# Scott Kelby 7D Mark II Real World



## Leafz66 (Oct 7, 2014)

Not sure if this was posted or not. Scott Kelby did a real world test on 2 pre-production 7D Mark II cameras.

http://scottkelby.com/2014/real-world-field-report-on-the-canon-7d-mark-ii/


----------



## setterguy (Oct 8, 2014)

I just reviewed the field report and I felt that they provided real time feedback on the capability of this new exciting camera. Scott and his team did a fantastic job without getting into the detailed technical specifications. The proof is in the pictures. Well Done!


----------



## jrista (Oct 8, 2014)

Looks like DIGIC 6 is doing a decent job. Not FF level quality, but definitely better than the 7D at high ISO. 

The thing that was surprising to me was the amount of color noise in the boke background of the ISO 100 shot...seems like a lot of color noise for midtones.... ??? I'm hoping it's just a JPEG encoding thing, and that it wouldn't be there in the RAW.

Which begs the question...where are some 7D II RAW images? The OOC JPEGS look good for an APS-C, and that's probably primarily due to the DIGIC 6 processor...but how are the RAWs? Are the RAWs cooked by DIGIC 6 like the JPEGS? If not...is RAW IQ going to suffer?


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 8, 2014)

jrista said:


> Which begs the question...where are some 7D II RAW images?



Probably all 7d2 reviewers had to sign an nda to hold back the raw images?

Reasons would be that the usual suspects can optimize their raw converters for the 7d2 so no sub-par raw conversions are used in reviews. And of course (conspiracy theory goes here) that the sooc jpegs are like Canon wants them to look, while in-depth raw reviews might discover the skeleton in the 7d2's closet sooner than necessary ...


----------



## jrista (Oct 8, 2014)

Ok, another curious thing. Kelby said in the video that the 7D II was 24mp. Is that true? I thought the specs said it was 20.2mp. If it's 24mp, then I am now rather intrigued...that would mean Canon really did create a new sensor, instead of just revamping the 70D sensor with a minor DPAF improvement.

I am not entirely sure about noise...I'd prefer to see RAW to determine how much better than the 7D it is. One thing that I think is Canon seems to have improved is their color fidelity. None of my Canon cameras have ever produced color quality quite like the 7D II appears to. That was a very big complaint of mine about Canon...their lower Q.E. really hurts their color fidelity. I am not sure if this is a DIGIC 6 trick, or whether Canon actually updated their sensor technology...but _if _the RAW images have the same kind of color fidelity as Kelby's sports JPEGS, then they finally did something to improve their IQ. That's at least a step forward in the right direction (midtone color noise at ISO 100 aside...that's kind of an annoying problem, but it may just be jpeg compression artifacts.)


----------



## flyingSquirrel (Oct 8, 2014)

Yeah I heard him say 24MP twice also. I was extremely disappointed, given the fact that the released camera will have only 20. I honestly believe canon made it 24MP but decided to use the 20mp in this body so they could keep the camera cheap and sell more. 

edit- and not only what I said above, but also that overall 24MP would just be "too good" for such a camera. Have to keep the FF pro body cameras looking good and the owners of 1-dx happy, etc.


----------



## candc (Oct 8, 2014)

flyingSquirrel said:


> Yeah I heard him say 24MP twice also. I was extremely disappointed, given the fact that the released camera will have only 20. I honestly believe canon made it 24MP but decided to use the 20mp in this body so they could keep the camera cheap and sell more.



I think you are right. The early talk was that several prototypes including a 24mp sensor body were being tested. Maybe the one he was using is one of those? That or he just mixed up the specs with an earlier prototype.


----------



## DominoDude (Oct 8, 2014)

Has anyone asked him why he mentions 24MP?


----------



## candc (Oct 8, 2014)

I checked the sample images posted on his blog and they are 5472x3648=20mp same as 70d. They look good but I think its the same basic sensor as the 70d, maybe with a few tweaks in the processing but likely the same hardware.


----------



## DominoDude (Oct 8, 2014)

candc said:


> I checked the sample images posted on his blog and they are 5472x3648=20mp same as 70d. They look good but I think its the same basic sensor as the 70d, maybe with a few tweaks in the processing but likely the same hardware.



Yupp! That's almost the same as what I did - I checked the resolution on the shots shown during the video. So he had a pre-production with the same size sensor as the coming real one.


----------



## Rocky (Oct 8, 2014)

flyingSquirrel said:


> Yeah I heard him say 24MP twice also. I was extremely disappointed, given the fact that the released camera will have only 20. I honestly believe canon made it 24MP but decided to use the 20mp in this body so they could keep the camera cheap and sell more.
> 
> edit- and not only what I said above, but also that overall 24MP would just be "too good" for such a camera. Have to keep the FF pro body cameras looking good and the owners of 1-dx happy, etc.


With the same fab techology, the 24mp and 20mp sensor will be the same cost. May be Canon is trying to see which one will have a better performance in noise and DR through out the ISO range.


----------



## flyingSquirrel (Oct 8, 2014)

candc said:


> I checked the sample images posted on his blog and they are 5472x3648=20mp same as 70d. They look good but I think its the same basic sensor as the 70d, maybe with a few tweaks in the processing but likely the same hardware.



Thanks for checking that. Extremely disappointing. I would not doubt however that* it's possible that these were shot at 24mp and then downsized (and the metadata stripped......)* to cover it up!!


----------



## Aglet (Oct 8, 2014)

jrista said:


> Looks like DIGIC 6 is doing a decent job. Not FF level quality, but definitely better than the 7D at high ISO.
> 
> The thing that was surprising to me was the amount of color noise in the boke background of the ISO 100 shot...seems like a lot of color noise for midtones.... ??? I'm hoping it's just a JPEG encoding thing, and that it wouldn't be there in the RAW.
> 
> Which begs the question...where are some 7D II RAW images? The OOC JPEGS look good for an APS-C, and that's probably primarily due to the DIGIC 6 processor...but how are the RAWs? Are the RAWs cooked by DIGIC 6 like the JPEGS? If not...is RAW IQ going to suffer?


The outdoor shots in decent light look OK.
Just a quick look but, amongst the noise, in lower midtones of some of the smooth OOF areas, it still kinda looks like some repetitive vertical pattern structures are faintly visible... :-\


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 8, 2014)

flyingSquirrel said:


> I would not doubt however that* it's possible that these were shot at 24mp and then downsized (and the metadata stripped......)* to cover it up!!



Sure, a 7d2 with more resolution than the expensive 5d3, and pigs can fly :->


----------



## pwp (Oct 8, 2014)

candc said:


> flyingSquirrel said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah I heard him say 24MP twice also. I was extremely disappointed, given the fact that the released camera will have only 20. I honestly believe canon made it 24MP but decided to use the 20mp in this body so they could keep the camera cheap and sell more.
> ...



If it was genuinely a 24mp prototype, we may see even more improved high iso noise in the 20mp version. There are a lot of comments posted on Scott Kelby's blog. Only George asks about the 24mp blooper, and it's unanswered by Kelby. 

Anyway, we'll see soon enough. Personally I'd prefer a lower noise, faster clearing 20mp 7DII.

-pw


----------



## coreyhkh (Oct 8, 2014)

The 7Dmkii is going to be an amazing camera!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 8, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Which begs the question...where are some 7D II RAW images?
> ...


 
You can download RAW images from Imaging resource at various ISO levels so they are out there. The jpeg images I've seen pretty much match the 70D. I downloaded a raw image, but then realized that Lightroom would not develop it, and I did not want to fool around with other software for a camera I do not intend to buy.

I try to compare resolution, color saturation, and contrast with a similar image from different models. The 1D MK IV beat the 7D MK II by about one stop as expected.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 8, 2014)

Good God you guys are dumb sometimes.

Download the full sized images, a couple have small crops but two are 5472x3648 for 19,961,856 px, a 20MP camera.

Jeez, talk about speculate rather than just think!


----------



## Sabaki (Oct 8, 2014)

I'm pretty satisfied. 

I felt he did a good job of not doing comparing the IQ between the 70D and 7Dii though but still, camera looks incredible.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 8, 2014)

jrista said:


> Looks like DIGIC 6 is doing a decent job. Not FF level quality, but definitely better than the 7D at high ISO.
> 
> The thing that was surprising to me was the amount of color noise in the boke background of the ISO 100 shot...seems like a lot of color noise for midtones.... ??? I'm hoping it's just a JPEG encoding thing, and that it wouldn't be there in the RAW.
> 
> Which begs the question...where are some 7D II RAW images? The OOC JPEGS look good for an APS-C, and that's probably primarily due to the DIGIC 6 processor...but how are the RAWs? Are the RAWs cooked by DIGIC 6 like the JPEGS? If not...is RAW IQ going to suffer?



Imaging Resource has lots of 7D2 RAW files posted.


----------



## pwp (Oct 8, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> Good God you guys are dumb sometimes.
> Download the full sized images, a couple have small crops but two are 5472x3648 for 19,961,856 px, a 20MP camera.
> Jeez, talk about speculate rather than just think!


Awww be nice. We're not all maths geniuses!

-pw


----------



## pwp (Oct 8, 2014)

whothafunk said:


> I looked at the video and I had cramps in my stomach. I just cannot take this guy seriously. I'm not even sure he knew which DSLR he is talking about (24MP), then he was like "we dared shooting at ISO800, even at ISO1000 and OH MY GOD, *jizz in his pants* OH MY GOD YOU GAIS, it's unbelievable!!". I would like to see some badly lit sports at ISO3200-ISO6400.
> Sure he posted, again "OH MY GOD YOU GAIS, 16.000 ISO of nipples", but at fast moving subjects in poorly lit conditions.. this is where it all comes down to what it can do.


So it wasn't just me...Scott Kelby is generally gushingly enthusiastic, but he was in other-worldly overdrive in this vid. He's exhausting! Hungry for any 7DII info, I skimmed through it. 

-pw


----------



## Quasimodo (Oct 8, 2014)

Leafz66 said:


> Not sure if this was posted or not. Scott Kelby did a real world test on 2 pre-production 7D Mark II cameras.
> 
> http://scottkelby.com/2014/real-world-field-report-on-the-canon-7d-mark-ii/



Thanks  I had not seen it


----------



## Gino (Oct 8, 2014)

I can't believe Scott Kelby, and his assistant, had to break out a calculator to figure out a 1.6 crop camera with the 70-200MM lens attached equals 320MM on the long end...did the guy graduate from high school?!?!

I enjoyed the video, but how can Scott give an honest opinion when he is sponsored by Canon???


----------



## candc (Oct 8, 2014)

Gino said:


> I can't believe Scott Kelby, and his assistant, had to break out a calculator to figure out a 1.6 crop camera with the 70-200MM lens attached equals 320MM on the long end...did the guy graduate from high school?!?!
> 
> I enjoyed the video, but how can Scott give an honest opinion when he is sponsored by Canon???



I think he was trying to say that the 200 with the 1.4x tc x 1.6x crop factor = 448


----------



## Maui5150 (Oct 8, 2014)

Gino said:


> I enjoyed the video, but how can Scott give an honest opinion when he is sponsored by Canon???



One, it is an opinion.

Two, he states that he was loaned the cameras to give feedback to Canon.

Three, everyone who has a slightest clue of who he is, knows he is sponsored by Canon and obviously a little biased. 

Something tells me Kelby's evaluation is a little more "Honest" than say Tony Northrup's where he only got 60% in focus with the 5D MKIII


----------



## weixing (Oct 8, 2014)

Gino said:


> I can't believe Scott Kelby, and his assistant, had to break out a calculator to figure out a 1.6 crop camera with the 70-200MM lens attached equals 320MM on the long end...did the guy graduate from high school?!?!
> 
> I enjoyed the video, but how can Scott give an honest opinion when he is sponsored by Canon???


Hi,
The first part of the video will give you the answer of your question:
http://youtu.be/jEh1C2F9D6U

Have a nice day.


----------



## miah (Oct 8, 2014)

OK, I just suffered through watching this entire video and heard one tidbit that made me rejoice. Unlike the 5D3 (which $%*@& should have this feature!) and like the latest firmware now allows on the 1DX, the 7D2 allows *exposure compensation with Auto ISO in Manual mode*. Hallelujah!


----------



## jaayres20 (Oct 8, 2014)

This is amazing to me. The camera is $1,700 and is the best (so far) 1.6 crop sensor camera available. Why is everyone hating so bad on Canon about this? And I am so tired about hearing about low ISO DR. It is a factor in so few scenarios and is sad really that it is the focus of almost every complaint about Canon now. 

Forbid there be some noise in the crop sensor. I mean the ISO 16,000 image looked very usable to me. I don't even shoot above 12,800 on my 1DX, and have very rarely ever needed to. 

I definitely liked the part where he mocked the DR question and stated that if you were to show up at a pro NFL game with a sony camera you would need to fear for your safety. 

There is a reason why a majority of pro sports shooters use Canon and it isn't because they are concerned about low ISO DR and I guarantee they can do a little better than 60% of the shots in focus.


----------



## Steve (Oct 8, 2014)

Watching this video now and there's some decent info here but some of the stuff they say is borderline retarded. Its so dumb that it just _has_ to be marketing talking points. Like, how amazed were they that crop sensors have more reach? They were acting like it was a brand new invention designed by Canon specifically for the 7DII. Or saying stuff like "these are all jpgs!!! no noise reduction at all!!! no sharpening!!!" :

e: Sounds like they fixed Auto ISO in manual. *thumbs up*


----------



## Gino (Oct 8, 2014)

weixing said:


> Gino said:
> 
> 
> > I can't believe Scott Kelby, and his assistant, had to break out a calculator to figure out a 1.6 crop camera with the 70-200MM lens attached equals 320MM on the long end...did the guy graduate from high school?!?!
> ...



Thanks....I feel bad for Scott...people get way to emotional, and aggrevated, when it comes to discussing camera gear!


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 8, 2014)

Gino said:


> people get way to emotional, and aggrevated, when it comes to discussing camera gear!



But only if our cameras have less metapixies and dynamo race than our neighbor's


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 8, 2014)

Gino said:


> I enjoyed the video, but how can Scott give an honest opinion when he is sponsored by Canon???



Integrity?
Professionalism?

Do you have evidence that Scott does not have integrity?


----------



## Sabaki (Oct 8, 2014)

Joining photography forums for me was abou improving my knowledge and interacting with like minded people. 

Seems what I didn't realize is the immense amount of negative sentiment that gets pushed on here. The constant, rabid want for suspicion and failure is becoming super stale. 

Time to move on maybe.


----------



## Gino (Oct 8, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Gino said:
> 
> 
> > I enjoyed the video, but how can Scott give an honest opinion when he is sponsored by Canon???
> ...



"honest" was poor choice of verbiage on my part, what I meant to convey is that anyone who owns a certain brand of product, Canon in Scott's case, is going to have a bias opinion in favor of the product they own...this is just human nature!

In any case, being that I own both a 1DX & 5DMIII, I like the fact that Scott is using Canon gear, because it appears that he is giving Canon some good input on how they can improve their products!


----------



## ScottKelby (Oct 8, 2014)

Hi Everybody:
Just wanted to clarify a few things from the broadcast that I saw were questions here:

(1) It's is 20.2 megapixels and always has been since I first heard of the camera. That was just a total brain-freeze on my part. I don't have a 24-megapixel version. That was just me misstating one of the specs. 
(2) The reason I didn't shoot in Raw was because I don't have any program that is updated to support the unreleased camera. No support yet for Lightroom or Camera Raw, so I had to shoot JPEGs. That being said, I shoot JPEGs for sports either way, but I would have shot some just for example purposes. 
(3) I am not sponsored by Canon. I hope to be one day, but at this point, I am not so I bought my Canon gear by selling my Nikon gear -- it was not given to me by Canon. I did get some loaner gear to try out. Nikon let me use loaner gear from time to time, too. So did Sony. Now, if I could just get Hassleblad… ;-)

High five to Forum member Sabaki. I'm with ya.  

All my best, 

-Scott Kelby


----------



## GaryJ (Oct 8, 2014)

Sabaki said:


> Joining photography forums for me was abou improving my knowledge and interacting with like minded people.
> 
> Seems what I didn't realize is the immense amount of negative sentiment that gets pushed on here. The constant, rabid want for suspicion and failure is becoming super stale.
> 
> Time to move on maybe. +1


----------



## serendipidy (Oct 8, 2014)

ScottKelby said:


> Hi Everybody:
> Just wanted to clarify a few things from the broadcast that I saw were questions here:
> 
> (1) It's is 20.2 megapixels and always has been since I first heard of the camera. That was just a total brain-freeze on my part. I don't have a 24-megapixel version. That was just me misstating one of the specs.
> ...



Thanks for the clarification. I watched the entire video. For the price, I think this is going to be a great crop DSLR and am going to upgrade my 7D. Your enthusiasm was entertaining ;D


----------



## Gino (Oct 9, 2014)

ScottKelby said:


> Hi Everybody:
> Just wanted to clarify a few things from the broadcast that I saw were questions here:
> 
> (1) It's is 20.2 megapixels and always has been since I first heard of the camera. That was just a total brain-freeze on my part. I don't have a 24-megapixel version. That was just me misstating one of the specs.
> ...



Scott,

Thanks for taking the time to post on the forum! Hopefully you'll stop by here more often!

Can you share with us anything you're hearing about the development of the 1DX MKII or 5D MKIV, and when they might be available to consumers?

Thanks


----------



## Woody (Oct 9, 2014)

I generally like the 7D2 specs. But I find the 7D body weight off-putting. Too bad, Canon could not squeeze these specs into a 70D body.


----------



## pdirestajr (Oct 9, 2014)

The 7D2 is going to sell very well. No thanks to the many threads on CR that have been bashing this camera (pre-release). Chill people, if it isn't for you move on! Any Canon product success is good for the brand's future. If you hate Canon and "their lack of innovation" there actually are other companies that make and sell cameras.


----------



## Gary W. (Oct 9, 2014)

Hey all,

If I could change ONE thing, I would make the body have the integrated grip like the 1D series. Nothing else.

Gary W.


----------



## GmwDarkroom (Oct 9, 2014)

Gary W. said:


> If I could change ONE thing, I would make the body have the integrated grip like the 1D series. Nothing else.


I was thinking this when the camera was initially announced and speculation was that it would be a crop version of a 1DX.

However since I've gotten a grip for my 60D, I love it. It's on at all times -- except when I do macro tripod work. I initially thought things would be fine, but there are situations when it got in the way for trying to manipulate the camera around. One spot in particular was when I reversed the center column for low shots. The grip added bulk and I really liked the flexibility that I could take it off and get the extra wiggle room.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 9, 2014)

Gary W. said:


> Hey all,
> 
> If I could change ONE thing, I would make the body have the integrated grip like the 1D series. Nothing else.
> 
> Gary W.



Many would hate that Gary. But I love my 1dx grip. It feels good when shooting with large lenses. Take that back, it's fun even I shoot with 40pancake ;D


----------



## candc (Oct 9, 2014)

I have a 70d and like it but for me its too small, the AF can be innacurate (especially in low light) and the buffer is too small when there is a lot of action going on and you are shooting a lot. There is nothing worse than pressing the shutter and nothing happens because the camera is busy writing to the card. The 7dii addresses these issues so I ordered one. It may be the best crop camera to come down the pipe but there is blowback because canon reps themselves said this camera was going to be "revolutionary" not "incremental". The fact is its highly evolved but not really revolutionary. I don't think there is anything new being debuted.

On the grip, I don't think there is any additional benefit from an integrated one over an add on one so its an option if you want it but not stuck with it you don't.


----------



## coreyhkh (Oct 9, 2014)

Wow so many haters what did all you people do 10 years ago when camera sucked.


----------



## FTb-n (Oct 9, 2014)

No grip. I haven't tried one and can't say that I wouldn't like it, but I love that my 5D3's are more compact, lighter, and easier to carry than with the added bulk and weight of the grip. If I shot extensively in vertical, I can see the benefit, but I find the standard grip quite comfortable in both directions. No grip was a good move. Let the customer decide if grip needs to be added.

One note about Kelby's review. Those ISO 16,000 images did look great without any _added _noise reduction. But, how much of this is the sensor and how much is the DIGIC 6 and its in-camera RAW conversion with_ in-camera_ noise reduction? This is where I wish we could have seen the RAW images.

It was interesting to note Kelby's claim that he shoots JPEGs for sports -- then to complain about the 5D3's buffer. I use my 5D3's primarily for sports and it only buffers if I burst in RAW. Just now, I tested a 54 frame burst in JPEG with no hesitation whatsoever. (I know, a minor nit.)


----------



## risc32 (Oct 9, 2014)

So it's being referred to as the 1dx light. that's not surprising, they said the same thing with the 40d and 1dmk3, and i bet the same about others as well. 
Not like i forgot, but watching this video reaffirmed to me the differences between pros and everyone else. Here Scott about losses it because he thought he lost his "lock" button. I have no idea what a lock button is,what it's for, do i even have one currently? i have no idea and i bet most of us don't either. But to Scott and guys who run like him, it's big. Then scott misspoke a few times and said something like 24mp. well, to him he probably doesn't really give a damn, as long as it's in the ballpark of what's the norm. But to some at home, that would be a pretty big thing, an extra 4million pixels? sweet!! That doesn't count for Jrista. He's on the hunt for a sign that canon is dumping money into their sensor tech, not really a few more MP. Same goes for RAW -vs- jpg. scott and his crew don't really care about RAW performance. You could squeeze out 2stops of DR/ ISO out of a RAW file and they won't care. they don't have time for that. Basically they want it to work as expected, no surprises, nail focus, have a long lasting battery and be dead reliable.
when these guys start really getting excited over it being such a great thing it is to have a 1.6 crop, my mind started to wander. really, ?! it's great! sure, if you say so.. care to swap me for your 1dx? And mom and dad don't HAVE to buy a 1dx to take photos of their kids playing sports? really? that's.....well,that's just retarded, and i'm not going to touch that one. 
all that said, i've never heard of scott kelby before this but he seems like he's probably a good guy. 

just a quick question, does the 7dmk2 have bright AF points or are we going to pretend that isn't a thing again?

one more, is anyone out there going to mention the insane awesomeness that they are claiming to do with indoor arena lighting? I'm at a loss for how little attention this is getting. it looks to be as cool as velcro laces!


----------



## risc32 (Oct 9, 2014)

FTb-n said:


> It was interesting to note Kelby's claim that he shoots JPEGs for sports -- then to complain about the 5D3's buffer. I use my 5D3's primarily for sports and it only buffers if I burst in RAW. Just now, I tested a 54 frame burst in JPEG with no hesitation whatsoever. (I know, a minor nit.)


 i caught that too, but forgot to mention it. my 5dmk3 isn't buffer limited while shooting jpgs, and it clears fast.

another, you guys looking for a smaller camera. again, that's not what scott would be looking for. lighter, sure. they would gladly take that, but they work that camera for hrs, they want it to fit their hand. full grown man hands, and work with those hands in the winter when they wear gloves. I just don't think this distinction is fully realized. basically, what scott wants and what many of us want are two different things.


----------



## Mr_EMan (Oct 9, 2014)

FTb-n said:


> It was interesting to note Kelby's claim that he shoots JPEGs for sports -- then to complain about the 5D3's buffer.



I interpreted that as he has to shoot JPEGs because he can’t convert the RAW yet.


----------



## FTb-n (Oct 9, 2014)

risc32 said:


> Not like i forgot, but watching this video reaffirmed to me the differences between pros and everyone else. Here Scott about losses it because he thought he lost his "lock" button. I have no idea what a lock button is,what it's for, do i even have one currently?



I do enjoy listening to the pros talk shop and often learn something when they do. Today, I learned how to switch the RATE button (that I never used) to a LOCK button. So, after watching this video and re-assigning my RATE button, I'll see if I can speed up my workflow by selecting images in-camera as Kelby does.

Workflow is how I was introduced to Kelby. He blogged about his method during the Olympics and I found it quite helpful.

The sports that I shoot are middle-school to high-school level and I typically shoot 400-600 images a game. This depends heavily on the talent on the court. Older kids tend to be faster and give me more opportunities, so I shoot more. I tend to depend on timing more than spray and pray. Part of this is old school habit from film. But, I learned quickly with my 7D that burst mode can give a lot of images that you're going to cull later. So, I try to time the shots and selectively burst, in part, to simplify the culling process. I also think that my success rate of capturing those moments are better with timing than spraying. Granted, with 12 FPS of the 1Dx, the spray method is may be more successful.

Kelby is used to 12 FPS with the 1Dx and seems to like using it. Plus, he's burning out a 7DII battery after only one game. I can't imagine the number of images that he must go through.

I do have to take issue with Kelby's assertion that the 5D3 isn't a sports body. It is limited to 6 FPS. But, the AF is clearly sports oriented. Most of us not shooting professional sports can find the 6 FPS quite suitable. It all depends upon the sport, the level of play, and one's dependency upon burst mode.


----------



## FTb-n (Oct 9, 2014)

Mr_EMan said:


> FTb-n said:
> 
> 
> > It was interesting to note Kelby's claim that he shoots JPEGs for sports -- then to complain about the 5D3's buffer.
> ...



He did state that he shot both the game and the wedding in JPEG because he couldn't convert the RAW yet. But, I thought he also said that he "always shoots in sports in JPEG". I assumed he does this speed up his workflow and turnaround time to get his images to his client during half-time and after the game.


----------



## miah (Oct 9, 2014)

ScottKelby said:


> Hi Everybody:
> Just wanted to clarify a few things from the broadcast that I saw were questions here:
> 
> (1) It's is 20.2 megapixels and always has been since I first heard of the camera. That was just a total brain-freeze on my part. I don't have a 24-megapixel version. That was just me misstating one of the specs.
> ...



Thanks for chiming in, Scott. To paraphrase the comedians, this forum can be a "tough crowd." I found your video and the two books of yours I own to be quite helpful and encourage you to keep at it. It seems that photographers in general and Canonites in particular (?) are eager to know as much as possible as soon as possible in the hopes that the latest technology will improve their art/work/hobby in some meaningful way. A lot of interested folks here read the Photokina press release on the 7D2 and have watched or read a few pre-release reviews such as your video. But until production cameras are released and lots of RAW images shot at a variety of ISO's are available for scrutiny, the purists here on CR will likely remain skeptical--if not downright hostile.

Personally, I see this camera as a perfect compliment to the 5D3. In addition to the ergonomics and many of its features being identical (no need to relearn or adapt when rapidly grabbing one body or the other), it offers near 1DX fps along with crop-sensor reach. And let's not downplay the price: $1799 is a surprisingly great price for this body!

My wife--who thinks you see one camera you've seen 'em all--reacted negatively when I proposed pre-ordering a 7D2 to use in concert with my 5D3. I knew I had one shot to explain why my beloved 5D needs a mate, so I offered her this simple explanation: "Honey, they're two different animals. The 5D is for subjects close and/or slow, the 7D far and/or fast." 

To which she replied, "Huh, I guess that makes sense."


----------



## Quasimodo (Oct 9, 2014)

candc said:


> On the grip, I don't think there is any additional benefit from an integrated one over an add on one so its an option if you want it but not stuck with it you don't.



Well the integrated grip lets you use the LP-4N battery which has a more power (voltage) to it, thus will enable you to gain incrimental speed on the AF of your lenses, and they also last longer. That said, given that 7D II is a pro-sumer camera, not having an integrated grip is sound (even if it will be used extensively by professionals as well as amateurs).


----------



## Eldar (Oct 9, 2014)

Regarding the extra grip, which provide double battery capacity. Does anyone know if they are using the batteries in parallel, to boost torque for faster AF speed? If they havn't, I'll drop the grip and just carry an extra battery, as I have done with my various 5D bodies.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 9, 2014)

Sabaki said:


> Joining photography forums for me was abou improving my knowledge and interacting with like minded people.
> 
> Seems what I didn't realize is the immense amount of negative sentiment that gets pushed on here. The constant, rabid want for suspicion and failure is becoming super stale.
> 
> Time to move on maybe.



There are other photography sites where actual useful posts can be found

But really, from an entertainment point of view, how can you beat CR? 

Just don't take anything here seriously and enjoy the slap fights. ;D


----------



## Quasimodo (Oct 9, 2014)

Eldar said:


> Regarding the extra grip, which provide double battery capacity. Does anyone know if they are using the batteries in parallel, to boost torque for faster AF speed? If they havn't, I'll drop the grip and just carry an extra battery, as I have done with my various 5D bodies.



I posted the very same question to another thread here a while ago, and I think it was neuro who answered that it uses the batteries sequentially, thus not paralell 

Edit: In all fairness, I asked this question unrelated to the 7D II, so it might yield another answer...


----------



## Eldar (Oct 9, 2014)

Quasimodo said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > Regarding the extra grip, which provide double battery capacity. Does anyone know if they are using the batteries in parallel, to boost torque for faster AF speed? If they havn't, I'll drop the grip and just carry an extra battery, as I have done with my various 5D bodies.
> ...


I knew they didn't for their previous models, but that would be a very strong argument to get one and from a design perspective, it is not that difficult to make a parallel version. Tesla Model-S have 7000 batteries in parallel, so Canon should be able to make 2 work :


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 9, 2014)

Quasimodo said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > Regarding the extra grip, which provide double battery capacity. Does anyone know if they are using the batteries in parallel, to boost torque for faster AF speed? If they havn't, I'll drop the grip and just carry an extra battery, as I have done with my various 5D bodies.
> ...



To be expected, Canon is quite zealous in guarding the 1dx-only features (faster af speed, af-linked spot, ..., no Magic Lantern). If they trickle down the af (5d3) & rgb metering (7d2) and don't find anything new to add to the 1d, this will only make them stick more to the exclusive features left.


----------



## Quasimodo (Oct 9, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Quasimodo said:
> 
> 
> > Eldar said:
> ...







Quote from: Eldar on Today at 07:20:48 AM

Regarding the extra grip, which provide double battery capacity. Does anyone know if they are using the batteries in parallel, to boost torque for faster AF speed? If they havn't, I'll drop the grip and just carry an extra battery, as I have done with my various 5D bodies.




I posted the very same question to another thread here a while ago, and I think it was neuro who answered that it uses the batteries sequentially, thus not paralell 

Edit: In all fairness, I asked this question unrelated to the 7D II, so it might yield another answer...Modify message 

« Last Edit: Today at 08:06:37 AM by Quasimodo »


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2014)

Quasimodo said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Quasimodo said:
> ...


Batteries are either mounted in series or in parallel.

If they were mounted in series, a pair of 9 volt batteries would give you an 18 volt battery. Since all the internal electronics is made to run off of a 9V battery, this would mean that instead of regulating from 9V down to 5V, you would now be regulating from 18V down to 5V and you would be wasting a lot of your capacity and building up more heat.... the only exception to this would be the power feed to drive the AF motors of the lenses.... and on some of the big whites they will operate faster with the higher voltage of the 1DX batteries, but certainly not at an even higher 2X LP-E6 voltage.....

Therefore they are not in series.

Mounting in parallel can either be both batteries active at the same time, or with circuitry to switch from one battery to the other once charge on the secondary battery depletes to a certain level. Most cameras do it this way. What will happen is that the camera will operate from the grip battery until it is drained, and then switch over to the internal battery. It is done in this order because the grips are removable and you can not always depend on having the grip mounted. If you did it the other way, you could end up with the scenario where you use the camera for a while, deplete the internal battery down to , say 20% left, remove the grip, and go on shooting with a ready-to-die battery. Much better to deplete the grip battery first, and if you remove it, you still have a well charged internal battery.


----------



## Quasimodo (Oct 9, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> Quasimodo said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



Thank you, this was informative


----------



## Eldar (Oct 9, 2014)

When using the grip you do not have any batteriy in the camera, but 2 in the extra grip. It would take fairly simple circuitry to run them in parallel to boost power. You could even make it programmable to select parallel or sequential. More boost would benefit the majority of my use, wheras the grip on/off would most likely never be an issue.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2014)

Eldar said:


> When using the grip you do not have any batteriy in the camera, but 2 in the extra grip. It would take fairly simple circuitry to run them in parallel to boost power. You could even make it programmable to select parallel or sequential. More boost would benefit the majority of my use, wheras the grip on/off would most likely never be an issue.



As I do a facepalm for what I said earlier.... 

You are right.... the Canon's remove the internal battery for the grip to be installed, and the grip has 2 batteries. Some cameras leave the internal battery in place, but not Canon DSLRs.. I have not verified this myself, but I was told that on the Canon grips one battery will discharge, and then the other....


----------



## Sabaki (Oct 9, 2014)

ScottKelby said:


> Hi Everybody:
> Just wanted to clarify a few things from the broadcast that I saw were questions here:
> 
> (1) It's is 20.2 megapixels and always has been since I first heard of the camera. That was just a total brain-freeze on my part. I don't have a 24-megapixel version. That was just me misstating one of the specs.
> ...



Hey Scott, thanks for the shout out. 

I've gotta question that I hope you won't mind giving your opinion on;

The image quality of the 70D vs 7D markii, is it largely similar or could you see a clear difference between the two?

Thanks buddy


----------



## DominoDude (Oct 9, 2014)

ScottKelby said:


> Hi Everybody:
> Just wanted to clarify a few things from the broadcast that I saw were questions here:
> 
> (1) It's is 20.2 megapixels and always has been since I first heard of the camera. That was just a total brain-freeze on my part. I don't have a 24-megapixel version. That was just me misstating one of the specs.
> ...



Thanks for the clarification, Scott.
It was easy to check in the video, and in your posted jpeg's, that the resolution was that of a 20 MP body, but some people didn't bother to, or didn't ask you directly.
I appreciate the focus on using the camera in this video, and showing how potent it is in the hands of someone who needs it to deliver. Also the comparisons to the "big brother" made for easy use of phrases like "nearly as good", "almost the quality of" and similar. Any comparisons to the minor brothers could have meant you had to bring up flaws in them to make the 7D Mark II look better; thus leading to later reviews that could have the 7D Mark II be torn apart for not being as good as stated or expected.

Looking forward to more from you and your KelbyOne team!


----------



## sgs8r (Oct 9, 2014)

A typical Kelby review full of breathless enthusiasm (and a lot of time wasted by RC's generally superfluous comments). A few comments:

1. Without experience with the original 7D, some context is lost. One of the main complaints is that without noise improvement, Canon could have added the 5D3 AF to the 7D and come out with this camera 2 years ago.

2. Yes the 1.6 factor may allow HS sports shooters to get by without a $10k sports lens (not sure what they are thinking of for $5k), but without significant high ISO improvement over the 7D, they will still need to put their camera away when the sun goes down. I'm happy with my 7D up to 1600, but that's not enough to shoot night games under typical HS lights. After reading the 7D2 reports, I got a 5D3 instead. Now I use the my 7D in bright light and the 5D3 at night.

3. If you are shooting jpg, some NR and sharpening is already baked in! To repeatedly say "I don't do any NR" or "this is without any NR or sharpening" is misleading. And most cameras slow way down in raw after the buffer is full. This is mostly the camera-card interface. In jpg the 5D3 bursts pretty well (though the 7D2 can supposedly do 10 fps until the card is full.

4. I thought the wedding photos were a little soft and lacking in detail. But this may partly be the video conversion/compression.

5. His complaints were a joke. Can't lock images without a CFunc change? Showing only starred images in Photo Mechanic? Starring (via the rate button) and locking seem equivalent to me. LR doesn't even have locking, but it will pick up stars from PM. And it takes just a click or two to show the starred images in PM. It's almost like complaining that the Info button is labelled "info" instead of "data". And I always have the center button (inside the wheel) set to "Playback" so I just hit the button, then scroll with my thumb. Seems pretty fast to me. These complaints seem more intended as indirect praise ("Well, if that's the worst thing about the camera then it must be awesome!").

This may seem a bit harsh. I like Scott and enjoy a lot of his stuff. But I get tired of the excessive hype ("This will CHANGE the way you think about photography!"). And a lot seems targeted at noobs and doesn't hold up so well for more experienced photographers. Admittedly, noobs are really where the $ is, so who cares what I (or CR) think. We aren't his target demographic.


----------



## OrangeCrush (Oct 19, 2014)

I know this may be a stretch but how likely would it be for the bodies that Scott tested to not be like the bodies that will be released? I forget the key words that were used something like AS Tested...how likely Canon could/would give him a couple of bodies that have cleaner out put than the ones that come off the production line?


----------



## 2n10 (Oct 19, 2014)

OrangeCrush said:


> I know this may be a stretch but how likely would it be for the bodies that Scott tested to not be like the bodies that will be released? I forget the key words that were used something like AS Tested...how likely Canon could/would give him a couple of bodies that have cleaner out put than the ones that come off the production line?



He received a beta camera so it wasn't off of the production line. As to cherry picked for excellence...?


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 19, 2014)

OrangeCrush said:


> I know this may be a stretch but how likely would it be for the bodies that Scott tested to not be like the bodies that will be released? I forget the key words that were used something like AS Tested...how likely Canon could/would give him a couple of bodies that have cleaner out put than the ones that come off the production line?



Zero.

In fact the preproduction versions output is not normally not as good as the final production versions. They will keep playing with the code until the last possible minute, which is why a 'first' version is often FW 1.+.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 19, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> OrangeCrush said:
> 
> 
> > I know this may be a stretch but how likely would it be for the bodies that Scott tested to not be like the bodies that will be released? I forget the key words that were used something like AS Tested...how likely Canon could/would give him a couple of bodies that have cleaner out put than the ones that come off the production line?
> ...



A firmware update! Inconceivable! Inconceivable! This has never happened before!
EOS-1D X Firmware Version 2.0.3
EOS 5D Mark III Firmware Version 1.2.3
EOS 6D Firmware Version 1.1.4
EOS 7D Firmware Version 2.0.5
EOS 60D/60Da Firmware Version 1.1.1
EOS REBEL T5i / EOS 700D Firmware Version 1.1.3
EOS REBEL T3i / EOS 600D Firmware Version 1.0.2
EOS REBEL T3 / EOS 1100D Firmware Version 1.0.5

oh wait.... it has happened.... and this leads us to a more important question.... how come there hasn't been an update for the 70D post-release?


----------

