.
> 
> People not upgrading their lenses will ... well, whine again because the increased resolution is nothing if you pair it with cheap lenses!



I thought everyone decided "aps-h" was uncool? (I still like it...and again, I would prefer 1.1x or 1.2x...) 

At any rate, there is no way a "7D" variant would receive that large of a sensor...because it would be called a 1D variant. Canon is apparently forever tied to 1.6x crop, and anything larger than 1.5x crop, would not work with the smaller (and usually cheap) lenses designed to be used with "aps-c"...

Which again...outlines a bit of a conundrum. "APS-C" was always meant to be an entry level format, was it not? Because a decade ago, it was cheaper to build smaller sensors (and couple them to smaller bodies and smaller mirror boxes). Now it is not so much cheaper, if any...to build the crop sensors, compared to full frame. So...again...why are people going to pay $2700 for a body that is hobbled by such a small sensor size? Because "aps-c"-specific lenses are superior to full frame lenses? Get friggin real, never going to happen, the physics are against it. Because they just will? Ok. Maybe they will buy because of the "cool factor", and because it's the Canon name and reputation behind it. Or maybe they won't buy as many as Canon would like. Time will tell.

One thing is for sure. 5D3 owners will be up in arms over anyone who posts that their new 7D2 is the superior camera...When it comes to Canon fanboys, you just don't mess with the 5D3.


----------



## jrista (Apr 22, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



I don't think physics has anything to do with the inferiority of EF-S lenses. Optics are optics...it doesn't matter what kind of mount you use. If the optics resolve an extremely sharp image at the focus plane, you could slap on any mount you want, it doesn't matter. Leica and Zeiss lenses are examples of how lenses small in physical size can offer superior quality, for a mount that is neither EF or EF-S. The mount has nothing to do with the quality of a lens. If Canon wanted to, they could produce EF-S lenses that were just as high quality as comparable EF lenses. In some cases, they have, or very nearly so. The optics of the 10-22 and 17-85 are both very high quality. I think Canon's goal with EF-S is to keep them consumer glass, that's all. 

As for APS-C, its just a format. It WAS cheaper in the past to manufacture them. As a matter of fact, it is STILL cheaper to manufacture them. Sensor cost is all about die area per sensor. No matter how you slice and dice it, FF sensors will always cost more than APS-C sensors. Waver costs have come down as 300mm crystal manufacture has improved, but that savings in cost distributes, so smaller sensors will always be cheaper than larger sensors, but a similar factor.

APS-C is not inherently "cheap", in terms of quality. APS-C also has its benefits. For anyone who photographs at range, the crop factor as well as the generally higher pixel density offers a reach advantage. Reach is everything for a number of fields of photography, and in that respect, APS-C offers significant value. For other fields of photography, getting the largest sensor you can get your hands on is the best thing to do...things like landscapes, astrophotography, portraiture and weddings, all benefit from a larger frame. There are pros and cons to both. APS-C is not intrinsically inferior technology just because the sensor is smaller.

Camera cost is also not entirely about the sensor. The advent of the 6D and D600 prove that. Even though those cameras both use a full frame sensor, they are relatively cheap. The camera as a whole is what drives its value, and that value ultimately has little to do with the materials cost (even if materials are the most significant cost), and more to do with the needs of the photographer. A 7D II with 61pt AF, 10fps, a deep frame buffer, clean high ISO (and ISO to 25600), and improved IQ overall (which would be especially likely if Canon does finally move to a 180nm process), are VALUABLE in and of themselves. That "package deal" is something photographers like myself could very much use...all that power, speed, and IQ with a cropped sensor? I WANT that reach, and I'll happily pay for it.

That said...I'll also happily pay for a 5D III AS WELL. I can use both cameras...I do stuff at range, as well as stuff close up (such as macro, which can benefit from larger pixels), as well as landscapes and astrophotography. The only question is which one I'll buy first, not which one is better than the other.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 22, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> Now it is not so much cheaper, if any...to build the crop sensors, compared to full frame.



Where did you get this information from?



CarlTN said:


> So...again...why are people going to pay $2700 for a body that is hobbled by such a small sensor size?



I for one don't think Canon will price it at $ 2,700. I think it will be priced slightly lower than the 6D giving users the option to go for a high end crop camera or a entry level FF. 



CarlTN said:


> Ok. Maybe they will buy because of the "cool factor", and because it's the Canon name and reputation behind it. Or maybe they won't buy as many as Canon would like. Time will tell.



-1. Crop cameras have their uses. A hobbyist / enthusiast looking for a camera for sports / birding will get the 7D II. If this logic was right, the 6D would never have managed to sell. 



CarlTN said:


> One thing is for sure. 5D3 owners will be up in arms over anyone who posts that their new 7D2 is the superior camera...When it comes to Canon fanboys, you just don't mess with the 5D3.



Agreed. I feel though that the 7DII will come very close OR may even better the 5D3 under good lighting conditions. High ISO will however, be a different story.


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 22, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > One thing is for sure. 5D3 owners will be up in arms over anyone who posts that their new 7D2 is the superior camera...When it comes to Canon fanboys, you just don't mess with the 5D3.
> ...



LOL, I don't know if I'd go that far! If the 7DII performs as well as the 5DIII on a per sensor area basis, then you might see the restoration of the 5D/7D combination. Although with the 5DIII's improved AF and frame rate, there might be fewer people using 5DIII/7DII combos -- the 5DIII might be good enough.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 22, 2013)

Random Orbits said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



I guess I should have qualified my statement further by adding "when shooting with the big whites"


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 24, 2013)

J.R. said:


> CarlTN said:
> 
> 
> > Now it is not so much cheaper, if any...to build the crop sensors, compared to full frame.
> ...



You sure like to quote me! I got the information from here, and other sources. Are you denying the cost of producing full frame sensors, has come down relative to the cost of making a crop sensor...from the early 2000's?

I never said crop cameras didn't have their uses. Stop putting words in my mouth. But a hobbyist is FAR less likely to pay $2700 for a camera body (especially for a crop camera body). And if the 7D2 costs less, and does not have "revolutionary" features such as some kind of large "pro" body (that uses the larger triple cell battery similar to, or the same as, the 1DX and previous 1D bodies), and advanced auto focus...then what are we really talking about? I'm talking about the rumored 7D2, and you seem to be talking about the 70D. Given what you "think" the 7D2 will be, I don't see room for a 70D...unless of course it's really just a glorified Rebel...but they already have glorified Rebels...so again, I don't see your logic.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...



Hi Carl!

No offence intended in my above post and I don't think I said what you think I said (see above). I was merely alluding to the cool factor. 

Crop sensors are still considerably cheaper to produce as compared to the FF ... that's why you have so many cameras with the same crop sensors going very cheap. What will come out in the 7D2 is still an unknown. 

While I agree a hobbyist will be unlikely to pay $2,700 for a crop cam, I doubt if it will be priced at $2,700 or it will be priced out of the market. I do think the 7DII will be better in IQ ... A stop maybe and will be an improvement with better AF and other features (WIFI, GPS)over the 7D as it stands.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 24, 2013)

J.R. said:


> While I agree a hobbyist will be unlikely to pay $2,700 for a crop cam, I doubt if it will be priced at $2,700 or it will be priced out of the market. I do think the 7DII will be better in IQ ... A stop maybe and will be an improvement with better AF and other features (WIFI, GPS)over the 7D as it stands.



No problem here J.R. I certainly agree, the 7D2 will be a vast improvement over the 7D. Because it has to be. If it actually is a "pro" body, and costs in the low $2k range, and has all the other features people seem to want, it will absolutely murder the Sony/Nikon and other crop format competition...no doubt about that. That gets back to my other point...especially regarding the "pro" body aspect. There will be a lot of unhappy 5D3 owners who shoot birds, sports, etc...in good light...especially if they have a series 2 great white. Because their body will no longer be the cool kid on the block.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 24, 2013)

(Italicized quotes are from Jrista.)

_“I don't think physics has anything to do with the inferiority of EF-S lenses. Optics are optics...it doesn't matter what kind of mount you use. If the optics resolve an extremely sharp image at the focus plane, you could slap on any mount you want, it doesn't matter.”_

Well, that’s what you think. It matters huge at the wide angle end, and you know it does. The 10-22 is not an f/2.8 lens. So a narrower aperture coupled to a smaller sensor with higher noise floor, will achieve inferior results to full frame on a good quality f/2.8 wide angle lens (for wide angle astrophotography, night imaging, etc.) The 10-22 Canon EF-S, is also very low quality…you just happened to either not look at your images at even 50%, or else you had an unnaturally good copy…or else you’re way off base. Have a look at what the rental houses say about the 10-22. The 10-22 is inherently soft in the outer 40% of the image, even closed to f/8. It’s worthless crap. Please post proof otherwise, if you have it, and it needs to be fairly ironclad, with full exif…say a shot done at less than 15mm, at f/8 or f/7.1…preferably RAW. Notice I'm throwing you a bone and allowing for the handicapped sharpness. I would ask for an f/3.5 image done at 10mm, but that would be a total waste of time. It's also f/3.5 in a crop sensor vs f/2.8 on a full frame...

Honestly Jrista, or whatever your name is...you're so hyper enthusiastic about the series 2 great white superteles...that for you to even mention the Canon EF-S 10-22, is not only laughable, but it also chips away at your credibility regarding your wonderboy opinions about lens performance and the like.

_“APS-C is not inherently "cheap", in terms of quality.”_

That’s not what I said, and again, you know that’s not what I said. You’re implying I’m saying the format itself, especially a camera body in the format…is inherently “cheap.” I don’t think it is inherently “cheap”, nor did I say it was. I was referring to most EF-S lenses, as can clearly be seen if you read what I said again, in context…rather than attempt to dissect it out of context. You seem to have a lot of time to do that. I suggest you go out and shoot more pictures, as I have been doing.

_“Reach is everything for a number of fields of photography, and in that respect, APS-C offers significant value.”_

And in the same sense, even smaller sensored cameras can offer even more value, such as the SX50. But the SX50 doesn’t cost over $2k for the body, plus the $7k to $10k cost of a supertele. “Value” is very highly subjective here. What one person thinks of as high value, someone else with slightly different needs, might see as not a value at all. Buying a series 2 great white, will always be the dominant part of the equation. The “value” of a camera body, factors in very little, unless it is at or close to the level of the 1DX…or unless you have or need 3 or 4 camera bodies in the arsenal. So if maximum reach with a given lens is all you value, then yes, bodies like the future 7D2 could be seen as representing "good value". Just remember that the "good value" here, is because you can use a single supertele lens with two different bodies to achieve two "effective" focal lengths. That's the only "value". You can achieve BETTER value by simply using two different teleconverters, because then you have 3 possible "effective" focal lengths, rather than two...all for under $1k over the cost of the lens alone...as opposed to ~ $2k+ for buying the top class APS-C body. 

_“That said...I'll also happily pay for a 5D III AS WELL. I can use both cameras...I do stuff at range, as well as stuff close up (such as macro, which can benefit from larger pixels), as well as landscapes and astrophotography. The only question is which one I'll buy first, not which one is better than the other.”_

I’m happy that you can inform us all, as to what the “only question is”. You are overqualified there, a happy coincidence for you. It’s getting tiresome from here. Good day.


----------



## jrista (Apr 25, 2013)

CarlTN said:


> (Italicized quotes are from Jrista.)
> 
> _“I don't think physics has anything to do with the inferiority of EF-S lenses. Optics are optics...it doesn't matter what kind of mount you use. If the optics resolve an extremely sharp image at the focus plane, you could slap on any mount you want, it doesn't matter.”_
> 
> ...



Sorry, I never knew, and never will know, what you "mean" in your head. All I know is what you say. You clearly said you thought APS-C was only for entry-level cameras (and thus inherently "cheap", as that is what entry-level cameras are...cheap. Simple and logical extrapolation there, base on what you SAID.)

As for the lenses, the 10-22 is not as good as the 16-35 L in the corners because it is bending light a lot more with cheaper glass. You can control that better, and if the 10-22 was an EF mount L series lens, it would be...better-grade optical glass, aspheric elements, fluorite elements, better engineering, etc. My point, which you missed, is that it is not the MOUNT that makes the lens bad, nor is the EF-S mount limited by physics. The lens is "bad" (relatively speaking, compared to an L-series wide angle zoom) only because Canon did not make it an actual L-series lens. They explicitly choose not to utilize high grade optics in EF-S lenses...because they are designed to be entry-level and mid-grade/prosumer lenses. Just because Canon did not put in the effort does not mean it is impossible for an EF-S lens to achieve the exact same quality level as an L-series lens does. The mount isn't the problem, and neither is physics. Canon *doesn't want* EF-S to attain the prestiege that L-series lenses to...that's reserved for L-series lenses, so they just plain and simply don't design the lens to attain superior optical quality. 

I'd say the market segment is the only thing against EF-S lenses, and that is a matter of active choice on the part of Canon, not nature.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 25, 2013)

So let's say Canon comes out with a 54Megapixel camera.... Think of a 21Megapixel 7D as the sweet spot of the big megapixel monster yet for half the price (or less)..... It will sell.

There are an awful lot of us that seem to be waiting on the 7D2. It will sell.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 25, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> So let's say Canon comes out with a 54Megapixel camera.... Think of a 21Megapixel 7D as the sweet spot of the big megapixel monster yet for half the price (or less)..... It will sell.
> 
> There are an awful lot of us that seem to be waiting on the 7D2. It will sell.



+1 ... If the ISO performance is better, it would interest me immensely. 

BTW, I'm not sure of the physics but what sort of processing power would a 21/24MP @ 10 fps require?


----------



## jrista (Apr 25, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> So let's say Canon comes out with a 54Megapixel camera.... Think of a 21Megapixel 7D as the sweet spot of the big megapixel monster yet for half the price (or less)..... It will sell.
> 
> There are an awful lot of us that seem to be waiting on the 7D2. It will sell.



Oh yeah, it'll definitely sell. The 7D has been extremely popular, as it fills a fairly unique niche. The 7D II can only be better! How could it not sell?


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 25, 2013)

jrista said:


> Oh yeah, it'll definitely sell. The 7D has been extremely popular, as it fills a fairly unique niche. The 7D II can only be better! How could it not sell?



Because the 6d is there.

In times of 7d & 5d2, the 7d mostly was the most expensive, i.e. "best" model in many stores, so people who wanted something "good" or "solid" were talked into buying that. Whith the 6d price on the decline, they'll probably buy ff quality & wifi/gps instead of 7d2 aps-c features a casual shooter doesn't need.


----------



## insanitybeard (Apr 25, 2013)

Carl, I think calling the 10-22 'worthless crap' is a bit much. It's not without it's limitations I freely admit, but it has got me some fantastic images I couldn't have got with any other lens*. Sharpness away from centre viewed close to 100% does suffer, but does that make it worthless crap? No it does not, and frankly, that's offensive. 

jrista, from an old Canon lens brochure I have, it appears to me (and I stand to be corrected) that the EF-S 10-22 optical layout is not that dissimilar to the 17-40L (complete with SUD and aspherical elements), apart from smaller elements, presumably for the reduced image circle.

(*-by this, I mean ultra wide on crop)


----------



## Zv (Apr 25, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> Carl, I think calling the 10-22 'worthless crap' is a bit much. It's not without it's limitations I freely admit, but it has got me some fantastic images I couldn't have got with any other lens*. Sharpness away from centre viewed close to 100% does suffer, but does that make it worthless crap? No it does not, and frankly, that's offensive.
> 
> jrista, from an old Canon lens brochure I have, it appears to me (and I stand to be corrected) that the EF-S 10-22 optical layout is not that dissimilar to the 17-40L (complete with SUD and aspherical elements), apart from smaller elements, presumably for the reduced image circle.
> 
> (*-by this, I mean ultra wide on crop)



I have both lens optical layout on my blog. I have used both lenses and the 10-22 is by no means "worthless crap". 

http://zeebytes.blogspot.jp/2012/12/glassware-canon-10-22mm-f35-45-and-17.html?m=1


----------



## insanitybeard (Apr 25, 2013)

Zv said:


> I have both lens optical layout on my blog. I have used both lenses and the 10-22 is by no means "worthless crap".
> http://zeebytes.blogspot.jp/2012/12/glassware-canon-10-22mm-f35-45-and-17.html?m=1



That looks like an interesting article Zv, I will take a better look when I have more time. Here is arguably my best image with the 7D and EF-S 10-22, not full size as the file is too big. Viewed at 100% (original file) the limitations of the lens are apparent but I wouldn't have got this shot without the ultrawide.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 25, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> Carl, I think calling the 10-22 'worthless crap' is a bit much. It's not without it's limitations I freely admit, but it has got me some fantastic images I couldn't have got with any other lens*. Sharpness away from centre viewed close to 100% does suffer, but does that make it worthless crap? No it does not, and frankly, that's offensive.



There are a lot of people out there making a living off that worthless crap.


----------



## jrista (Apr 25, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> Carl, I think calling the 10-22 'worthless crap' is a bit much. It's not without it's limitations I freely admit, but it has got me some fantastic images I couldn't have got with any other lens*. Sharpness away from centre viewed close to 100% does suffer, but does that make it worthless crap? No it does not, and frankly, that's offensive.
> 
> jrista, from an old Canon lens brochure I have, it appears to me (and I stand to be corrected) that the EF-S 10-22 optical layout is not that dissimilar to the 17-40L (complete with SUD and aspherical elements), apart from smaller elements, presumably for the reduced image circle.
> 
> (*-by this, I mean ultra wide on crop)



I did not know it used an aspheric element, interesting. Ultralow Dispersion elements were good a decade ago, but Fluorite elements are far superior today, and considerably lower weight as well. That said, the 17-40 is by no means a 16-35. The 16-35 is definitely the optical superior to the 17-40. Not saying that the 17-40 is bad, but if the 10-22 has a similar design, it explains why it is so good for an EF-S lens. Even so, EF-S lenses are manufactured with the mass-production process, rather than the more hand-crafted process that higher-end L-series lenses get. I also do not believe it uses the higher grade optical glass that L-series lenses use, which would hurt IQ a bit as well. 

There is no reason to think that the mount is putting any kind of physical limitations on the lens...materials quality, engineering quality, and whether or not there is a hand-crafted touch and meticulous verification process to ensure optimal performance are what determine the resolving power of a lens.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 25, 2013)

jrista said:


> insanitybeard said:
> 
> 
> > Carl, I think calling the 10-22 'worthless crap' is a bit much. It's not without it's limitations I freely admit, but it has got me some fantastic images I couldn't have got with any other lens*. Sharpness away from centre viewed close to 100% does suffer, but does that make it worthless crap? No it does not, and frankly, that's offensive.
> ...



none of the Canon UWA Zooms have fluorite elements. 

10-22: 3 aspherical + 1 UD - $ 819
17-40: 3 aspherical + 1 UD - $ 799
16-35: 3 aspherical + 2 UD - $ 1,629

(Canon MRP, not taking into account the rebates / discounts)

Of course the quality of the elements used is different amongst the lenses but I would say that the 17-40 and 10-22 are very similar except that the elements would be smaller. However, there must be a reason why the 10-22 is more expensive than the 17-40.


----------



## Skirball (Apr 25, 2013)

J.R. said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > insanitybeard said:
> ...



For all intents and purposes they cost the same. But supply and demand play a role: there are no other options for UW on a crop, where as on a FF you have what, 4 choices?


----------



## jrista (Apr 25, 2013)

J.R. said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > insanitybeard said:
> ...



Sure, I believe all three lenses could stand to be updated. The 16-35 II is not a particularly great performer in the corners either (at least, not compared to the Nikon 14-24 anyway). I'm just trying to say, if the 10-22 or the 16-35 or any other Canon lens were redesigned and built today, any one of them, hell all of them, could perform much better than their current (and now aging) designs do. Physics is not explicitly limiting the optical performance of the 10-22, nor is the fact that it is a short-back design for a smaller mirror box, nor the fact that it is projecting a smaller image circle. None of those things intrinsically limit the resolving power of the lens...physics is not a "problem" for EF-S. If Canon so chose, they could make the EF-S 10-22 perform extremely well...it would just require more effort to build (especially if they were more hand-crafted like the great whites), and thus would also cost a lot more. 

The only thing that is really against the 10-22, or any one of those three lenses, is market segment. Two cost ~$800, the other costs ~$1600. I believe the list price for the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 is $2200. That extra $600 in cost gets you much better corner performance. It wouldn't matter if it was F mount, EF mount, EF-S mount, M42, or anything else. _The mount does not impose a physical limitation on how good the optics in the lens body can be._ That is the only point I am trying to make. The Fluorite element comment just has to do with the CA that exists in Canon's UWA lenses in the corners (which is really rather bad, even on the 16-35 II.)


----------



## J.R. (Apr 25, 2013)

jrista said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



All three lenses do need to be updated. The UWA zoom segment is probably is the Achilles heel for Canon at the moment with no updates in sight. That said, I'm sure the next updated lens will have fluorite elements. 

I fully agree though that the IQ a lens delivers cannot be impacted in any manner by the mount it is made for. The IQ is almost entirely a function of the optical elements in a lens. The EFS 17-55 comes very very close to L lenses and there is no reason it cannot be done with the 10-22. Whether Canon wants to do it ... well its impossible to tell.


----------



## jrista (Apr 25, 2013)

J.R. said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > J.R. said:
> ...



Aye! There has been quite a lot of competition in the WA and UWA zoom lens market lately, not just from Nikon, but from all the third-party manufacturers as well like Sigma, Tamron, etc. Canon is in the middle of a wide-ranging lens lineup update...probably to ensure they can support continued increases in pixel density/sensor resolution. I figure in the next couple of years, their UWA segment will get some updates, maybe an addition (14-24 f/2.8 of the same 24-70 f/2.8 II caliber, please!) 

I don't ever foresee Canon making EF-S lenses perform as well as L-series lenses, though...that is the whole entire domain of the L-series lens in the first place. If you want the quality, you know you gotta pick up a lens with the red band...


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 25, 2013)

J.R. said:


> All three lenses do need to be updated. The UWA zoom segment is probably is the Achilles heel for Canon at the moment with no updates in sight.



I have to disagree for the 17-40L which is the budget L choice and does ok iq-wise - any new version would surely result in a significant price "update" and this would rob the lens of one of the two key elements (the other being light & sturdy).

The 16-35L on the other hand seems to be overprices looking at the competition and could very well be replaced either by a mk3 version as the premium photojournalists' choice - a 14-24L wouldn't serve that purpose as it isn't long enough for a "always on" lens.


----------



## Diko (Apr 26, 2013)

Hi again,

first of all - what-the-hack with that LENSE OFF TOPIC?!? And BTW had any of you imagined a APS-C with L lenses? Like in my case.



Marsu42 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Oh yeah, it'll definitely sell. The 7D has been extremely popular, as it fills a fairly unique niche. The 7D II can only be better! How could it not sell?
> ...



EXACTLY!!! With 6D into PLAY things get ugly. A game changer was 5D2, then 7D came out better and improved... but APS-C... 

Now we have 6D. If anyone states that 5D3 was something great... nope - cheaper 1DX version with reduced features. Now 70D and 7D2... I will be happy to have xxDs back in the pro/amateur league. However I know for 100% that CANON is treating 7D as TOP ASP-C. And *superiour* to 6D. That is the way CANON represent it to resellers!!! NO matter the FF, wi-fi, GPS....



J.R. said:


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



2 CPUs - true: they could be either DIGIC 5+ and yet since they have DIGIC 6 it would be better at the same PRICE to put the new one.



J.R. said:


> ...
> 
> 
> CarlTN said:
> ...



Why not?!?! 5D3 had nothing innovative. It was updated 5D2... For me the only different between 1Dx, 5D3 & 6D is the Speed... AF... you say... 1DX - yes... the rest NO!



jrista said:


> Price is a matter of demand, not consumer desire for status. Canon has extremely high demand for their cameras, regardless of their technological status. The percentage of camera owners who care about the minutia of a manufacturers technology is extremely small relative to the total camera buying populace. High demand drives higher prices more than any other factor, with perhaps base commodity (materials) prices and import/export tariffs being close seconds.


 Hell yeah! That is what I call MILKING the Canon glass owners. :-(



jrista said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > CarlTN said:
> ...


So far agree!



jrista said:


> ...better ISO thanks to some of the improvements that found their way into the 1D X, 5D III, and 6D (more translucent CFA and higher SNR) supporting ISO 25600 (and clean ISO 1600 output), and maybe a process shrink to 180nm (to demonstrate Canon is and will be a competitive force in the DSLR world going forward).


 What do you mean!?!? 
1DX is to be 2 years ago released when 7D2 comes out... +/- a few months... You mean that the new APS-C flagship that is just 6 month away from the 1DX upgrade (remember the big megapixel monster with new generation of technologies that would cost around $10K) will have the same ISO and technology as 5D3?!?
What for?!? I mean - sorry I am missing the _more "revolutionary" than "evolutionary"_ part here.


jrista said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > So...again...why are people going to pay $2700 for a body that is hobbled by such a small sensor size? Because "aps-c"-specific lenses are superior to full frame lenses? Get friggin real, never going to happen, the physics are against it. Because they just will? Ok. Maybe they will buy because of the "cool factor", and because it's the Canon name and reputation behind it. Or maybe they won't buy as many as Canon would like. Time will tell.
> ...



I am sorry if I messed up the quotes on this one.... :-(

Anyways: Here in this forum I bet there are a lot of wedding photographers - perhaps they would know best... But I presume that I was one I would buy - 1Dx & 7D2 (given that both are with dual CPU and/or 10fps). ONLY L lenses. 

My scenario: 24-70 L II on 1Dx and 70-200 2.8 L IS II on 7D2. The best wedding configuration... Primes not included - I have no experience there... 

No 5D3, or any other body.

However my point is the timeline:

7D as I now will be more than 4 years old...


DIGIC I = 4 Bodies
DIGIC II = 9 Bodies
DIGIC III = 5 Bodies
DIGIC 4 = 10 Bodies
DIGIC 5 = 7 Bodies
DIGIC 6 = 1 Body... so far...


IMHO anything above 6 Bodies would be milking the technology... 

CANON is perhaps a DSLR market leader - yes, but technology leader definitely NO... why would they...?

Additionally if you think that mid-range (70D) deserves DIGIC 5+... after two generations (50D & 60D) with the same CPU (DIGIC 4).. when CANON have already skipped a CPU 5D (DIGIC2) -> 5D2 (DIGIC 4). I say there is no SENSE in another body with DIGIC 5+. 

I rest my case! 8)






P.S. I couldn't show the image attachment here which is a screenshot of the *timeline*. Please excuse me :-(


----------



## Eric_2012 (Apr 26, 2013)

What a great timeline. It is so much easier to appreciate facts in a picture.


----------



## jrista (Apr 26, 2013)

Jackson_Bill said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



It is actually not that difficult to figure out in exact terms. Assuming a 24.3mp sensor, in the case of Canon it would actually be ~8% more, as they have a border of masked off pixels that is still part of the pixels read off the sensor. So the actual READ pixel count would be around 26.2mp. Assuming every pixel is 14 bits, then the data size of a full sensor read would be 26,200,000 * 14 / 8 (to convert to bytes), or: 45,850,000 bytes. At a rate of 10fps, that is 458,500,000 bytes per second, or ~460mb/s. A pair of DIGIC 5+ could handle that, with room to spare (as I believe each DIGIC 5+ is capable of processing input at a rate of 250mb/s). 

At 12fps, the numbers would work out to 551mb/s, in which case something a little more powerful than a pair of DIGIC 5+ would be necessary.


----------



## jrista (Apr 26, 2013)

Diko said:


> Hi again,
> 
> first of all - what-the-hack with that LENSE OFF TOPIC?!? And BTW had any of you imagined a APS-C with L lenses? Like in my case.
> 
> ...



I'm curious why you think the 6D even remotely qualifies as competition to the 7D line. The two are radically different parts. The 7D line is all about performance and reach. It has a high frame rate (currently 8fps, rumors put 7D II at 10fps), a higher end AF system (19pt all cross type, rumors put the 7D II at 61pt same as 1D X), a much deeper frame buffer, and a load of other bells and whistles.

The 6D? It is about the most gimped part Canon can possibly make. The fact that it is full frame means nothing in the context of the market position the 7D line fills. The two are incomparable...so it's odd that you compare them in such a way as to indicate the 6D is a 7D killer...IMO, it doesn't even qualify as a contestant for that title, let alone the title holder.



Diko said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Well, I just did the math in a reply to another answer. Here it is again. Assuming some extra masked pixels, ~8%, then we have two sensors with "real" pixel counts of 22.7mp and 26mp. Assuming 14-bit, then the numbers work out as:

22,700,000 * 14 / 8 * 10 = 398mb/s
26,000,000 * 14 / 8 * 10 = 455mb/s

I did calculations in another thread, and I came to the conclusion that each DIGIC5+ chip is capable of processing at a throughput rate of 250mb/s. A pair of them, interleaved as they are in the 1D X, would offer 500mb/s throughput. A pair of DIGIC5+ in the 7D II should be plenty to support a 10fps frame rate at either 21mp or 24mp. 



Diko said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Um...did you actually READ my post? Canon isn't milking anyone. Market factors over the last five years have pushed commodity prices very high. Even after the recent "crash", they are still quite high, only pulling back to prices from about two years ago (which is considerably higher than they were for the first half of the first decade of the 21st century.) On top of materials costs...there are your BASIC supply and demand factors. Companies don't just sit pretty and "milk" their customers...if the customer thinks the price is too high, they won't buy, and the natural consequence of that is that prices come down. People were more than willing to pay $3500 for a 5D III, and have been more than willing to pay as much as $13,000 for a nice telephoto lens. Those are consumer CHOICES! It has nothing to do with a corporation milking its customers for all they are worth. Canon has to sell at what the market demands, and so long as they can sell and still make a profit, if the MARKET demands a lower price, then a lower price will be had. 



Diko said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Rienzphotoz said:
> ...





Diko said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > ...better ISO thanks to some of the improvements that found their way into the 1D X, 5D III, and 6D (more translucent CFA and higher SNR) supporting ISO 25600 (and clean ISO 1600 output), and maybe a process shrink to 180nm (to demonstrate Canon is and will be a competitive force in the DSLR world going forward).
> ...



Why do things NEED to be "revolutionary"? I mean, what exactly does "revolutionary" get you over "evolutionary"? How is that even a factor at all? If the 7D II offers significantly improved IQ, does it really matter whether the way Canon achieved that improvement is revolutionary or evolutionary? The vast majority of progress is made on the knowledge and backs of what and who came before. There is very little in any industry these days that is truly "revolutionary". The Exmor sensor could be called revolutionary by some, but the trends were already in place when Exmor was introduced...the process move to 180nm had already been done, locating high frequency components away from readout logic had already been done, etc. Most of those advancements HAD to be made for the nanoscopic sensors found in cell phones and the like to produce the kind of quality they do. Sony made one extra leap, from analog readout to digital readout. Revolutionary? Or Evolutionary? Hard to say, although personally, I feel it was part of a continual chain of evolutionary progress that has been occurring for years on the sensor front.

So, if Canon continues to build on their own knowledge in the realm of sensor design and manufacture...and if they reuse some of the improvements they first introduced with the 1D X and 5D III...that would be grounds for you NOT being interested in the 7D II? Seriously?

BTW, if Canon DOES move to a 180nm process, within the domain of Canon, that would be a pretty significant move. They have been on a 500nm process for a VERY LONG time. They have done amazing things with it, but I think it is at EOL. Canon needs to move to a new process. If they DO move to a new process, I think a lot of things will improve for Canon sensors. I think their overall IQ will increase, as they will have a lot more space on die to build noise-reduction circuitry. The relative area that is consumed by logic and wiring will also shrink considerably, even with added circuitry, which leaves more area for photodiode. At any given pixel size, on a 180nm process, the actual light-sensitive photodiode area will increase. An 18mp APS-C 7D II on a 180nm process would have a fairly considerable benefit in terms of FWC over the 18mp APS-C 7D I. That alone would improve noise performance. Improved CDS, on-die readout and digital conversion, column parallel readout, etc. all of which would be possible or more plausible with a process shrink, could also have a significant impact on IQ, reducing noise considerably, potentially even to D800 levels. 

That all assumes Canon only moves to what everyone else is using. Rumors have mentioned that Canon is working on getting their process viable for mass manufacture. They could be moving to 180nm, but they have steppers and scanners capable of 90nm manufacture as well. Who's to say Canon isn't working on leapfrogging the competition in terms of process size? A 90nm process in a digital sensor would compound the benefits of moving to a 180nm process! 

There is plenty of room for Canon to be "revolutionary". Even if they continue to apply the advancements they made with the 1D X, 5D III, and 6D...they can STILL be "revolutionary", and can still apply some radical improvements to their next sensors.


----------



## candyman (Apr 26, 2013)

http://jonrista.com/photography/


Some excellent photos! I enjoyed them very much


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 26, 2013)

Yikes...there are lots of quotes here, and lots I'd love to comment on but will restrict it to a few...

The original 7d was an oddball and made many aspiring togs make choices. When I bought my 7d it was a tough choice between that and the 5d2. I knew the 5d2 had better IQ, but, the 7d would function in a greater variety. SO I went 7d. I almost never used the full frame rate on that because I was not a sports shooter. 

7d vs 6d vs 7d2...each body occupies a niche that shouldn't overlap too much. For the causal user, the 7d2 will be overkill if it has the rumored specs (61pt AF, 10 fps) casual users will move to xxd or the 6d. I agree on pricing of the 7d2 - it will most likely be around $2500 - that's assuming Canon intends on making it a true pro crop body, and assuming that the 70d will have a spec sheet that would render the 7d2 dead on arrival unless it's stepped up to more of a pro level. That means it will appeal to serious shooters looking for fast frame rates and range (and yeah, the occasional casual user with too much money to burn). The 6d will be what it is...entry level FF for those that don't need machine gun style burst rates. The 6d will most likely still be a btter performer in low light. Wedding shooters will still probably flock to the 5d3 unless canon can pull off a miracle at the higher ISO's, and likewise, the 6d will still be a very viable option for wedding shooters looking for a backup body to compliment the 5d3. 

So it really boils down to the niche...it seems like the 7d2 will be the perfect compliment to the 1dx for sports shooters and bird togs, while the 5d3/6d combo is the wedding/event shooter niche. 

I do think the combo of 6d and 5d3 do kill the current 7d though (that and the fact that the XXXD series pulls ahead of the 7d in IQ, the only reason to get a 7d now is for the slightly better AF and burst rate). 

Again, back to my decision process - if the 5d3 was there when I made my first big upgrade, I would have snagged the 5d3 because that truly was and is the body that better suits what I'm doing. 

Either way, I don't see the 7d2 killing the 6d, nor do i see the 7d2 as dead on arrival because of the 6d...both will occupy a niche and both will be desired based on what each can do. Just look to history, the 7d2 did not kill the 5d2, even though the burst rate and AF were vastly superior. FF will always have an IQ edge over crop, and a feel to the images that crop just doesn't have. 

It will lead to interesting decisions being made by aspiring photogs who are in the situation I was in when I made my first upgrade ---- when cost is a big issue and your still learning and trying to find the niche you want to shoot in...will they go 6d or will they go 7d2? (difference though is the 6d will most certainly be the cheaper option, where for me, it way the other way around.)



jrista said:


> Diko said:
> 
> 
> > Hi again,
> ...


----------



## jrista (Apr 26, 2013)

candyman said:


> http://jonrista.com/photography/
> 
> 
> Some excellent photos! I enjoyed them very much



Thanks!


----------



## Diko (Apr 26, 2013)

Hi.

Thank you for the thorough reading. I must confess that perhaps my odd english might be the cause of a few misunderstandings... Let me clarify:


jrista said:


> I'm curious why you think the 6D even remotely qualifies as competition to the 7D line. The two are radically different parts. The 7D line is all about performance and reach. It has a high frame rate (currently 8fps, rumors put 7D II at 10fps), a higher end AF system (19pt all cross type, rumors put the 7D II at 61pt same as 1D X), a much deeper frame buffer, and a load of other bells and whistles.


I never said that they are comparable. The 6D is the bottom of FF and 7D2 is the top of the APS-C. IMO it actually will compete with the 5D3 depending on what specs will come out.. If they are "evolutionary" no chance to top 5D3... If they are revolutionary now then we are talking about an interesting game for sure. About _evolutionary/revolutionary_ please continue reading :



Diko said:


> ...
> 2 CPUs - true: they could be either DIGIC 5+ and yet since they have DIGIC 6 it would be better at the same PRICE to put the new one.





jrista said:


> Well, I just did the math in a reply to another answer. Here it is again. Assuming some extra masked pixels, ~8%, then we have two sensors with "real" pixel counts of 22.7mp and 26mp. Assuming 14-bit, then the numbers work out as:
> 
> 22,700,000 * 14 / 8 * 10 = 398mb/s
> 26,000,000 * 14 / 8 * 10 = 455mb/s
> ...


 WOW!  I actually learned something new... for which I am very, very thankful! 


However I hope you DO consider the possibility that additionally to the POWER OUTPUT in MHZ or whatever it is - they do implement new mathematical instructions, which later are used for new algorithms on which better ISO is achieved or totally new features. E.g. face recognition. Was it achieved in DIGIC 5 or 4?

Although to be honest so far what I hear - most new features for DIGIC 6 are video related :'(



Diko said:


> Why not?!?! 5D3 had nothing innovative. It was updated 5D2... For me the only different between 1Dx, 5D3 & 6D is the Speed... AF... you say... 1DX - yes... the rest NO!





jrista said:


> Price is a matter of demand, not consumer desire for status. Canon has extremely high demand for their cameras, regardless of their technological status. The percentage of camera owners who care about the minutia of a manufacturers technology is extremely small relative to the total camera buying populace. High demand drives higher prices more than any other factor, with perhaps base commodity (materials) prices and import/export tariffs being close seconds.


I believe here you missed my point: I've got your idea pretty well, I believe. The high demand in DSLR market (mid, advanced, Pro) is dictated by the prerequisite of lenses ownership. Entry LEVEL is totally different game/market and perhaps easier to be explained with the basics of Economics. 

Yes, I know people enough flexible and liberal to switch to NIKON... but most are conservative to go that painful road, which aside from the learning curve which is shorter for them and yet exists also includes possible loss of money by selling CANON to buy NIKON glasses. 

"_ The percentage of camera owners who care about the minutia of a manufacturers technology is extremely small relative to the total camera buying populace._" - true for point & shoot and entry level. But currently I don't want to move to NIKON even though I know that their Dynamic Range is better than Canon's. Ergo I am interested in technology and I know where it already happens, but stay with the "_total camera buying populace_" due to financial commitment in L glasses.  And again I will state it: 

Hell yeah! That is what I call MILKING the Canon glass owners. :-( 


jrista said:


> Um...did you actually READ my post? Canon isn't milking anyone. Market factors over the last five years have pushed commodity prices very high. Even after the recent "crash", they are still quite high, only pulling back to prices from about two years ago (which is considerably higher than they were for the first half of the first decade of the 21st century.)


 Come one! *PLEASE*! Digital photography was a risky business with bad image and results compared to traditional photography back then in the "_first half of the first decade of the 21st century_"! Hardly could you even think of comparing prices then and now.
....


jrista said:


> Companies don't just sit pretty and "milk" their customers...if the customer thinks the price is too high, they won't buy, and the natural consequence of that is that prices come down. People were more than willing to pay $3500 for a 5D III, and have been more than willing to pay as much as $13,000 for a nice telephoto lens.
> Those are consumer CHOICES! It has nothing to do with a corporation milking its customers for all they are worth. Canon has to sell at what the market demands, and so long as they can sell and still make a profit, if the MARKET demands a lower price, then a lower price will be had.


 CHOICES??? - you mean *LACK OF CHOICES*. What should have people bought (did I use the correct tense here!?!? :-[) when there was ONLY 5D3 and 1DX...? An OLD body? Buying in most cases is an incentive of upgrade. NOw don't tell me if you were a regular Joe you would buy your kids a 5D3 to have fun with?!? I even don't want to speculate what would have happened if 2 months after the 5D3, the 7D2 have come out... That is why we are currently in the "evolution" game.




jrista said:


> ...better ISO thanks to some of the improvements that found their way into the 1D X, 5D III, and 6D (more translucent CFA and higher SNR) supporting ISO 25600 (and clean ISO 1600 output), and maybe a process shrink to 180nm (to demonstrate Canon is and will be a competitive force in the DSLR world going forward).


180nm is out there even from CANON for quite some time! *Since 2007*. If technology available and NOT used for for 5 years... you call it principals of Economics. I call it "milking". 



jrista said:


> Why do things NEED to be "revolutionary"? I mean, what exactly does "revolutionary" get you over "evolutionary"?


 DEVELOPMENT! Evolution is NO TREND SETTER. Evolution is for followers. 
Revolution (here) is game changer, new trend, new DEMAND requirement for the customers if you wish. 5D2 was the first VIDEO DSLR, even if it was followed ONLY a few months later. 6D is the first wi-fi, DSLR AFAIK.
CANON is a follower FINALLY about dual memory cards. A trend in the PRO market set by... NIKON? (not sure).

That is why I don't want 7D2 with a 5D3 CPU and CMOS! I will NOT be happy with ISO achieved 2 years ago by the time the 7D2 would have reached the streets. I want & need a revolution body!


jrista said:


> ...
> Sony made one extra leap, from analog readout to digital readout. Revolutionary? Or Evolutionary? Hard to say, although personally, I feel it was part of a continual chain of evolutionary progress that has been occurring for years on the sensor front.


 Yeah! That is why NIKON & SONY are ahead on the DR. Do you want me to remind you whose CMOS is on the top places on DXo? :


jrista said:


> So, if Canon continues to build on their own knowledge in the realm of sensor design and manufacture...and if they reuse some of the improvements they first introduced with the 1D X and 5D III...that would be grounds for you NOT being interested in the 7D II? Seriously?


 Yeah for sure! I want all the features set by NIKON as a trend for some time before BOTH 1Dx and 5D3. And by-the-way... which "specific" feature of 5D3 should I be interested in? The FF?  
The way I see it: 
1DX- GREAT! but unreachable for limited pocket.
5D3 - a 1DX cheaper and slowly copy
6D - the cheapest and slowliest version of 1DX, but with wi-fi within the body.


jrista said:


> .... An 18mp APS-C 7D II on a 180nm process would have a fairly considerable benefit in terms of FWC over the 18mp APS-C 7D I. That alone would improve noise performance. Improved CDS, on-die readout and digital conversion, column parallel readout, etc. all of which would be possible or more plausible with a process shrink, could also have a significant impact on IQ, reducing noise considerably, potentially even to D800 levels.


 Using CANON technology from 2007? How inspiring! March 2012 is the street date of D800. And its current price is $2,796.95. Do you want to bet that if CANON (hopefully) have FINALLY implemented the 180nm in their CMOS the price would be above (AT LEAST) $3k. We are promised to have 8/10 fps as well 8)


jrista said:


> A 90nm process in a digital sensor would compound the benefits of moving to a 180nm process!


 Ahym if finaly this year we are to get 180nm that would make 90nm somewhere in the mid-summer of 2018? ;D


jrista said:


> There is plenty of room for Canon to be "revolutionary". Even if they continue to apply the advancements they made with the 1DX, 5D III, and 6D...they can STILL be "revolutionary", and can still apply some radical improvements to their next sensors.


 *APPLY* is one nice key word. The "advancement" please read as "following the competitors". The NIKON 4D was in February 2012 on the streets. The 1DX was in March 2012. Which still makes CANON a FOLLOWER!

Thank you again. I learned something very nice from you!


----------



## jrista (Apr 26, 2013)

Diko said:


> Hi.
> 
> Thank you for the thorough reading. I must confess that perhaps my odd english might be the cause of a few misunderstandings...



Hmm, I think I'm misunderstanding or misinterpreting some things...maybe a bit of a language barrier thing. If I understand you correctly, it seems we are pretty much in agreement. I honestly can't tell for sure, though! It does sound like I misunderstood you regarding the 6D/7D stuff...and I agree, they serve different markets. Anyway, sorry for the misunderstandings...



Diko said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > There is plenty of room for Canon to be "revolutionary". Even if they continue to apply the advancements they made with the 1DX, 5D III, and 6D...they can STILL be "revolutionary", and can still apply some radical improvements to their next sensors.
> ...



One thing I disagree about is who is the leader and who is the follower. The actual release dates of the D4 and 1D X, for example, actually have very little to do with when the technology they utilize was actually invented, designed, and implemented. It takes years to develop new technology, sometimes decades. I don't think anyone outside of Nikon and Canon can honestly say who came up with what first. We only have release dates to go by, and I would call release dates woefully inadequate as a basis upon which we determine who innovated what or when. I remember reading Canon press releases and rumors here on CR where Canon was talking about greatly improving their high ISO capability several YEARS ago. That was long before the D4 was released, or even announced, or even talked about. I think Canon had the 1D X sensor design in the works for a while.

Additionally, Nikon has outsourced a lot of its innovation, or partnered with other companies like Sony, in order to innovate at a faster rate. They have also had to outsource the manufacture of more parts to companies (and, ironically, competitors) like Sony in order to remain competitive. The D800 sensor, Exmor, is actually a Sony part, jointly designed with Nikon. It benefited from DECADES of patents and research either done by Sony, or purchased by Sony. In contrast, Canon has completely innovated all of their own technology, or perhaps purchased some of it via patent purchases over the years. From a competitive standpoint, one driven by R&D, innovation, and maintaining a loyal customer base...Canon is doing extremely well. 

Whether they came up with new sensor technology "first" or not doesn't really seem to matter. Canon certainly seems to be doing what is right* for their business.* As much as we consumers may not like that on an immediate basis, I think doing the right business thing leads to a more stable company. Canon has not overextended themselves (Sony is radically overextended...they have so much debt new bond offerings are usually junk bonds the interest rates are so high, and the rating for Sony as a company is so low.) If I had to bet on a camera and optics company still being here in 20 years, I'd bet on Canon in a heartbeat. I think they run a better business, one that is not solely based on being the technological first in the marketplace...but rather being a solid, respected, customer-satisfying BUSINESS.


----------



## daniela (Apr 27, 2013)

I hope the 7DII will be as good as we hope it will be.... The D7100 (dpreview) is quite an good opponent (I personally hope Canon will optimize the IQ, not only the Video quality to beat the D7100). The IQ is really good, as the pics of my boss show...

But I received an not so good rumor from an girlfriend in Japan, who is an enthusiastic photographer and working for an supplying company (they produce something for Canon that they need to sell their products, but has nothing to do with the product itself) . She wrote, that she hardly could imagine, that Canon will sell the 7D2 earlier then 11-12/2013. Maybe before christmas.... This will be the best time to earn most money for this product.
I hope, she is wrong.

But she knows nothing about the 70D. Japanese enthusiasts are without any rumors too....

Daniela


----------



## garyknrd (Apr 27, 2013)

You know honestly. If Canon only matches the 7100 I would be very happy. If they make it better then I would be in heaven with the new Super tele lenses. Wow... If not?
I have a bud that shoots Nikon super teles with the D4 and the 7100 now. I am going to ask him next time we shoot together if I can shoot some shots with it. So I can process and look at the raw's. I love tack sharp and detailed pics and that camera looks to be what I am after. For birding.


----------



## jrista (Apr 27, 2013)

garyknrd said:


> You know honestly. If Canon only matches the 7100 I would be very happy. If they make it better then I would be in heaven with the new Super tele lenses. Wow... If not?
> I have a bud that shoots Nikon super teles with the D4 and the 7100 now. I am going to ask him next time we shoot together if I can shoot some shots with it. So I can process and look at the raw's. I love tack sharp and detailed pics and that camera looks to be what I am after. For birding.



The D7100 won't be a match for the 7D II, not even close. As I've always said, IQ is about more than just the sensor.


----------



## garyknrd (Apr 28, 2013)

jrista said:


> garyknrd said:
> 
> 
> > You know honestly. If Canon only matches the 7100 I would be very happy. If they make it better then I would be in heaven with the new Super tele lenses. Wow... If not?
> ...



I sure hope you are right. I love the new lenses. They are a joy to use in every way. I get frustrated some time. Waiting forever it seems. But if you are right then the wait will be worth it...


----------



## jrista (Apr 28, 2013)

garyknrd said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > garyknrd said:
> ...



It isn't just about better glass either, though. Everyone seems to forget that frame rate, AF system, logic pairing between lens and body for AF (another area where Canon excels), metering, IS capabilities, etc. all factor into IQ. The sensor is one factor out of MANY, and depending on the kind of shooting you do, sensor could be the LEAST important. For me, I would say AF system is most important, frame rate is second, and sensor is third...or at best, AF system is most important, and frame rate & sensor tie for second (I need excellent high ISO performance...I could really care less if the sensor offered an additional two stops DR at ISO 100 or not, I probably shoot below ISO 400 less than 2% of the time, and below 800 less than 30% of the time.)

People rag on Canon for not having excellent ISO 100 performance. That is certainly important for some types of photography, and even I myself when I do landscapes would much put low ISO sensor performance first in my list (and AF system dead last). I think more people, however, have the need to shoot at higher ISO settings. From ISO 400 on, the differences are negligible between any brand in terms of DR, and the key thing that matters to IQ is SNR/noise. Canon excels in that area right now. So even though sensor is not necessarily the single most important thing to most photographers, it is _not _like Canon is doing _terrible _in that arena either.

And it doesn't really matter how you slice up the pie...the 7D II can't be "worse" than the original 7D. There hasn't ever been a real solid competitor to the 7D in the past, and it does not appear as though there will be a significant one in the future, unless Nikon changes tack a little bit and makes the D400 a serious 7D competitor (with the key factors being frame rate and AF system). 

If the rumors are true, it sounds like the 7D II will get some fairly significant boosts to all of the critical features that made the 7D a success (and it IS a success...despite the fact that it probably has one of Canon's worst sensors in the last five years, which is really saying a lot about how good that "bad" sensor really is!) It'll get a better AF system, faster frame rate, dual card slots, and...if what Canon has been saying is true...a fairly significant upgrade to it's sensor as well, not just higher resolution, but something fairly radically new. I wouldn't worry...one way or another, the 7D II will be an awesome camera, and for what the 7D line is built for...action photography with added reach, low ISO performance is not going to matter much, regardless of whether it ends up being great or no better than the original 7D. 

The biggest thing for the sensor is whether it improves high ISO SNR, which should reduce noise. I can't say for sure what Canon is planning regarding the sensor, but a process shrink to me seems to be the crux of the issue. I don't see how Canon can make the 7D successor perform better on the noise front, while increasing megapixels (which is what everyone is expecting, and what Canon will probably deliver) without a process shrink. At 21 or 24 megapixels, the 500nm process would consume too much photodiode space. Even with microlenses, shrink the pixels without shrinking process, and the photodiode area will have to shrink, which will reduce the full well capacity even further than the rather mediocre level the 7D achieves now (which is just shy of 21,000 electrons max per pixel). With a process shrink, Canon could increase the megapixel count with a minimal hit to FWC, if any. There are also a number of papers published in the last five years or so that describe how to utilize the penetration depth of different wavelengths of light to improve well capacity in three dimensions rather than just two...embedding photodiodes at multiple levels in the silicon base, each one being sensitive to different frequencies of light (although these frequencies do not necessarily correspond to red, green, and blue).


----------



## garyknrd (Apr 28, 2013)

That 7D is a good camera but I miss so many shots because of AF I finally stopped using it. If the 7100 is accurate then that alone would sway me.. 

Off subject but got me to thinking. I have some Sigma screw AF lenses for Pentax mount cameras. Really good glass IMO. Really anxious to see what Pentax Ricoh has to offer in there next crop sensor camera. The rumor is it is going to be a pro level crop camera? If AF is there I will be in heaven. Being able to use my Sigma glass again... 

For me AF is the main thing. I quit Pentax because of it and stopped using the 7D also. I have an old IV and it hits pretty consistently. Very happy with that camera so far. Night and day in the AF systems? Right now I am very happy with Canon gear.


----------

