# Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 12, 2014)

```
<p>DPReview has completed their review of the Canon EOS 7D Mark II and it’s extremely positive. They make a special effort to stress this camera is not an incremental update to the original EOS 7D.</p>
<p><strong>From the review</strong>

<em>“It would be easy to write off the EOS 7D Mark II as just an incremental upgrade to the original 7D, but that would be a serious mistake. The two cameras may share the number 7 and the letter D on their bodies, but inside they are very different machines.</em></p>
<p><em>With the 7D II Canon is putting a stake in the ground that it is committed to the crop sensor market. Although it will likely be seen as an aspirational camera for novices, or an upgrade path to people using more consumer oriented crop sensor bodies from Canon, the 7D II is unquestionably a pro camera. It’s built like a tank, has the control layout of a 5D Mark III and an autofocus system to compete with the 1D X.</em></p>
<p><em>Canon has added lots of tools to the Mark II, but one deserves special mention. Dual-Pixel autofocus may be one of the most important, and yet under-appreciated, technologies introduced to digital cameras in a long time. It’s significant that Canon now includes this technology on their Cinema EOS cameras. Canon still seems to be dialing in the optimal implementation for the technology, but it will be exciting to see how it evolves.”</em></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii" target="_blank">Read the full review</a> </strong>| <strong><strong><strong><strong>EOS 7D Mark II in stock $1799: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1081808-REG/canon_9128b002_eos_7d_mark_ii.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00NEWZDRG/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00NEWZDRG&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=4IHYPE3ZKJN5VL4X" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></strong></strong></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Marauder (Dec 12, 2014)

Looking forward to reading it! ;D


----------



## WillT (Dec 12, 2014)

Not looking good for the 7dmk2 imo 
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii/13


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 12, 2014)

hehe, only silver. 



> Its *dynamic range* and video quality* fall behind* some of its top-performing peers, but its performance is class-leading.



Looks like the the DpReview DRones will be as popular here as the DXO fellas. ;D



> Canon has added lots of tools to the Mark II, but one deserves special mention. Dual-Pixel autofocus may be one of the most important, and yet under-appreciated, technologies introduced to digital cameras in a long time. It's significant that Canon now includes this technology on their Cinema EOS cameras. Canon still seems to be dialing in the optimal implementation for the technology, but it will be exciting to see how it evolves.



Exactly. All that DPAF stuff is in it, but it does not really deliver the goods: live view AF as fast as that lowly Sony A6000 or better. 



> The Mark II is more evolutionary than revolutionary when it comes to image quality. Its 20.2 MP resolution sensor is a minor increase over the 7D, and not terribly noticeable on its own. It's certainly not a reason to upgrade from a 7D in and of itself.
> 
> Canon has been busy under the hood, however. Jpeg processing has seen a big improvement, and Jpeg files are capable of holding down noise and maintaining color and contrast for an extra stop (and sometimes more) compared to the 7D. Raw noise is slightly better, but Canon's real improvement in this area is the elimination of banding commonly found in dark shadow areas on other EOS cameras.



yea ... minor iteration. Better jpg engine. Less banding. RAW minimally improved, DR basically unchanged. Not good enough. Not at all. 

Overall I consider both rating and conclusions are balanced and fair. 7D II would have been REALLY GREAT, had it come in spring 2013, but now it is very late to the party really only interesting for those, who have not moved to FF yet and/or are in the rather small niche of action/tele reach-oriented users. And even those may soon discover, that mirrorless cameras like Samsung NX1 are better suited for reach-limited, action-oriented captures.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 12, 2014)

IMO they give it a very good review. No it's not going to resolve as well as a nikon d810 but for what it's meant to do I think it's pretty great.


----------



## tayassu (Dec 12, 2014)

I was surprised how much the DR difference to the Nikon D7000 is, but then I remembered how well my old 7D can deal with harsh lighting conditions with the right PP technique. 
Would be nice, but I can live without it.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 12, 2014)

I sure wouldn't go with the Samsung nx1 or other mirrorless systems just do to the fact canons lenses are much better and have a lot more options.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 12, 2014)

GraFax said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > And even those may soon discover, that mirrorless cameras like Samsung NX1 are better suited for reach-limited, action-oriented captures.
> ...



+1


----------



## WillT (Dec 12, 2014)

The NX1 is everything the 7d should have been.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 12, 2014)

GraFax said:


> Really? Which 400 f2.8, 500 f4 or 600 f4 were you planning on using with your Samsung? Or did you mean things you couldn't reach with the included zoom kit lens?



Samsung 300/2.8 for starters. -
Maybe followed by a 2x Extender next.
;D


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 12, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> GraFax said:
> 
> 
> > Really? Which 400 f2.8, 500 f4 or 600 f4 were you planning on using with your Samsung? Or did you mean things you couldn't reach with the included zoom kit lens?
> ...



Umm sorry but Samsung lenses can't compete with the high end canon and nikon lenses. Just because it says 300 2.8 doesn't mean it's a great lens. For a hobbyist its fine. For the absolute best image quality no. Maybe in the next few years Samsung a others will have great glass but right now they don't.


----------



## WillT (Dec 12, 2014)

GraFax said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > GraFax said:
> ...



If your shooting with the 600 f4 I would guess you would not be using the 7D... Honestly I would rather use the 5D and crop than the 7D. The IQ will be better in most cases.


----------



## bholliman (Dec 12, 2014)

WillT said:


> If your shooting with the 600 f4 I would guess you would not be using the 7D... Honestly I would rather use the 5D and crop than the 7D. The IQ will be better in most cases.



Granted, most 600/4 owners also own a 1DX or 5D3, but I imagine a good number also own or will buy a 7D2 for the added reach. 

In reach limited situations, as wildlife photographers often are, more pixels on target usually equals better IQ.


----------



## WillT (Dec 12, 2014)

bholliman said:


> WillT said:
> 
> 
> > If your shooting with the 600 f4 I would guess you would not be using the 7D... Honestly I would rather use the 5D and crop than the 7D. The IQ will be better in most cases.
> ...



You would think, but my experience had been that I would rather crop than deal with the IQ from the 7D


----------



## DominoDude (Dec 12, 2014)

Still haven't had enough many cups of caffeine poured into me eyelids, but I see Digital PReview mentioning that it's disappointing that we had to wait so long for the 7D Mark II.
Now they know how many of us feel about their reviews of the Canon 1D X and Nikon D4s and a few other bodies...
(A rumour says that it's a Mr Godot that's carrying out those reviews. We just have to wait a little longer.)

Also, it looks like the primary "cons" they've found are such that I wouldn't consider them to be top priority for what I believe to be the typical buyer of 7D's. Softish video, lacking touch screen and other items seemingly more important for those shooting via LiveView. Perhaps their overall conclusion and score is fair, but as I read it I would expect a slightly higher total score. How they weigh the numbers from their test results are perhaps the same kind of mystery as it is with DxO's sensor testing.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 12, 2014)

bholliman said:


> WillT said:
> 
> 
> > If your shooting with the 600 f4 I would guess you would not be using the 7D... Honestly I would rather use the 5D and crop than the 7D. The IQ will be better in most cases.
> ...



+1


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 13, 2014)

WillT said:


> You would think, but my experience had been that I would rather crop than deal with the IQ from the 7D



Agreed. And so does every professional wildlife photographer I shoot with. They exited the crop game with the 7D and never went back. Crop or get longer glass.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

There are many "pro" wildlife shooters who use crop sensors. Many use ff and crop too like you say as well. A crop sensor is a very valuable addition to any wildlife shooters kit.


----------



## WillT (Dec 13, 2014)

Ryan85 said:


> A crop sensor is a very valuable addition to any wildlife shooters kit.



I was not trying to say that crop sensors are bad, I have one. I was just saying the 7d MK ii has suspect IQ through the ISO range. I also found the focus system to be ok at best when tracking birds using all the AF points. Tracking people, boats, large objects and such it nailed them! 

I was really excited to try out the AF system as I thought that even if the pictures were somewhat soft I would get more keepers. I ended up going back to selecting the points I want and shooting they way I have on every other camera. Also I thought the IR would mean better low light tracking and it did not :/


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

Hopefully with some firmware updates they improve some of those things if they can.


----------



## WillT (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> WillT said:
> 
> 
> > Ryan85 said:
> ...



I agree, I was just under the impression that the AF system was revolutionary or a game changer. I more than likely had to high of expectations for the AF system  Here is an example of it failing in broad day light. http://imgur.com/a/VAgAa I found the AF system to be similar to the 1Dx and 5d3. Great Eagle shot!


----------



## Marauder (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> DominoDude said:
> 
> 
> > Still haven't had enough many cups of caffeine poured into me eyelids, but I see Digital PReview mentioning that it's disappointing that we had to wait so long for the 7D Mark II.
> ...



I concur. I liked the review. I think they spent a bit more time dwelling on low ISO noise than was probably warranted for the target market. I'm firmly in the target market and I really don't care about that "issue." Or the lack of a touch screen or soft video. 

On the other hand, I see the trolls have already been pooping in the thread. No surprise there--it's all they do! Gravitated to the few negatives and tried to spin the entire review as negative--probably hoping they could discourage the gullible from reading the review at all, or just aiming them at the portions with "issues." Decidedly ridiculous and childish--but very predictable. 

The primary difference between DPReview and DXO Mark is that DPReview works very hard to present a balanced assessment. Like DXO Mark, they still gravitate towards an issue that matters more to them than to me--low ISO DR. But unlike DXO Mark, they look at the entire package when they make their assessment. Overall I liked the review. And, in spite of the spin doctoring that has gone on in this thread trying to convince the reader that this review proves that the 7D Mark II is minimal upgrade, the reality is that DPReview's conclusion is that: "It would be easy to write off the EOS 7D Mark II as just an incremental upgrade to the original 7D, but that would be a serious mistake." And it would be a mistake--but it's a mistake the trolls and DRones would love to continue to foster!


----------



## Marauder (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> WillT said:
> 
> 
> > Ryan85 said:
> ...



That is an awesome shot!!!


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

Marauder said:


> GraFax said:
> 
> 
> > DominoDude said:
> ...



+1!


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

Great eagle shot GraFax!! What lens did you have paired to the the 7d2?


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

Thanks. I was guessing you used the 400 5.6. It's a great lens. I use it with the 5d3 and I just got the 7d2 tonight. I'm looking forward to trying that combo this weekend!


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> I posted this to the BIF thread earlier today. Center 15pt small zone AF. I have a sequence of about a dozen of these and they are all sharp despite some very erratic movement. The AF works great if you put the effort into it. It took a while for me to get it dialed in.



Really nice capture but the noise is quite high.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> Generalize much? That statement could not be less true. Many of the worlds best wildlife photographers were still using 7D's as recently as a month ago, That was when they switched to 7D2's. You should get out more or find some new "professional" wildlife photographers to shoot with.



I've been shooting with the world's best in Montana the last three months, and none of them would use a 7D or 7DII as a doorstop. 

The sensor is ancient tech. 

Canon's high MP, APS-C cameras are great for situations where you control the light, such as fashion or portrait. But when filming wild animals during winter inversions, they're just not up to the task. FF is.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 13, 2014)

Marauder said:


> I though it was generally fair. I wouldn't have put so much space into the low ISO DR testing since the results were to be expected and didn't reflect the 7D2's intended High speed/High ISO/ Long Lens use.



The 7DII isn't intended for high ISO use. That's the 6D and 5DIII. Oh, and the 7DII isn't intended for low ISO, low noise landscape use either, that's intended for the 6D and 5D III. 


See where this is going? 




> I concur. I liked the review. I think they spent a bit more time dwelling on low ISO noise than was probably warranted for the target market.



A $1900 DSLR market isn't interested in low ISO noise levels?


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> GraFax said:
> 
> 
> > Generalize much? That statement could not be less true. Many of the worlds best wildlife photographers were still using 7D's as recently as a month ago, That was when they switched to 7D2's. You should get out more or find some new "professional" wildlife photographers to shoot with.
> ...



Really? The 7d & 7d2 not even as a door stop? Everyone has a option whether they prefer to crop a ff image or use a crop sensor for the extra reach. Both ways work it's personal prefrence. FF is not the end all be all and isn't the only tool the "pro's" use. There are plenty of wildlife photographers who make there living shooting a crop sensor.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> Ryan85 said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks. I was guessing you used the 400 5.6. It's a great lens. I use it with the 5d3 and I just got the 7d2 tonight. I'm looking forward to trying that combo this weekend!
> ...



Thanks I will! The 400 5.6 does need lots of light but it's a great lens for its price and what I could afford when I got it. I'll be trying my 70-200 2.8 is 2 with the 7d2 as well.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> Hey Ryan85 - Too funny dude. Like I said in the other thread. There is always one.



Yep lol My thoughts exactly. Maybe all the pros who use crop sensors were in colarodo since all the pros he was with in Montana were shooting FF. Good grief.


----------



## Marauder (Dec 13, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> Marauder said:
> 
> 
> > I though it was generally fair. I wouldn't have put so much space into the low ISO DR testing since the results were to be expected and didn't reflect the 7D2's intended High speed/High ISO/ Long Lens use.
> ...


That must be why Arthur Morris won't touch one. Oh wait, he IS using one! But he hates it because its so noisy. Oh, wait...hmm...seems like he LOVES it for wildlife and loves the results at fairly high ISO's! Oh, and pros won't touch it---except there are innumerable reviews of professional wildlife and sports photographers who are using, are loving it and say it's an amazing camera! 

See where this is going? 8)


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

Lol


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> Marauder said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...


LMAO!


----------



## Marauder (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> Marauder said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...



LOL It's like a series of parrots from the bad side of town. 

"GAWK--Full frame!"
"GAWK--Exmor!"
"GAWK--Mirrorless!"
"GAWK--*whistle* Nikon!!!"

:


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 13, 2014)

Ryan85 said:


> Really? The 7d & 7d2 not even as a door stop?



That was a quote from the best wildlife photographer in the Rockies, not mine.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 13, 2014)

Canon's high mega-pixel APS-C cameras fair poorly in crepuscular conditions, which are usually the best time to film the charismatic mega-fauna found in the Northern Rockies.

I went out with an open mind the last two years, shooting Canon crop and FF in the same conditions. The results speak for themselves. 

But I agree, use what works for you. 

If you are shooting birds in brightly lit beach environments or using flash, grab the 7DII. If you are unable to control the light and shoot in crepuscular conditions, go FF.

And apparently, the target market for the 7DII is those who don't care about image quality. Interesting rationalization.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

And apparently, the target market for the 7DII is those who don't care about image quality. Interesting rationalization.


[/quote]

say that out loud to yourself. Not a smart comment or a way to make your point and add to the discussion. Makes you look petty that not everyone agrees with your point. Not one person who buys that camera thinks that. I get sarcasm but come on. The 7d2 is a very good camera. Is it a 1DX? No but its a very good camera at a fraction of the price. Look at some of the images people have posted on this site or other sites and you'll see it's very capable of taking very good photos which have good image quality. It's a addition to a wildlife shooters kit imo and can complement a ff.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Dec 13, 2014)

I think it's fair comment when people are reduced to excusing away low ISO noise and DR quality.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

I love my 5d3 it's a great all arounder IMO. It's my primary camera for weeding and portriat shoots. I take it out and shoot wildlife with it from time to time. I also take a crop body with me when shooting wildlife. if I'm shooting elk that are beded down for instance and can't get closer without them knowing I'm there I'll shoot with the 5d3 then if I need more reach I'll switch to a crop sensor. When I pull them up I've been as happy or more so with the image quality of the crop sensor over cropping the 5d3. That's just my experience so I'm happy with FF and crop.


----------



## AvTvM (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > GraFax said:
> ...



No, i don't think and I did not write that a 300/2.8 + 2x will be equal in iq to a native 600/4. Yes, nobody knows yet, how good or not that samsung 300/3.8 is going to be. But considering how the NX-1 apparently matches and in some respects even beats the 7D II capabilities, we might just be in for yet another nice surprise.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 13, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> And apparently, the target market for the 7DII is those who don't care about image quality. Interesting rationalization.





MichaelHodges said:


> I think it's fair comment when people are reduced to excusing away low ISO noise and DR quality.



If that's a fair comment, then evidently *you* don't care about image quality. If you did, you wouldn't be using a camera with such poor low ISO DR. :


----------



## justaCanonuser (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> I posted this to the BIF thread earlier today. Center 15pt small zone AF. I have a sequence of about a dozen of these and they are all sharp despite some very erratic movement. The AF works great if you put the effort into it. It took a while for me to get it dialed in.



Really great eagle shot, GraFax! Looks like the 400/5.6 works quite well with the 7D2. I use it frequently when there's enough light and I do not want to carry the bigger and heavier 500 with me. I think seriously about upgrading my old 7D because I use it much less since I have my 5D3, mostly because I love the 5D3's AF system. Your great image shows again that the skills of a photographer matter much more than any DR specs (in fact, my impression is: the worse a photographer is the more DR does he always need). Obviously the 7D2 delivers nice enough IQ for good wildlife shooting.


----------



## DominoDude (Dec 13, 2014)

Marauder said:


> GraFax said:
> 
> 
> > DominoDude said:
> ...



I hope I'm not considered to be one of the trolls or DRones, then I am misunderstood. I vent my opinion at time, but it's done to vent my opinion, not out to make it another person(s) opinion.


----------



## DominoDude (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> DominoDude said:
> 
> 
> > I hope I'm not considered to be one of the trolls or DRones, then I am misunderstood. I vent my opinion at time, but it's done to vent my opinion, not out to make it another person(s) opinion.
> ...



*nods in understanding* No offence taken.


----------



## AmselAdans (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> *photo of an eagle*


BAM, what a shot! Great photo of a beautiful dinosaur.
I like it, when pros here actually share their work. Somehow it's far more convincing than those "yada yada but the DxO rating say" or "my lens cap told me that..." statements.
So what remains? Good photographers will be able to take great photos with the 7DII. Not so good photographers will not. And "7DII" might be replaced by almost any recent camera at this level.


To speak of the DPreview review of the 7DII: Refreshingly neutral, no bashing but also no overwhelmed chorus of praise. It summed up most of the things we already knew.

My personal, subjective point of view is: Wow, great AF system, definetely an exciting piece of technology to play with. Wow, that amount of (improved) features. Moreover that price, thats a sensational value for money. But... somehow I have the creepy sensation, that this thing is the last, delayed piece of an era that fades away. 

Additionally, from the very first DSLRs, Canon was the company that set the norm. They were the company, all other companies wanted to reach. Then the introduction of videos in DSLR. Another bang in the industry and among users. It is sad to see that in videos (yes yes and in sensor tech, when "good enough" is surpassed by "even better") Canon has been overtaken by several other companies. Somehow I miss the drive in Canon's developments, the aspire to be the undisputed number one. The 6D provides affordable FF (and, based on the users here, devliers exactly what it should: very good image quality), but seems like a "dumb" brick equipped with a shutter button. Despite the 7DII having an amazing AF system, high FPS, excellent build quality... after several weeks my feeling is more or less: "....meh..."


----------



## Marauder (Dec 13, 2014)

GraFax said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's high mega-pixel APS-C cameras fair poorly in crepuscular conditions, which are usually the best time to film the charismatic mega-fauna found in the Northern Rockies.
> ...



LMAO!


----------



## Marauder (Dec 13, 2014)

AmselAdans said:


> GraFax said:
> 
> 
> > *photo of an eagle*
> ...



I concur that it was a fair and balanced review. As to the areas where they were disappointed, such as low ISO DR, lack of touch screen and lack of video improvement, those areas are of limited (or no) importance to me. On the other hand, combining useful IQ improvements with first class AF, fast burst and a deep buffer make this a very compelling and exciting product for me. Also for many others who do wildlife or sports/action type shooting. 

For landscape shooters and videographers, I get how the 7D Mark II may seem underwhelming. On a side note, it's similar to why the 6D (and D810 for that matter) are such "YAWN" products for me. They aren't suited to the kinds of photography I most enjoy doing, while the 7D II IS suited to them. But I certainly get why those who do landscapes etc. like these other cameras--and are underwhelmed by the 7D Mark II. In the end, it's a matter of selecting the best product for the sort of job you're going to do. 

What I like in a balanced review is the ability of the reviewer to look beyond their own biases and photographic needs and imagine what a hypothetical user in a different field might want and I think the DPReview review delivers on that mostly. A bit of their own preference for a low ISO DR camera for landscape photography does come through, but it's counter balanced by their ability to grasp the importance of other features for a wildlife photographer. They have the ability to see how a different sort of photographer might have different "must haves" on their list--and not all reviews and reviewers have had that balance.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 13, 2014)

I concur that it was a fair and balanced review. As to the areas where they were disappointed, such as low ISO DR, lack of touch screen and lack of video improvement, those areas are of limited (or no) importance to me. On the other hand, combining useful IQ improvements with first class AF, fast burst and a deep buffer make this a very compelling and exciting product for me. Also for many others who do wildlife or sports/action type shooting. 

For landscape shooters and videographers, I get how the 7D Mark II may seem underwhelming. On a side note, it's similar to why the 6D (and D810 for that matter) are such "YAWN" products for me. They aren't suited to the kinds of photography I most enjoy doing, while the 7D II IS suited to them. But I certainly get why those who do landscapes etc. like these other cameras--and are underwhelmed by the 7D Mark II. In the end, it's a matter of selecting the best product for the sort of job you're going to do. 

What I like in a balanced review is the ability of the reviewer to look beyond their own biases and photographic needs and imagine what a hypothetical user in a different field might want and I think the DPReview review delivers on that mostly. A bit of their own preference for a low ISO DR camera for landscape photography does come through, but it's counter balanced by their ability to grasp the importance of other features for a wildlife photographer. They have the ability to see how a different sort of photographer might have different "must haves" on their list--and not all reviews and reviewers have had that balance.
[/quote]

+1 well said


----------



## Marauder (Dec 14, 2014)

Thank you.


----------



## sanj (Dec 14, 2014)

There is much more to a photo than IQ. Many who can't afford the 1dx or longer telephotos will find 7d2 ideal for their needs. They will know it is not the very best IQ in the market, but the very best IQ that they can afford. 
And MANY MANY times the 2nd best IQ is just FINE. And difference visible only to pixel peeping photographers.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 14, 2014)

sanj said:


> There is much more to a photo than IQ. Many who can't afford the 1dx or longer telephotos will find 7d2 ideal for their needs. They will know it is not the very best IQ in the market, but the very best IQ that they can afford.
> And MANY MANY times the 2nd best IQ is just FINE. And difference visible only to pixel peeping photographers.



+1 absolutey


----------



## dtaylor (Dec 14, 2014)

AvTvM said:


> And even those may soon discover, that mirrorless cameras like Samsung NX1 are better suited for reach-limited, action-oriented captures.



The Samsung cannot AF. In TheCameraStoreTV's review it blew half the frames in a dead simple tracking test (brisk walk/slow jog speed). In the Golden City Films review the two guys just tore the Samsung apart over AF. They said it was terrible at tracking at a dog park and even in the studio trying to get the 85mm to focus on the model's eye. The 7D II? Reliable as expected.

Absent a major firmware update, I don't think the NX1 is going to make any in roads into the Canon/Nikon sports and wildlife markets.


----------



## dtaylor (Dec 14, 2014)

tayassu said:


> I was surprised how much the DR difference to the Nikon D7000 is, but then I remembered how well my old 7D can deal with harsh lighting conditions with the right PP technique.



DPReview's processing of the Canon file was awful. There are multiple samples in a thread on their forums that are much better and therefore closer to the D7000. Still not as good, but much closer.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 14, 2014)

dtaylor said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > And even those may soon discover, that mirrorless cameras like Samsung NX1 are better suited for reach-limited, action-oriented captures.
> ...



I agree. Maybe in a few years if they continue to innovate and get the cameras better. And produce some great glass


----------



## dtaylor (Dec 14, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> The 7DII isn't intended for high ISO use. That's the 6D and 5DIII.



A crop sensor that's usable at ISO 16,000 is "not intended for high ISO use?" :



> Oh, and the 7DII isn't intended for low ISO, low noise landscape use either, that's intended for the 6D and 5D III.



It's absolutely fine for landscape use. 99% of the time you couldn't tell it apart from a D810 in a 24" print given good glass on both and low/mid ISOs.

Unless, of course, you habitually underexpose by 5ev.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 14, 2014)

dtaylor said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > The 7DII isn't intended for high ISO use. That's the 6D and 5DIII.
> ...



+1


----------



## Phil Lowe (Dec 14, 2014)

Great Blue Heron shot using the Canon 7D2 and Tamron 150-600 @600mm. ISO 3200, f/7.1 @1/1000. Post-processed in Lightroom 5.7.

I've got no issues with this camera. None.

This camera is cleaner at ISO 3200 than the 7D is at ISO 800. I used the settings I did because this bird was hunting in early evening light, and I wanted to be sure I had the shutter speed to see it catch a vole. 

I sell my wildlife on Shutterstock, iStock, and Alamy, as well as Crated.com. Many of my wildlife photos shot with the 7D and Tamron 150-600 have sold, and the IQ from this camera beats the 7D. I also have images on the stock agencies shot with my 5D3, and the IQ of the 7D2 is much closer to the IQ of the 5D3 than its predecessor.


----------



## Phil Lowe (Dec 14, 2014)

Another example of my 7D2 and the Tamron 150-600 in less than ideal lighting. Shutterstock won't accept an image with excessive noise, rendering issues (like too much noise reduction added), or soft focus.

As you can see, they accepted this one because it was clean, sharp, and well-rendered.

Pros do use the 7D2 for good reason: it delivers the goods.







http://shutterstock.com/g/Phil+Lowe


----------



## bholliman (Dec 14, 2014)

sanj said:


> There is much more to a photo than IQ. Many who can't afford the 1dx or longer telephotos will find 7d2 ideal for their needs. They will know it is not the very best IQ in the market, but the very best IQ that they can afford.
> And MANY MANY times the 2nd best IQ is just FINE. And difference visible only to pixel peeping photographers.




+1 I fully agree. I am often guilty of being a pixel peeper myself. Often the subtle differences in IQ that we make such a big deal about are imperceptible to 99% of the people viewing the picture.


----------



## miah (Dec 14, 2014)

GraFax said:


> A 400 5.6 is about the longest lens I can comfortable carry and shoot hand held for a full day out. Even with the 7D2/4005.6L, my right shoulder is a bit sore.



Thanks for posting the great eagle shot, *GraFax*. I too use a 400 f/5.6 on my 5D3 and just yesterday received a new 7D2. Like you, I shoot a lot of wildlife and want a combo that I can carry around and handhold all day without getting too beat up. *Question*: I'm thinking about getting a grip for the 7D2. I've never owned or used a grip, but I like the concept. Do you think a grip would add more bulk/weight to the combo than it's worth?


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 14, 2014)

miah said:


> GraFax said:
> 
> 
> > A 400 5.6 is about the longest lens I can comfortable carry and shoot hand held for a full day out. Even with the 7D2/4005.6L, my right shoulder is a bit sore.
> ...



Hi Miah, like you I just got my 7d2 this weekend and will be using my 400 5.6 with it. I have been using my 5d3 with the lens. As far as the battery grip goes IMO if you are going to shoot vertical/portriat orientation a lot the grip will help you use better form while handholding. It is going to,add weight so if you hand hold all day that might get to you.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 14, 2014)

Ryan85 said:


> miah said:
> 
> 
> > GraFax said:
> ...



Personally, I find it less tiring to handhold a gripped body all day if a large lens (the 400/5.6 certainly qualifies) is being used. If your hands are medium-large, you can use your whole hand on the body, not just 3 fingers.


----------



## miah (Dec 14, 2014)

Ryan85 said:


> miah said:
> 
> 
> > GraFax said:
> ...



Thanks, Ryan85! In addition to less typical vertical shots, I've heard the 7D2 eats batteries, so I was thinking the grip would be nice to keep the party going all day long without having to swap batteries at a critical moment. Murphy's Law has caught me a number of times, swapping batteries right when the crucial moment comes and goes. That said, I hate carrying anymore weight/bulk than absolutely necessary, so I'm leaning towards going without. I'd like to hear from Grafax, since he's been shooting with his rig for a while, now. I'm headed to Bosque del Apache on Thursday, so I need to order (or not) that grip today.

Adding to GraFax's comment from earlier in the thread, I noticed he said he hasn't had much luck with a 1.4x TC on the 400 f/5.6. I'd have to agree that it's not the preferred set-up, but I've captured some of my best shots of BIF with the 1.4x TC attached to the 400 with my 5D3. In other words, that combo gives me fewer keepers, but when it hits--it hits!


----------



## miah (Dec 14, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Ryan85 said:
> 
> 
> > miah said:
> ...



Thanks, Neuro. My hands are in the medium-large category and without gloves I can pretty comfortably hold on to the 5D3/7D2 body with all four fingers. But once I'm wearing gloves, forget it. I know you shoot with a 1Dx. Do you find the extra grip nice to have when you're wearing gloves out in winter conditions? If so, even just using the removable grip seasonally might be a worthwhile investment (especially since batteries drain faster in the cold, as well).


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 14, 2014)

Thanks for,the advice on the 1.4x extender. Your right I've heard the 7d2 does really eat the battery up so the grip may be a good idea. If you want to talk to GraFax you might ask him on a different thread like anything posted with a 7d2, he said he's done with this one as there's been some disagreement with ff vs crop. I'm not familiar with the place your heading Thursday but enjoy and I hope the new camera helps you capture some great photos!


----------



## JoFT (Dec 14, 2014)

I read a bit of the topics here on this thread. I have a long story with the 7D. I wanted to avoid the investment into the Canon 28-300mm-L-Lens. Shooting Hockey in halls.. Field hockey. Not Ice Hockey. My daughters plays it... 7D+ 24-105 should work from the focal range - and did work but definitely not from the noise point of view.... I was totally disappointed... I wanted to sell it. And I bought the 28-300mmL as well as the 5DMIII....

But than came the "Aha-Moments". 
• Field Hockey in the summer outdoors: Best choice: 23-300L with the 7D!! no way, also for soccer!!!
• Birds, Animals: great, especially with the 100-400
• Ski Racing with the 100-400: just amazing...
• flash control with off camera flash: also great...

Big improvements against bot 5D´s MkII & III really.

For me it was no sauté: the 7D MarkII is a must - and I am not disappointed: it is a great camera. It has the best Autofocus I ever used... You can use it as general purpose camera, but it´s bulky... Use it for what it is made for - and there is no better camera on the market for those purposes...

And to give you some ideas: 
http://delightphoto.zenfolio.com/blog/2014/11/7d-mark-ii-the-beast---reloaded


----------



## miah (Dec 14, 2014)

Ryan85 said:


> Thanks for,the advice on the 1.4x extender. Your right I've heard the 7d2 does really eat the battery up so the grip may be a good idea. If you want to talk to GraFax you might ask him on a different thread like anything posted with a 7d2, he said he's done with this one as there's been some disagreement with ff vs crop. I'm not familiar with the place your heading Thursday but enjoy and I hope the new camera helps you capture some great photos!



Thanks, Ryan85; I PM'ed Grafax, so hopefully he'll rejoin the stage...


----------



## justaCanonuser (Dec 15, 2014)

dtaylor said:


> Absent a major firmware update, I don't think the NX1 is going to make any in roads into the Canon/Nikon sports and wildlife markets.



As long as only a small to nothing selection of good tele lenses with Samsung mount is available, the NX1 will be no match for Canon/Nikon sports and/or wildlife shooters. But I appreciate that brands such as Samsung try hard to challenge the (still) big players, we users can only profit from competition.

I expect the 7D2 to be what my old 7D, my 5D3 and older Canon models always proved to be: solid tools you can always rely on when you need them to perform - even in rough terrains, even after crashing against rocks. That's what really matters. 

But my feeling is that we are really encountering the last days of the SLR dinosaur period. That said, they still are damn good cameras! And as long as mirrorless cameras with bigger sensors are not with fast electronic shutters available, digital photography is not mature anyway. Hey Sony, where's your AX without mechanically shuddering shutter? This challenge might be a chance for Canon to return as a really innovative company, the dual pixel AF was already a good move.


----------



## rany (Dec 19, 2014)

The Mark II is the successor to the original 7D, look at the review: http://d800vsd810.com/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-review/


----------

