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



## Ivan Muller (Jul 7, 2014)

it has the same sensor as the Eos70D but with just more bells & whistles?

I have a sneaky feeling that maybe its going to be the same image quality as the 70D just more robust, full frame viewfinder, gazillion frames per second, wifi, gps and class leading video...So just how disappointed will you be if that is the case?

Lets face it the Sony sensors are pretty good, if not class leading, probably as good as it's going to get at the moment, so just why will Canon have such better sensor technology as Sony's? Nothing in the recent history of Canon sensor technology suggests otherwise...

If, and its a big if, they bring out a ID mkIV size sensor it will be great, but maybe its also an indication that they just could not squeeze out anymore image quality with their R&D at present....which begs the question then why they don't just buy Sony sensors? Would anybody mind a Sony sensors in Eos bodies?


----------



## tron (Jul 7, 2014)

I will not be disappointed because ... I will not buy it anyway ;D

I keep my disappointment for 5DMkIV ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 7, 2014)

Ivan Muller said:


> it has the same sensor as the Eos70D but with just more bells & whistles?
> 
> I have a sneaky feeling that maybe its going to be the same image quality as the 70D just more robust, full frame viewfinder, gazillion frames per second, wifi, gps and class leading video...So just how disappointed will you be if that is the case?



Neither surprised nor disappointed. It seems pretty likely, to me. If there's a significant IQ boost, I might be tempted to get one as a backup body...but the kind of IQ boost I'm talking about likely defies the laws of physics, so I'm not holding my breath. 



cosmopotter said:


> My friend at Canon confirmed that there is something NEW about this sensor.



Now that sounds like a reliable source. My friend at Canon said nothing of the sort... :

Still, keep in mind that Canon uses the term 'newly designed sensor' quite frequently. For example, there was Hybrid CMOS then Hybrid CMOS II, the latter being a 'NEW' sensor, but from an IQ standpoint there was no difference between the two or the myriad of other 'new' 18 MP APS-C predecessors. So, with the 7D we may see DPAF II. Woot.


----------



## Ivan Muller (Jul 7, 2014)

But will the 'something new' translate into something with much better image quality?


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 7, 2014)

tron said:


> I will not be disappointed because ... I will not buy it anyway ;D
> 
> I keep my disappointment for 5DMkIV ;D


I will save that for X ii ;D


----------



## tomscott (Jul 7, 2014)

I think it would be disappointing because even if it is a dual digic 5 they have been out on the market for 2+ years with the 1DX. Have the other 'bells and whistles' really needed the time in R&D as the 7D has been sitting on the shelf for so long. If this is so it will be like the 60D announcement just a load of recycled parts again that will have people not very happy.

Im positive that we will see some nice new technology in digic 6, if not digit 6 then digic 6+ or dual digic 6 as digit 6 already exists lower down in the range.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 7, 2014)

Only a little. The 7DII sensor is quite good, I'm rarely limited by low-ISO DR, and Canon could potentially use the same sensor and still improve IQ by improving off-sensor electronics and/or using some tricks associated with the dual pixel architecture of that sensor.


----------



## anthonyd (Jul 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Ivan Muller said:
> 
> 
> > it has the same sensor as the Eos70D but with just more bells & whistles?
> ...



Really? You think this is the end of the line for IQ? Sure, some sizes inside the sensors might be reaching the limits set by physics, but most problems are a question of engineering. I don't have a way to prove my claim, but I bet you if you look back in 10 years, you will agree with me that the IQ now and the IQ then will not be comparable.


----------



## nebugeater (Jul 7, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Only a little. *The 7DII sensor is quite good*, I'm rarely limited by low-ISO DR, and Canon could potentially use the same sensor and still improve IQ by improving off-sensor electronics and/or using some tricks associated with the dual pixel architecture of that sensor.



So if you have the 7DII sensor in hand you better spill some info on this thing!


----------



## Lightmaster (Jul 7, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> The 7DII sensor is quite good



mhm....


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Ivan Muller said:
> 
> 
> > it has the same sensor as the Eos70D but with just more bells & whistles?
> ...


 
The thing is ... If there is a significantly better sensor (doubtful), then the same technology can be applied to a FF body, and the improvement would be even greater.
Now, if they priced it at below $1000, it might make a backup camera.


----------



## awinphoto (Jul 7, 2014)

anthonyd said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Ivan Muller said:
> ...



If i've said it once, i've said it a hundred times, in film, the 35mm topped out at 8x10 for image quality... yeah you could print bigger but you were always sacrificing quality and or grain by going 11x14 or 16x20... now we have the 5d3 and the like that can print almost a 16x20 out of camera with little to no interpolation of the pixels. We have gone leaps and bounds than the film era, but like, neuro, we are really reaching it's max potential... Now with the improvement of technology and processing, I can see similar qualities or maintaining the quality, but even bigger picture/file/pixel counts... and that in itself is no easy feat... but to have the assumption that you can keep getting bigger and better sensors that are really size dependent and restricted, I dont see that happening too much more without major sacrifices. Lastly, with technology getting better, slowly but surely i hope and can see medium format being the route many photographers will go in the future (like in the days of film) when optimum IQ and print size was ideal.


----------



## Lightmaster (Jul 7, 2014)

anthonyd said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Ivan Muller said:
> ...



it´s sure not end of the line.

as you can see with todays sony sensors there is room for improvement on canon sensors.

a better manufacturing process that shrinks the additional electronics on the sensor, better AD ... etc.
new materials who can collect more photons before they are saturated (full well capacity increased).

i think canon sensor can be optimized for quantum efficiency too.

i would be very happy when i get cleaner shadows and some more MP.
not only for the 7D Mk2 (i will not buy) but for FF sensors too.
and some bump in DR would be nice.

it´s all possible as we see today already.

it will not be like moores law.. but it´s sure not the end.


----------



## docsmith (Jul 7, 2014)

+1 for those only expecting a marginally better sensor. Other significant improvements such as fps and AF are more expected. I also hope they work on the AA filter to help with sharpness.

But specifically looking at the sensor, everyone likes to tout Nikon/Sony and how much better they are, but when you compare the 70D (which is a bit better than the 7D sensor on dxomark measurements), the tonal range and SNR are very similar with the Nikon D7100. There is some gain to be had in DR at low ISO and color sensitivity. But I doubt either will be mind blowing. 

In short, even if you drop the latest cropped sensor from Sony/Nikon into the 7D II, it wouldn't give you FF performance in a crop sensor body. It would be marginally better. But many marginal improvements (sensor, AF, fps, etc) would be a very solid upgrade. Maybe even throw in 4K video (not that too many here will care, but others would).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 7, 2014)

anthonyd said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Ivan Muller said:
> ...



Oh, I'm sure there's room for improvement. But I stated, "...the kind of IQ boost *I'm* talking about," that would get *me* excited about the 7DII. As mainly a FF user, and one who shoots a lot in relatively poor lighting where I also need fast shutter speeds, I derive great benefit from the ~3.5 extra stops of usable high ISO that the 1D X gives me, compared to the 7D. 

Do you honestly believe the 7DII will eat significantly into that margin? Even if it does, a 1D X II will soon follow with equivalent tech. That's the physics I'm referring to – when it comes to sensors, bigger is better. I use my EOS M occasionally, but only in good light...it's only advantage is the small size, and the 7DII won't have that.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 7, 2014)

It's probably not the camera for me, so I'd be more surprised than disappointed. IMO the long delay on the 7DII _must_ relate to the sensor; everything else is in place.

So if the sensor doesn't offer some significant advance over the 70D s new tech of duel 'pixel' I'd be surprised. I still wonder if Canon would have the b***s to make it a high speed, low light king of around 16 mp. Leave the really high mp to the amateur lines and really kick out some FF challenging IQ from the crop sensor.


----------



## Lightmaster (Jul 7, 2014)

im not up to date but isn´t there still a fill factor problem for CMOS sensors compared to CCD?

im no cmos engineer but when that problem could be eliminated sensor performance will increase.

i mean especially canon should have this problem when they still use a 500nm process.

someone correct me when im wrong....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 7, 2014)

Lightmaster said:


> im not up to date but isn´t there still a fill factor problem for CMOS sensors compared to CCD?



Microlenses, particularly gapless ones like those in current sensors, pretty much obviate fill factor as an issue.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> That's the physics I'm referring to – when it comes to sensors, bigger is better.



Bigger sensors aren't better in low-light, larger apertures are. Bigger sensors work better in low-light when you can use a longer focal length at the same f-stop, thus increasing aperture. For example, you might use a 500/4 on full frame (125mm of aperture) instead of a 300/4 on 1.6-crop (75mm of aperture). However, if that option isn't available lens-wise, then the larger sensor loses its advantage.

I often have that option available, which is why I can (and do) obtain the advantage of a larger sensor in low light. But one must be careful to make sure such an option is available before buying into the advantage.


----------



## Lightmaster (Jul 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lightmaster said:
> 
> 
> > im not up to date but isn´t there still a fill factor problem for CMOS sensors compared to CCD?
> ...



i know they help... but do they really "eliminate" the influence?
or is it that they compensate for it... and how much?

especially for high megapixel sensors i would think that greater fill factor will help.

from common sense i would say when your manufacturing process stays at 500nm and you shrinking the pixels then the fill factor will decrease.


----------



## slclick (Jul 7, 2014)

I guarantee you there will be two changes you can bank on. 

Price and name (mark)


----------



## Lightmaster (Jul 7, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > That's the physics I'm referring to – when it comes to sensors, bigger is better.
> ...



a smaller sensor can be as good as a bigger one when you give him more light... i can agree to that.

but... maybe it´s my bad english but i don´t get what you say.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 7, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Bigger sensors aren't better in low-light, larger apertures are. Bigger sensors work better in low-light when you can use a longer focal length at the same f-stop, thus increasing aperture.



I think that from that statement you are confusing light intensity with quantity of light. So a large aperture ( greater intensity) coupled with a larger sensor ( greater quantity) is going to provide more light than the equivalent in a smaller sensor.


----------



## Ivan Muller (Jul 7, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> It's probably not the camera for me, so I'd be more surprised than disappointed. IMO the long delay on the 7DII _must_ relate to the sensor; everything else is in place.
> 
> So if the sensor doesn't offer some significant advance over the 70D s new tech of duel 'pixel' I'd be surprised. I still wonder if Canon would have the b***s to make it a high speed, low light king of around 16 mp. Leave the really high mp to the amateur lines and really kick out some FF challenging IQ from the crop sensor.



No I actually dont think they do have the b.lls for something like that. If anything the past has shown us that they are arch conservative...their one highlight might have been the leap from 12 to 22 mp with the 5D2..since then they have not ventured into any unfamiliar territory... which has not been a bad thing from their financial point of view but a bit of a let down for camera enthusiasts...think Fuji X100s, Sony Rx100mk3, Olympus OMD, Nikon DF, Sony A7R...the list goes on and on. But if you look at their financials they do seem to still be profitable in the face of dwindling camera sales....


----------



## Lee Jay (Jul 7, 2014)

Lightmaster said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



What matters for final image quality (aside from sensor performance, processing, etc.) is the total light accumulated during the exposure. f-stop controls light intensity (illuminance), not total light. f-stop * sensor area is thus total light, and aperture (not f-stop) controls that. A larger sensor will do better in lower light at the same f-stop because of the larger aperture and focal length needed to frame the same subject the same way at the same f-stop.


----------



## LJ3Jim (Jul 7, 2014)

Mildly disappointed if it's the same sensor as the 70D. Major disappointment if the 7D2 doesn't have 5D3's focusing system.

Regards, Jim


----------



## colinrb (Jul 7, 2014)

Most developments are evolutionary rather than revolutionary, so we shouldn't expect things to change too much at one step.
Look at the original 5D and compare against the MK III significantly different, but II to III not so different. We then should check the MK V against the MK III when it is launched in 2020?.
I think the crop sensor is a good way of trying new technologies, before putting them into FF, simply on cost, so we may see something in the 7D MKII we were not expecting.

I am waiting for the sensors to step up to 16 bit, so we can get 14-15 stop DR.


----------



## distant.star (Jul 7, 2014)

.
My disappointment would be about the same as if the guy living next door woke up one morning and had to take a cold shower.

My shower is still warm and comfy.


----------



## PicaPica (Jul 7, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Lightmaster said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...




mhm.. but isn´t some light "wasted" when you attach a lens made for fullframe to a crop camera?

i mean a crop camera use only a part of the image circle.. not?

maybe more light is collected by the bigger aperture, but is all of it projected onto the smaller sensor?


----------



## Rob Carter (Jul 7, 2014)

colinrb said:


> Look at the original 5D and compare against the MK III significantly different, but II to III not so different.



My experience was that from 5D to MK II not so different but MK II to MK III significantly different.

Do other peoples experience match colinrb or mine?


----------



## chauncey (Jul 7, 2014)

Disappointment would be Canon releasing new prosumer cameras that are comparable to Sony...Gawd, I hope not.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 7, 2014)

Rob Carter said:


> colinrb said:
> 
> 
> > Look at the original 5D and compare against the MK III significantly different, but II to III not so different.
> ...



I know this is going off thread, but it is an interesting question because it really depends on where your priorities lie. The 5DII offered a significant improvement in tonal quality over the original, especially in more extreme lighting conditions, a noticeable increase in resolution and a moderately better higher ISO performance. OOC jpegs can be quite useable. The II also had the much improved screen, video capability etc.. The 5DIII gives a very subtle improvement in tonal quality over the II, but a huge improvement in high ISO performance. It is also much faster, has an improved level of build, and of course, the AF in in a different league.

If you look at the overall package of the camera, I would say on balance that each mark was an equal jump forward in 'overall' performance. 

I think most would agree that the first incarnation of the ubiquitous 18mp sensor in the 7D was the worst, so hopefully if the 7DII does have a new sensor it will be more thoroughly sorted than the original.


----------



## Dukinald (Jul 7, 2014)

Will be slightly disappointed if it is significantly better than my 70D. I expect it to have better build and weather sealing but hoping everything else just marginal  Don't want/need an upgrade this soon


----------



## bsb03 (Jul 7, 2014)

Im pleased with my 7D. I would hope the mk 2 to be a bit better than the 70D. For a while now I have been shooting with my 5D Mk III, but its nice to have the crop factor on the 400mm 5.6. This weekend I went out and shot some birds and the IQ from the 7D still impressed me.


----------



## l_d_allan (Jul 7, 2014)

Ivan Muller said:


> which begs the question then why they don't just buy Sony sensors? Would anybody mind a Sony sensors in Eos bodies?



Mixed feelings, but overall a plus to shorten R&D. 

To me, Canon leap-frogged everybody back in 2008-2009 with the 5d2 and 7d. Sony leap-frogged back with their sensors in f.f. and APS-C several years ago. I've been disappointed at the length of time that has elapsed with Canon not accomplishing a suitable leap-frog in their sensor technology. 

Well, there was the 70d follow focus, but I'm barely interested in video. That was a ho-hum. The 5d3 is a very nice camera with great AF, but sensor-wise was a big disappointment, and very expensive.


----------



## l_d_allan (Jul 7, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> If you look at the overall package of the camera, I would say on balance that each mark was an equal jump forward in 'overall' performance.



Interesting observation. I was disappointed by the 5d3, but a much better AF over the admittedly marginal AF of the 5d2 wasn't a priority. I was hoping the 5d3 sensor could match the impressive Nikon D800(e) that was announced at about the same time.



> I think most would agree that the first incarnation of the ubiquitous 18mp sensor in the 7D was the worst, so hopefully if the 7DII does have a new sensor it will be more thoroughly sorted than the original.


Not my understanding. I recall that DPR beat up on the prior Canon 50d, and noted that the megapixel race should be over ... the 15 mpx 50d had inferior per-pixel performance over lower mpx Canons. Then the 7d with 18 mpx came out with per-pixel IQ better than the 50d, much to the surprise of DPR (and others).


----------



## Eldar (Jul 7, 2014)

The 7D was my wife´s camera. I sold it earlier this year, because I thought the 7DII would be released prior to our summer vacation (how wrong was that ...). I have few options but to buy it, since my wife is a bit upset that I sold her old body and she really likes the flexibility of the super-zooms (18-200 alternatives).

I hope it will be a nice complement to my 1DX for wildlife and not just a backup. A near 5DIII/1DX AF system, decent fps, 1.6x crop, 24MPish sensor, some low ISO improvements and hopefully also some improvements in DR. I could´t care less about video, but I´m sure I´ll get plenty. 

I have a feeling Canon has made a bit more out of the sensor this time, but it might be that I´ll be disappointed.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 7, 2014)

Eldar said:


> since my wife is a bit upset that I sold her old body



That thought has crossed my mind but my wife wouldn't like it either


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 7, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > since my wife is a bit upset that I sold her old body
> ...



Ouch, you'd better hope your wife never reads this, Eldar. If she does, make it very, very clear you meant you sold her *camera*.


----------



## Eldar (Jul 8, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Eldar said:
> ...


He he, that language thing again : On the other hand, I'm sure she'd be very happy if I managed to sell her old body and get her a new one. A Gisele Bündchen model would probably be well received ...


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Jul 8, 2014)

If it has an SD- card slot, maybe now understanding UHS-!, but only half speed.

Buffer with only 15 frames depth.

No spot metering on the activated AF- field.

And all this only to make it fit to its pricetag aka cripple to fit.


----------



## Ivan Muller (Jul 8, 2014)

Even though I am not really in the market for a new 7Dmk2 I would be very disappointed if it doesn't have new and improved sensor technology because it would mean that there is a very good chance that there also will be nothing new on the horizon for FF either. 

I desperately want a FF 36mp+ sensor body 
plus an Eos M mk3 with an electronic viewfinder (build in or otherwise) and at least 70D comparable live view AF! 

Is this just tooo much to ask for? Really??


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 9, 2014)

It would be disappointing if the 7D-II was just an incremental upgrade of the 70D. I mean, why on earth would they have needed to take so long to bring it to market?

I might have bought the 70D already if it had a headphone jack, but I want decent IQ at ISO 3200. If the 70D sensor can't achieve that then I'll just wait for a viable option that can.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 9, 2014)

StudentOfLight said:


> It would be disappointing if the 7D-II was just an incremental upgrade of the 70D. I mean, why on earth would they have needed to take so long to bring it to market?



Perhaps because the 7D was selling quite well...



StudentOfLight said:


> I might have bought the 70D already if it had a headphone jack, but I want decent IQ at ISO 3200. If the 70D sensor can't achieve that then I'll just wait for a viable option that can.



I'm not convinced the 7DII will have significantly better high ISO performance than the 70D.


----------



## Leigh (Jul 9, 2014)

I currently have two 7D bodies, and one 6D.

The 7D replacement would need to have significantly lower noise performance for me to upgrade; although I wouldn't expect to match that of the 6D.

The 7D used value is going rapidly "down the tube"; I've had one of my bodies, with an EF-S 17-85 on Craig's list for two months, started with $900 OBO, now down to $650 OBO, and not one response.

Leigh
www.leighwax.com


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 9, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > I might have bought the 70D already if it had a headphone jack, but I want decent IQ at ISO 3200. If the 70D sensor can't achieve that then I'll just wait for a viable option that can.
> ...



Personally, I expect the 7D2 to be a huge leap forward from the 70D for high ISO performance.... at least a third of a stop...


----------



## Tugela (Jul 9, 2014)

awinphoto said:


> anthonyd said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Higher resolution sensors mean squat if the lens resolution is less than that. Current resolution sensors are more than adequate for 99%+ of users. 

Real improvements will come from reducing noise levels and increasing dynamic range, not simply increasing resolution.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Jul 9, 2014)

Maybe Canon has decided to finally make some pro-grade lenses to go with the 7D, and is waiting until they can launch both at once.


----------



## RGF (Jul 9, 2014)

Stephen Melvin said:


> Maybe Canon has decided to finally make some pro-grade lenses to go with the 7D, and is waiting until they can launch both at once.



All the Pro grade lenses (the "L" lenses) will work on the 7D. Do you mean that they will make pro grade EF-S (crop sensor) lenses? To do that, they will need a pro grade body. A 1Dx with an APS-C sensor.


----------



## RGF (Jul 9, 2014)

Unless there is a major improvement in the sensor quality, this signals bad news for the future of Canon. They are behind Nikon (Sony) in sensor technology and need to step up their game to keep competitive.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 9, 2014)

Ivan Muller said:


> it has the same sensor as the Eos70D but with just more bells & whistles?
> 
> I have a sneaky feeling that maybe its going to be the same image quality as the 70D just more robust, full frame viewfinder, gazillion frames per second, wifi, gps and class leading video...So just how disappointed will you be if that is the case?
> 
> ...



Although at this point I probably only have $ for one body so I'm more looking to 5D4. Although a 7D2 would make, one would hope, an awesome wildlife camera and be nice to have. If I did mange to get both, it would be a bit disappointing, although it wouldn't be a complete no dice as it would be for a 5D4 which is where I'd be doing my critical landscape work and so on where the low ISO DR is more 100% critical for me (not that it can't be nice at times for wildlife and sports though, but it's not quite as upsetting as if every type of shot was to be low ISO DR limited again, at least it would just be wildlife and some sports, where it can matter, but not as often for me as for landscape and such). It would be a bit of a shame if it didn't set a new standard for aps-c high iso though too though (not that I expect the 5D3 matching miracle that some do, since that is not really even possible). So yeah a bit of a disappointment for sure, but maybe not quite to the no dice level, but a shame, especially since it might last another 3-5 years.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 9, 2014)

anthonyd said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Ivan Muller said:
> ...



There is still room to improve. Certainly by miles for lower ISO DR for Canon and even DR at higher ISO can get better. For SNR for the standard upper mid-tone gray test there is not that much more room to improve though. What are the sensors, like 50-60% efficient? So at this point you can't even double the efficiency no matter what (although I'm not quite sure what they based the efficiency on, perhaps not all colors and jsut green or something and so maybe there is a little more room still than seems with a totally new type of technology, but all the same there still isn't room for a ton more. Some talk about how amazing it will be when we have 4 stops, 10 stops better, never happening. More like 1 stop or something with the ideal effort (not easy!). 7D tech is a little older than 6D/1DX tech though so a touch more room to improve. And certainly they can reduce high iso banding on it and make whatever it has look better in some circumstances, like the 5D3 is maybe 1/2 stop better than 5D2 only, but it has a lot less high iso banding under some circumstances and in scenes with lots of stuff near black that can effectively make the 5D3 seem, in certain ways, 1.5 or even 2 or 3 stops more usable, from time to time or extremely odd occasion for the 3 stops.)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 9, 2014)

Because ISO6400 and up and even ISO3200 or 1600 to some extent look ugly it's easy to forget what the reality is and just how high those ISO are and how amzing the performance is already actually. Just look back to film to realize! Look at your old ISO800 at what would be like 100% view 5D2 scale and it's nasty and grainy, ISO800, even ISO400 suffers quite some. So think how many stops better these amazing digital sensors have become than film collection.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 9, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> Personally, I expect the 7D2 to be a huge leap forward from the 70D for high ISO performance.... at least a third of a stop...



Canon could claim 1.5 stops...and as usual, omit that the stated improvements applies to JPG only.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 9, 2014)

RGF said:


> Unless there is a major improvement in the sensor quality, this signals bad news for the future of Canon. They are behind Nikon (Sony) in sensor technology and need to step up their game to keep competitive.



LOL. They've 'been behind' in sensor quality for 4 years now, and Canon is still the market leader, while Nikon has lost market share. As soon as people start buying bare silicon sensors, that may change...but as long as people are buying *cameras*, predictions of doom like this are, quite honestly, a ridiculous fallacy.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 9, 2014)

At this point I'm already looking to the 5DMkIV just as much (or maybe a 1D?), if it actually gets a 47MP sensor then I would have a hard time justifying owning both it and the 7DMkII.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 9, 2014)

RGF said:


> Unless there is a major improvement in the sensor quality, this signals bad news for the future of Canon. They are behind Nikon (Sony) in sensor technology and need to step up their game to keep competitive.



I think you have the reversed. According to the latest data, the gap between Canon and Nikon is actually growing slightly. Seems that Nikon had better do something and react, not the other way.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 9, 2014)

bdunbar79 said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > Unless there is a major improvement in the sensor quality, this signals bad news for the future of Canon. They are behind Nikon (Sony) in sensor technology and need to step up their game to keep competitive.
> ...



See, there you go…bringing up data and facts. How dare you?!?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 9, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > RGF said:
> ...



But...but...DxOmark said so...


----------



## klickflip (Jul 9, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> It's probably not the camera for me, so I'd be more surprised than disappointed. IMO the long delay on the 7DII _must_ relate to the sensor; everything else is in place.
> 
> So if the sensor doesn't offer some significant advance over the 70D s new tech of duel 'pixel' I'd be surprised. I still wonder if Canon would have the b***s to make it a high speed, low light king of around 16 mp. Leave the really high mp to the amateur lines and really kick out some FF challenging IQ from the crop sensor.



A 16mp low light fast action monster would be a very good press/ sports / event / gig camera but - 'leave the really high mp to the amateur lines and really kick out some FF challenging IQ from the crop sensor' ??? 
Like general Ams would love to be dealing with 40mp files sucking the life out of their cheap dells , maybe a few gotta have it tech heads would love it with maxed out machines but most would not. Personally I'd like it but still concerned by crop sensor IQ, we tested 5Dc recently to the 7D and the 5Dc is much much better IQ. FF make a big difference. 

And think of all the birders who bought into the 7D .. a fair few extra MP would help them crop tighter if needed so they would welcome that, although not pros and certainly not typical Ams .. many are very very keen enthusiasts that would welcome it. So more MP = higher end . But there are a lot out there... 

Personally if its the 70D sensor then they need to be rounded up and shot for selling regurgitated good year on year. 

My bets/hopes are 24 MP dual pixel 1 stop better DR than anything current and that would be a teaser for the future of high end Canon cameras 1DxII and 5D IV .


----------



## NancyP (Jul 10, 2014)

I won't be disappointed if it doesn't improve on the very functional 7D. I will just get a cheap 7D "classic". :


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Jul 13, 2014)

Stephen Melvin said:


> Maybe Canon has decided to finally make some pro-grade lenses to go with the 7D, and is waiting until they can launch both at once.





RGF said:


> All the Pro grade lenses (the "L" lenses) will work on the 7D. Do you mean that they will make pro grade EF-S (crop sensor) lenses? To do that, they will need a pro grade body. A 1Dx with an APS-C sensor.



Of course that's what I mean. 15 years into the digital age, and Canon makes a superb APS format camera (the 7D), and yet no professional grade lenses designed specifically for the format. Meanwhile, M43 and Fuji are rounding out some really good lens lineups for their smaller cameras.

This whole "L lenses work on APS sensors" thing is beyond idiotic. You knew full well I meant designed for the format. Only Pentax has bothered to make the appropriate lenses for their APS format cameras. But Canon continues to add 18-xxx mm superzooms. They should have had a 58mm f/1.2 lens designed for portraiture a decade ago. A 50-135mm f/2.0 would be an amazing sports lens. And of course a 15-45mm f/2.0. And that's just for starters. 

Nikon's been just as stupid, and for their most profitable cameras. There's no direct upgrade path for either camera company. Madness.


----------



## NancyP (Jul 22, 2014)

Pro-grade supertelephoto lenses for APS-C would be as huge as the current EF Big Whites. If the market for pro grade APS-C cameras is largely sports and wildlife/bird photographers, they are the ones wanting pro grade lenses, and the existing Big Whites are the lenses they want. I don't see a huge market for pro-grade shorter EF-S lenses. The 17-55 f/2.8 seems to fill the bill for most amateurs wanting L grade lenses. I am quite fond of my EF-S 15-85 as a walk-around lens, similar in utility to the 24-105L.


----------



## Clayton (Aug 2, 2014)

Stephen Melvin said:


> Stephen Melvin said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe Canon has decided to finally make some pro-grade lenses to go with the 7D, and is waiting until they can launch both at once.
> ...



There is, in my opinion some truth to your core point here. Both Canon and Nikon in order to keep their feet in both worlds and protect full frame markets have made some interesting compromises.


----------

