# EOS 7D Mark II Talk [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 9, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14476"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14476">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Canon EOS 7D Mark II

</strong>We’ve heard a bit of talk recently about the follow-up to the EOS 7D. The same sort of time frame is still mentioned, an announcement in Q2 of 2014.</p>
<p>One suggestion is the 7D Mark II will become a bit more video oriented. So beyond a “pro” APS-C camera, it will also be highly desirable for the videographer. The camera as such will also retail well above the EOS 70D.</p>
<p>We’re also told any follow-up to the EOS 7D will get a new sensor and not use the 20.2mp sensor that is found in the EOS 70D.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## trulandphoto (Oct 9, 2013)

I, for one, am a bit tired of my bodies being "video oriented". My 5DII, 7D and 60D have not shot a second of video. I guess I'll just have to hang on to them until the pendulum swings a bit in the other direction.


----------



## -Jarred- (Oct 9, 2013)

Yeah I don't use the video function on mine. But, as long as they don't compromise stills features in favour of video it doesn't bother me. Show me an improvement in ISO perf, a healthy burst and an upgrade to the focus system and I'll be sold.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 9, 2013)

I for one don't mind having the dual functionality.

Now that we're not being told to expect the 70D sensor I've got my hopes back up for something with higher resolution. 32MP would be awesome as long as they keep the buffer up to 15 shots+ on full RAW.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 9, 2013)

What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?

Hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinder?
Faster frame rates below 1080p?
Higher resolution (4k)?
Smooth digital video zoom from full-frame to 1:1?
Quad pixel for 4-way AF sensors on every pixel?
Some sort of power zoom lens system?


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 9, 2013)

9VIII said:


> I for one don't mind having the dual functionality.
> 
> Now that we're not being told to expect the 70D sensor I've got my hopes back up for something with higher resolution. 32MP would be awesome as long as they keep the buffer up to 15 shots+ on full RAW.



I want a minimum 3 second raw buffer at maximum frame rate, preferably more.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 9, 2013)

I might use video more if autofocus worked well.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 9, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?
> 
> Hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinder?
> Faster frame rates below 1080p?
> ...



I read it as more video oriented than the 7D, not necessarily more video oriented than the 70D. 

Second quarter of 2014? Hmm. Seems like a long time between major announcements. That would coincide with Photokina though. Now, do it wait or do I go for a 6D in the meantime? Decisions...Decisions. 

I know Canon would like me to buy both. Very clever on their part.


----------



## AprilForever (Oct 9, 2013)

trulandphoto said:


> I, for one, am a bit tired of my bodies being "video oriented". My 5DII, 7D and 60D have not shot a second of video. I guess I'll just have to hang on to them until the pendulum swings a bit in the other direction.



I likewise am fed totally up with video. I want a stills optomized camera. I don't care about video. 

However, I am sure that they are working on a new sensor for the 7D mk II. The 70D sensor will go for the XXXDs for a while and likely also the M-2....

Focus the camera on stills improvement and I will be happy. I want better AF, better build quality, and and at least two stops of improvement in ISO performance.

Video I don't care a rat for.


----------



## serendipidy (Oct 9, 2013)

AprilForever said:


> trulandphoto said:
> 
> 
> > I, for one, am a bit tired of my bodies being "video oriented". My 5DII, 7D and 60D have not shot a second of video. I guess I'll just have to hang on to them until the pendulum swings a bit in the other direction.
> ...



+1...never use it.


----------



## Harry Muff (Oct 9, 2013)

Add me to the list of people sick of paying all that extra cash for a function I don't want.




Love my 5D3, don't care about video.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 9, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?
> 
> Hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinder?
> Faster frame rates below 1080p?
> ...



A ton! No line skipping for FAR less aliasing and moire and better SNR. Focus peaking, live 10x focus box, RAW video recording, non-mangled up compressed video/HDMI out video, zebras, zoomed modes including 1:1, 4k, etc. etc.

I know it's popular if you are a still shooter to laugh off video, but seriously why not expand your creativity to new world. 5D3 ML RAW video is pretty stunning! Some things work better as video, just as some work better as stills and many work equally as well.


----------



## mps (Oct 9, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?
> 
> Hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinder?
> Faster frame rates below 1080p?
> ...




- fixed moire / aliasing issues
- better codec
- faster framerates AT 1080p. 240fps like on the fs700 is possible and would be a HUGE selling point
- no need for 4k - and for sure will not be there - who else would then buy the 12k 1DC?
- no need for digital zoom, but a 1:1 mode like on the gh2 would be nice to see
- clean hdmi out
- zebra / focus peaking
- basically a pre installed magic lantern 
- a quote from another website: "the first who dares to implement 10bit 4:2:2 will win this game" - but i highly doubt this one will come from sony/canon/panasonics - maybe nikon will surprise us someday? after all they wouldnt kill their professional video lineup (since they dont have one)
- not sure if its is possible to build a hybrid viewfinder on a dslr, but would be nice to see.... otherwise maybe a fixed metal frame at the screen to place these aftermarkets LCDVFs onto? not many people like to glue it on afterwards....

some of you dont need a videofunction? well, others do. for every hour of footage i take 1 photo with my (well, my company's) 7d. hm, only kind of true since we timelapse quite a bit - but this does count more as filming than taking photos, right? so actually there are some folks out there really wanting a video dslr


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 9, 2013)

How about the *7D Mark II* being basically a 70D, but with a sensor which starts with ISO 800 ... meaning it has an optimised, high-ISO sensor designed for high-speed and low-light photography.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 9, 2013)

The more "video-oriented" Canon makes their cameras, the less likely i am going to buy them.
Canon read my lips: I have never captured video, i have no desire to capture video, i will never capture video. And if I were interested in capturing video, i would use a video cam. You want me to buy a new camera from you? Make it stills- optimized. Make the camera small. Make it mirrorless. Make the sensor larger ... Yes, 36x24 mm will be fine. Make it something that makes it easier and more likely for me to capture those still images i would like to capture.


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 9, 2013)

Well, since everyone is ranting about video ... that is probably the main reason I've not updated my cameras with the latest models. I do not need, want nor desire video and the current models hence do not present an upgrade in stills functionality for me. So, Canon, you win some with video and you lose some due to it ... that new *Sony A7* looks pretty awesome for stills photography.


----------



## Ricku (Oct 9, 2013)

Dear Canon.

F U and your video orientation.


----------



## xps (Oct 9, 2013)

Shooting videos is an actual trend. More and more handycams offer sending these to social media (youtube,...).
Maybe Canon want to meet this trend too.

In my opinion Canon has an burning problem: Every other Camera manufacturer releases new, improved, quite better Cam-sensors than Canon does. 
In an German photo-magazine (Color foto) an comparison between the 70D and the Olympus OMD EM1 shows that other manufacturer have quite better sensors than Canon has. Canon has to hurry on, their revolutionary new AF is beaten by some mirrorless cams.

On the other hand, the late release date of the 7D2, combined with an looooooong time between announcement and product release - and even an exclusively right on selling it by professional Canon stores first, could be well thought-out by Canon to maximize their profit too.

But who knows....?


----------



## Eldar (Oct 9, 2013)

CANON PLEASE LISTEN: I DON'T DO VIDEO!!! I'M NOT INTERESTED IN VIDEO!!! I WANT A STILLS OPTIMIZES CAMERA!!!

Good to get it out ...

I want more pixles, improved dynamic range, higher fps, improved AF, improved silent mode, ruggedness and weather sealing, plus a few more. I prefer FF, but could well be interested in a good APS-C or APS-H body. I have a 7D and a 1DIV, but I currently don't use them, because the 1DX and 5DIII is so much better. A 7D-II and/or a 1DV could well change that.


----------



## Woody (Oct 9, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re also told any follow-up to the EOS 7D will get a new sensor and not use the 20.2mp sensor that is found in the EOS 70D.



The sensor may be different, but the still image quality will be nearly the same, just like the 70D 20 MP sensor vs 700D 18 MP sensor. IOW, zero improvement in dynamic range.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 9, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> <div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14476\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14476\">Tweet</a></div>
> <p><strong>Canon EOS 7D Mark II
> 
> 
> ...



The 70D is pretty much the same spec as a 7D mkI with a few tweeks and a few extra bells. The 7D mk II will need a strong progression to hold onto it's premium price point and model placement. I'm asuming the aspiration and promotion of the XXD linage to the current 70D is an indictaor that the 7DII will indeed push the boundaries of the 7D lineage....pro level AF, low iso noise, improved DR, fast frame rate are all needed in this sector. If we look at the 5DIII and it's relation to the 1Dx, the 7DII needs to improve on that basis and progress further, it's a newer model after all!


----------



## TrabimanUK (Oct 9, 2013)

Q2 of 2014?! So realistically that'll be Q3 2014 before it ships. Going to have to buy another MK1 for next year's safari then. Was hoping to have a new gun with high FPS and low noise to shoot the wildlife, oh well, looks like two older guns will have to do. Hey ho


----------



## xps (Oct 9, 2013)

TrabimanUK said:


> Q2 of 2014?! So realistically that'll be Q3 2014 before it ships. Going to have to buy another MK1 for next year's safari then. Was hoping to have a new gun with high FPS and low noise to shoot the wildlife, oh well, looks like two older guns will have to do. Hey ho



announced Q2/2014, ..... this means first free shipping Q4/2014 (maybe your christmas present) 
Buy an used MK1.


----------



## xps (Oct 9, 2013)

Eldar said:


> CANON PLEASE LISTEN: I DON'T DO VIDEO!!! I'M NOT INTERESTED IN VIDEO!!! I WANT A STILLS OPTIMIZES CAMERA!!!
> 
> Good to get it out ...
> 
> I want more pixles, improved dynamic range, higher fps, improved AF, improved silent mode, ruggedness and weather sealing, plus a few more. I prefer FF, but could well be interested in a good APS-C or APS-H body. I have a 7D and a 1DIV, but I currently don't use them, because the 1DX and 5DIII is so much better. A 7D-II and/or a 1DV could well change that.



Canon wil NOT listen.... except their sales figures are located in the dive. Do not forget: Canon is brand-leader. Why change a winning team?


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 9, 2013)

Eldar said:


> Good to get it out ...



Just switch to Nikon - it's clear where Canon is going, they haven't got the low iso sensor iq of exmor but are compensating with dual pixel af, live view touch screen & a digic6+ with 1080/60p. And firmware gimmicks of course, my 6D can now play background music to a slideshow 

If Magic Lantern adds raw capability on top of that and the 22mp 7d2 has no moire like the 5d3, Canon will gain more video customers than it will loose amateur photogs that want cheap 14fps to machinegun wildlife... the 70d is "good enough" for that. If you want better, spend €15000 for a 1dx + lenses.


----------



## dw2013 (Oct 9, 2013)

I've just heard on the grapevine that the next Canon Camcorder to be released will also have a new 45mp FF sensor to take photo's with.... 

Seriously though, do people buy a Camcorder to take photo's?! If you want video, buy a camcorder...if you want photos, buy a DSLR. If you want both, buy an iPad or something!


----------



## BRNexus6 (Oct 9, 2013)

Well, I doubt it will cost $2000. Probably $1699 tops. If its more video oriented than it still needs to come with a swivel screen, headphone output, and get rid of the moire/aliasing like the 5D Mark lll did.


----------



## xps (Oct 9, 2013)

BRNexus6 said:


> Well, I doubt it will cost $2000. Probably $1699 tops. If its more video oriented than it still needs to come with a swivel screen, headphone output, and get rid of the moire/aliasing like the 5D Mark lll did.


70D is 1099€, I bet the 7D2 ist 2000-2500€


----------



## xps (Oct 9, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > Good to get it out ...
> ...



Canon should ask ML how to make their products better. ML seems to be superior in creating firmwares


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 9, 2013)

xps said:


> Canon should ask ML how to make their products better. ML seems to be superior in creating firmwares



I'm sure the Canon people are also very able, but they only put it to work on the 1d series ... for the cheaper cameras, it's all about stability and recycling the older fw (no updates, no support cost). Plus they are very busy crippling the cameras and adding things like playing music along the slide show


----------



## ICE (Oct 9, 2013)

> Yeah I don't use the video function on mine. But, as long as they don't compromise stills features in favour of video it doesn't bother me. Show me an improvement in ISO perf, a healthy burst and an upgrade to the focus system and I'll be sold.






> I want more pixels, improved dynamic range, higher fps, improved AF, improved silent mode, ruggedness and weather sealing, plus a few more. I prefer FF, but could well be interested in a good APS-C or APS-H body.



+1 and WiFi


----------



## xps (Oct 9, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > Canon should ask ML how to make their products better. ML seems to be superior in creating firmwares
> ...


Indeed. You are right.
Maybe Canon will cover up the not so good IQ with good music, when you lokk at your photos or videos. Like when you go shopping. :


----------



## gjones5252 (Oct 9, 2013)

Wow. lots of frustration about the video feature. Before you get to frustrated you should realize that DSLR became extremely more profitable when it increased its customer base. People everywhere are buying dslrs now that they can do both. People who also want a cheaper interchangeable lens system would gladly buy these over similar priced camcorder of far lesser quality.
Also if they get a new person to come on board the canon boat that is a whole new set of lenses, cameras and toys. If a current user buys one new camera its valuable and they love it but the margin difference is massive.
Be happy a bunch of video people decided to pump fountains of money into the R+D the help benefit your picture quality. Now feature wise it does seem that most features are coming out for video but look at the cameras that are out there 1dx and 5d3 are top of the line image producing machines. 
We will soon have a megapixelmonster. 
Both Photo and Video features have a huge dollar sign. I think it is silly to complain about something that will not disappear and according to historical pricing has not dramatically affected what either party is paying. 
Long term this is awesome. More customers to canon=more canon product=more product compatible with canon=more customers to canon. 
Its good for all of us. Don't get wadded up on the fact video features are part of the team now too.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Oct 9, 2013)

gjones5252 said:


> Wow. lots of frustration about the video feature. Before you get to frustrated you should realize that DSLR became extremely more profitable when it increased its customer base. People everywhere are buying dslrs now that they can do both. People who also want a cheaper interchangeable lens system would gladly buy these over similar priced camcorder of far lesser quality.
> Also if they get a new person to come on board the canon boat that is a whole new set of lenses, cameras and toys. If a current user buys one new camera its valuable and they love it but the margin difference is massive.
> Be happy a bunch of video people decided to pump fountains of money into the R+D the help benefit your picture quality. Now feature wise it does seem that most features are coming out for video but look at the cameras that are out there 1dx and 5d3 are top of the line image producing machines.
> We will soon have a megapixelmonster.
> ...



+1 people whine way too much about video on a dslr and have very selfish reasons to do so. If you don't like it, simply don't use it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 9, 2013)

Harry Muff said:


> Add me to the list of people sick of paying all that extra cash for a function I don't want.



How much extra cash do you think you're paying?


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 9, 2013)

it is fine with me that 
* Canon camcorders are available with a lens mount compatible with EF lenses 
* Canon has a wide range of video-optimized cameras on offer, both in the shape of classical camcorders (C100/300/500) and in DSLR-shape (1Dc)
* videographers are happy to buy and use all sorts of Canon equipment 

BUT ... I am really pissed off that
* Canon has not a single stills-optimized camera in its entire current lineup 
* Canon optimizes all camera sensors to capture hours and hours of video at a time which undoubtedly comes at the expense of highest quality stills capture 
* No Canon sensor is able to yield stills images that match and surpass competitor's products in terms of resolution and dynamic range and low noise/no banding at low and hi ISO settings any longer
* 18+ MP sensors in stills cameras being wasted on capturing video @2MP of resolution (Full HD, 1920x1080x) 
* Canon puts a marked-in-red "Record video" buttons in a prime ergonomic location on every camera 
* this button is not even user-assignable to do something useful for stills capture
* Canon menu systems getting bloated with lots of video-related stuff
* and all the many other - partially hidden - compromises forced upon stills photographers 

And all of this only because Canon decides to charge a f*cking ton of money for video gear and significantly less money for video-compromised stills cameras. 


PS: this is not "whining", this is a proper rant!


----------



## Woody (Oct 9, 2013)

gjones5252 said:


> Its good for all of us. Don't get wadded up on the fact video features are part of the team now too.



It all sounds good except Canon seems to be crippling the video capability on their DSLRs... Don't believe? Just look at what MagicLantern did with video features on Canon DSLRs. Ironic isn't it? They are afraid DSLR sales will eat into their camcorder business.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 9, 2013)

Woody said:


> It all sounds good except Canon seems to be crippling the video capability on their DSLRs



There's a difference between "crippling" and "not implementing": removing features like afma 50d->60d, removing save sources on hdr/multlexpo 5d3->6d = crippling; not adding raw capability that has never been there is something else.

Problem is that there is a fine line between those though, you can see the moiré on the 20mp ff 6d sensor or the limited sd card write speed as "crippling" or not, according to personal views.


----------



## vlim (Oct 9, 2013)

I'm glad to have buy a new 70d for 892 € (and don't wait for the 7D II) and be happy about how it performs !


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2013)

Harry Muff said:


> Add me to the list of people sick of paying all that extra cash for a function I don't want.



It's not that easy... yes, it does cost more to develop the firmware features for video, but the addition of video increases the sales, which gets you better economy of scale pricing.... the balance point is anyone's guess...


----------



## pedro (Oct 9, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> <div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14476\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=14476\">Tweet</a></div>
> <p><strong>Canon EOS 7D Mark II
> 
> 
> ...


*New sensor: what would that mean? techwise, nm-wise? any guesses?*


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 9, 2013)

pedro said:


> *New sensor: what would that mean? techwise, nm-wise? any guesses?*



my guess: 24 MP, dual-pixel AF and IQ, DR, noise/banding ... like 70D and just a bit below next Nikon [D7200].


----------



## pierlux (Oct 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Harry Muff said:
> 
> 
> > Add me to the list of people sick of paying all that extra cash for a function I don't want.
> ...



Exactly. Nearly nothing. 

And let me say, just implementing the dual pixel CMOS AF, regardless of any other video feature which might be added to the 7DII, would suffice for considering it "more video oriented" than the current 7D. Anyway, Magic Lantern _docet_, there's plenty of functions Canon could introduce in the next bodies, if only they felt doing so does not impair their Cinema EOS cameras' sales.

Talking about sensor and pixel density, I'm still hoping for a (relatively) low MP count 7DII, in the range of 14 - 16. Let me explain. Today, the reasons for choosing an APS-C body are: price, compactness and reach. According to rumors, the 7DII is not going to be a cheap cam, it may even be a "baby 1DX" with integrated grip; if so, price and compactness are ruled out. Pricewise, a better choice could be either the 6D or the 5DIII. Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact. So, IQ-wise, I'm not going to spend as much money as the 5DIII costs on a hi-MP 7DII if I could not take advantage of the only advantage I'd care about: reach.

I'm hoping Canon to bring on a lo-MP, monster-framerate, good hi-ISO IQ, as-much-as-they-want-video-oriented (I don't care, but I know I'm not spending any extra cash on it), pro-grade weather sealed 7DII.

Cheers!


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 9, 2013)

pierlux said:


> And let me say, just implementing the dual pixel CMOS AF, regardless of any other video feature which might be added to the 7DII, would suffice for considering it "more video oriented" than the current 7D.



You probably will change your mind because dual pixel (only usable in lv) af goes along with a touch screen, which might mean less weight will be put into the vf and phase af ...

... and since you're supposed to use the comfort of the touch screen, they could very well change the ergonomics like reducing the wheel size or less old-school buttons.


----------



## pierlux (Oct 9, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> pierlux said:
> 
> 
> > And let me say, just implementing the dual pixel CMOS AF, regardless of any other video feature which might be added to the 7DII, would suffice for considering it "more video oriented" than the current 7D.
> ...



Good points! You're perfectly right, nevertheless I don't see Canon dropping the dual pixel AF tech in any of their future cams, provided they are video capable, which means probably all of them. If your statement refers to the fact that I, like many others, don't care much about video, I'm with you on this one generally speaking, except that in the specific case of the 7DII I don't see both the situations you fear will occur. In particular,



Marsu42 said:


> ...might mean less weight will be put into the vf and phase af ...


not necessarily, and certainly not in a classy 7DII as it is rumored to be. Since both the 70D viewfinder and phase AF have been improved with respect to the 60D, I can't imagine this not happening in the 7D --> 7DII transition also.



Marsu42 said:


> ...they could very well change the ergonomics like reducing the wheel size or less old-school buttons.


I'm a little more concerned on this one because it's exactly what happened along the 50D-->60D-->70D pathway. It must be noticed, however, that the ergonomics change, and particularly the wheel size reduction, came together with a reduction of the overall body size; I'm not expecting a smaller 7DII, I'd rather expect it to grow in size and weight (maybe 100% wf and integrated grip), so I hope no change for the worse in the ergonomics.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Harry Muff said:
> 
> 
> > Add me to the list of people sick of paying all that extra cash for a function I don't want.
> ...



The number is negative.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 9, 2013)

pierlux said:


> Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.



It's not only not a fact, it's a fact that that fact is flat out wrong.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > *New sensor: what would that mean? techwise, nm-wise? any guesses?*
> ...



My guess - greater than 22.1 megapixels. That gives you 3x1920 pixels across, allowing for easy bining of a 3x3 pixel block from the sensor into a single pixel of 1920x1080 video... add a few pixels to each side for video stabilization and the 24MP sensor looks very likely.

Tech wise, I think it's a given that it is dual-pixel technology... but I'd like to see Canon playing with the two halves and set them to different ISO for more DR... or even alternate between vertical and horizontal splits to improve the AF...

I'd like to see the mirror and shutter disappear so we have a truly digital DSLR, but I doubt that the technology is ready yet....that's for the future...


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 9, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> My guess - greater than 22.1 megapixels. That gives you 3x1920 pixels across, allowing for easy bining of a 3x3 pixel block from the sensor into a single pixel of 1920x1080 video... add a few pixels to each side for video stabilization and the 24MP sensor looks very likely.



How is binning at 3x3 on a grid that repeats at 2x2 easy?



> I'd like to see the mirror and shutter disappear so we have a truly digital DSLR, but I doubt that the technology is ready yet....that's for the future...



The shutter can go. I still need the mirror, and will continue to need it for the foreseeable future.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> pierlux said:
> 
> 
> > Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.
> ...



Speaking from experience.... a 60D with a 70-200 gives better bird pictures than a 5DII with a 70-200.... and a 5DII with a 28F2.8 takes better landscape pictures than a 60D with a 28F2.8.... and I think that most of us would agree that a 7D is better than a 60D.

Blanket statements are usually wrong.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > My guess - greater than 22.1 megapixels. That gives you 3x1920 pixels across, allowing for easy bining of a 3x3 pixel block from the sensor into a single pixel of 1920x1080 video... add a few pixels to each side for video stabilization and the 24MP sensor looks very likely.
> ...



It's easier than with ratios like 2.7..... (the 5184 pixels across of the 18M sensors), but 2 is super-easy.....

I wonder if that ratio has anything to do with reducing moire??????


----------



## pierlux (Oct 9, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> pierlux said:
> 
> 
> > Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.
> ...



Well... you're right. First because I wrote 5DII instead of 5DIII, which is the cam I was actually talking about, second because I missed to specify "at high ISOs", which is often the situation you're into when shooting fast action sports, birds or wildlife in general. I remember several threads, and some comparison sample pictures also, which appeared here on CR (and massively in some other forums) concerning this matter: not considering the loss of resolution, simply IQ-wise, hi-ISO FF crops looked better than uncropped APS-Cs to my eye. But, please, don't ask for links, I'm too lazy to look for old CR threads now, let alone other websites... I just want to mention what I always say, that a 8 MP clean image is better than a 18 MP noisy one. You can always apply NR, but then you lose detail, anyway.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 9, 2013)

xps said:


> Canon should ask ML how to make their products better. ML seems to be superior in creating firmwares



ML is just a few people working without documentation (a few more them and with full docs perhaps they might be better though). The Canon team could likely do better and even faster since they have full docs and more man power. It's Canon marketing and MBA droids who keep their engineers in the dungeon and restrict what they can do and have them cripple this that and everything else.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 9, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > It all sounds good except Canon seems to be crippling the video capability on their DSLRs
> ...



it is still crippling if it could've been implemeneted and marketing told them not too, now RAW is a bit of a tricky thing maybe you don't count that at the time since it needed ultra-fast cards etc. etc. but zebras/focus peaking/live 10x view boxes, intervalometers, etc. etc. is all crippling. And even just the video quality. Why is HDMI clean out mush compared to ML RAW? ok, maybe it might just be that digic is a really crappy image processor and it's not crippling, hard to say, it could be crippling, it might be poor design for digic (it is interesting ot note that they decided to use old video chips in the C100 line and not digic; but if digic is the problem, well they had a lot of years after the 5D2 to fix up digic but maybe marketing was like why bother we don't want it to compete with C100 and so on so then we are back to crippling once again)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 9, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> pierlux said:
> 
> 
> > Reach? Assuming we all care about IQ, it's a consolidated opinion by now that a cropped image taken with the 5DII looks better than one taken with the 7D. Better still, it's more than an opinion, it's a fact.
> ...



Yeah it's extremely flat out wrong. I've owned both and I even sold the 7D to buy a 5D3 so it's not like I'm biased in favor of the 7D because that is the one I own. 7D has better IQ per sensor area than the 5D2 (now it has a lot less sensor area so when NOT reach limited sure the 5D2 wins).


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Oct 9, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > Canon should ask ML how to make their products better. ML seems to be superior in creating firmwares
> ...



I think Canon definitely helped ML with the latest raw video development. The timing with the "aha" moment is just too suspicious. But for the most part I think you are right about the Canon MBA droids.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 9, 2013)

pierlux said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > pierlux said:
> ...



7D still does better when reach limited even at high ISO than the 5D2, it simply has a more efficient sensor per area

the 5D3 sensor is a little bit more efficient per area than the 7D so you do get a bit better SNR from the 5D3 in all cases but the extra density of the 7D still makes it better than the 5D3 for reach limited scenarios in most cases, even at ISO3200 I have some real world bird pics I took with both and I prefer the 7D versions

if you scaled the 7D reach limited subjects down to 5D3 size the SNR isn't THAT much different, although a bit worse, but they have less moire/de-bayer artifacts; if you keep them full res they show a lot more detail (for high contrast subjects not in the darkest parts of the frame even at ISO6400 they pull a lot more detail)

less contrasty, darker subjects in darker parts of the frame might come out worse overall at high iso with teh 7D than with the 5D3 though even when reach limited (when not reach limited 5D3 obviously better)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Oct 9, 2013)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > xps said:
> ...



It was a bit curious that it occurred right at the same time that the official video firmware upgrade (which has been considered quite a let down) came out. It could be coincidence though, of course. But maybe it was some engineers frustrated and wanting to see their HW do what it could do and they tossed out hints without management knowing. Or maybe some in management let them to take heat off the video firwmare having taken ages and done so little. Who knows. Prob either engineers doing it on their own or coincidence.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 9, 2013)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> I think Canon definitely helped ML with the latest raw video development. The timing with the "aha" moment is just too suspicious.



Of course I don't know, and the ml devs who might have gotten help won't tell (not that they've signed an nda, but they don't want to mess up the neutral stance with Canon) ... 

... however: I doubt it. Don't underestimate what these ml people can do by careful reverse engineering, they're very able with the tools and if it's absolutely stunning how they've recreated the Canon api just by these means. They might be working for free, but not because they're incompetent, but because detective work and coding for a dslr also a lot of fun.

Canon can only "help" by speeding up the process, but sooner or later every capability of the digic and system will be found, it's not encrypted after all.


----------



## Etienne (Oct 10, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?
> ...



+1000

Dissing video means you are afraid of the future
It's here to stay.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 10, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > I for one don't mind having the dual functionality.
> ...



A 30 frame buffer on the 7D2 would be great, but that puts it on-par with the 1Dx. I'm afraid of the pricing Canon might want to apply if they actually make the 7D2 a crop sensor 1Dx.


----------



## mps (Oct 10, 2013)

Etienne said:


> Dissing video means you are afraid of the future
> It's here to stay.



true - and lets not forget - when you come home, fall down on your couch and start getting brainwashed by TV - lots of this stuff is shot with these cameras! as a matter of fact, most of our movies (we shoot docs for german TV, quotas about 12-15% aka 10 million viewers) is a combination of pmw200 footage (4;2;2 50 mbit to meet broadcast requirements) and low DoF 7D footage - its a perfect combination!


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Oct 10, 2013)

Improved high ISO video performance would be very welcome. 7d footage at 1600 and above just looks horrible. I understand how the smaller pixel size on APS-C sensors is a limitation, but it would be SOO nice to have a Canon crop at least equal to just the Mark *II* as far video ISO performance.

Would it be possible to create a ~24mp APS-C sensor (so lets say pixel size of: 4µm) but use larger pixels (something closer to full frame size: 6.4µm.....or even bigger like 8µm) for the pixels designated for video, (resulting in AWESOME low-light performance)? Or does having different pixel sizes on the same sensor simply not work for whatever reason?

And I can think of a ton of photo applications for such technology as well. I'm one of those weirdos who would love a 8-10MP camera with ridiculous pixel size and thus great high ISO performance. Plus getting 14fps+ should be a breeze with that image size.


----------



## garyknrd (Oct 10, 2013)

Canon has backed itself in a corner. Canon does not have the sensor technology now to offer an update IMO.
Time to move on. I am selling the 7D. I put the brakes on buying new Canon equipment when they failed to deliver a good crop camera for me. Now 1 year since I stopped buying Canon gear.

Fortunately I have some good lenses for Pentax. With the new K-3. If AF is fairly accurate I am moving on.

If and when a new enthusiast Canon crop camera materializes. Then I will think about it.


----------



## pwp (Oct 10, 2013)

Sella174 said:


> How about the *7D Mark II* being basically a 70D, but with a sensor which starts with ISO 800 ... meaning it has an optimised, high-ISO sensor designed for high-speed and low-light photography.


You wouldn't want to leave home without a good set of ND filters...

-pw


----------



## AprilForever (Oct 10, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?
> ...



Because I don't want to expand to video. I actually have shot video with the 7D, for pay, for a small independent video I will never name (it was that bad... but money is money... ). I don't like shooting video. I like stills. I want a camera completely optomized for stills, and I don't like paying money for video. 

Video is a totally different world than stills; I can only do so much well, and working on video is somethign I would rather trim than have to deal with.


----------



## bvukich (Oct 10, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


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



Photosensors are in a 2x2 grid, but you're not binning a quad of photosensors; just the reds together, greens together (x2), and blues together... So yes, it is easy.

In the attached image you bin the following:
r1+r1+r1+r1+r1+r1+r1+r1+r1=r1'
g₁1+g₁1+g₁1+g₁1+g₁1+g₁1+g₁1+g₁1+g₁1=g₁1'
g₂1+g₂1+g₂1+g₂1+g₂1+g₂1+g₂1+g₂1+g₂1=g₂1'
b1+b1+b1+b1+b1+b1+b1+b1=b1'
And you bin down right back into a bayer pattern which you can than save as-is, or demosaic, or whatever.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Oct 10, 2013)

Add me to the list of "No video functions". I have the 5D Mark II and haven't touched the video portion at all. If I want to do video, I'll hire someone or get a dedicated video cam....


----------



## Lawliet (Oct 10, 2013)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Or does having different pixel sizes on the same sensor simply not work for whatever reason?


You'd need an AA-filter with adjustable strength. Possible, but has Canon the proper patents?
And then pattern noise and assorted nastiness with the on sensor wiring come up.

Better bet: do it like the 70D for AF, read multiple subsensels together. Instead of just the AF-parts combine 18 elements from 9 AF capable sensels a 22+ MP sensor would have for fHD video. Less noise-both from the area as well as statistical cancellation of readout noise, the latter being Canons weak spot atm-, and with the right interweaving reduced moire.


----------



## TheJock (Oct 10, 2013)

I don’t know why the video function on our EOS’ is such a major issue with everyone, I’ve personally never used it, in fact I’d need to get the user manual out to begin with, but I know it’s there and that makes me happy. It’s like that old situation, you’re in a pub in Glasgow on a Saturday night and you hit the jackpot with the honey of your dreams, I’d rather know I had that condom!!!!! 

But back on topic, I ‘m looking forward to the 7D MKII release as it’ll force the price of the 7D MKI and 70D down some more, then I’ll be able to buy one of the later and an “L” series lens!!


----------



## moreorless (Oct 10, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> What could you add to the 70D to make it more video oriented?
> 
> Hybrid EVF/OVF viewfinder?



If it can be achieved I think this could be the best move, the new 7D would seem like the perfect camera to introduce it on as it looks like it might struggle to differentiate itself otherwise.


----------



## TheJock (Oct 10, 2013)

xps said:


> BRNexus6 said:
> 
> 
> > Well, I doubt it will cost $2000. Probably $1699 tops. If its more video oriented than it still needs to come with a swivel screen, headphone output, and get rid of the moire/aliasing like the 5D Mark lll did.
> ...


I know this may be irrelevant to most, however; the 70D (body only) is currently 804 Euro’s in Dubai, or 1,105 Euro’s with the 18-135 IS STM, so if your passing through and plan on purchasing one, there’s some good deals here.


----------



## M.ST (Oct 10, 2013)

The actual prototypes that are out for testing don´t have the 70D sensor, a CF card slot, a fixed display, no stupid RATE-button, AEB like the 5D Mark III, a better AF system as the 70D, AF works down to -3 EV and are NOT video oriented. It´s a camera for semipro photographers, but you can make good videos with it.

The Mark II is a perfect camera for all photographers who want an APS-C body for all possible shots. Sports, Action and Wildlife shots included.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 10, 2013)

M.ST said:


> don´t have the 70D sensor



Meaning better low-light / higher shutter speed capability, or just some more mp like the current 18mp->20mp aps-c?


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 10, 2013)

bvukich said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



That method throws away half the light collected.

The 2x2 approach bins the 2 greens, 1 red and 1 blue in the block into 1 RGB pixel. Simple and no light lost.

Rather than do the above, why not demosaic and interpolate with a simple interpolation method like bilinear? That way, you'd at least keep all the light.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 10, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...


?????????

Where is there light being thrown away?

A normal pixel is 1 red, 1 blue, and 2 greens divided by 2... Let's say you have an 8 bit a/d converter.... that gives you a 24 bit pixel and you have 8 stops of dynamic range..

Bin 9 pixels together... (for ease of math I will just use 8 of the 9 pixels) with an 8 bit a/d converter you get an 11 bit number, or a 33 bit pixel, or 11 stops of dynamic range.... no light is lost, it is all summed up in the final number... you are trading resolution for dynamic range.


----------



## pedro (Oct 10, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > bvukich said:
> ...



*you are trading resolution for dynamic range.*
don't understand any tech but a trade of res for dr would be the deal for many folks, I guess. anyway, I am all for high ISOs. But I can imagine, this might have its impact on high ISOs as well. Or is it like this: either better high ISOs or better DR? I don't know nothing about tech acutally, so thank you for any help.

I like every improvement on every body level as it will pay off in the next 5Ds as well 8)


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 10, 2013)

pedro said:


> *you are trading resolution for dynamic range.*
> don't understand any tech but a trade of res for dr would be the deal for many folks, I guess.



Thing is, the 3x3 binning example would mean an 89% resolution loss (8/9) and much smaller gains in DR. A/D is not 8 but 14 or 16 bit these days. A 24 MP sensor would only yield 2.5 MP resolution. Good enough for HD video, but not for stills.


----------



## RGF (Oct 10, 2013)

Hope we get a mini 1Dx.


----------



## TrabimanUK (Oct 10, 2013)

+1 - Mini 1Dx


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 10, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > *you are trading resolution for dynamic range.*
> ...


I used 8 bit for ease of math  

Since bining came up concerning video (1920x3 pixels across on a new sensor???), a 3x3 bining would be great for video. Bining could also be used in still modes as a tradeoff between resolution and DR... the great thing about using bining is that is implimented in software... if you want it, turn it on, if you don't, turn it off.... sort of like having a 24Mp sensor, a 6Mp sensor (3000x2000) and 2 stops DR gain with 2x2 bining, a 2.67Mp sensor (2000x1333) and 3 stops DR gain with 3x3 bining, and a 1.5Mp sensor (1500x1000) and 4 stops gain with 4x4 bining.... enought resolution for publishing on the web...

Of course, any of this would hinge on image formats that could store and/or use any extra dynamic range....


----------



## bvukich (Oct 10, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



I'm sorry, but you apparently don't understand what binning is.

You're saying instead of demosaicing just use each 2x2 block of subpixels to create one rgb pixel. That is not binning, and would really gain you nothing. It should probably be better than line skipping, though. However this is not binning.

Binning is adding the signals from all the same colored subpixels a square block (the way phase one does it is slightly more complex, each color is in a square, but the squares for each color that are combined are offset). Binning reduces noise (main reason for doing it), and should improve low light performance (since the "metapixel" collects photons like an equivalent size pixel would. The tradeoff is reduced resolution (which is not an issue for video) and increased moire/aliasing because the AA filter is effectively nullified.


----------



## ashmadux (Oct 10, 2013)

trulandphoto said:


> I, for one, am a bit tired of my bodies being "video oriented". My 5DII, 7D and 60D have not shot a second of video. I guess I'll just have to hang on to them until the pendulum swings a bit in the other direction.



This.

I also shoot no video. I want a killer stills camera, preferably apsc because of prices. Features for improved stills shooting have come to a grinding halt, except for some gradual iso improvements- since 2009.

Pretty damn sad.


----------



## mkabi (Oct 10, 2013)

trulandphoto said:


> I, for one, am a bit tired of my bodies being "video oriented". My 5DII, 7D and 60D have not shot a second of video. I guess I'll just have to hang on to them until the pendulum swings a bit in the other direction.



I hate people that own multiple bodies, complain about the next iteration of canons not having enough megapixels and complain about video capabilities. (Sounds like a spoiled brat). In my opinion, save your money and invest in a medium format camera!!!

It gives you all the MP you want.... which in turn has amazing IQ.... and guess what? No video!


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Oct 10, 2013)

mkabi said:


> trulandphoto said:
> 
> 
> > I, for one, am a bit tired of my bodies being "video oriented". My 5DII, 7D and 60D have not shot a second of video. I guess I'll just have to hang on to them until the pendulum swings a bit in the other direction.
> ...



Now now, no need to resort to name calling. The video nay sayers can cry foolishly all by themselves in their little corner. I mean, it's obvious that video changed the price of the bodies, and even the lenses. For example, It's definitely not the dramatic performance upgrade to the 5D3 that supposedly made it so unaffordable. And the bayer sensors they've been using this entire time even before video was added isn't holding development back at all, no, supposedly it's....dun dun dunnnn. Video. Thanks to video, we couldn't have 62 AF points instead of 61 on the 1D-X. Boo frikkity hoo. How can I press the shutter button now knowing my camera has features I don't use, oh no. This is worse than the print button. Save me.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 10, 2013)

bvukich said:


> I'm sorry, but you apparently don't understand what binning is.
> 
> You're saying instead of demosaicing just use each 2x2 block of subpixels to create one rgb pixel. That is not binning, and would really gain you nothing.



It's binning the two green pixels and it's what's used in the C300:

http://downloads.canon.com/CDLC/EOS_C300_RGB_Resolution_Considerations_in_New_CMOS_Sensor_12-19-2011.pdf


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 10, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > bvukich said:
> ...



I guess I misunderstood your figure. I thought the top-left red pixel was made by keeping the four reds and throwing out the greens and blues in that 3x3 block, and the same for the other final blocks.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 10, 2013)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Improved high ISO video performance would be very welcome. 7d footage at 1600 and above just looks horrible. I understand how the smaller pixel size on APS-C sensors is a limitation, but it would be SOO nice to have a Canon crop at least equal to just the Mark *II* as far video ISO performance.
> 
> Would it be possible to create a ~24mp APS-C sensor (so lets say pixel size of: 4µm) but use larger pixels (something closer to full frame size: 6.4µm.....or even bigger like 8µm) for the pixels designated for video, (resulting in AWESOME low-light performance)? Or does having different pixel sizes on the same sensor simply not work for whatever reason?
> 
> And I can think of a ton of photo applications for such technology as well. I'm one of those weirdos who would love a 8-10MP camera with ridiculous pixel size and thus great high ISO performance. Plus getting 14fps+ should be a breeze with that image size.



Ugh, the "large pixel" myth rears its ugly head again. Lower resolution sensors gain you nothing but a smaller file size. Full frame sensors are better in low light because of increased total surface area.



bvukich said:


> Binning is adding the signals from all the same colored subpixels a square block (the way phase one does it is slightly more complex, each color is in a square, but the squares for each color that are combined are offset). Binning reduces noise (main reason for doing it), and should improve low light performance (since the "metapixel" collects photons like an equivalent size pixel would. The tradeoff is reduced resolution (which is not an issue for video) and increased moire/aliasing because the AA filter is effectively nullified.



Binning should be standard practice for photographs as well as video, given that the display industry has always counted multiple sub pixels as a single pixel.


It's actually kind of disheartening to think that a 24MP bayer filter sensor is actually producing a 6MP image by any other standard. Yes they do a very good job of interpolating data, but you're still not getting true RGB color on a per pixel basis, and with an AA filter you're throwing out all the fine details anyway. With my 5D2 I can easily cut the resolution in half with minimal loss of detail.
If someone wants a "real" 8MP camera they should actually be asking for a 32MP bayer filter with binned output.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 10, 2013)

Chosenbydestiny said:


> This is worse than the print button. Save me.



good comparison ;D 

* Both, the ubiquitous marked-in-red red "record video" button on every DSLRS and the former 
"direct print button" are utterly useless to the overwhelming majority of DSLR users.

* Both are not user-reassignable to something useful. 

* direct print buttons were out of the way, somewhere on the left side of the camera body and did not interfere with stills capture ever

* The marked in red "capture stupid video"-button is directly under users thumbs in a prime ergobnomic property location on every camera today

* Direct print buttons are gone, the record video button unfortunately is still around


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 10, 2013)

I was playing around with the diffraction calculator here (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm)
It looks like 64MP is about the highest resolution I would want on a Canon APS-C bayer sensor, details would still be pristine at f4, and only a little degraded (from the insane 64MP native resolution) at f5.6. I have to wonder how binning would affect diffraction though, if a 64MP bayer image binned to 16MP would go back to being diffraction limited only above f8.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 10, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> Chosenbydestiny said:
> 
> 
> > ...Boo frikkity hoo. How can I press the shutter button now knowing my camera has features I don't use, oh no. This is worse than the print button. Save me.
> ...



On my 7D the video button is also the live-view button and you have to move a switch over in order to shoot video. I guess I don't really need a live view button, but I'm not expecting Canon to reconfigure their bodies just to suit my personal taste. 

Don't people have better things to do than fixate on this? It's about as productive as demanding that car manufacturers remove electric windows because you are capable of cranking the window down by hand.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 11, 2013)

Chosenbydestiny said:


> I mean, it's obvious that video changed the price of the bodies



Indeed - since Magic Lantern added 1080p raw capability to the 5d3 a few month ago the price has not been going down anymore but rather up afaik, due to the demand from the video crowd :-o


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 11, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> Chosenbydestiny said:
> 
> 
> > I mean, it's obvious that video changed the price of the bodies
> ...



How does ML explain the price increase on some lenses, or the price decrease on others?


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 11, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> How does ML explain the price increase on some lenses, or the price decrease on others?



There is? With my budget being spend for this century, I now don't follow lens prices anymore :-o 

Anyway: I was stating an observation, and I know that a correlation is not a causality... but it stands to reason with the 5d3 being an extremely good raw video camera (next to the 50d, that is) with a big community to provide the necessary raw workflow there will be additional demand - even lensrentals seems to have ml-equipped cameras now.


----------



## Raja Baruah (Oct 12, 2013)

Very happy if canon 7D MkII will come with a swiveling LCD!! Think a swiveling LCD will help lot in DSLR Videography!!


----------



## Loren E (Oct 14, 2013)

A 7DII with slight megapixel increase, awesome high ISO, AF system from 5Dmk III and same build/FPS as the current 7D...a lot of wildlife and sports shooters would be pretty pleased I think!


----------



## mkabi (Oct 14, 2013)

Raja Baruah said:


> Very happy if canon 7D MkII will come with a swiveling LCD!! Think a swiveling LCD will help lot in DSLR Videography!!



Not going to happen... destroys the purpose of indestructibility and weatherproofing.
If you have the swivel open and you drop the DSLR, its going to break. 
Too many creases between the swivel parts that make it less waterproof.

If you like swivel screen so much stick with the 70D.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 14, 2013)

mkabi said:


> Not going to happen... destroys the purpose of indestructibility and weatherproofing.
> If you have the swivel open and you drop the DSLR, its going to break.
> Too many creases between the swivel parts that make it less waterproof.



This is an urban legend, of course you can make a waterproof swivel screen, man has been to the moon. 

And the "it might break if open" is like "you must not use a flash on a hotshoe, it will break if dropped" or "only use p&s with retractable lens, a lens on a dslr will break"... the swivel screen only on the 60d/70d and not on 7d is because 7d is older, and might not on 7d2 because of product differentiation and people believe this legend. Furthermore, you'll usually use the swivel screen when on tripod, and it makes a great screen *protector* when turned inwards.


----------



## Loren E (Oct 14, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> Loren E said:
> 
> 
> > A 7DII with slight megapixel increase, awesome high ISO, AF system from 5Dmk III and same build/FPS as the current 7D...a lot of wildlife and sports shooters would be pretty pleased I think!
> ...



I should have qualified "awesome" - I'm not asking for 5DmkIII high ISO obviously since a couple years of sensor development won't trump a significantly larger sensor of course - I'm talking D7100 awesome which I found to have much better high ISO performance than 7D.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Oct 14, 2013)

9VIII said:


> CarlMillerPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Improved high ISO video performance would be very welcome. 7d footage at 1600 and above just looks horrible. I understand how the smaller pixel size on APS-C sensors is a limitation, but it would be SOO nice to have a Canon crop at least equal to just the Mark *II* as far video ISO performance.
> ...



You don't seem to understand the relationship between pixel size and signal to noise ratio. All other factors equal, larger pixels collect more light than smaller ones, thus giving them better noise performance. It's not a "myth," it's physics.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 14, 2013)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > CarlMillerPhoto said:
> ...



It's true if everything else is equal or the same. Nikon have gained a bit of DR by placing their D/A converted earlier in the on chip processing path than Canon which is wjy they ahve a little more DR at the moment, but it's not a huge difference. Processing, chip design and on chip NR all have an effect on iso noise performance. But yes, the general rule is smaller the pixels, the greater the noise. 
But here' the irony, the physical size of the pixel is the same for all DSLR's....it's the size of the bin which it sits in that collects the quality of light. This bin (with the pixel sitting at the bottom) is capped off with a micro lens which more directs light to it. Once upon a time, the iso noise was controlled by the size of the microlenses. Every time there was a jump in MP, Canon would make the micro lenses proportionally bigger to equalise the iso noise...then Nikon spoiled it all and used the largest possible (gapless) on a full frame 12 mp sensor in the D3...thus shooting themselves in the foot for a short term iso advantage. Once the public got used to that level of iso performance...they demanded al the time...even from cameras with twice the resolution, whihc has caused the entire processing path to be re-designed to extract the maximum performance. I doubt that there will be much increase in MP goign forwards....I think the Nikon D800 has proved that point. More MP means more resolution at low iso values...but really poor iso performance at high iso values. Canon is wise sticking to the ~20mp region for a while. It's the best res / iso ratio. 
If we consider the slight difference in iso abilities between the 1Dx, 6D and 5DIII...it's clear that it's purely the quantity of MP which is dictating the iso abilities. Slightly lower mp = slightly improved Iso performance.
If we consider the abilities of the 1Dx, it's quite extraordinary. 18mp, 12 fps and iso 6400 is SO clean!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 14, 2013)

Loren E said:


> A 7DII with slight megapixel increase, awesome high ISO, AF system from 5Dmk III and same build/FPS as the current 7D...a lot of wildlife and sports shooters would be pretty pleased I think!



The problem with the current 7D (which I discovered quite early on...I was an early adoptor and then defector) is with the sensor not the rest of the camera. In fact it's a fantastic camera, let down by it's mediocre sensor performance. 18mp is fine, no issues there. But I found a lack of micro contrast, a certain milkyness and softness at 100% which I've not seen in any other Canon DSLR. I needed to selectively sharpen it's images. I concluded that this was due to an over active Aliasing filter to smooth out video footage. 
I found it's iso performance quite poor too. I was seeing a stop and a half loss against a 5DII, even at Iso 400 I saw a lot of noise. 
While I liked it's handling, 8fps and great AF system (for then), I found it's IQ and sensor to be lacking. Maybe this will improve with the mkII..I hope so, this camera deserves a better sensor.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 14, 2013)

CarlMiller is right:


CarlMillerPhoto said:


> *All other factors equal*, larger pixels collect more light than smaller ones, thus giving them better noise performance. It's not a "myth," it's physics.



However in real life, "all other factors are rarely ever equal".  
In real life, Nikon/Sony (currently) have simply better sensors than Canon. Twice the resolution and yet significantly better dynamic range - on the same sensor surface area. As nicely demonstrated in the chart posted by Canonpekka.


CanonPekka said:


> D800 and 1dx DR/iso



Canon needs to step up image quality offered, rather than just optimizing video features in its stills cameras. Nikon D7100 is too low a benchmark for a current 7D II. It needs to do even better, to be worthwhile.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 14, 2013)

mkabi said:


> Raja Baruah said:
> 
> 
> > Very happy if canon 7D MkII will come with a swiveling LCD!! Think a swiveling LCD will help lot in DSLR Videography!!
> ...



Canon have gone on record to say that they can't make a swivelling LCD screen which is robust enough to be classified as "Professional Grade". So we won't be seeing one on a 1D or 1X series.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 14, 2013)

mkabi said:


> Not going to happen... destroys the purpose of indestructibility and weatherproofing.
> If you have the swivel open and you drop the DSLR, its going to break.
> Too many creases between the swivel parts that make it less waterproof.
> 
> If you like swivel screen so much stick with the 70D.


As someone who has a 60D with 70,000 shots on it, and who takes the camera hiking and canoeing (not a pampered life), let me make a few comments about tilt-swivel screens....

Waterproofing - the 60D, with a tilt-swivel screen, is surprisingly well sealed. According to canon, the level of sealing is supposed to be the same as a 5D3, not as good as a 1Dx or 7D, but better than a 6D or the rebels.... You do not have to make the joints on a tilt-swivel mechanism waterproof, just the ends....

Protection - turn the screen around and it is protected from scratches... Mine is still scratch free, something which can not be said for my friends 5D2.... And her camera is less used than mine and has seen more gentle use.

Fragility - my local camera store says that they have seen more DSLR's with broken fixed screens than articulated screens (all manufacturers, not just Canon).... Perhaps it is because the "lower end" cameras get tossed instead if being fixed, but however you look at it, it is not a slam-dunk....perhaps transportation of a camera is more dangerous than usage of the camera?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 14, 2013)

The real fact is that EXMOR sensor has better DR up to ISO 400, and will match DR from ISO 800. I need the best possible image at ISO 1600 and above. I am satisfied with low ISO Canon, although current 7D needs a major improvement in this area with his successor.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 14, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > The real fact is that EXMOR sensor has better DR up to ISO 400, and will match DR from ISO 800. I need the best possible image at ISO 1600 and above. I am satisfied with low ISO Canon, although current 7D needs a major improvement in this area with his successor.
> ...


With all due respect, I disagree with the arguments you present. Everyone who saw images of the real world know that D7100 has noticeably better image than D5200 in all aspects, but DXO says otherwise. I will not even address the issues about how DXO is biased with different camera brands. Yes, 7D is already old lady and her replacement will be much better in noise and DR. Meanwhile 70D showed timid advances in these areas. But I tell you that even so I would choose 70D over D7100 because their images are more natural and pleasant at ISO 1600 and above for my look. If I wanted to shoot primarily at ISO 100, this time I could choose Nikon, but I do not remember when was the last time I used ISO 100 on a job.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 14, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> This is an urban legend, of course you can make a waterproof swivel screen, man has been to the moon.



Sure, one can be made. Panasonic's ToughBook convertible tablet has a water/dust resistant swivel display. The real question is, can Canon make a swivel LCD water resistant and robust enough with consideration for impact on production cost and/or sale price? 



CanonPekka said:


> Then Canon *must have a goal* which is to improve theirs APS sensors to meet Toshiba and Sonys APS-C high iso reproduction and resolution.



Why? 

Canon's real goal is to sell cameras, and to sell more cameras than the competition. Despite being 'behind' in sensor performance compared to Exmor sensors for the past several APS-C dSLR generations, Canon continues to outsell Nikon (and Sony remains a niche player). What lesson can Canon learn from this? That the performance of Canon's internally-produced sensors is good enough to support _market leading sales_. As the saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 14, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > CanonPekka said:
> ...


In the case of ISO 100, more pixel means better sharpness. When it comes to ISO 6400 and above, even DXO and their "mysterious" scores not say that more pixels mean better noise and DR.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 14, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...


It seems that Nokia has the best camera sensor with 41 megapixel. Only because of that, they will dominate the mobile phone market? If you depend on DXO MARK, Nokia Lumia 1020 should score higher than a Canon Rebel, but I do not give a damn about DXO MARK.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 14, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> it sounds like Nokia here in Finland, we all knows what happens when they are not up to date



+100!

I will definitely skip the Canon 7D II ... irrespective of when Canon finally releases it and what its specs may be. 

Compact, affordable FF-sensored mirrorless digital cameras are almost here. Not from Canon though ... oO 
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-hot-first-full-size-images-of-the-a7-and-a7r-cameras-with-lenses/


----------



## mkabi (Oct 14, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> mkabi said:
> 
> 
> > Not going to happen... destroys the purpose of indestructibility and weatherproofing.
> ...



Yes, and we have figured out how to travel through time too. I mean... man has been to the moon back in 1969, its been 44 years since then.... I'm sure the time machine was discovered, what 3 years later? And, what about those flying cars.... I own like 3 of those... I transformed my DeLorean into a flying time machine. 

External flash are add-ons, have you seen a magnesium alloy flash? They know that it will break.... thats why they are made of plastic. 

Even lenses are add-ons too.... some more durable than others.... you can't compare a 50 1.8 II vs 50 1.4 vs 50 1.2.... which do you think will break after one drop, after multiple drops, etc.?

Ultimately, you have to ask the question... why magnesium alloy body? Or waterproofing?
Why does anyone need that crap? The majority are cheapos that want everything for as little as possible and if the majority doesn't need magnesium alloy or waterproofing because they are going to use it indoors away from water and pools, and they aren't in the middle of a war or anything... it should be alright, right?
Do we serve the majority or the minority? Lets say 10% is the minority and the other 90% is the majority.
So product differentiation came along to help address these issues.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 14, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> And the "it might break if open" is like "you must not use a flash on a hotshoe, it will break if dropped"



Actually..... The base of a flash is designed to break off if too much stress is placed on it.... this is to protect the camera's hotshoe. I have not done this myself, but if you mount a large lens on the camera and try to pick it up by the flash, the base of the flash will break off.... too much stress...


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 14, 2013)

mkabi said:


> Ultimately, you have to ask the question... why magnesium alloy body? Or waterproofing?



Why indeed? A full-lmag body is more likely to crack if dropped than a more flexible plastic body which will bonce, at least that's what I've heard on CR from people having dropped both... and I can also state that the "plastic" 60d is surprisingly sturdy, if anything will break it'll be the lens or a lcd, swivel or not...

... and waterproofing: No eos camera is waterproof, try diving with a 1dx. It's just different levels of water resistance, and I'm sure before a well built swivel screen breaks the water has leaked into the camera in different places. Today I left my 6d at home to shoot mushroom macros, because the 60d has a swivel screen and I'd rather loose a bit of iq @iso100 than lie in the mud looking at the display for the whole day.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 14, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > CanonPekka said:
> ...


Nikon also does not manufacture the sensors from their cameras, but I must admit that they offer great quality at low ISO. That does not change the fact that at high ISO, Nikon does not have the same advantage. In fact the image quality depends on the set =sensor+electronic circuits+signal processing+lens. It turns out that the set mentioned above has advantages at the white side of the force (Canon) at least ISO 1600 or higher.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 14, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> ...Canon's real goal is to sell cameras, and to sell more cameras than the competition. Despite being 'behind' in sensor performance compared to Exmor sensors for the past several APS-C dSLR generations, Canon continues to outsell Nikon (and Sony remains a niche player). What lesson can Canon learn from this? That the performance of Canon's internally-produced sensors is good enough to support _market leading sales_. As the saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."



This is something gearheads never understand. "Best" almost never wins in the marketplace. "Good enough" almost always wins. The iPhone isn't the best smartphone, but it's good enough. Windows wasn't the best operating system, but it was good enough. VHS wasn't the best video technology, but it was good enough. The gasoline-powered internal combustion engine wasn't the best engine, but it was good enough. The list goes on and on. 

Heck, Canon was never the "best." When I bought my Canon F1 in the 1970s, it wasn't the best camera system. Among SLRs Nikon was considered the best and among 35mm cameras generally, Leica was the best. But, through shrewd marketing and perseverance, Canon overcame it's competitors and became the market leader. Superiority for the sake of superiority has never been Canon's objective. They grew to market dominance by providing a "good enough" system that balances cost and quality. Don't expect them to abandon that winning strategy just because gear geeks are upset about an irrelevant, marginal difference in lab tests.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 14, 2013)

unfocused said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ...Canon's real goal is to sell cameras, and to sell more cameras than the competition. Despite being 'behind' in sensor performance compared to Exmor sensors for the past several APS-C dSLR generations, Canon continues to outsell Nikon (and Sony remains a niche player). What lesson can Canon learn from this? That the performance of Canon's internally-produced sensors is good enough to support _market leading sales_. As the saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
> ...


+1
"The best" rarely gets purchased... "The best that I can afford" and "this meets my needs" are the two big sellers... That's why there are a lot more 5D's out there than 1DX's and that's why Rebels outsell the rest of the Canon DSLR lineup...


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 15, 2013)

While the original foundation of the company was (is?) to copy the best and make it affordable, I think the recent (20ish years) dominance of Canon is due to their focus on the interaction between the user and the camera.
It has been said that their success, even to this day, is largely due to the fast and wholesale adoption of autofocus in the early 90's; a feature that doesn't change the quality of the image at all, it just gets the camera to do something for you.
Under ideal conditions Image Stabilization doesn't have any affect on the image either, and Digital was actually detrimental to image quality for a while, but highly desirable from the user end. Now look at dual pixel AF, they could have done a bunch of different things with extra pixels, but of all those things they chose to use them to improve live view, what on this forum is usually considered to be a fairly obscure function.

The bottom line really is a fine line between high end and mass appeal though.
When I purchased my first camera in 2006 (a high end point and shoot), my decision process was a mixture of common opinion, personal experience, and Canon had to have the right product at the right price.
In the past family members had owned Canon products, and they were good. I knew Canon was largely regarded as a top camera maker, and they had a camera with a long optical zoom for under $400.
Really, the product itself was only a small fraction of the equation. Before you can sell something to someone, they have to know about you, like you, and agree to your price.


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 15, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> "The best" rarely gets purchased... "The best that I can afford" and "this meets my needs" are the two big sellers...



Imho the better part would be "The most expensive I can afford" rather than "this meets my needs" as Canon's marketing is extremely clever at giving customers means to rationalize spending a hellish amount of money for equipment that exceeds their needs or ability. Canon's whole lineup is designed for upselling with producing nice cameras/lenses, but still leaving out enough to annoy you and let you wish for the next best thing (usually L lenses or at least a 5d3)...


----------



## regnwaldo (Oct 16, 2013)

For video - faster tracking of focus is needed than the 70D, although auto focus on video can be a curse.

My objection to the 70D is the defective processing of hand held shots. Canon does something TOO smart. This is one of a hundred or so pics using 500mm hand held 1/750 sec with defective bg, I suspect image stabilization software. ALL of them with bg foliage 'streaking' from top right to bottom left. The honeyeater was photographed using a 5D Mk II in the same fashion with NEVER such a problem. 

So, heaven help the 7D Mk II dreamers.


----------



## sfunglee (Oct 16, 2013)

Oh 7DII seem too long to go..

Canon seems asking 7D user to choose 70D or 1Dx...

Sound like Canon designing the 8pfs for MoviE soon? @[email protected]


----------



## chris_w_digits (Oct 16, 2013)

regnwaldo, your top bird picture with the "streaking" in the background almost looks as if the out-of-focus background was separated from the in-focus foreground and some kind variant of inverse filtering or reconstruction was attempted on it to remove motion blur or defocus, then placed back in the image behind the foreground. It looks a bit puzzling.


----------



## jgharding (Oct 17, 2013)

With regard to video, Canon's own (very) long-term road map s to blend still and video:







Did anyone watch the concept video for the above camera? The plan is to give a constant stream of full quality raw frames and allow you to pick the stills you want.

No more will we hear "wow we have 10fps for sports!" but more like "my 8k sensor (33MP in photo terms) runs 60fps raw and I pick the still I want to process."

Never miss that shot...

To be honest I expect Nikon to lag quite a way behind for a long while.


----------



## jgharding (Oct 17, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> In what way?
> Nikon can deal with Sony, Toshiba, Renesas,Aptina ,Omnivision . Canon are alone
> Your faith in Canon is touching.
> 
> ...



My apologies, I don't think unsolicited touching is good practice!

"Faith" is a strong word, they're just tools, I've owned or hired tools made by many companies, Canon, Hasselblad, Red, Arri, Sony so on...

I've never found Nikon on that list yet though. If I were hiring a body for a high MP shoot I'd probably go medium format, if it were action or non-studio I'd stick to the Canon bodies I know, and I know those Canon menus because they were smart enough to get me into their photo bodies via video and still combined.

It's a great customer acquisition strategy, and it's a winning one. Hence them eating Sony's old camcorder market almost completely.

Nikon have no video division and no established pedigree in any such area, so they'll doubtless try to grab those angry about video by emphasising stills... but long term I don't think it's wise to ignore the few extra firmware tweaks required to add great video.

I have absolutely no vested interest in either company, I don't work for any of them and I'll use whatever is good! 

But experience tells us, Canon will have their 30-odd MP body before too long, and it'll all continue. 

The point of my post is simple: video is a long-term strategy for Canon, and one that's seen them take over the corporate video sector with C300, raising the profile of their hybrid imaging at the same time.

Nikon have made no such advances. Their sensor is Sony. Their own SLR mount can't take as much glass as EF or mirror-less. The video is not as well implemented. 3rd party hacks aren't available. Because of all of this, when it came to D800 or 5D MKiii I chose the latter. Not because of "faith" but because it's the most balanced product.

If you don't use video, fair enough, but business matters. If Nikon don't keep up, they'll be eaten up. The sales speak for themselves. Here's one example:

http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Camera-Photo-Digital-SLR-Cameras/zgbs/photo/3017941?tag=crf-20


Without significant innovation, their very long-term prospect (10-15 year) appears to be: get bought by someone else. Maybe Sony?


----------



## Ruined (Oct 18, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> In what way?
> Nikon can deal with Sony, Toshiba, Renesas,Aptina ,Omnivision . Canon are alone
> Your faith in Canon is touching.
> 
> ...



So I guess you have thrown away all your Canons, Sonys, and Nikons and bought the 41MP Nokia Lumia 1020 cameraphone since MP is king eh?  36MP is a lot of pixels, also a lot of marketing.

Reminds me of when people plan to buy a 55" 4K HDTV, simply because 4K is so many more pixels than 1080p... Even though the size of the TV is too small to demonstrate any difference at all. As pixel density increases, at a point diminishing returns are reached - and then pixel density increases simply are marketing decisions.

There are literally tons of other things that can affect image quality adversely, so putting all your eggs in the MP basket probably isn't the best bet.


----------



## regnwaldo (Oct 19, 2013)

chris_w_digits, yes it is puzzling. An out-of-focus point should degenerate to a circle, as in the honeyeater photo. As you say, bg and bird parts of the image have been separated, bg stacked, and bird re-inserted. I DID NOT DO THAT! The Canon 70D did it! I'll have to start a thread on this. The Canon 70D Diagonal Image Processing Defect (DIP defect). The reason for raising this under 7D was that so many of us dreamed od the 7D Mk II that it was a surprise the 70D was released first - perhaps prematurely, with an indication of what was in store. I suspect defective sw aimed at image stabilization, although I have not read of it. I also suspect the sw was not properly assessed with long focus lenses. I don't take many shots at less than 300mm. But I have some hundred shots with the DIP defect at 500 mm.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 19, 2013)

CanonPekka said:


> jgharding said:
> 
> 
> > With regard to video, Canon's own (very) long-term road map s to blend still and video:
> ...


Why do I seem to hear such a Mikael, or Ankorwat, saying something like that anyway?.


----------



## scottkinfw (Oct 19, 2013)

I agree, but at least with the VHS/Beta, I think the real issue was marketing over quality, so there are issues in play that cause these ironic outcomes.



unfocused said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ...Canon's real goal is to sell cameras, and to sell more cameras than the competition. Despite being 'behind' in sensor performance compared to Exmor sensors for the past several APS-C dSLR generations, Canon continues to outsell Nikon (and Sony remains a niche player). What lesson can Canon learn from this? That the performance of Canon's internally-produced sensors is good enough to support _market leading sales_. As the saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
> ...


----------



## scottkinfw (Oct 19, 2013)

You make sense, and I agree with you completely, but I must say, I enjoy the prose of Pekka (punctuation/spelling not withstanding  ).


jgharding said:


> CanonPekka said:
> 
> 
> > In what way?
> ...


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 19, 2013)

> My objection to the 70D is the defective processing of hand held shots. Canon does something TOO smart. This is one of a hundred or so pics using 500mm hand held 1/750 sec with defective bg, I suspect image stabilization software. ALL of them with bg foliage 'streaking' from top right to bottom left. The honeyeater was photographed using a 5D Mk II in the same fashion with NEVER such a problem.
> 
> So, heaven help the 7D Mk II dreamers.




and you really think canon has not tested the 70D with long lenses and this is a common issue?
my 100 bucks are on a problem with your specific camera.


----------



## jarrieta (Oct 20, 2013)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Why do I seem to hear such a Mikael, or Ankorwat, saying something like that anyway.



Same thing crossed my mind.


----------

