# Canon EOS 7D Mark II in 2014 [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 12, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href=""></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Canon EOS 7D Mark II

</strong>The Canon EOS 7D will finally get replaced in the first half of 2014. The exact announcement and availability dates are unknown at this time, but we’re told it will come in the first half of 2014.</p>
<p>The new camera will be a “pro APS-C” camera and be priced around the $2000 USD mark. It will have a new sensor, as well as a variation of a new autofocus system that it will share with a new EOS-1 body.</p>
<p>Wifi, GPS and a the biggest LCD screen in Canon’s lineup will appear on the camera.</p>
<p>More to come….</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Eldar (Nov 12, 2013)

Sounds promising


----------



## Ruined (Nov 12, 2013)

Hopefully it will be announced early on in 2014 so it will be cheaper by the holidays


----------



## trulandphoto (Nov 12, 2013)

This could be a body I would purchase. I migrated from a 1DIII to a 7D for sports for the extra megapixels and greater crop so my 70-200 f/2.8 would suffice for field sports. 

I do miss the pro body of the 1DIII and would love a good APS-C sensor in the same body.


----------



## WPJ (Nov 12, 2013)

1st half.......what first half, calendar or physical. And will they deliver it before 2015?


----------



## DaveMiko (Nov 12, 2013)

This is the next camera I'm going to buy, the day it becomes available. 8)


----------



## Click (Nov 12, 2013)

Looking forward to that


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 12, 2013)

Hey Canon! If you want a beta-tester for this camera I volunteer!

I think/hope that this camera will be in 2014 what the 7D was in 2009....

EDIT> and for some mysterious reason, a "slim your wallet" advertisement appeared right after I posted


----------



## aznpoet (Nov 12, 2013)

Hooray!! Nikon will soon follow with D400 ...


----------



## dhr90 (Nov 12, 2013)

Time for everyone to repost what they hope to be in it from the other threads? 

I won't be getting it on release (only just got my 7D), but it will be very interesting to see the specs and how it performs!


----------



## ScottyP (Nov 12, 2013)

So the AF will get an upgrade. Thats good but not revolutionary. I Hope there is a meaningful upgrade in high ISO performance. Second choice if that's not possible would be a meaningful jump in megapixels if it could be done without impairing high ISO performance. 

If neither of these, then what? Make it a 1.8x Or 2x "super crop"? That would turn a 70-200 into a pretty potent field sports lens. (only half joking here)


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 12, 2013)

ok ok we know it's going to come out.... but WHAT ABOUT DR, ISO, Photo only features, NOISE, IQ, Build............


----------



## Ruined (Nov 12, 2013)

If this and the 5D4 both come out next year it will be one expensive year! :'(


----------



## Lee Jay (Nov 12, 2013)

Eldar said:


> Sounds promising



Yeah...that.


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 12, 2013)

Ruined said:


> If this and the 5D4 both come out next year it will be one expensive year! :'(



Highly doubt the 5d4 will come out next year


----------



## Lee Jay (Nov 12, 2013)

Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.


----------



## scottkinfw (Nov 12, 2013)

This could be very exciting.

Hoping for great iq.

sek


----------



## docsmith (Nov 12, 2013)

I'll go a different angle on this, price seems low for true "pro" level. So I expect something, besides APS-C to be separating the 7DII from 5DIII/1DX. Also, if true Pro level, canon needs to upgrade a general purpose zoom. I say that as a former owner of the 15-85, which was a great lens. But they need a EFs general purpose zoom with weather sealing and better build quality. 

That said, I'll consider buying the 7DII, depending on the specs and actual performance.


----------



## distant.star (Nov 12, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.



I agree completely.


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 12, 2013)

docsmith said:


> I'll go a different angle on this, price seems low for true "pro" level. So I expect something, besides APS-C to be separating the 7DII from 5DIII/1DX. Also, if true Pro level, canon needs to upgrade a general purpose zoom. I say that as a former owner of the 15-85, which was a great lens. But they need a EFs general purpose zoom with weather sealing and better build quality.
> 
> That said, I'll consider buying the 7DII, depending on the specs and actual performance.



The original 7D was originally billed by canon as a Pro level APS-C... heck at the time had better AF than the 5d2... Could be the same here...


----------



## dufflover (Nov 12, 2013)

haha /cue all the posters still waiting for that real 7D upgrade in the sensor (and other accuracy tweaks, that should be said) that bring it up to match the competition. Yes that includes me.

And yes I'm also of the preference of no-built in grip. That "feature" is almost as divisive as push-pull from what I've seen people discuss. For me it's just the size/shape of a gripped body won't well for my bags and packing (and I've barely touched the cheap grip I bought for my 60D to try it out).

7D with new better sensor, more accurate/refined (you'd think) AF, and flippy screen too (good for shooting) low. Kewl ...

But if there's one thing learnt in the last 4 years ... I'LL BELIEVE IT WHEN I CAN SEE IT :


----------



## gmrza (Nov 12, 2013)

awinphoto said:


> The original 7D was originally billed by canon as a Pro level APS-C... heck at the time had better AF than the 5d2... Could be the same here...



At this point, unfortunately, I am not expecting big strides in IQ between the 7D and 7DII. If recent releases are anything to go by, I think we should lower our expectations.

Given that the 7D's weather sealing and AF were already better than the 5DII, I expect the likely level of improvement to the 7DII will be smaller than the difference between the 5DII and 5DIII. The difference between 19pt AF and 63pt AF is much smaller than the difference between 9pt AF and 63pt AF.

As a result I expect to see less reason to move from a 7D to a 7DII than from a 5DII to a 5DIII.

Those people who had a 7D and 5DII and moved to a 5DIII will also have less reason to buy a 7DII, so unless Canon does something radical (for instance to court laggard 1DIV users who can't see the need for a 1DX) I don't see the 7DII being as successful as the 7D.


----------



## Lee Jay (Nov 12, 2013)

docsmith said:


> I'll go a different angle on this, price seems low for true "pro" level. So I expect something, besides APS-C to be separating the 7DII from 5DIII/1DX. Also, if true Pro level, canon needs to upgrade a general purpose zoom. I say that as a former owner of the 15-85, which was a great lens. But they need a EFs general purpose zoom with weather sealing and better build quality.



EF-s 15-60/2.8 IS with L build quality would be my choice.


----------



## KAS (Nov 12, 2013)

If true, I'll just have to sell all my nikon gear and jump ship...


----------



## WPJ (Nov 12, 2013)

DaveMiko said:


> This is the next camera I'm going to buy, the day it becomes available. 8)



I might have to order 2, and sell my 2 7D's


----------



## cheeseheadsaint (Nov 12, 2013)

pro crop sensor camera(7Dmkii) vs entry full sensor(6D).. ack now I'm indecisive again. Will the 6D iso performance be still better than the 7Dmkii?


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 12, 2013)

gmrza said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > The original 7D was originally billed by canon as a Pro level APS-C... heck at the time had better AF than the 5d2... Could be the same here...
> ...



Part of the 7D's success was that at that time, the closest thing to the nikon D300 was the 50D and that was a failure in comparison by most measuring sticks... Then canon came out with their trump card, almost out of nowhere that had had as good if not better everything... From IQ (although debatable), video, ergonomics, FPS, AF cross points, etc... Even after nikon came out with the D300S, the 7D still came out smelling like a rose.... Now nikon has gone out in full force with their 5100 and anticipated D400, this will have tougher competition and may not be the reigning king like it was 3-4 years ago. Wifi would be a cool feature, but it isn't new and shiny, the 6D and so on had that... 63 point AF, well that obviously wont be something new... HDR, Video, etc... most features has been implemented before... As far as ground breaking stuff, i dont know if there would really be any real jaw dropping features unless maybe it does 4k video. I for one wouldn't want a flippy out screen, but touch screen with that dual pixel sensor may be nice to have... I think even if all they did was slighly raise FPS to 10-12, like what most people are expecting, cleaner ISO and IQ and sharper/cleaner video with less jello, that would be enough for most people with the original 7D to plunk down $2k.


----------



## WPJ (Nov 12, 2013)

dufflover said:


> And yes I'm also of the preference of no-built in grip. That "feature" is almost as divisive as push-pull from what I've seen people discuss. For me it's just the size/shape of a gripped body won't well for my bags and packing (and I've barely touched the cheap grip I bought for my 60D to try it out).



Personal preference I guess, I have only taken my grips off my 2 7D'd a few times to clean them and upgrade there firmware. If,it was,built in and takes the same battery as the 7D, sweet.


----------



## jrista (Nov 12, 2013)

Wow. Finally a CR2 for the 7D II. Sounds about what I expected....~$2000 price tag, and true high end, professional features. This actually has me getting excited again about a Canon camera release...haven't felt this way since the 1D X was announced.

I guess my one single question is: New 180nm (or smaller) CMOS fab process for a sensor that uses modern pixels and on-die parallel ADC? 

I really don't want another camera with Canon's epically DEAD 500nm sensor process... Even if it is damn good...I really expect better sensor IQ, across the board (low ISO and high) now that most of Canon's competitors offer it...


----------



## unfocused (Nov 12, 2013)

Doesn't surprise me since I just bought a 5DIII. 



No regrets though. If it has improved autofocus and some marginal improvement in ISO performance it will eventually find it's way into my camera bag.

At $2,000 I am sure it won't be a gripped body. I still say more of a 5DIII in APS-C format. 

What bothers me about this rumor though is that I don't believe this: "...a new EOS-1 body."

I just don't see Canon introducing a new EOS-1 body when the 1Dx was only released in 2011. There is no competitive reason for Canon to replace the 1Dx since Nikon's D4 pretty much mirrors the 1Dx and there's no indication that Nikon will be replacing it anytime soon. And, while I don't get all caught up in naming conventions, I can't imagine Canon dropping its "X" designation for 1 series cameras, nor can I imagine that the market would support both a 1Dx and another 1 series body. 

I want to believe this rumor, but the EOS-1 statement throws it all into doubt in my view. 



Well, let me amend that slightly and go back to an old idea I've had before. A 7DII that mirrors the 5DIII and a 7Dx that is targeted to pro-sports photographers who miss the 1.3 crop. Should be possible to develop a APS-C sensor today that has the same or better image quality and low-light performance of the last generation of APS-H sensor.

Both could share the same sensor, while the "x" version's autofocus would be to the 7DII as the 1Dx is to the 5DIII. Close but not quite the same. Put the "x" version in a fully weather sealed, gripped pro-style body and it could be a winner with professional sports shooters.


----------



## RGF (Nov 12, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.



Non removable grip does not matter to me if the camera was a mini-1Dx. I want similar controls to 1Dx, same AF, and IQ. Of course the S/N will limit the ISO, perhaps to 2 stops less than 1Dx.

But I am afraid for $2,000 the camera will not have the quality (build and IQ) as 1Dx


----------



## RGF (Nov 12, 2013)

unfocused said:


> What bothers me about this rumor though is that I don't believe this: "...a new EOS-1 body."



New 1D could be high MP body


----------



## Brymills (Nov 12, 2013)

I went from a 7D to a 5D 3, and mostly do sport stuff. Very occasionally I miss the higher FPS of the 7D. What I miss most is the buffer depth to write raw + jpeg whilst using the highest FPS of the 5D 3. But the IQ of the 5D 3 surpasses the 7D by a significant margin - and at higher ISOs by a very significant margin. I'd go back to a 7D in heartbeat if it married the FPS of the 7D - or slightly higher with the IQ of the 5D 3, and as a bonus, the AF of the 1DX. Not bothered about a gripped body, not bothered about articulated screens. Not bothered about dual card slots either to be honest - not unless it's dual CF.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Nov 12, 2013)

jrista said:


> I guess my one single question is: New 180nm (or smaller) CMOS fab process for a sensor that uses modern pixels and on-die parallel ADC?



modern pixels.....? it´s called photosites. 

and yes i too hope they produce the sensor in a new fab process.
not that the actuall canon sensors are bad.
but i guess a switch to 180nm could bring some IQ gain... and more important.. it should shut down the whiners for 3 hours.


----------



## dufflover (Nov 12, 2013)

7D fps/features + 5D3 IQ = 1D-X so I doubt you'll get that in the 7D2 

Will be very happy to be wrong if Canon do it to try and leap frog the competition with some crazy new sensor but I agree with other posters the track record says no


----------



## candc (Nov 12, 2013)

i have enough confidence in it being a great camera that i would preorder it now without even knowing the specs


----------



## RichM (Nov 12, 2013)

candc said:


> i have enough confidence in it being a great camera that i would preorder it now without even knowing the specs



I'm not quite sure I agree with the above, but.... I'm very excited about the potential for a 7d2. I shoot a lot of sports, and own both the 5d3 and 7d, and tend to pick up the 7d and 300/f4 for field sports, with the 5d3 and 70-200/2.8 as the second setup. The 8fps vs. 6fps difference is noticeable. I've been yearning for the 7d2, assuming better high ISO performance, and slight improvements in AF, IQ etc all in an APS-C format.


----------



## pwp (Nov 13, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.


Maybe for you. It's the complete opposite for me. I'll take the built in, fully integrated grip.

Part of the reason the ergonomics of 1-Series bodies is so brilliantly refined is that it's a totally integrated package. On a body with a bolt-on grip, there are inevitable and very real functional design compromises. I confront these differences on a daily basis with my gripped 5D3 & 1D MkIV.

Hopefully todays CR post is not just another in the long line of 7D2 apparitions. Eventually a real camera will emerge from the smoke and mirrors.

-pw


----------



## candc (Nov 13, 2013)

This is a camera that canon is going to do its best to make good, not just to appeal to the widest audience. You can pretty well bet it will have at least a stop better than 70d iso performance, 2 digic processors, a nice size for big telephoto lens build with good weather sealing, probably 24 mp,and a really good AF system. Probably no floppy screen. 

The people that want this camera want a mini 1dx and canon knows it.


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Nov 13, 2013)

I'm still loving my 5D3 and just keep my 7D around for backup. The difference in sensor noise is so apparent in post processing, that I really don't care to use the 7D unless I'm forced to. It's a nice handling camera, so I feel kinda bad about that.

When the 7D2 comes out, I will withhold judgement until there are many reviews addressing image quality/noise/higher ISO performance. There will have to be a big improvement to attract my $$.


----------



## thfifthcrouch (Nov 13, 2013)

This is not a camera for the full frame pixel peeping connoisseur. If your worried about razor thin depth of focus, noise at 6400 iso or any of that sort of thing, this is not your camera. It simply can't be. This will be amazing for the wild life or birder who wants that extra reach with a multitude of tools to get you there. It will produce amazing pics at ISOs up to 800 (which if you come from film is amazing). It will do fine over that for small prints or such that you want to post on facebook and just like every crop frame. All that said I love birding and it's mine, all mine. ;D


----------



## eml58 (Nov 13, 2013)

RGF said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > What bothers me about this rumor though is that I don't believe this: "...a new EOS-1 body."
> ...



That would be my Guess as well, also my hope.

But why Canon would produce a high MP Camera in a 1 D Body, and develop a separate focus system to the existing 61 point in the 5DMK III & 1Dx ?? beats me.

I could see a 39 (pick a number) point system going into the 7D2, along with a better sensor (70D ?? Type), some better weather sealing, GPS etc, but you can't get away from the $$$, if the 7D2 is a 2k Camera Body, your going to get 2k value, those hoping for a 1Dx in a non 1 series body may be disappointed, again.

But if it had better IQ than the 1DMK IV, then it does become an interesting Body as a back up for the 1Dx in wildlife, the 1.6 sensor with real IQ would be interesting.


----------



## Lee Jay (Nov 13, 2013)

pwp said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.
> ...



Part of the reason for my post is that I find the ergonomics of the 1-Series worse than any Canon body aside from perhaps the M. They're too large and they're unnecessarily heavy. They're simply unusable for me. I'll take my 5D over a 1-series every day. In fact, if you give me a 1Dx for free, I'll put it in the basement along with my VCR.


----------



## candc (Nov 13, 2013)

eml58 said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



I don't think you will see an integrated grip like the 1 series, that would drive the price up too much but weather sealing is cheap to include, they just don't on what they consider "consumer grade" its smart marketing. I have a 70d and its fine at iso 1600 in the shadows higher in decent light is fine too. Bump that up 1 step and your in business. 

Canon execs said this camera would offer more than incremental evolution, let's hope they come through.


----------



## Otara (Nov 13, 2013)

Its less pixel peeping and more cropping for me.

With both the tamron biglens update and the 7d2 appearing, it will either be very exciting or time to accept I have to accept the limitations of what I can achieve without relying on technology to help it further.

If they could make sure it fits my 7d underwater housing too that would be great . yes I know I'm dreaming.

Otara


----------



## iam2nd (Nov 13, 2013)

Eagerly awaiting. I hope that 2014 is a year full of exciting, innovative DSLR body and lens releases from Canon.


----------



## Tom W (Nov 13, 2013)

Looking forward to a new 7. I sold my 7D a few months back, since I wasn't really using it any more (got the 5D3). Certainly, pixel density is my friend, if they're clean pixels. And if they are, I'm all over it like flies on 'you-know-what'.


----------



## mdmphoto (Nov 13, 2013)

I moved up to a 6D this past Spring for improved IQ, low noise, and high iso. I love it, but I sorely miss the af and fps of my 7D; though I still use it, I find the 6D comes in more handy for my night shooting and indoor event shots. Barring some unanticipated bad thing, I will absolutely be adding the 7D II as soon as it's available.


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 13, 2013)

7D2

+ 22 MP (70D sensor)
+ 10 fps
+ 1 CF slot
+ pop up flash
+ 61 AF points
+ Digic 6
+ GPS built-in

:


----------



## Woody (Nov 13, 2013)

Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR..... ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Ruined (Nov 13, 2013)

mdmphoto said:


> I moved up to a 6D this past Spring for improved IQ, low noise, and high iso. I love it, but I sorely miss the af and fps of my 7D; though I still use it, I find the 6D comes in more handy for my night shooting and indoor event shots. Barring some unanticipated bad thing, I will absolutely be adding the 7D II as soon as it's available.



Actually, the 6D and 7D2 should be a pretty excellent combo!


----------



## Ruined (Nov 13, 2013)

I hope this has a touchscreen for pinch to zoom during preview and liveview autofocus. Menu navigation I could care less about.


----------



## KanonKaz (Nov 13, 2013)

So will the Pro APS-C have a crop factor of 1.6 like that of a Rebel and the 7D or 1.3 like the Canon Mark IV?

Also. Would it be better to buy the Canon Mark IV or wait for the 7D Mark II???

Thanks!


----------



## pwp (Nov 13, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> pwp said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...


Really? Seriously? Hmmm....OK

-pw


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 13, 2013)

KanonKaz said:


> So will the Pro APS-C have a crop factor of 1.6 like that of a Rebel and the 7D or 1.3 like the Canon Mark IV?
> 
> Also. Would it be better to buy the Canon Mark IV or wait for the 7D Mark II???
> 
> Thanks!



The 1.3X crop factor is dead! It came about when the yields were so low on FF sensor that a practical alternative was needed... The yields are high enough now that it is not needed.

A 1.3X crop would not work with APS-C lenses so you would need FF lenses only.... so why not go FF? What would be the use of a crop camera that can't use any of the current crop lenses?


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Nov 13, 2013)

pwp said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > pwp said:
> ...



Or you could donate it to one of us who do prefer it. I prefer the grip, just a minor annoyance with the somewhat cumbersome traditional grips they've made so far. If they redesign it to make the grip area smaller than at least half it's size now, we could very well all have the compromise we've been waiting for. With today's technology I'm sure they could redesign the battery bay to be smaller and carry a thinner battery that equals the power of about two LP-E6s and a slightly better voltage to drive the AF better than it's driven on the 5D mark III but not as good as the 1D-X. Since it will most likely be a crop body with lower ISO performance, I don't feel that the 5D Mark III would be cannibalized in sales. That design would put the vertical shutter button closer to the thumb wheel and AF selector button as well. It would fit the 1D-X nickname that's been floating around. I'd definitely pay 2k for that.


----------



## pwp (Nov 13, 2013)

KanonKaz said:


> So will the Pro APS-C have a crop factor of 1.6 like that of a Rebel and the 7D or 1.3 like the Canon Mark IV?
> Also. Would it be better to buy the Canon Mark IV or wait for the 7D Mark II???


I'd be astounded if it shipped with anything other than an APS-C sensor. There is no final, official 7DII specifications list, so everything on this thread is either speculation or comment. Besides, if it were x1.3 crop, it would be correctly described as APS-H not APS-C.

1D4 vs 7DII? Who knows? The 1D4 is an awesome camera that ticks a lot of boxes, but there is the reality that it's now getting pretty old, being announced back in October 2009. Depending on the final specs, the 7DII could pull ahead of the 1D4 despite being less durable in the long term, but at only $2k, who cares?

FYI, check this chart to see that the 7D is the longest running Cannon DSLR.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canon_EOS_digital_cameras

-pw


----------



## KanonKaz (Nov 13, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> KanonKaz said:
> 
> 
> > So will the Pro APS-C have a crop factor of 1.6 like that of a Rebel and the 7D or 1.3 like the Canon Mark IV?
> ...



Off the top of my head. I would say I'd like a 1.3 over a smaller sensor size in the 1.6. Image quality is definitely better on the 1.3 over the 1.6. I currently have the 5D Mark III, and while I like the full frame sensor on the camera, I'd rather have my 300 2.8 on a 1.3 sensor camera which yields a 390 2.8. Great length for most sports shooting. And, much sharper than the 1.4 ext on the lens on the 5D Mark III. Of course, I'd like having the frame per second speed of the Mark IV and the 7D Mark II over my 5D Mark III as well as better auto focus. I don't own any APS-C lenses. I shoot with the 16-35, 70-200 and a 300 2.8.


----------



## Etienne (Nov 13, 2013)

drmikeinpdx said:


> I'm still loving my 5D3 and just keep my 7D around for backup. The difference in sensor noise is so apparent in post processing, that I really don't care to use the 7D unless I'm forced to. It's a nice handling camera, so I feel kinda bad about that.
> 
> When the 7D2 comes out, I will withhold judgement until there are many reviews addressing image quality/noise/higher ISO performance. There will have to be a big improvement to attract my $$.



+1


----------



## Etienne (Nov 13, 2013)

thfifthcrouch said:


> This is not a camera for the full frame pixel peeping connoisseur. If your worried about razor thin depth of focus, noise at 6400 iso or any of that sort of thing, this is not your camera. It simply can't be. This will be amazing for the wild life or birder who wants that extra reach with a multitude of tools to get you there. It will produce amazing pics at ISOs up to 800 (which if you come from film is amazing). It will do fine over that for small prints or such that you want to post on facebook and just like every crop frame. All that said I love birding and it's mine, all mine. ;D



Canon was able to do amazing high ISO performance in the C100, and C300, which are basically APS-C, so they could do it in the 7DII


----------



## nonac (Nov 13, 2013)

WPJ said:


> 1st half.......what first half, calendar or physical. And will they deliver it before 2015?



Sorry, but as an accountant I had to correct this. It is a fiscal year, not a physical year. How do you even know their fiscal year is different from the calendar year, maybe it's the same?


----------



## KAS (Nov 13, 2013)

nonac said:


> WPJ said:
> 
> 
> > 1st half.......what first half, calendar or physical. And will they deliver it before 2015?
> ...



Fiscal year = calendar year for Canon.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 13, 2013)

Eldar said:


> Sounds promising


*INDEED!*


----------



## Canon 14-24 (Nov 13, 2013)

Sounds like a camera to showcase along with a brand spanking new 100-400 II or 70-400 IS L !


----------



## Sabaki (Nov 13, 2013)

I really want this camera. 

But I really want to use ISO 800 without having to do noise reduction during post. 

I'm not expecting images as clean as full frame. From what I've read, that's physically impossible. 

But would love to remotely trigger my 600EX-RT from the body too. 

I also think the 7D II should have two versions, one with battery grip and one without. I love my battery grip on my 500D


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 13, 2013)

jrista said:


> Wow. Finally a CR2 for the 7D II. Sounds about what I expected....~$2000 price tag, and true high end, professional features. This actually has me getting excited again about a Canon camera release...haven't felt this way since the 1D X was announced.
> 
> I guess my one single question is: New 180nm (or smaller) CMOS fab process for a sensor that uses modern pixels and on-die parallel ADC?
> 
> I really don't want another camera with Canon's epically DEAD 500nm sensor process... Even if it is damn good...I really expect better sensor IQ, across the board (low ISO and high) now that most of Canon's competitors offer it...



Yeah I do hope it uses a truly new sensor and not the same old same old otherwise that won't bode well that Canon cares about ISO100-400 image quality at all. At this point I'm so thirsting for more DR I've prioritized the A7R over the 7D2.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 13, 2013)

candc said:


> This is a camera that canon is going to do its best to make good, not just to appeal to the widest audience. You can pretty well bet it will have at least a stop better than 70d iso performance, 2 digic processors, a nice size for big telephoto lens build with good weather sealing, probably 24 mp,and a really good AF system. Probably no floppy screen.
> 
> The people that want this camera want a mini 1dx and canon knows it.



A stop better than the 70D for mid-tone SNR would be awfully tricky. People forget how efficient for bayer the current cams are already.


----------



## rbr (Nov 13, 2013)

The image quality better be MUCH better than the current 7D or else no one will take it seriously. IMO Canon should go back to making APS-C cameras since there is a day and night difference in the quality between a 1.3 and a 1.6x crop factor. I owned a 7D for a short while. No thanks, I won't waste any more money on one again. I'll stick with full frame and my trusty 1D4's.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 13, 2013)

Canon 14-24 said:


> Sounds like a camera to showcase along with a brand spanking new 100-400 II


That would be AWESOME! and I'd definitely get them.


----------



## Richard8971 (Nov 13, 2013)

It's hard to get excited about something that hasn't been announced yet. Anything said here is 100% speculation as to what it might be. Until such time that Canon decides to release a 7D replacement, my current 7 is doing one hell of a job getting the action wildlife photographs I want and more.

That being said, ANY 7D replacement would have to be one hell of a camera to make me want to upgrade, I mean at 8fps @ 18mp is really nothing to complain about, especially for as low as you can get the 7D body now. 

I have shot with 5D2's, 5D3's, 50D's 40D's... etc... and the 7D is a very hard camera to beat in terms of speed. As a wildlife photographer, my needs are different than someone who shoots a lot of stills, where a FF camera would be ideal. I love the crop factor and the 8fps are brutal in capturing what I want.

Are there faster cameras out there? Yup, 2 come to mind, the 1DX ($6799.99) and the 1D4 (used, about $3400.00), both of which still command a hefty price tag. 7D's are cheap if you get one on sale, even better if you get a refurbished unit from Canon.

When I can get a new 7D for $1500.00 now or wait for an even better sale (I've seen them as low as $1300.00 new), spending $3400.00 for a 5D3 or $3600.00 for a 1D4 or even 7 grand for the 1DX, it doesn't add up. Again, if you need (or just really want) a FF (I.E 1DX), then go for it, who am I to tell you not to?

The 7 works for me and is a very capable camera. Again, it's just hard to get worked up over something that hasn't even been announced yet.

My worthless 2 cents. 

D


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 13, 2013)

Etienne said:


> thfifthcrouch said:
> 
> 
> > This is not a camera for the full frame pixel peeping connoisseur. If your worried about razor thin depth of focus, noise at 6400 iso or any of that sort of thing, this is not your camera. It simply can't be. This will be amazing for the wild life or birder who wants that extra reach with a multitude of tools to get you there. It will produce amazing pics at ISOs up to 800 (which if you come from film is amazing). It will do fine over that for small prints or such that you want to post on facebook and just like every crop frame. All that said I love birding and it's mine, all mine. ;D
> ...



They are also basically 8MP downscaled to 2MP though.


----------



## sanj (Nov 13, 2013)

distant.star said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.
> ...



I disagree completely.


----------



## sanj (Nov 13, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> pwp said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



That would not be a very nice thing to do. Just inbox me and I come to collect it. Will give you a non grip camera in exchange. 
Btw the 1dx is simply usable to me.


----------



## Eldar (Nov 13, 2013)

sanj said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > pwp said:
> ...


----------



## TrabimanUK (Nov 13, 2013)

First half (hopefully calendar) 2014 sounds good - chance of a slight reduction by Q3 2014.

Modified (downgraded?) version of new 1D autofocus system? At least it's a nod towards the imprtance of the 7D2 in the lineup, as I was expecting a cut-and-shut older system. Saying that, does that make the 7D2 the guinea pig for the new 1D?

Oh well, hopefully less than 6 months to go


----------



## jrista (Nov 13, 2013)

sanj said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



I don't see it happening, whether I agree or disagree. Integrated grip is one of the big selling points of the 1-series, and I can't imagine the 7-series getting it before the 5-series.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 13, 2013)

WPJ said:


> 1st half.......what first half, calendar or physical. And will they deliver it before 2015?



"First half" means annoncement on May 31st, 23:59:59 :-> ... delivery will take quite a while looking at how many people are waiting for this.

The one question of course is the "new sensor", and looking at Canon's latest performance this doesn't mean much ... think of it: $2000 with all possible gimmicks and comforts Canon can add is still rather cheap if this would be a *real* challenge to 5d3/ff quality, so I don't expect this to be the famed "next sensor generation".


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 13, 2013)

jrista said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > distant.star said:
> ...



Just out of interest, what percentage of your shots are shot in portrait orientation?


----------



## greger (Nov 13, 2013)

Here we go again, another 7Dll announcement. I hope it has better ISO 3200 quality performance than the 7D. I was 
disappointed with the results from this past weekend. Overcast lighting performance was not as good as the sunny days of
Summer. I will be interested in reading about it but might not be able to buy it as I may spend my money on software.
I need a PS replacement and noise reduction software.


----------



## jrista (Nov 13, 2013)

StudentOfLight said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...



Oh, maybe 15-20%. Mostly landscapes, and of those, mostly waterscapes. I do have some portrait wildlife and bird shots, though...sometimes it's the only way to frame nicely. With the 600mm f/4 lens, it is pretty easy to flip to portrait when mounted in a tripod, as the tripod ring has two preset "notches" for landscape and portrait that can be selected simply by loosening the tripod ring tightening knob. I only really display my portrait shots in print form, though...the vertical orientation just doesn't fit the web well most of the time. 

I should point out, I do have a battery grip attached to my 7D most of the time. It isn't as good as a fully integrated grip, it has an undue amount of flex that I am wary of...but it does help when shooting portrait with the 600/4 or 300/2.8 on a tripod (not to mention the day-long battery life it offers, too.)


----------



## M.ST (Nov 13, 2013)

RE to: Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.

The preseries 7D Mark II don´t have a built-in non-removable grip.


----------



## sanj (Nov 13, 2013)

For photographers who want a cost effective crop camera there is the 70D. I am wishing for a 'mini 1dx'. Will be perfect second camera along with my 1dx for 'good light' wildlife work. And I hope the 7d2 has better IQ than version I starting from ISO 100 itself to 1600. Hope......


----------



## Lee Jay (Nov 13, 2013)

M.ST said:


> RE to: Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.
> 
> The preseries 7D Mark II don´t have a built-in non-removable grip.



Great!


----------



## thfifthcrouch (Nov 13, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > thfifthcrouch said:
> ...



The reason I say this is that a full frame sensor is 2.6 times larger then a crop frame. That is 2.6 times or 1.15 stops more light to work with. So full frame will always be the better performer. But I think the crop frame is a different way of shooting and requires a different lens strategy. Bird pictures no matter how long a lens you have will always require cropping unless your right on top of them which seldom happens. They also require detail that intensely packed pixels on the crop frame provide, so crop is IMHO better for that type of application.
Also I think that lens' can be designed at least economically that can take advantage of the smaller frame size. The example here is the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. All looks of that piece of glass seems to be outstanding and kinda evens (though not completely) the crop full frame thing. Cheers!


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Nov 13, 2013)

I only have two wishes, a sensor that doesn't line skip to create a live view image and a fast CF card slot. Anything else is icing on the cake.


----------



## rsdofny (Nov 13, 2013)

All these changes are only incremental. With the DSLR market is maturing and the low end market completely decimated by smartphone, Canon needs to work a lot harder to keep themselves in the game. Sony, on the other hand, has been capturing a lot more headlines lately while Nikon is pushing the technological curve very hard as well. To say the least, Canon does not even have an answer for a compact APS-C/full frame camera after Sony has introduced the RX100 more than 12 months. 

I have been a Canon person all my life. It is hard for me to switch, but that does not mean I would buy more new gear.


----------



## kaihp (Nov 13, 2013)

Chosenbydestiny said:


> With today's technology I'm sure they could redesign the battery bay to be smaller and carry a thinner battery that equals the power of about two LP-E6s and a slightly better voltage to drive the AF better than it's driven on the 5D mark III but not as good as the 1D-X.


Alas, we are up against physics here, so getting towards a ~ half-sized battery (compared to an LP-E6) is not very likely.


----------



## TrabimanUK (Nov 13, 2013)

kaihp said:


> Alas, we are up against physics here, so getting towards a ~ half-sized battery (compared to an LP-E6) is not very likely.



Damn that Isaac Newton! The world was much better off before he invented gravity and physics! Just think of the possibilities!


----------



## WPJ (Nov 13, 2013)

nonac said:


> WPJ said:
> 
> 
> > 1st half.......what first half, calendar or physical. And will they deliver it before 2015?
> ...



thanks typo, typing,to fast,on my phone. Correct I have no idea if there years line up, hence why I was asking


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 13, 2013)

WPJ said:


> nonac said:
> 
> 
> > WPJ said:
> ...



FWIW, Canon's fiscal year is the calendar year, Nikon's fiscal year is April-March.


----------



## docsmith (Nov 13, 2013)

Ruined said:


> Actually, the 6D and 7D2 should be a pretty excellent combo!



They are...it is called the 5DIII   ;D



sanj said:


> For photographers who want a cost effective crop camera there is the 70D. I am wishing for a 'mini 1dx'. Will be perfect second camera along with my 1dx for 'good light' wildlife work. And I hope the 7d2 has better IQ than version I starting from ISO 100 itself to 1600. Hope......


Yep, this is the basis for my earlier comment that I am worried that $2k isn't a high enough price to make the 7DII "professional level"....really, I was thinking "mini-1DX."

Considering it would be $900 more than the 70D, there is plenty of room/need for differentiation. But, "mini-1DX" I'd expect to be on par with the 5DIII in price. As the quick example, if the 7DII was given 63 pt AF, 10 fps, improvments in sensor technology gave us ~1-2 stops better high ISO noise performance, AND there was improved low ISO noise performance at $2k price point....who would buy the 6D, 5DIII or 1DX? 

Perhaps Canon does go this route, kill the sales of their current FF lineup and release the fabled high MP FF body (3D? 1DXs?) so they'd get sales from the 7DII and 3D/1DXs for 2014 and then refresh the 6D/5D/1D lineup in 2015 with the improved sensor tech.

Maybe....really, that would be great and make everyone very happy....but I am expecting a more modest upgrade to the 7DII at the $2k price point.


----------



## viggen61 (Nov 13, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> Please tell me that "Pro" doesn't mean a built-in non-removable grip. That would be a deal-killer for sure.


I, for one wouldn't mind the EOS-1D form factor one bit. I've had the grip on my 7D almost from the start, and it works just so much better for me. 

But, if Canon keeps the present form, could we at lest get a grip that maintains the same level of weatherseal as the camera? I'm still working out intermittent problems with the grip (I.e. Grip shutter activates meter, but is intermittent firing...) since I used the camera in a very, very light mist...


----------



## viggen61 (Nov 13, 2013)

thfifthcrouch said:


> This is not a camera for the full frame pixel peeping connoisseur. If your worried about razor thin depth of focus, noise at 6400 iso or any of that sort of thing, this is not your camera. It simply can't be. This will be amazing for the wild life or birder who wants that extra reach with a multitude of tools to get you there. It will produce amazing pics at ISOs up to 800 (which if you come from film is amazing). It will do fine over that for small prints or such that you want to post on facebook and just like every crop frame. All that said I love birding and it's mine, all mine. ;D


+1

(Though a little high-ISO help would be much appreciated!)


----------



## mahilandfnp (Nov 13, 2013)

It is funny how people are so concerned with image quality... I get it... at least, I used to. But I used the Canon 40D then 7D for wedding photography for over six years. In that time, I was nominated and voted into the top 4 wedding photographers in a large market city twice. I normally only used primes to compensate for the lack of high ISO performance and depth of field from the crop bodies (they are sharper anyhow). For these reasons, I have far less $$$$ wrapped up in equipment than any of my colleagues. There will always be something newer and better, but the image quality achievable from the 7D mark I is awesome, even on large prints (e.g. 36x48). Anything Canon releases moving forward will only be icing on the cake!!!


----------



## unfocused (Nov 13, 2013)

mahilandfnp said:


> It is funny how people are so concerned with image quality... I get it... at least, I used to. But I used the Canon 40D then 7D for wedding photography for over six years. In that time, I was nominated and voted into the top 4 wedding photographers in a large market city twice. I normally only used primes to compensate for the lack of high ISO performance and depth of field from the crop bodies (they are sharper anyhow). For these reasons, I have far less $$$$ wrapped up in equipment than any of my colleagues. There will always be something newer and better, but the image quality achievable from the 7D mark I is awesome, even on large prints (e.g. 36x48). Anything Canon releases moving forward will only be icing on the cake!!!



Thank you!

This is a perspective we don't hear often enough. And, I'm sure there will be someone who replies trying to dispute or discredit your statement. But, I would be willing to bet that no client ever came to you and said: "This is a great shot, but could you get a little more shadow detail in the groom's tuxedo?" Or maybe, "There's just not enough dynamic range in this picture of the bride in her wedding gown." 

It's one thing to always be wanting better tools. We all do that. It's quite another to act as though it's the camera's fault if you can't produce outstanding images.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 13, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> WPJ said:
> 
> 
> > nonac said:
> ...



FWIW #2, You're still typing *too* fast apparently. I think the years line up over *there*.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Nov 13, 2013)

mahilandfnp said:


> It is funny how people are so concerned with image quality... I get it... at least, I used to. But I used the Canon 40D then 7D for wedding photography for over six years. In that time, I was nominated and voted into the top 4 wedding photographers in a large market city twice. I normally only used primes to compensate for the lack of high ISO performance and depth of field from the crop bodies (they are sharper anyhow). For these reasons, I have far less $$$$ wrapped up in equipment than any of my colleagues. There will always be something newer and better, but the image quality achievable from the 7D mark I is awesome, even on large prints (e.g. 36x48). Anything Canon releases moving forward will only be icing on the cake!!!


Exactly. Every day I see people in CR, praising 5D classic. Now that is a cheap camera (and very old) can compete in price with APS-C. I see in my city, some photographers doing weddings with classic 5D + 28-135mm, and the result is quite disappointing. On the other hand, several photographers doing weddings with 7D + 17-55mm has far superior results.


----------



## docsmith (Nov 13, 2013)

mahilandfnp said:


> It is funny how people are so concerned with image quality... I get it... at least, I used to. But I used the Canon 40D then 7D for wedding photography for over six years. In that time, I was nominated and voted into the top 4 wedding photographers in a large market city twice. I normally only used primes to compensate for the lack of high ISO performance and depth of field from the crop bodies (they are sharper anyhow). For these reasons, I have far less $$$$ wrapped up in equipment than any of my colleagues. There will always be something newer and better, but the image quality achievable from the 7D mark I is awesome, even on large prints (e.g. 36x48). Anything Canon releases moving forward will only be icing on the cake!!!



I agree with the others, and love the perspective. It is very important to note that what we have is good enough. Skill/time/effort are usually the limiting factors, not the camera. Most pro photographers I know aren't worried about upgrades. Matter of fact, most that I know are shooting with 1-3 generation old equipment. The one I know the best has something like 8xD300s and 2xD3s bodies as their arsenal and typically shoot events with a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 @ f/5.6. I was speaking with a pro videographer and they manual focus everything...couldn't care less about dual pixel technology. When the canon 24-70 II came out I read an article and saw a video about several several pretty famous pros that were planning on keeping their 24-70 I. They saw no need to upgrade.

It is interesting, but I often don't think upgrades are about pros. 

But getting back to perspective, I don't think we can forget, people can have different interests in the same subject. Using cars as the analogy, for some people they just get them from point A to point B, others love the technology, some like the ride comfort, some the speed, some cornering, others--fuel economy or what they can haul. Lots of different interests....and perspectives. Yet, they keep coming out with new car models when, really, we've had all that we "need" for decades.


----------



## ZimUW (Nov 13, 2013)

I hope the 7D mk II isn't a "gripped" model. I plan to replace my 550D with the 7D2 as my underwater camera. And a housing for a 1D-size camera will cost a fortune. 

J


----------



## Lee Jay (Nov 13, 2013)

If you look at the numbers over at sensorgen, the 7D's sensor is around 1/3 of a stop behind the 1Dx sensor in performance per unit of surface area. That isn't much.

There's always room for improvement, and the 7DII should do better, but let's keep this in perspective. If it has more pixels and a better sensor with lower read noise and higher QE, it *might* do 1/2 a stop better at high ISO in raw than the 7D. Of course, low-ISO read noise could drop a lot more, and improve DR by up to 3 stops or so, but Canon hasn't shown technology of their own that can manage that yet. Maybe this is the one, I don't know, but the talk about 1-2 stops better high-ISO performance is simply not possible except, perhaps, in out-of-camera JPEGs due to superior in-camera processing, not a better sensor.


----------



## Eldar (Nov 13, 2013)

I have some friends who occasionally say "I wish I was 20 again. Think of all the things we could do then ...". My response to that is "I´m happy being in my fifties ... Think of all the things we can do today, because we can afford to"


----------



## Lee Jay (Nov 13, 2013)

By the way, you know why I'm hot to upgrade? Because I'm still shooting with my 20D and 5D (including weddings and other professional outings). They've served me well and I've accumulated some good lenses for them, but I'm not into little upgrades. 20D -> 7DII should be a pretty big step. 5D -> 5DIV should as well (I hope).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 13, 2013)

jrista said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > distant.star said:
> ...



I sure hope neither 7 nor 5 series get the integrated grip (unless it absolutely truly is the only way to get more computing performance and nothing they can do in battery design or slightly upsizing the batteries works).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 13, 2013)

docsmith said:


> Considering it would be $900 more than the 70D, there is plenty of room/need for differentiation. But, "mini-1DX" I'd expect to be on par with the 5DIII in price. As the quick example, if the 7DII was given 63 pt AF, 10 fps, improvments in sensor technology gave us ~1-2 stops better high ISO noise performance, AND there was improved low ISO noise performance at $2k price point....who would buy the 6D, 5DIII or 1DX?



It might not allow raw video the way the hacked 5D3 does.
It still wouldn't be FF, if they improved the high ISO SNR 1-2 stops then they'd also do the same for the next 5D3 and so on. Plus they don't have the room to improve the high iso that much, the 7D is already too good at high iso.
If they just give it the tiniest tweak who would ever buy it compared to the current 7D??? Or a D400 or whatnot??? And this thing needs to be able to sell for a few years. There is competition.

Of course the way Canon has acted lately and priced things maybe you do have some legitimacy to your worry, but all the same it doesn't have to play out as you say at all.



> Perhaps Canon does go this route, kill the sales of their current FF lineup and release the fabled high MP FF body (3D? 1DXs?) so they'd get sales from the 7DII and 3D/1DXs for 2014 and then refresh the 6D/5D/1D lineup in 2015 with the improved sensor tech.



They sort of have to do that anyway, so yeah.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 13, 2013)

unfocused said:


> It's one thing to always be wanting better tools. We all do that. It's quite another to act as though it's the camera's fault if you can't produce outstanding images.



Nobody ever said you can't make outstanding images. The bride doesn't complain because she is never shown and maybe the photographer never attempted the shots that wouldn't fit into the DR of the body used. If all he shot was shots that didn't work with the camera he used he wouldn't be getting hired.

It's all about having less limitations and if the competition has sensors that offer less, why not get them too. Nobody is saying you can't take an endless stream of great photos that do work.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 13, 2013)

docsmith said:


> mahilandfnp said:
> 
> 
> > It is funny how people are so concerned with image quality... I get it... at least, I used to. But I used the Canon 40D then 7D for wedding photography for over six years. In that time, I was nominated and voted into the top 4 wedding photographers in a large market city twice. I normally only used primes to compensate for the lack of high ISO performance and depth of field from the crop bodies (they are sharper anyhow). For these reasons, I have far less $$$$ wrapped up in equipment than any of my colleagues. There will always be something newer and better, but the image quality achievable from the 7D mark I is awesome, even on large prints (e.g. 36x48). Anything Canon releases moving forward will only be icing on the cake!!!
> ...



That is because are in a different world, a cold hard calculating world where money rules and if they don't think they bring in a lot more cash from some equipment then it means nothing to them or if they don't think they might miss a certain one of shot that had to be taken and get a mad boss then they don't care. That is looking at things from a very different perspective and one, ironically enough, often with much looser standards (at least in some number of cases about some things, it depends, lots of Olympics type pros were flipping out over the 1D3 and lower body AF problems and were very happy about 1DX/5D3).


----------



## jrista (Nov 13, 2013)

kaihp said:


> Chosenbydestiny said:
> 
> 
> > With today's technology I'm sure they could redesign the battery bay to be smaller and carry a thinner battery that equals the power of about two LP-E6s and a slightly better voltage to drive the AF better than it's driven on the 5D mark III but not as good as the 1D-X.
> ...



For batteries, probably. That doesn't mean manufacturers couldn't move towards fuel cells of some kind, though...and fuel cells can be remarkably efficient.


----------



## dufflover (Nov 13, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> That is because are in a different world, a cold hard calculating world where money rules and if they don't think they bring in a lot more cash from some equipment then it means nothing to them or if they don't think they might miss a certain one of shot that had to be taken and get a mad boss then they don't care..



As much as I can appreciate the whole "it's not the camera that makes the photo" type of posts basically justify lack of development, that doesn't really change the fact that as mentioned the best of both worlds can exist. I for one spend my hard earned very carefully to not buy something that is only marginally better when the competition is doing so much more.



rsdofny said:


> It is hard for me to switch, but that does not mean I would buy more new gear.



Well put. Nikon doesn't have anything in particular that ticks all the boxes (the D300 replacement may ...) but I could sure use some Nikon/Sony improvements in my primary camera. On the flipside, after promising that I wouldn't buy a 4 yr old Canon sensor _again, _the EOS-M price got slashed and I bought it because at that price for that product it was a bloody good deal.
Like many others can't really do much but use what we got and twiddle our thumbs. I'm sure Canon have benefited by getting people giving up and paying more for a 5D3 LOL. I've been tempted by that as well but I keep finding myself reach limited (my lazy fault most of the time though) so it wouldn't be good value for me.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 13, 2013)

Woody said:


> Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR, Low ISO DR..... ;D ;D ;D



Won't happen, this is exactly what Nikon/Sony patented (exmor) and so far Canon doesn't seem to be willing to license it, just as they devised their own operating System (DryOS) rather than license an existing one. For Canon, it's all about high iso, look at their latest line of ultra low-light security cams.


----------



## eml58 (Nov 14, 2013)

sanj said:


> That would not be a very nice thing to do. Just inbox me and I come to collect it. Will give you a non grip camera in exchange.



I think the line at this Lads front door is going to be reasonably long.

Very Funny Sanj.


----------



## sanj (Nov 14, 2013)

docsmith said:


> Ruined said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, the 6D and 7D2 should be a pretty excellent combo!
> ...



Agree. Except even with all these improvements, a crop camera cannot beat the benefits of a full frame. So even if they launch our wish list 7d2, the full frame cameras still have their appeal.


----------



## duppencf (Nov 14, 2013)

> a crop camera cannot beat the benefits of a full frame



4K or RAW video would be the killer features (combined with dual pixel af) that could make this body a stand out for the entire product life cycle and get every videographer pressing the Buy Now button. Both are proven possible with small sensors.

Obviously we're getting 10+ fps and great traditional AF... Just not sure what "innovative video features" will entail.


----------



## dufflover (Nov 14, 2013)

sanj said:


> Except even with all these improvements, a crop camera cannot beat the benefits of a full frame. So even if they launch our wish list 7d2, the full frame cameras still have their appeal.



Except the price lol


----------



## Richard8971 (Nov 15, 2013)

dufflover said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > Except even with all these improvements, a crop camera cannot beat the benefits of a full frame. So even if they launch our wish list 7d2, the full frame cameras still have their appeal.
> ...



For now... Who knows what the technology of the near future will bring.

Try and remember that APS-C sized digital sensors came about because Advanced Photo System's film sized formats (C, H and P) was introduced right around the time that digital SLR's were first hitting the market (1996). That is why, unfortunately for Kodak, that size of film format never really took off. 

Canon and Nikon (among others) saw this as an opportunity to be able to produce a smaller digital sensor to help keep costs down and to get digital cameras into the hands of many as possible, while keeping to a known film foramat size. (Something that was VERY important, at the time, in getting someone used to film to switch over to digital) The APS-C format was something people were already familiar with, so it really didn't have much to do with image quality or one being better than another, it was a way to produce a DSLR cheaper and advertise the "additional reach" you can get with a crop sensor over FF! That was one of Kodak's main marketing strategies for the APS-C film format!

Well, it worked. So much so, that we today have evolved into 2 main groups of DSLR lovers. Ones who love FF and ones who love crop sensors. They both have advantages and disadvantages over each other. Sensors are getting cheaper and cheaper to manufacture so it really isn't so much a matter of pure costs anymore. Canon and Nikon (and others) recognize that even though they could inexpensively put FF sensors into ALL of their cameras now, not everyone is going to want that.

That's why Canon _will_ continue to make crop sensor bodies. There is a market and need for them. The 7D is one of the most successful and popular bodies that Canon has ever made and I see them twice in number over many of the other DSLR's. 

Canon really has their work set out for them, it will be a hard camera to top. I love my 7 so much in fact that I really don't plan on replacing it until this one falls apart, regardless of what Canon puts out. It has done everything I have ever asked of it and more. Nothing currently (based on cost) is worth "upgrading" to. It's funny, I even keep a 40D as a back up to my 7. Love that camera just as much.

Don't take me wrong, I have shot FF as well as many offerings from Nikon etc... They are all wonderful cameras. But compared to the overall awesome image quality and brute speed of the 7 at it's current asking price, it is a VERY hard camera to beat. 

In 5 years? Who knows what digital sensors will be like. Maybe low noise at high ISO will be a thing of the past, regardless of sensor size. Who knows, maybe all DSLR's will have the option of shooting FF, or crop sensor (H or C) with a flip of a switch. I know some do that already...

Hard drives went through a similar problem. Around the turn of the century, hard drive space was nearing it's maximum, using then-current hard drive technology (about 1TB). In 2005 Perpendicular Magnetic Recording became commercially available and now we have 4TB drives with 12TB drives being predicted being available by 2016.

You never know what tomorrow will bring. 

D


----------



## Richard8971 (Nov 17, 2013)

???

Did I kill the thread?


----------



## WPJ (Nov 17, 2013)

I still think that there could be a crop sensor come out which is miles better than existing full frame which will just make the next full frame even more wild. After isn't that what we all want canon to finally innovate again..


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 17, 2013)

Time is flying at the moment so in my mind, at least, it won't be long before the 7D-II is released ;D


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 18, 2013)

StudentOfLight said:


> Time is flying at the moment so in my mind, at least, it won't be long before the 7D-II is released ;D



But not before at least a dozen of other [CR2] threads pop up about the 7d2, of course quickly followed by a couple of [CR3] before the announcement  ... this shows how slow 2013 has been for Canon in the enthusiast/semipro market segment :-o


----------



## DRR (Nov 18, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> Sensors are getting cheaper and cheaper to manufacture so it really isn't so much a matter of pure costs anymore. Canon and Nikon (and others) recognize that even though they could inexpensively put FF sensors into ALL of their cameras now, not everyone is going to want that.



I have to disagree with this statement - it will always be a matter of cost. The reason being that a crop sensor is significantly less expensive to manufacture:







Yes prices are dropping, and of course there are a lot of other factors that go into the price of a camera/camera body, but remember just based on size, a full frame sensor will always be roughly three times the cost to manufacture as a crop sensor.

If a crop sensor can yield 90% of the IQ for a third of the cost - it's kind of a no-brainer for the manufacturer!


----------



## 9VIII (Nov 18, 2013)

DRR said:


> Richard8971 said:
> 
> 
> > Sensors are getting cheaper and cheaper to manufacture so it really isn't so much a matter of pure costs anymore. Canon and Nikon (and others) recognize that even though they could inexpensively put FF sensors into ALL of their cameras now, not everyone is going to want that.
> ...



http://www.robgalbraith.com/images/canon_full-frame_cmos_white_paper.pdf



> Interestingly, the APS-H sensor of the EOS-1D Mark II N is the largest size that can be imaged in one shot onto a wafer. Extended through the whole sensor production process, the difference in price between the 1D Mark II N and the 1Ds Mark II can be readily understood.



I want APS-H sensors back!
Though I wouldn't be surprised if they increased the size of their projectors since 2006.

In the article it says that Full Frame sensors cost 10-20 times as much ,or more, than APS-C. It says that dust particles can easily wipe out an entire wafer of Full Frame sensors, where an APS-C batch would still have plenty of usable chips.

I hate to think what people have to go through to get a medium format sensor out the door.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 18, 2013)

DRR said:


> but remember just based on size, a full frame sensor will always be roughly three times the cost to manufacture as a crop sensor



... now the one thing that would be really, really interesting how much in *absolute* $$$ a ff sensor costs - ff cameras aren't so expensive just because of the sensor, but because they add other expensive features (yes, even the 6d...) and have a price premium as they produce the best dslr iq.


----------



## ashmadux (Nov 18, 2013)

My 2c

The 70d feels like a great camera in use. The plastic-ness was very off-putting at first handle- same like the 60d. Playing with it and taking sample images yesterday gave me a much better impression. I can only wonder at what the 7d 2 will be like- that's gotta be a killer. 

Hmm- smaller things though will probably be the return of the spot Af mode?


----------



## Jan (Nov 19, 2013)

9VIII said:


> I want APS-H sensors back!
> *Though I wouldn't be surprised if they increased the size of their projectors since 2006.*


That's exactly it. I don't think the statements from 2006 still hold. At least, I hope...


----------



## dufflover (Nov 19, 2013)

As much as I'd like a 7DII I'm starting to think_ realistically_ I'd end up with a 5DMark3 or my 7D + 60D sold/merged into a 70D (with the EOS-M as the new 2nd body).

It's not that I need a FF sensor but like many other CR members I'm sure, I'm a bit of a gear head, a tech head. I know I don't need it but I like my toys! Well, of the not-rich-not-poor variety where I can't go buying 1D-X bodies and Canon super-telephotos, but my friends all thought I had a FF camera LOL. Just because I look like that sort of person.


----------



## TrabimanUK (Nov 19, 2013)

9VIII said:


> I want APS-H sensors back!



+1 - would make the 7DII a bit differnt and differentiate it from the 1D, 5D and xxD range. Be a bit like ressurecting the 1D IV


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 19, 2013)

9VIII said:


> http://www.robgalbraith.com/images/canon_full-frame_cmos_white_paper.pdf


Thank for posting the link to the white paper. I see it was published in 2006... I don't know how much production processes might have changed since then. But it is very interesting reading none-the-less.

I'm not an electronics designer so I would appreciate some info with regards to the following questions:

1) Are sensors still being made on 8" silicon wafers? If larger diameter wafers are used then there could be a lower percentage wastage when larger sized sensors are manufactured, bringing it closer to the smaller sensors.

2) Is the silicon wafer the expensive raw material component in the manufacture or the sensor elements which (I assume) are deposited onto the wafers?

3) Why are these silicon wafers circular? If rectangular wafers could be used then there would be no inherent production wastage, only possible rejects.

These are honest questions, please don't bite my head off when answering.


----------



## dufflover (Nov 19, 2013)

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2010/05/06/why-are-processor-wafers-round/


----------



## photonius (Nov 19, 2013)

StudentOfLight said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.robgalbraith.com/images/canon_full-frame_cmos_white_paper.pdf
> ...



1) There are larger sizes, but they require bigger machines to handle, and production of larger, flawless wafers is more difficult. 
2) Silicon wafers have not gone down in price. So, unlike a CPU in a computer, where you just make the individual transistors smaller to pack more CPU power into the same size (Moore's law), 
the image sensors don't scale like that. Yes, you could pack smaller and smaller pixels into the same size (megapixel race), but that's not really where the limitations lie these days.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 19, 2013)

StudentOfLight said:


> 3) Why are these silicon wafers circular? If rectangular wafers could be used then there would be no inherent production wastage, only possible rejects.



Because of the laws of centrifugal force.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czochralski_process


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 19, 2013)

Thanks for the links guys.


----------



## TrabimanUK (Nov 19, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> Because of the laws of centrifugal force.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czochralski_process



Sorry to be picky, but working with physics boffins sometimes rubs off. Do you mean centripetal force?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centripetal_force


----------



## unfocused (Nov 19, 2013)

Interesting reading about the wafer production. 

Not being a techie I could be wrong about this, but it sounds like the process is more organic or chemical than electronic, which in my mind would explain why the the cost doesn't drop nearly as much as for other components.


----------



## 9VIII (Nov 19, 2013)

StudentOfLight said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > http://www.robgalbraith.com/images/canon_full-frame_cmos_white_paper.pdf
> ...



Page 11 in the article itself.


> Depending upon its composition, (for example, high-resistivity silicon wafers have much greater electrical field depth -- and broader spectral response -- than low-resistivity wafers) an 8" diameter wafer could cost as much as $450 to $500, $1,000 or even $5,000.



I'm going to go with "not cheap" as a baseline. If they only lose 50% of their chips per wafer that's $50-$500 per sensor in raw materials. I guess that's a big spread, but the possibilities are kind of scary to think about.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 19, 2013)

9VIII said:


> I'm going to go with "not cheap" as a baseline. If they only lose 50% of their chips per wafer that's $50-$500 per sensor in raw materials. I guess that's a big spread, but the possibilities are kind of scary to think about.



If I understand pp11 correctly at 0% loss worst case a raw ff sensor would be $250 ($5000/20) - strangely the article gives such a large price span for a dslr-sensor quality wafer, so I guess the cost would be much lower than this to prevent doing the exact calculation we're trying to do.

The big question is how much yield they get, maybe not as much as in computer processors as these are designed to work around defective circuits while on a dslr sensor a big flaw cannot be covered up.

Btw the paper is from 2006 and the aps-h advantage seems to have gone by now - maybe a lot of other things have also changed since then.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 20, 2013)

TrabimanUK said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Because of the laws of centrifugal force.
> ...



No.


----------



## jrista (Nov 20, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > I'm going to go with "not cheap" as a baseline. If they only lose 50% of their chips per wafer that's $50-$500 per sensor in raw materials. I guess that's a big spread, but the possibilities are kind of scary to think about.
> ...



Since 2006, at the very least, 12" (300mm) wafers have become far more common. I doubt the costs of an 8" wafer still top out at $5000, I think they are quite a bit cheaper. I don't know if Canon has yet moved from 8" wafers to 12" wafers for their APS-C and FF fabrication, but even if they have not, it is highly doubtful their 8" wafer cost is $5000 (if it was, they would have a SEVERE handicap relative to the likes of Aptina and Sony, both of whom use 12" wafer fabs to produce CMOS Image Sensors (CIS). 

I think Canon is currently using more advanced 12" wafer production for small form factor sensors, and I believe those fabs can produce 180nm transistors with Cu metal interlinks, lightpipe tech, etc. It is my sincere hope that they are using these fabs to produce the new 7D II and future BigMP sensors...but who knows for sure. There really isn't much good, solid information about this stuff.


----------



## Richard8971 (Nov 26, 2013)

jrista said:


> I think Canon is currently using more advanced 12" wafer production for small form factor sensors, and I believe those fabs can produce 180nm transistors with Cu metal interlinks, lightpipe tech, etc. It is my sincere hope that they are using these fabs to produce the new 7D II and future BigMP sensors...but who knows for sure. There really isn't much good, solid information about this stuff.



I would imagine that soon "DLSR's" (either mirror or mirror-less) would soon become "choose your sensor" size cameras. 

Think about it and it makes sense. It's becoming more and more difficult to produce something new in the camera world and look at what this has spawned. For one thing a new very impressive mirror-less full frame from Sony. 

I would imagine that the next big thing will be a full frame camera that offers a full frame format that you can select FF, APS-H or -C formats. I do believe that there are a few camera offerings (perhaps Nikon? I'm not sure the D7100 1.5x crop counts) that does this but I believe it will become more commonplace. 

A full frame that offered FF @ 5fps, APS-H @ 8fps and APS-C @ 12+fps and a viewfinder that "changed" with each format size you chose. Maybe Canon or Nikon won't go this route, but someone will. If Sony or Panasonic came out with a serious camera with this offering, it would be a very tempting offer. A photographer could at a click of a switch, choose whatever format he needed. That could move some serious buying market from Canon and Nikon if they did. 

Most offerings so far have been "cheesy" at best, not all, but most.

I had always imagined that the 7D2 would offer something along these lines, but the fact that any upgrade to the 7D would have to include being able to EF-s lenses, it rules out -H and FF. 

D


----------



## dufflover (Nov 26, 2013)

I don't see the point of that. That's nothing more than a fancy viewfinder and software (easily doable with an EVF system) because the camera you buy still has a 35mm sensor costing $___ . To change the shot size in camera would make it nothing more than another JPEG feature for the people who need good out-of-camera shots. And part of the cost appeal of a crop sensor is cheaper cost because you aren't paying for a bigger sensor.


----------



## jrista (Nov 26, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I think Canon is currently using more advanced 12" wafer production for small form factor sensors, and I believe those fabs can produce 180nm transistors with Cu metal interlinks, lightpipe tech, etc. It is my sincere hope that they are using these fabs to produce the new 7D II and future BigMP sensors...but who knows for sure. There really isn't much good, solid information about this stuff.
> ...



So, your saying everything becomes a FF camera with the ability to read the FF area, APS-H area, or APS-C area of the sensor? Sure, this could be an option...but you would always be paying for the FF sensor. There are some benefits to that, but I think there is still explicit value in smaller physical sensor formats like APS-H and APS-C. I don't ever foresee the 7D line becoming a FF with selectable readout areas. It will always be an APS-C part.

FF sensors will always be more expensive than APS-C sensors as well. The reasons why FF sensor cost has come down (which include the use of 300mm wafers) are the same reasons APS-C will always maintain a cost lead. Reducing defect rates or whatever will result in higher APS-C yield as well. There is always a market for the cheaper version. Doesn't matter how cheap FF gets, people will still buy APS-C (and other, similarly small formats.)

When it comes to interchangeable camera backs, if that is what you were talking about, that comes at a significant increase in cost. You have to standardize the systems design, make sure that each camera back will work with the body (or, as could quite likely be the case...bodies). Standardizing the design of a camera system limits future progress. Let's say you create an interchangeable camera back DSLR system, allowing you to drop in FF, APS-H and APS-C sensors. You have a lot of challenges. Either you put the full readout pipeline on the back, which basically means the back is 80% of the camera, that greatly increases the cost of each back. If you put the readout pipeline on the body, then you suddenly created a potential bottleneck to future, faster sensors that come out in the future (since image processors like DIGIC and EXPEED tend to improve generation over generation right along with sensors, BY NECESSITY.)

I really don't see either of these things really occurring any time soon, if they ever do. If they do, then it would still be a premium feature, because adding the options requires additional work, regardless of how you go about doing it. More work on the part of the manufacturer never really results in a cheaper product for the consumer. Your also always going to have advocates who insist the best way to get the best IQ is with a system designed explicitly to produce the highest IQ from a given sensor, and they won't buy anything else.


----------



## Richard8971 (Nov 27, 2013)

jrista said:


> So, your saying everything becomes a FF camera with the ability to read the FF area, APS-H area, or APS-C area of the sensor? Sure, this could be an option...but you would always be paying for the FF sensor. There are some benefits to that, but I think there is still explicit value in smaller physical sensor formats like APS-H and APS-C. I don't ever foresee the 7D line becoming a FF with selectable readout areas. It will always be an APS-C part.



What I said was a possible trend for DSLR's to go, not a "this is what's going to happen". (geesh : )

DSLR's have a limited lifespan anyway because of the mirrorless segment and if you don't think that mirrorless will someday outperform DSLR's, well then you are not really paying attention to the technology and what it's capable of. The technology is rapidly advancing and because people don't really like radical change, it will come, in small doses and before you know it. BAM! DSLR's are gone and mirrorless becomes the standard.

Just because Nikon and Canon have not given mirrorless a serious thought does not mean that it is useless. Companies like Sony and Panasonic, IF they continue down the road that they have started to build, will soon offer up some very serious camera bodies that Nikon and Canon will have to pay attention to, if they have not already.

Don't think DSLR's are going to be replaced? CRT monitors? Floppy disk? Tape players? How about DVD? oh wait they were ALL replaced by something better and by something that was a radical difference from what people ever thought was possible. Heck, CRT monitors disappeared almost overnight and you would be hard pressed to even fine one new now-a-days.

Don't think Canon and Nikon could ever fail as a company? Well Rome was a world power and fell... 

And I never seriously suggested the 7D2 would be FF, I have always believed that the 7D2 was going to stay APS-C. Go back and look at my older posts and you will see.

Don't get all buggered on here because someone suggests a product or performance that YOU may not agree with. This IS Canon RUMORS right, not Canon FACTS???

Lighten up and have some fun...

D


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 27, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> DSLR's have a limited lifespan anyway because of the mirrorless segment and if you don't think that mirrorless will someday outperform DSLR's, well then you are not really paying attention to the technology and what it's capable of. The technology is rapidly advancing and because people don't really like radical change, it will come, in small doses and before you know it. BAM! DSLR's are gone and mirrorless becomes the standard.
> 
> Just because Nikon and Canon have not given mirrorless a serious thought does not mean that it is useless. Companies like Sony and Panasonic, IF they continue down the road that they have started to build, will soon offer up some very serious camera bodies that Nikon and Canon will have to pay attention to, if they have not already.



I have a 16Mpixel p/s camera that does some amazing things... It can do video at 240hz... It has face recognition and tracking..... I wish my 60D could track birds that well..... I will probably have to wait for mirrorless technology to emerge before DSLR's can do that.....


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 27, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> It has face recognition and tracking..... I wish my 60D could track birds that well..... I will probably have to wait for mirrorless technology to emerge before DSLR's can do that.....



Nonono, you're getting this the wrong way: Your 60d is not *supposed* to track that well, that's what the more expensive models are for! Canon of course could have added some fw features at zero cost, not to speak that a better af model probably isn't an economic impossibility either for the former 60d price.

Meaning: even with mirrorless each camera segment (p&s, amateur/semipro-crop, enthusiast/pro-ff) will be stratified so that the cheaper models will lack some vital features, that's just the way it works.


----------



## dufflover (Nov 27, 2013)

Out of the mirror mechanism and sensor pretty sure most of the cost is in the sensor. DSLRs getting replaced doesn't actually change much as the expensive part (artificial price levels or otherwise) of a larger format is the sensor, just the mirror.


----------



## jrista (Nov 28, 2013)

Richard8971 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > So, your saying everything becomes a FF camera with the ability to read the FF area, APS-H area, or APS-C area of the sensor? Sure, this could be an option...but you would always be paying for the FF sensor. There are some benefits to that, but I think there is still explicit value in smaller physical sensor formats like APS-H and APS-C. I don't ever foresee the 7D line becoming a FF with selectable readout areas. It will always be an APS-C part.
> ...



I think your comparison of either Canon or Nikon DSLRs to "CRT Monitors" is a bit naive. CRT's were old and decrepit DECADES before they became obsolete. DSLRs, on the other hand, are currently the pinnacle of digital photography equipment. They have competition, yes, and eventually mirrorless will become dominant, sure. But that does not mean that Canon and Nikon will disappear right along with the DSLR. Both have already forayed into the mirrorless market. Both are fairly careful companies, so they are testing the waters rather than diving in head first with all the funding they've got (with the exception that Nikon seems rather desperate to develop and release as many diverse products as it possibly can just to keep itself viable.) 

Where you say Canon will fail because they are currently primarily dependent upon the DSLR for their revenues, I say they will adapt and produce a phenomenal mirrorless part, much like they produced cine parts, in more than enough time to survive the changing market. Just because a company "is currently" dependent upon one particular product for it's revenues in a given market segment does not mean that company is incapable of changing which products they depend upon for revenue.

As facts would have it, 2013 is the FIRST year that DSLR sales actually missed their targets in many years. Up through last year, DSLR sales, particularly the entry-level models but also higher end models, were actually growing. Last year, DSLR growth actually topped mirrorless growth in a number of key markets. One year's market miss does not make a trend. We may see similar things over the next few years, and if we do, then a trend it definitely is...but it isn't a trend yet. In several articles I read last year and the first part of this year, the analysis of the DSLR growth gave an increase in photography amongst consumers in general, thanks to smartphone sales, as a driver for those same consumers becoming more interested and wanting better quality. To date, the DSLR has historically offered the best image quality to price ratio in the digital photography arena. That is certainly primed to change if cameras like the A7r become commonplace, and cheaper models become available. 

But again...Canon and Nikon are certainly not incapable of adapting to market change. They have adapted to, and in some cases even lead, market change in the past decades...it isn't like this is the first radical shift the photography market has experienced. Last time, Canon came out on top, and Nikon lost some ground (and seems to have experienced a permanent supply chain/manufacturing capability problem as a result, which I think is more to blame for their struggles than producing intriguing products that people want to buy.) So, I don't disagree that mirrorless technology will eventually become dominant, never have...although I personally despise EVFs and do not think they will ever be able to physically achieve the kind of raw pixel resolution, dynamic range, or frame rate necessary to avoid their shortcomings relative to optical viewfinders, so I'm not a big fan of mirrorless technology. I do not, however, believe either Canon or Nikon, the two biggest players in photography for decades, are going to fail just because the market is enduring another shift. I think both companies are innovative, competitive, and often quite shrewed in their business dealings, and they will survive...probably with some particularly compelling products as well.


----------



## dgatwood (Nov 28, 2013)

jrista said:


> So, your saying everything becomes a FF camera with the ability to read the FF area, APS-H area, or APS-C area of the sensor? Sure, this could be an option...but you would always be paying for the FF sensor. There are some benefits to that, but I think there is still explicit value in smaller physical sensor formats like APS-H and APS-C. I don't ever foresee the 7D line becoming a FF with selectable readout areas. It will always be an APS-C part.



Assuming they can come up with a reasonably reliable mirror box design that allows the use of EF-S lenses (e.g. a flip-down mask on the OVF to show the smaller coverage area and a mirror that slides before it flips so that it doesn't hit the back of the lens), no, there isn't any real value in a smaller physical sensor format over an APS sensor with the same pixel density (pixels per unit of area).




jrista said:


> FF sensors will always be more expensive than APS-C sensors as well. The reasons why FF sensor cost has come down (which include the use of 300mm wafers) are the same reasons APS-C will always maintain a cost lead. Reducing defect rates or whatever will result in higher APS-C yield as well. There is always a market for the cheaper version. Doesn't matter how cheap FF gets, people will still buy APS-C (and other, similarly small formats.)



One big reason for the higher cost of FF sensors is economies of scale. You don't necessarily spend the money to get your yield up if you're building a low-volume, high-end product. If you're building a mass-market product, you do, because that extra R&D cost up front pays off over the long term. Make the APS sensor the mass-market choice, and its cost will come way down.

Now there are certainly other factors (like the wasted silicon near the edges of the wafer), but there are ways of dealing with that, too (like printing DIGIC chips and other custom parts in that space).


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 28, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> Now there are certainly other factors (like the wasted silicon near the edges of the wafer), but there are ways of dealing with that, too (like printing DIGIC chips and other custom parts in that space).



... or decreasing the sensor resolution from 22mp to 20mp like 5d3->6d, I guess next to marketing that's the reason they did this no matter how bad the video moire is because it lets you get more yield from the current production setup.

The other possibility that the 20mp sensor in the 6D is actually 22mp, but they cut it a bit to still use sensors with flaws at one or two sides... I'm just guessing of course as this would be trade secrets.


----------



## dgatwood (Nov 28, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > Now there are certainly other factors (like the wasted silicon near the edges of the wafer), but there are ways of dealing with that, too (like printing DIGIC chips and other custom parts in that space).
> ...



No, the pixel density on the 6D is lower than the 5Dmk3. The flaws on a sensor would typically be equiprobable in the center versus on the edge, so there wouldn't be much of a yield advantage to doing those sorts of tricks.

I suspect, but am not certain, that yield problems on sensors are caused more by the electronic features—that is, the wiring on the back side or front side of the sensor—than by the pixels themselves. This is one place where fully back-illuminated (stacked) sensor designs like the Exmor should have a real advantage. If you don't have to worry about the amount of vignetting caused by the wiring being in front of your photo sites, you should be able to make those features larger, which means better yield.

With such a design, you could even do neat tricks like stacking a buffer behind the photo sites to eliminate rolling shutter without the loss of sensitivity that you get with interline transfer sensors or the huge surface area needed for frame transfer sensors.


----------



## jrista (Nov 28, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > dgatwood said:
> ...



BI designs aren't technically "stacked". Stacked designs are basiclly where a sensor and a DSP are fabricated independently, then wired together into a single package. I'd also point out that it is only Exmor RS, not Exmor, that is a BI design. Exmor, the one used in the D800 and A7r, are good old FI designs. Sony's edge is that they use a smaller transistor, 180nm vs. Canon's 500nm. Smaller circuitry features do mean less space consumed by wiring and the like, leaving more room for photodiode area.

Etching both sides of a silicon wafer, as in a BI design, has it's own challenges. Usually the back side of the wafer is untouched, giving rigidity to the whole sensor. Etching both sides results in increased fragility, which is why BI designs are currently only used in small form factors, and not ASP-C or FF sensors. There are some patents out there, including one by Canon, that aim to address these issues with BI designs and allow their use in larger form factors...who knows if/when they might actually be viable enough for mass production.

Yield issues come into play when defect count per sensor area increases beyond a reasonable threshold. As I understand it, one defect in a pixel's area can render the entire pixel unusable. This has to do with the photodiode, not necessarily the wiring. When there are only a few pixels affected by small defects, those pixels can simply be deactivated and mapped. They effectively become dead pixels, but every sensor has them, and you never know it because of the demosaicing process which basically filters over them. Sensors with larger run a higher risk of losing more pixels per sensor, and if you lose too many (not sure what the threshold is) you can't as easily gloss over the problem. There is also the issue of larger defects, which render the entire sensor unusable. Smaller sensors means that while a large defect may render a whole sensor unusable, because you can pack so many more onto each wafer, those few lost to defects don't cost you as much. The problem of lost sensors due to large defects becomes exponentially more costly, as you lose the whole area of the sensor, which could span two or more times as much area as a single smaller sensor (plus, you also have margin losses where you can't fit whole FF sensors into areas near the periphery of the wafer, so you have yield losses there as well.)


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 28, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> No, the pixel density on the 6D is lower than the 5Dmk3.



Thanks to you & jrista for the interesting posts! And you're correct, I looked it up - both sensors have the same physical size, and with the the same pixel size (6.25 micron) obviously the pixel density has to be different and the sensors cannot be from the same production line.


----------



## dgatwood (Nov 28, 2013)

There are other ways to do multilayer chips besides etching the back side.


----------

