# A Shake-up Coming to the APS-C DSLR Lineup? [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 13, 2018)

```
It doesn’t appear that 2018 is going to bring us any interesting new DSLRs, we’re still being told that there won’t be another DSLR of significance released in 2018 (An announcement is always possible).</p>
<p>We’re also being told that the APS-C lineup is going to see some kind of a “shake-up” in regards to any EOS 80D and EOS 7D Mark II replacements. The EOS 80D is just over 2 years old and the EOS 7D Mark II will be 4 years old in September.</p>
<p>The source mentios that the shake-up is likely that the EOS 80D/EOS 7D Mark II duo will be split into 3 cameras with the EOS 7D Mark III being the top camera in the APS-C lineup annd two more cameras below it, one being an EOS 90D and a camera between the two.</p>
<p>With what we have seen recently with Canon’s Rebel and EOS M lineup, I think there’s always a possibility of more sku’s appearing at other levels of the product catalogue.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Chaitanya (Apr 13, 2018)

????


----------



## Sharlin (Apr 13, 2018)

Wow, getting a bit crowded, eh? With the 77D, I could see the 90D being bumped a bit higher in order to differentiate, but 77D–90D–??–7D3? Although I must say I might actually be in the target audience of that ??, depending on the eventual specs of the 7D3.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 13, 2018)

"The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."
_—The dSLR_


----------



## Iago (Apr 13, 2018)

APS-C lineup. Could one of these be a mirrorless with an EF EF-S mount?


----------



## olivierpicault (Apr 13, 2018)

Canon 8D or 9D ? I feel like there is too much bodies close to each other.


----------



## amorse (Apr 13, 2018)

That seems like a lot of segmentation. What niche could fit in between that slot? 7DS? 7DC with no-crop 4K and a flippy screen?

Regardless, from all the rumors it sounds like Canon is planning a big 2019.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 13, 2018)

exactly what the market wants ... even more marginally different mirrorslappers. 
7D III, 90D and an 88D on top ... Canon wants to celebrate "mirror-calypse" with a final firework it seems.


----------



## Canoneer (Apr 13, 2018)

How about the 7D III for moderate resolution/high FPS, the _8D???_ for extreme resolution/low FPS, and the 90D for balance between the two. A high resolution APS-C sensor would certainly shake things up as far as competition goes - 48MP or so.


----------



## tmc784 (Apr 13, 2018)

??? : I don't feel any shake-up.


----------



## justawriter (Apr 13, 2018)

How about a 7Dsr, 50 MP on a APS-C sensor?


----------



## Canoneer (Apr 13, 2018)

justawriter said:


> How about a 7Dsr, 50 MP on a APS-C sensor?



I was thinking along those lines as well. It would be a great way for Canon to throw a wrench into the rising market share of mirrorless APS-C systems by Sony and Fuji. I think the new EF-S glass is good enough to resolve 50MP or so. And that kind of camera would certainly be targeted towards users who already have a decent collection of full-frame EF glass anyway, or would at the very least, encourage them to buy some good quality EF glass to take advantage of the camera.


----------



## rsdofny (Apr 13, 2018)

Just turn the 80D line into a mirrorless and keep the high performance 7D successor as a DSLR.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 13, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> exactly what the market wants ... even more marginally different mirrorslappers.



Yes, that does seem to be exactly what the market wants. The _real_ market...not the 'millions and millions of people' in your imagination.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Apr 13, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > exactly what the market wants ... even more marginally different mirrorslappers.
> ...


 The consumers in the "market" actually dont know EXACTLY what they want, that is why Canon can flood the lower end with weak and marginally different cameras and apparently they sell.


----------



## CanoKnight (Apr 13, 2018)

With Sony at its tail Canon is darting around directionless. My predictions for the next four models -

77.5D, 83.6D, 90.4D and the next APS-C king, queen and prince to be released simultaneously - 7D Mark 2.8, Mark 3.5, Mark 4.1. Each of these 7D's will best each other by 15 ISO points.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 13, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



The 'market' is a gestalt phenomenon.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 13, 2018)

CanoKnight said:


> With Sony at its tail Canon is darting around directionless. My predictions for the next four models -
> 
> 77.5D, 83.6D, 90.4D and the APS-C king, 7D Mark 2.8



Gave me a laugh!

While I dislike Sonys rapid development of follow-ups I dislike the fine grained segmentation of Canon which is well depicted by your 77*.5*D etc.

The funny thing is that I really like the SL2 / 200D because it has very good IQ, a very good live view + DPAF for macro and is ergonomically at least good. It is light and small hence very portable. My beloved EF-S 60 macro works extremely well with the 24MPix sensor. So at the moment tired of choosing between 10...20 options at partly much higher prices!

I really dream about the times where you had the choice between AE-1 (basic tool), A-1 (very versatile tool) and F-1 New F-1 as the more than basic and extremely robust tool with market availabilities of the different bodies of 5...10 years!


----------



## unfocused (Apr 13, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Only people in the top 1% of income levels would consider the XXD and 7D lines to be "the lower end." For most people these are the high end. Or are you just trying to throw this thread off the rails by injecting your personal opinion about the Rebel lineup?


----------



## RayValdez360 (Apr 13, 2018)

unfocused said:


> RayValdez360 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


 you dont have to be wealthy to know that the rebels are lower(not lowest) end of the professional camera scale and there are a ton of rebels/X0Ds. They are the cheapest and have the least controllable functions. Saying they are lower end is a fact, Me commenting on their usefulness or quality would be an opinion. And in my opinion I personally don't find them useful in many of the jobs i get.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 13, 2018)

I would agree that there doesn't seem to be much room between the 80D and 7D for another model. In fact, there isn't much room at all between the 80D and 7D. 

So, I would also agree that if this rumor is true, the third body is likely to be something quite different. 

In my fantasy world, we would see a 7DIII of about 22 mp with significantly improved noise and low light performance. But probably more likely would be a 7DIII and a 90 D sharing a 28 mp sensor, coupled with a 90Ds with something in the 40-50 mp range.

I could also see a video-centric XXD with flip screen, 4K, and whatever other goodies the video crowd desires. Something for the young aspiring DSLR filmmakers. Students who can't afford the cinema line, but will be out there making movies and documentaries. Get the next generation of filmmakers locked into the Canon system.

From my personal, selfish perspective, I find this encouraging whatever Canon decides to release, because it will likely further narrow the small feature gap between the 7DIII and the 1Dx line.


----------



## SkynetTX (Apr 13, 2018)

CanoKnight said:


> With Sony at its tail Canon is darting around directionless. My predictions for the next four models -
> 
> 77.5D, 83.6D, 90.4D and the next APS-C king, queen and prince to be released simultaneously - 7D Mark 2.8, Mark 3.5, Mark 4.1. Each of these 7D's will best each other by 15 ISO points.


+1!  But a *real* shake-up should be Digic 6 processor for entry level and Digic 7 for mid level cameras with a bit more AF-points and higher resolution.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 13, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > RayValdez360 said:
> ...



I am not objecting to your having an opinion on the Rebel line. I just don't see its relevance to this rumor about the XXD and 7D lines. Perhaps those buying Rebels don't know exactly what they want. More likely, they know exactly what they can afford and Canon tries to accommodate them by offering a variety of price points.

But, this thread is about the higher end of the APS-C line and I believe most people who are in that market certainly do know what they want. If you read the comments from AvTvM and Neuro, they were disagreeing as to whether or not the market wants more upper-level APS-C models. Your comments regarding the Rebel line struck me as off topic and not related to the discussion at hand.


----------



## Talys (Apr 13, 2018)

A year ago, I would have said that I thought a camera between 90D and 7D3 was a bad idea -- just like I thought that the 77D wasn't a good idea.

However, my position has evolved -- I must admit that I was flat out wrong, as the 77D has actually done pretty well, and I've run into quite a lot of people who are happy with it, not the least of which are the stores that are selling them. I'm not exactly sure why, because I'd still buy an 80D if I had to choose today, but the product segmentation wizards at Canon had it right.

So what could be the difference between them? 

1. Maybe the highest end 7D3 will retain a non-articulating screen to be more rugged, while the model just under it will be a little less bulletproof and have an articulating screen? 

2. Perhaps the highest end version will be 5D sized, and the next version down will be 6D sized, and the xxD will retain 80D size.

3. Hopefully at least the two top-end versions will have a joystick and dial; the 90D will probably have 80D/77D controls.

4. Maybe maximum frames per second; the top end version is probably going to be at least a little faster.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Apr 13, 2018)

unfocused said:


> RayValdez360 said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...


I was replying to someone else replying before you jumped in to make your reply so you understand that might lead to a deviation from the original topic.


----------



## kkamena (Apr 13, 2018)

unfocused said:


> I could also see a video-centric XXD with flip screen, 4K, and whatever other goodies the video crowd desires. Something for the young aspiring DSLR filmmakers. Students who can't afford the cinema line, but will be out there making movies and documentaries. Get the next generation of filmmakers locked into the Canon system.



I was thinking the same thing. Canon has appeared to not have sought after the Vlogger/video market as much as the other manufactures have. A decent video-centric APS-C camera would fill in a gap as Canon continues to develop it's M lineup.


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 13, 2018)

justawriter said:


> How about a 7Dsr, 50 MP on a APS-C sensor?



YES!!!


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Apr 13, 2018)

I'll bite.
I think the 7D Mark III will be split into two options- one having the optical viewfinder, the other LCD. I think a much higher fps is in order now. I also think it's time for adding the capability to do audio annotations. 
Many pro sports shooters use the 7D series as a second body. It would make a lot of the sports shooters happy to see the 7D Mark III become the crop sensor version of the 1D X Mark II. Canon would absolutely kill it with the addition of stunning 4K video, but that would eat into their video camera line, so maybe not.
Maybe throw in a flippy LCD just to keep everybody happy.


----------



## kellymjones (Apr 13, 2018)

mb66energy said:


> The funny thing is that I really like the SL2 / 200D because it has very good IQ, a very good live view + DPAF for macro and is ergonomically at least good. It is light and small hence very portable. My beloved EF-S 60 macro works extremely well with the 24MPix sensor. So at the moment tired of choosing between 10...20 options at partly much higher prices!


I hear you on the SL2, it's a great little camera. I wish Canon sold an upscale version of the SL2 that retained the same size and weight but with back button focus and the improved firmware/software from their high end models. It would be killer to have the flexibility of their high end cameras in a small form factor.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Apr 13, 2018)

kkamena said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I could also see a video-centric XXD with flip screen, 4K, and whatever other goodies the video crowd desires. Something for the young aspiring DSLR filmmakers. Students who can't afford the cinema line, but will be out there making movies and documentaries. Get the next generation of filmmakers locked into the Canon system.
> ...


 they seem like the dont want to up the features to compete with other brands. this why people get gh4 a6300 etc. all those cameras are kinda crappy when it comes to photos but cheap and more crispy for video than canon. the m50 was kinda a move in the right direction but the extreme 4k crop factor will have rookies scratching their head.


----------



## NancyP (Apr 13, 2018)

There's a market for 1. a small and very inexpensive basic APS-C DSLR with kit lens (students, others buying first controllable ILC) 2. slightly less basic APS-C DSLR with flip screen, fairly basic video, faster processor, kit lens (people buying first video DSLR) 3. full-featured APS-C DSLR with flip screen, video oriented, 4 K, not necessarily weatherized 4. 7D3 sports/wildlife suitable fast-frame-rate APS-C, fully weatherized, no flip screen (video users at this level probably want their own monitors anyway), 4K


----------



## transpo1 (Apr 13, 2018)

Canon will further divide its lineup by creating more DSLR models? Shocking!


----------



## pvalpha (Apr 13, 2018)

I just got everything perfect about my 7D2 after years of effort. I'm good for a while, even though I keep on hoping for a 7D3 soon. Although in my heart I know that I won't see one until 2020-2022. Canon. The C stands for Conservative.


----------



## Talys (Apr 13, 2018)

pvalpha said:


> I just got everything perfect about my 7D2 after years of effort. I'm good for a while, even though I keep on hoping for a 7D3 soon. Although in my heart I know that I won't see one until 2020-2022. Canon. The C stands for Conservative.



Canon is trying to give you time to enjoy your 7D2, now that you finally got it perfect


----------



## Talys (Apr 13, 2018)

NancyP said:


> 4. 7D3 sports/wildlife suitable fast-frame-rate APS-C, fully weatherized, no flip screen (video users at this level probably want their own monitors anyway), 4K



I don't think these are necessarily the same camera, because a camera that is great for general-purpose video should focus on different things than a camera that is designed for wildlife.

A perfect video-purposed camera will have _lower_ resolution/pixel density, because that's how you get less noise and better low light performance. It should have an electronic viewfinder, because you can't see the display screen in the sun (and monitors with shades are often not appropriate). Factors like drive speed (fps) and autofocus modes don't matter much. Instead, in the consumer-ish market, you're looking for features like dual pixel autofocus, subject tracking, and facial recognition.

A perfect wildlife camera for enthusiast types will have higher resolution, because we're forever too short on reach and are forced to crop. We want optical viewfinders, because they don't have refresh issues, autofocus modes and precision are very important, more fps is always welcome, and things like subject tracking don't matter at all. Plus, we're looking at how big the buffer is and how quick it can empty out, something that video people don't care about, because what they want is the ability to constantly write data at a speed fast enough for whatever resolution they're recording.


----------



## Cochese (Apr 13, 2018)

The only possible thing I can think of is if we get a high megapixel APS-C camera slotted between the two. A 7DS, if you will. Other than that, I can't even imagine.


----------



## Velo Steve (Apr 13, 2018)

What I'm learning (or confirming) here is that I don't understand product marketing. When I saw the front page teaser for the article, I immediately expected to hear that the recent profusion of models was going to be organized into a few distinct lines which could be marketed clearly and manufactured cost-effectively. Guess not.

As an amateur, I have the luxury and curse of time. The next time I want (not need) a camera I'll want to figure out which camera is the best fit to my rather diverse interests. I'll probably end up with a spreadsheet full of specs. A confusing list of models with mix-and-match feature sets is more likely to delay the decision than to make me buy quickly.

Apparently I'm not the target market for Canon's marketing approach. I shouldn't be surprised. I don't seem to be in anyone's target market.


----------



## rbr (Apr 13, 2018)

I still like and use my 1D Mark4.


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 13, 2018)

Maybe 

90D 24mpx sensor

7D Mark III 24mpx sensor

7Dr (same as 7D Mark III but 30 mpx sensor and no low pass filter)


----------



## crashpc (Apr 13, 2018)

9VIII said:


> justawriter said:
> 
> 
> > How about a 7Dsr, 50 MP on a APS-C sensor?
> ...



When I asked this months and months ago here and elsewhere, I got mostly negative comments.
Now we´re four in one thread. I´m excited! 
M6 with 22mm f/2 for EDC, and 7DSr for portraits, stills, and even some static birding. That would be golden ages for me too.


----------



## Bobbo (Apr 13, 2018)

Here we go again. The old retail upscaling trick. 
Welcome the 7D3 - £2000


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 13, 2018)

justawriter said:


> How about a 7Dsr, 50 MP on a APS-C sensor?



I suspect 50mpx would be too much. it would need a 2.6um pixel pitch so say goodbye to good low iso performance at full resolution! Still, that's still bigger than the 1.9um pitch on the 150mpx APS-H sensor they've built.

But, I'd love to be wrong. 50mpx on APS-C would certainly be different. It'd also translate to a 126 megapixel FF sensor for the next 5DSR


----------



## crashpc (Apr 13, 2018)

jonyonralph: what do you believe would be best compromise in resolution for APS-C cameras supposed to be resolution beasts? I think 39,3Mpx is interesting number (8k wide, 3:2 ratio). 
Seeing the uptick from 18 to 24Mpx myself, It would be nice jump. 50 would still be welcome.
But I believe we´re not seeing any of that. One day, they´ll throw 32Mpx at us, and that´s it.


----------



## zim (Apr 13, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Maybe
> 
> 90D 24mpx sensor
> 
> ...



What fps's would you put on those?
A 7Dr sounds juicy but please not at to much expense of fps, 8 would be minimum for me.

The notion of an additional model number suggests to me moving the top of the line 7D up a level and I find that exciting


----------



## amorse (Apr 13, 2018)

Possibility of a video-centric body in between the 90D and 7DIII with 4K low/no crop, and flippy screen? Maybe a low-resolution body which could provide a near-full sensor readout and reasonable low light performance? 

That might not cannibalize the other lines through having a smaller sensor than the Cinema line, less stills resolution than a stills focused camera, less durability than 5D/7D lines with a flippy screen, while appeasing the vocal group that want 4K?

That sounds like it could meet the perceived demand for video DSLRs without bleeding out any other line.


----------



## warc1 (Apr 13, 2018)

I don't get this from a business perspective. New models have huge development costs that limits the number you can introduce over time. With the mature, shrinking camera market, adding to your product breadth seems more likely to splinter your customer base rather than adding to it. Alternatively, you could spend that same money for existing model updates that decreases life cycle times. That too doesn't really add to your customer base, but it does increase turnover which increases revenue. For example, the 5D Mark III/IV, 5DSR and 7DII all appear to be on 4-5 year product cycles. Reduce that to 3 years and you have a significant opportunity to increase sales over time.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 13, 2018)

Talys said:


> A perfect video-purposed camera will have _lower_ resolution/pixel density, because that's how you get less noise and better low light performance. It should have an electronic viewfinder, because you can't see the display screen in the sun (and monitors with shades are often not appropriate). Factors like drive speed (fps) and autofocus modes don't matter much. Instead, in the consumer-ish market, you're looking for features like dual pixel autofocus, subject tracking, and facial recognition.
> 
> A perfect wildlife camera for enthusiast types will have higher resolution, because we're forever too short on reach and are forced to crop. We want optical viewfinders, because they don't have refresh issues, autofocus modes and precision are very important, more fps is always welcome, and things like subject tracking don't matter at all. Plus, we're looking at how big the buffer is and how quick it can empty out, something that video people don't care about, because what they want is the ability to constantly write data at a speed fast enough for whatever resolution they're recording.



As usual, that's well-reasoned. But I don't quite agree. 

First, I don't think we are talking perfect anything. Perfect is the realm of Canon Cinema and the 1D line, not the APS-C line. So, in my mind it's all about the compromises. 

Since video cameras generally shoot at lower shutter speeds than stills cameras (double the frame rate) and since random noise can be less apparent on video (it moves around from frame to frame) I think a case can be made that a video camera can sustain higher pixel density than a stills camera. 

Note that I'm only saying "a case can be made" and I'm sure some video folks will disagree. But, I'm just saying that the 1/60 of a second for video allows for a lot more light to hit those pixels than the 1/800 and above needed for birds and moving wildlife. Plus, with video, you are much less likely to be using a 400mm plus lens, which drives up the shutter speed needed for stills photography.

You may be correct about an EVF, but any video DSLR is a compromise and this is a rumored DSLR, not a rumored mirrorless with an EVF.

On the other hand, a wildlife camera needs to have the highest possible ISO performance because most birds and mammals are active during the lowest-lit parts of the day. Yes, reach is important, but if the image is noisy that will only get worse as you crop. And, as I mentioned above, those high shutter speeds are needed with those long lenses. 

I'm not sure what you mean by "things like subject tracking don't matter at all." Subject tracking matters a whole lot if you want to shoot a bird in flight. 

So, while I respect your opinion, I'd have to say that from my perspective, I tend to reach the opposite conclusion.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 13, 2018)

warc1 said:


> I don't get this from a business perspective. New models have huge development costs that limits the number you can introduce over time...



True, but I would argue that the development cost of the 5Ds was probably minimal, since it reused an existing body design and basically uses an upscaled version of a sensor that was already being produced for the 70D and which was to be used for the 7DII. 

We don't know what this mystery camera is, but if Canon followed the same pattern and used a 90D or a 7DIII body, the development costs might not be that great.


----------



## photonius (Apr 13, 2018)

if they really want to shake up things make it like a computer made to order web site:

a) choose from three body sizes
SL1/sl2, xxxD (pentamirror), xx/xD pentamirror

b) options
- shutter (with some restrictions due to body size)
- sensor resolution
- processor (digital 7, 8...)
- RAM
- articulated screen 
- top lcd (not sl1/sl2)
- 9 p AF, or 48 Af
- micro adjust 
.... etc....

who's for it?


----------



## warc1 (Apr 13, 2018)

unfocused said:


> We don't know what this mystery camera is, but if Canon followed the same pattern and used a 90D or a 7DIII body, the development costs might not be that great.



Maybe not the first one, but when a company attempts to create a new market niche, they generally intend to maintain it. That requires ongoing development efforts over time that I would argue could be better spent on more rapid updates of the existing, very comprehensive model lineup.


----------



## greger (Apr 13, 2018)

I sadly am quickly heading to the I don’t care side. I could end up buying the ??? In between camera if it appears. I don’t want to guess what the specs will be for any new cameras in the lineup. All the rumour tells me is that I have more time to save up for my new camera. Whatever specs Canon decides to go with.


----------



## BillB (Apr 13, 2018)

unfocused said:


> warc1 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't get this from a business perspective. New models have huge development costs that limits the number you can introduce over time...
> ...



I would think that the costs associated with the body would be a fairly small part of development costs, compared to the costs of designing the sensor, the AF, the processor, the user interface, and the software to integrate the system. There will be some carryover from previous models, but innovation has its price, especially if you want a bulletproof product.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Apr 13, 2018)

warc1 said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > We don't know what this mystery camera is, but if Canon followed the same pattern and used a 90D or a 7DIII body, the development costs might not be that great.
> ...


 if you flood the market people will more likely see your brand and choose your brand your profit may not be the greatest but people will buy into you for a long period of time. Canon as enough money to do this apparently. i am learning this right now with my business. i did a lot of work for a lot of people now I am getting a lot new people hitting me up often because my name is more familiar and my work is better than others out here working.


----------



## BillB (Apr 13, 2018)

I know that the rumor said DSLRs , but I am not sure that rules out a mirrorless design in the mix somewhere, especially if 3 new models are going to replace two DSLR's.


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 13, 2018)

zim said:


> What fps's would you put on those?
> A 7Dr sounds juicy but please not at to much expense of fps, 8 would be minimum for me.



Obviously the lower resolution version would have a faster frame rate than the higher resolution one. 

I'd think more likely to be 8-9fps for the 24mpx version and 6-7 fps for the higher resolution version


----------



## dak723 (Apr 13, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > exactly what the market wants ... even more marginally different mirrorslappers.
> ...



Went to best buy. All the Canons, Nikons, Sonys on display. Far more Canons on display. More choices seems to mean far more likely to find the features and price point that shoppers want. May seem to be too many models, but it seems to be working.


----------



## slclick (Apr 14, 2018)

Funny how so many folks complain about choices of bodies which they will never use. The more the merrier...that is unless you're anti choice.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 14, 2018)

Iago said:


> APS-C lineup. Could one of these be a mirrorless with an EF EF-S mount?



I believe you are right.


----------



## bf (Apr 14, 2018)

I don't get this approach of product map.
It seems canon wants to act like a car company and these models are different options of each platform that its dealership has configured.


----------



## AuroraChaserDoug (Apr 14, 2018)

bf said:


> I don't get this approach of product map.
> It seems canon wants to act like a car company and these models are different options of each platform that its dealership has configured.



I'm curious about the broader strategy as Canon develops its mirrorless camera lineup. I think we will see a broader product map that appears to be scattershot like a "No Hunting" sign in Montana. But the product map lines will converge as the life cycle of those product lines end, including the entire APS-C line as we know it. And while this is obvious, it's good to know that I can go out and buy any lens for my kit this year and know that it won't be orphaned next Spring by Canon at Photokina or some other major event.


----------



## Talys (Apr 14, 2018)

unfocused said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > A perfect video-purposed camera will have _lower_ resolution/pixel density, because that's how you get less noise and better low light performance. It should have an electronic viewfinder, because you can't see the display screen in the sun (and monitors with shades are often not appropriate). Factors like drive speed (fps) and autofocus modes don't matter much. Instead, in the consumer-ish market, you're looking for features like dual pixel autofocus, subject tracking, and facial recognition.
> ...



Thanks  I'm quite fine with different perspectives -- I have had my mind changed about many things over the years  The things that matter and the way I shoot now, whether it is wildlife or portraiture is dramatically different than a decade ago, and a lot of that is simply people convincing me that there's a better way.

So first of all, I'm not a video guy at all. For me, aside from the occasional family thing that I could just as easily take from a smartphone, I don't do video. I totally agree that a flagship APSC DSLR is not an ideal format for a video-centric rig, which I didn't articulate well -- but I what I was driving at is that basically, nobody should be spending $2,000 (or whatever) for an APSC DSLR and hoping for an awesome 4k video rig. 

I mean, maybe the 7D3 will do 4k, but I just can't imagine that 4k video is a reason to buy the 7D3, 90D or model in between.

On the birds in flight, I have a miserable track record with AI tracking (using sensitivity/acceleration/point switching on 5D/7D bodies), but it's not really the fault of the tracking technology. Basically, what happens is, if the bird is small enough in the field of view to be effectively tracked and cropped, I will be probably be unhappy with the final result, because the bird will be too small, even if it's perfectly in focus.

If the bird is big enough for me to be happy with the result, I will be tracking the bird anyways. At the end of the day, it's just easier to use spot AF or center + expanding points and make sure I'm pointing at the bird in flight 

I am happy to be convinced otherwise; I just haven't been able to get good enough results out of tracking to use it, and it was a large contributing factor to my deciding to buy a 6DII despite not having any of the fancy AF modes.

I totally agree with you with wanting high ISO performance so that we can raise shutter speeds. However, I have been convinced by people in this forum that getting much better than 80D or Sony A6300 (given their pixel densities) is an unrealistic expectation given today's technology. So with APSC, what I'm primarily looking for is a bright daylight camera with lots of reach and shooting at lower ISOs.

At over ISO 800, I am not really happy with my 80D's results for most bird shots, and prefer cropping from a full frame image on my 6DII. The additional noise, especially in the eyes, just kills the shot for me. Not because they're terrible photos -- just, it'll be another at-best mediocre shot, and I generally just cull those because I already have terrabytes full of them.

There are exceptions, of course -- especially if it's something I've never photographed before... I'm just talking about a general rule of thumb for me.


----------



## nchoh (Apr 14, 2018)

zim said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe
> ...




This sounds the most logical. A higher pixel 7D would help drive sales of the newer EF-S lenses.


----------



## RGF (Apr 14, 2018)

I wonder if Canon will put their best AF, metering in the top of line APS-C camera. Nikon has done this and the D500 is much superior to the 7D M2 in terms AF, DR, ...


----------



## ritholtz (Apr 14, 2018)

Hoping it is be 90D in SL2 size. I want to go back to 80D. It is just too big.


----------



## zim (Apr 14, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > What fps's would you put on those?
> ...



Sadly that sounds about right, 1 or 2 less than I'd want. As always tho imaginary specs for imaginary cameras always leave room for hope


----------



## zim (Apr 14, 2018)

nchoh said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > jolyonralph said:
> ...



Actually I think a high pixel 7d would be more inclined to drive L glass. Lower Res video centric being more STM glass


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 14, 2018)

an SL-2 sized DSLR with 7D III functionality would be of interest. very compact but full performance. all muscle, no fat. best sensor available, best DIGIC, best AF available, fully functional EOS UI and an LP-E6 battery for sufficient juice (yes, it will fit). 

basically a mini john cooper works. just like the car industry took nearly a century to find out that many people prefer small cars but still want full performance ... camera industry still has not understood this. those "innovative" canikons still want you to buy humgonguos bricks if you want full functionality, performance and control. this fundamentalky wrong approach is the main reason why smartphones have been eating most of camera makers cake. people got sick and tired of their sorry, underpowered "compact camera" offerings and sorry, underpowered "rebels" and bulky, heavy and absurdly overpriced mirrorslapper bricks.


----------



## Hector1970 (Apr 14, 2018)

I wouldn’t see the he point at all of a higher density pixel 7D3.
The 7D series is all about frame rate. 
You also want the fastest shutter speed possible so you’d want much better ISO performance than the 7DII
The second best upgrade it can have is better tracking.
It’s hit and miss on BIF - birds are small and tricky you need the best focusing you can get.
More MPs is just a waste unless you are photographing static objects. If you are an XXD or XXXD camera would be better value for money.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 14, 2018)

slclick said:


> Funny how so many folks complain about choices of bodies which they will never use. The more the merrier...that is unless you're anti choice.



It depends on the availability of "clear choices" - 20D and 5D was a clear situation: APS-C or FF and a substantial price gap. Today you have the choice between flavours of basically the same thing like SL2 - 77D - M50 - 80D all sporting very similar or same sensor but slightly different feature sets and prices between 500 ... 850 EUR. O.k., the M50 as mirrorless has a very special property at least for me: I can adapt other optics without "mirror box hassle".

The problem (at least for me again) is that I have slow progress of decision processes if the options are too close together. At the moment I can make faster decisions in the lower price segment where the losses in case of a wrong decision do not hurt


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 14, 2018)

Hector1970 said:


> I wouldn’t see the he point at all of a higher density pixel 7D3.
> The 7D series is all about frame rate.



This is exactly why they would differentiate into two streams, a lower-pixel faster frame rate model, and a higher-pixel lower frame rate model because everyone has different needs and you clearly would prefer the former while others would prefer the latter.


----------



## fingerstein (Apr 14, 2018)

7d mark II has better performance for video than 6d or 5d mark III - higher framerates, DPAF, headphone jack...
I expect for 7D mark III to be somewhere below 1dx mark II but a bit better than 5D4. Of course, in low light it will suck.


----------



## BillB (Apr 14, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> Hector1970 said:
> 
> 
> > I wouldn’t see the he point at all of a higher density pixel 7D3.
> ...



Faster fps and more mp may be better, but I'm wondering how much practical difference there is in 20-30% bumps in fps or mp.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 14, 2018)

BillB said:


> Faster fps and more mp may be better, but I'm wondering how much practical difference there is in 20-30% bumps in fps or mp.



If your employer offered you a 20-30% raise, would you turn it down because you question the practicality of the difference?


----------



## crashpc (Apr 14, 2018)

Bhaha, yes, 30% is easily noticable, 50% is very significant. It would be so awesome to have 32Mpx APS-C cameras around now...
I tried two teleconverters at once on my 55-250mm IS STM, and they still resolved more than the lens alone.
That is, 50Mpx sensor for that lens is not an issue, and would help to resolve more, crop more, or resample more...
After 150Mpx, moire issues would be healed almost completely. That´s what I´m after.


----------



## BillB (Apr 14, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > Faster fps and more mp may be better, but I'm wondering how much practical difference there is in 20-30% bumps in fps or mp.
> ...



And why would a 30% increase in fps be comparable to a 30% increase in income? A 30% increase in fps gives you 9 images per second rather than 7. Better, sure? But how much better?


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 14, 2018)

BillB said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > BillB said:
> ...


I think you've just made his point: more is always better unless there's a specific cost to the increased FPS. For BIF, sports, etc. it can improve the chance of getting the shot you wanted (e.g. wing position). Is it a lot of difference? No, but what's the drawback? A much higher frame rate can affect the choice of sensor tech used; but, other than that, more is better.


----------



## BillB (Apr 14, 2018)

crashpc said:


> Bhaha, yes, 30% is easily noticable, 50% is very significant. It would be so awesome to have 32Mpx APS-C cameras around now...
> I tried two teleconverters at once on my 55-250mm IS STM, and they still resolved more than the lens alone.
> That is, 50Mpx sensor for that lens is not an issue, and would help to resolve more, crop more, or resample more...
> After 150Mpx, moire issues would be healed almost completely. That´s what I´m after.



If you look at the effect on print quality, the questions become how many more pixels per inch you are getting out of a 30 per cent bump in the pixels on the sensor, and how much difference that will make to print quality. 300 ppi seems to be the magic number for print quality and opinions vary on how much quality you are buying when you go above that. The number of pixels per inch on the print varies with the square root of changes in the number of pixels on the sensor, so a 30% increase of pixels on the sensor isn't going to give you a 30% increase in pixels per inch on the print.

More pixels on the sensor are better, but how much better? Any time camera spec numbers get thrown around there is the danger of falling prey to DPR Magic Number Syndrome, in which all numerical differences are believed to be significant.


----------



## BillB (Apr 14, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



True enough, but is the improvement worth the cost of buying a new camera, or paying more for the higher specs?


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 14, 2018)

BillB said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > BillB said:
> ...


Each person has different values and disposable income.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 14, 2018)

BillB said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > BillB said:
> ...



30% = 30%. What's confusing about that?

30% more MP means you can crop deeper with the same output resolution. Maybe that means a 400mm lens will do, instead of a 500mm lens. 

30% higher fps means a higher chance of capturing the moment of peak action. Sports and birds in flight are obvious applications, but higher fps is useful in many situations. 

"_Pucker Up_"



EOS 1D X, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ 70mm, 1/200 s, f/2.8, ISO 100


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 14, 2018)

BillB said:


> True enough, but is the improvement worth the cost of buying a new camera, or paying more for the higher specs?



You can make those decisions for yourself, but not for anyone else.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 14, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > True enough, but is the improvement worth the cost of buying a new camera, or paying more for the higher specs?
> ...



It seems a little strange to me that people argue there are too many choices when we have absolutely no idea what choices Canon is planning to offer.


----------



## Velo Steve (Apr 14, 2018)

photonius said:


> if they really want to shake up things make it like a computer made to order web site:
> 
> a) choose from three body sizes
> SL1/sl2, xxxD (pentamirror), xx/xD pentamirror
> ...


First reaction: YES! There are always features I want to max out and others that don't matter to me.

Second reaction: Can I tolerate reboots and compatibility issues in a camera? NO!

I like the concept, though.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 14, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> an SL-2 sized DSLR with 7D III functionality would be of interest. very compact but full performance. all muscle, no fat. best sensor available, best DIGIC, best AF available, fully functional EOS UI and an LP-E6 battery for sufficient juice (yes, it will fit).
> 
> [...]



Very close to my thoughts after 2 days with SL-2: Make a SL-2x "Pro" variant with a few more direct controls and give it a late aluminium age PD AF - not the stone aged 9 pt AF and a larger battery.. The only problem I see is to (1) make the motor for the same fps small enough and (2) put the same AF sensor array of a hypothetical 7D iii into the same body. The rest would be possible from what I see.

But: I am very happy with the SL-2 and my 13 year old EF-S 60 macro for what it is and what I had to pay for it. Despite of its plastic body and reduce set of controls it is a valuable tool to take photos with gorgous IQ.


----------



## docsmith (Apr 14, 2018)

This is all odd. Starting with the title. Shake up implies a significant disruption. This is Canon adding a model.

I would have titled this something like "Consumers Win! Canon adding Third Higher End Cropped Sensor DSLR"

Along those lines, I recently bought a 80D for my wife. I was debating between the 77D and 80D. We went to Best Buy and both of us vastly preferred the ergonomics of the 80D. Differences between models can be subtle, but ultimately mean a great deal in terms of the end users experience whether it be a few extra fps or a better grip. 

So, bring on the different models, bring on different options so I can better pick which one is best for me!


----------



## ritholtz (Apr 14, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> an SL-2 sized DSLR with 7D III functionality would be of interest. very compact but full performance. all muscle, no fat. best sensor available, best DIGIC, best AF available, fully functional EOS UI and an LP-E6 battery for sufficient juice (yes, it will fit).
> 
> basically a mini john cooper works. just like the car industry took nearly a century to find out that many people prefer small cars but still want full performance ... camera industry still has not understood this. those "innovative" canikons still want you to buy humgonguos bricks if you want full functionality, performance and control. this fundamentalky wrong approach is the main reason why smartphones have been eating most of camera makers cake. people got sick and tired of their sorry, underpowered "compact camera" offerings and sorry, underpowered "rebels" and bulky, heavy and absurdly overpriced mirrorslapper bricks.


I am also in the same boat. Want to get more features in SL2 size. Like small car and more features. I actually want to go back to 80d for suppose to be good video IQ and other features. Compared SL2 with other offerings in store. There is a big difference in size between SL2 and 80d. SL2 view finder is decent when compared to 80d. Of course basic rebels (T6) have better button design then SL2. May be Canon is going this direction. Fully loaded SL2 can take on mirrorless.


----------



## entoman (Apr 14, 2018)

It's quite possible, and IMHO a good idea, that Canon shelves plans for a 7DMkii.

The D500 has effectively stolen the APS sports DSLR market from them, so in order to compete, Canon's next offering would have to be a major jump, not an incremental one. They need much faster burst speeds, much better continuous drive AF subject tracking, a bigger brighter viewfinder, significantly improved dynamic range and far better high ISO noise performance. What's more, they need to get this into the stores right now, because you can bet your life that Nikon have an even better successor to the D500 in an advanced state of development.

The ONLY way to really grab sales in the APS sports/wildlife camera field is to produce a mirrorless that accepts EF primes and sports zooms natively, and has a body largely based around 7DMkii/5DMkiv ergonomics and size. That would enasble photographers to switch easily between Canon DSLRs and Canon mirrorless without a lengthy "adaptation" period.

Mirrorless is definitely the way forward for sports cameras, as proven by the amazingly capable Sony a9. A large bodied sports mirrorless would offer all the normal mirrorless benefits of very fast burst speeds, no mirror blackout, no vibration, silent shutter, less mechanical parts to fail, live histogram in the EVF, and would also have room for larger longer lasting batteries.

Better for Canon to shelve the 7DMKiii and concentrate on producing a real Sony/Nikon beater, in the form of an APS mirrorless competitor to the Sony a9, in a 7DMkii body style.


----------



## ScottyP (Apr 14, 2018)

What I'd think someone should be interested in would be a low-light performer. We've seen every other specialization get a model. We've seen high megapixel specialist models. We've seen high frame rate models. We've seen rugged models. We've seen small form factor models. We've seen cheap models. We've even seen an astro photography version if I remember right. Why not release a model with just 16-18 mp, but with a good processor, and not tax the processor with high frame rate so it can do something with noise instead. See what can be done if you really set out to make one that gives high IQ in low light. 

Problem may be that some crop buyers are the newcomers to photography, and would not see a low-MP camera as being as good as one with higher MP, and may not fully understand how big a deal low light performance is. 

Maybe they should make a dedicated full frame low light camera and see what they could do.


----------



## haggie (Apr 14, 2018)

The "shakeup" could also be a combined set of differentiating features.

The 7D is mainly used as an action camera for stills photographers: that is what it is made for and how it is marketed by Canon. The wish for a new cropped camera by Canon that is (once again) class leading in image quality and general performance has been expressed often enough, also on this forum.

Hardly any serious use as a video camera is involved by action photographers. But often when the subject of a 7D Mk III comes up, there are some that argue that a camera like the 7D Mk III should nevertheless also get top-of-class video features. After all, there are many serious video shooters in the APS-C arena as well, and in high numbers too (including but not restricted to vloggers).


Could it be that the 7D Mk III will be 'revolutionary' in the way that Canon incorporates a big leap in DR and Noise performance, added with a big increase in AF-performance? Thus, Canon could make the 7D Mk III the "cropped action camera to beat" for years to come.

Then the 90D could be practically a normal 'evolutionary' update to the 80D. 
Or not ..... perhaps the 90D would get an EVF instead of the present OVF would be a next step in Canon's EVF cameras. That could make sense after the M50. 
On the other hand that would mean the end of the camera range xxD as we know it (including the name '90D'). I am not sure how Canon estimates sales of such an EVF camera as compared to the succesful xxD series cameras (with OVF, that is). But again, it could be a bold next step for a next EVF body by Canon. It would certainly get much attention as the xxD has features that have proven attractive to large numbers of buyers, and therefor it has the potential to establish canon a a major playerin the EVF camewra business.

And the third new "camera in between" could be a 7D Mk III 'light". 
With 'light' I means a little less performace in the stills department (like less fps, less AF-performance and less tuning, possibly a little less sensor performance like DR and Noise) but with steep video features, e.g. really good 4K video and some interfacing for microphone, head set and output for post processing.


----------



## The Fat Fish (Apr 14, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>The source mentios that the shake-up is likely that the EOS 80D/EOS 7D Mark II duo will be split into 3 cameras with the EOS 7D Mark III being the top camera in the APS-C lineup annd two more cameras below it, one being an EOS 90D and a camera between the two.</p>



Please not this segmentation rubbish again. The APS-C line already has too many models creating more and more reasons for Canon to hold back features. Remember when you had three lines for APS-C and three for FF and the choice was clear? I'm really trying to stick with Canon but they are making it very difficult these past few years.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 14, 2018)

entoman said:


> The D500 has effectively stolen the APS sports DSLR market from them, so in order to compete,



How do you figure? Here's the Amazon rankings as of a few minutes ago:

D500 #68 in Camera & Photo > DSLR Cameras 
7DMkII #23 in Camera & Photo > DSLR Cameras 

You can certainly argue that Amazon is not representative of global sales, but this is probably as good as it gets without internal sales numbers. The much older Canon is *far* ahead of the D500 in sales rankings, so it's a false statement (see below) to say that the Canon is not competitive.

Regarding "competitive:" I'd guess that your use of the word "competitive" means competing for your purchase. When manufacturers think of the word, they're thinking of overall sales/profits. I don't at all intend to disparage the D500 -- by all accounts it's a really nice body, and I can see how it would be "competitive" for photographers with certain needs. However, Canon will look at the overall sales numbers and see that the 7D2 is very competitive against the D500, and they'll ask themselves how they can do that again. Similarly, Nikon will look at those sales numbers and ask themselves "we made this great camera that's getting eaten alive by the 7D2, what the hell do we have to do to be competitive."

In the end, you should buy what works for you, but you can't forecast what manufacturers will produce based on your particular interests or values.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 14, 2018)

The Fat Fish said:


> Please not this segmentation rubbish again. The APS-C line already has too many models creating more and more reasons for Canon to hold back features. Remember when you had three lines for APS-C and three for FF and the choice was clear? I'm really trying to stick with Canon but they are making it very difficult these past few years.



More choices = bad? I suppose some people get paralyzed by indecision when presented with too many choices. 

Especially if the options are extraordinarily complex, like having six APS-C camera choices. Mind. Blown.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 14, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



The drawback of more fps is more noise and less DR.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 14, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > BillB said:
> ...


Not necessarily. If you put a 5D4 into slow continuous or single, it does not suddenly lose noise and gain DR compared to high-speed continuous.


----------



## CanoKnight (Apr 14, 2018)

> The much older Canon is *far* ahead of the D500 in sales rankings, so it's a false statement (see below) to say that the Canon is not competitive.



That is not an accurate way to judge popularity. There are simply more people invested in a Canon system than Nikon and the only option available to them to upgrade is the 7D2. How many of these are grudgingly upgrading to a 7D2 while wishing they could get a d500 instead ? A better indicator of popularity would be the number of buyers buying a 7d2 vs d500 who are not already invested in either. I don't think that would be a big number because the 7d2 and d500 are not starter cameras. But still, that number would be a lot more telling than total sales of 7d2 vs d500.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 14, 2018)

CanoKnight said:


> > The much older Canon is *far* ahead of the D500 in sales rankings, so it's a false statement (see below) to say that the Canon is not competitive.
> 
> 
> That is not an accurate way to judge popularity.



Total sales are the *most* accurate way to judge popularity. If you were going to argue that Amazon US isn't representative of the global high-end APS-C market, that could be debated. .


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 14, 2018)

CanoKnight said:


> > The much older Canon is *far* ahead of the D500 in sales rankings, so it's a false statement (see below) to say that the Canon is not competitive.
> 
> 
> That is not an accurate way to judge popularity.


It's the only one we have.



> There are simply more people invested in a Canon system than Nikon and the only option available to them...How many of these are grudgingly upgrading to a 7D2 while wishing they could get a d500 instead ?



Good question, but we have no way to know. We have only sales numbers. If you want me to believe something else, you'll need to present some kind of evidence.



> A better indicator of popularity would be the number of buyers buying a 7d2 vs d500 who are not already invested in either.


I'm not sure that would be helpful: someone with no investment in either is likely somewhat new to photography. A better measure would be a graph of switching brands vs. $$ invested in current brand. Good luck to us getting any useful data, other than raw sales.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 14, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> CanoKnight said:
> 
> 
> > > The much older Canon is *far* ahead of the D500 in sales rankings, so it's a false statement (see below) to say that the Canon is not competitive.
> ...


Also, when any new camera comes out, there is a spike in sales and for a period, that camera is number one in sales. Then, the sales slowly decline over the life of the camera.... this gives us the interesting pattern where the older model has higher total sales, but the newer model has higher recent sales....

Since none of these cameras have the exact same feature set, there will always be a degree of apples-to-oranges in any comparison. 

Ultimately, it comes down to long term averages of individual decisions, and the effect of any one model, no matter how good or bad, does not have much of an impact.


----------



## slclick (Apr 14, 2018)

Raise your hand if you yourself (no, not a spouse or whomever) would buy one of these proposed (and rumored) models. Yeah, that's what I thought. A bunch of guys on the internet complaining about things that aren't even up their alley.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 14, 2018)

slclick said:


> Raise your hand if you yourself (no, not a spouse or whomever) would buy one of these proposed (and rumored) models. Yeah, that's what I thought. A bunch of guys on the internet complaining about things that aren't even up their alley.










I've been saving/planning for a 7D3 if the price and features are reasonable.


----------



## Talys (Apr 14, 2018)

slclick said:


> Raise your hand if you yourself (no, not a spouse or whomever) would buy one of these proposed (and rumored) models. Yeah, that's what I thought. A bunch of guys on the internet complaining about things that aren't even up their alley.



I will almost certainly buy an 80D/7DII successor if the image quality is improved. It's my workhorse camera and is just about perfect -- being APSC doesn't matter, because practically every shot is ISO100.

Which APSC successor -- now that's more interesting. It's _possible_ I might like the in-between model better. What I want:

- If one model had visibly better high ISO IQ, that would be huge
- Size: I quite like the 80D size. But it's not determinative by any means.
- Flippy screen - must have!
- Fancy autofocus - I would really appreciate center expanding points. I don't care about the rest of it (Cases iTTR, tracking, blah blah blah). If one model had faster autofocus, that would be big.
- I would take UHSII model, over one that didn't, if only for faster read times when offloading to PC.
- I don't care about video at all.
- I don't care about FPS, as long as it's at least 8.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 14, 2018)

I have no interest in an APS-C dSLR. But then, I'm not complaining about them, either.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 15, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Raise your hand if you yourself (no, not a spouse or whomever) would buy one of these proposed (and rumored) models. Yeah, that's what I thought. A bunch of guys on the internet complaining about things that aren't even up their alley.
> ...


+1


----------



## slclick (Apr 15, 2018)

Oh wait, this isn't the Rebel T8i thread?


----------



## mover (Apr 15, 2018)

I wonder how much the law of diminishing returns is affecting this shake up?


----------



## zim (Apr 15, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Raise your hand if you yourself (no, not a spouse or whomever) would buy one of these proposed (and rumored) models. Yeah, that's what I thought. A bunch of guys on the internet complaining about things that aren't even up their alley.
> ...



+1. (7d owner)


----------



## unfocused (Apr 15, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...



I fully expect to buy two 7DIIIs, one for me and one for my spouse.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 15, 2018)

unfocused said:


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



Yeah, bit you guys are only considering it because you're locked into the Canon system and are being forced to stay there, right? Because we all know that the D500 is better than the 7DIII can possibly be, right? And the D510 will be even better, right?


----------



## crashpc (Apr 15, 2018)

neuroanatomist: near miss. I´m locked with Canon because other manufacturers have greater problems on their hands. I jumped once, and saw what a mistake I did. Now, for the company solving everything major problem, working generaly well, it´s quite shame that they don´t go after some other things some more. Technology is there, everybody else does it, but not Canon. But what I see they actually go after it. It just takes more time than expected. See poor sensor (DR) performance apology way, and others. Now we´re probably heading to the end of poor lens selection era for EOS M. All this wasn´t debunked at the time of discussion, but it was, eventually in time for the isuue discussed.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 15, 2018)

crashpc said:


> neuroanatomist: near miss. I´m locked with Canon because other manufacturers have greater problems on their hands. I jumped once, and saw what a mistake I did.



You chose Canon because their system better meets your needs. Makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 15, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


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



If all my gear were stolen I'd take a hard look at the D500 and Nikon glass. I don't know that I'd buy, but I'd seriously consider it.


----------



## Antono Refa (Apr 15, 2018)

Talys said:


> - I would take UHSII model, over one that didn't, if only for faster read times when offloading to PC.



UHS-II is backward compatible with previous SD versions, so you can get faster read times when offloading to PC by inserting a UHS-II card into whichever camera's SD slot.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 15, 2018)

for camera itself D500 clearly beats 7D II. But for me the days of mirrorslappers (and half-format sensors) are over .


----------



## ashmadux (Apr 15, 2018)

What a way to build excitement, eh Canon...lets just give it a year or so.

Lame.

Dinosaur brand (for bodies), it now seems.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 15, 2018)

ashmadux said:


> Dinosaur brand



Yep. Dominant species, no asteroid in sight.


----------



## Orangutan (Apr 15, 2018)

ashmadux said:


> What a way to build excitement


Excitement? What? For a tool? Really? 

Excitement is for personal experiences, not for inanimate tools. YMMV.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 15, 2018)

ashmadux said:


> What a way to build excitement, eh Canon...lets just give it a year or so.
> 
> Lame.
> 
> Dinosaur brand (for bodies), it now seems.



Please, go buy your Sony and stop trolling this website.


----------



## mover (Apr 15, 2018)

With the new speed of the new high megapixel cameras, D850 & AR7III, it is making it harder and harder for me to consider a crop sensor like the 7d III if that is what it will be. I love my original 7d but it is easier for me to do creative cropping in post with a high megapixel photo. I have just been waiting patiently for the new 5DRII to see what the fps will be. I would be happy with 6 or 8 fps and better DR. If nothing by end 2019 I probably will have to switch. I am getting older and time is one thing I can't replace.


----------



## zim (Apr 15, 2018)

AvTvM said:


> for camera itself D500 clearly beats 7D II. But for me the days of mirrorslappers (and half-format sensors) are over .



Really? I had no idea you felt that way! glad that's cleared things up :


----------



## scyrene (Apr 15, 2018)

zim said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > for camera itself D500 clearly beats 7D II. But for me the days of mirrorslappers (and half-format sensors) are over .
> ...



You beat me to it! ;D


----------



## Talys (Apr 15, 2018)

Antono Refa said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > - I would take UHSII model, over one that didn't, if only for faster read times when offloading to PC.
> ...



This is true -- I actually thought of this and gave it a whirl, but it turns out that the UHS-II card that a friend lent me (along with a Sony camera) actually clears the buffer on my 6DII slower than a Sandisk Extreme Pro, despite costing something like three to four times the price.

The read time off to a PC is really nice, though.

Hopefully, at some point, the stars will align: Canon camera support, cheaper cards, readers being more common, and more of a need anyhow as file sizes get larger. Then, I'll just get a three 128GB cards and be done with it.


----------



## tron (Apr 15, 2018)

Talys said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...


I recall that Canon had already mentioned that for Canon 5DMarkIV too.


----------



## tron (Apr 15, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...


When my 40D with many lenses (10-22,501.4,85 1.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 ) had been stolen I just switched to full frame 5DMarkII with 24-105 4L. Later I added lenses.True I already had other Canon lenses like 16-35 2.8 and 300 4L (non IS) but it never occurred to me to switch...


----------



## Ditboy (Apr 15, 2018)

What makes the most sense to me and my prediction (at some point) the Rebel line is dropped and the M line replaces it.


----------



## tron (Apr 16, 2018)

They all have a place. The rebels support the EF and EF-S series of lenses and can be a backup to a higher end camera.


----------



## dak723 (Apr 16, 2018)

Just wondering, when does adding another camera to the line qualify as a "shake-up?" Sounds more like business as usual.


----------



## Scumbag (Apr 16, 2018)

The only thing that I can imagine would be a shake-up would be integrating support for full frame and crop within the one body.

The mirror would be sized for APS-C, and would only show the centre crop of the image. If you have an EF-S lens attached, then it would enforce cropping. If you have an EF lens attached then you would have the option of centre crop (you get what you see through the optical viewfinder), or entire frame.

Optical focusing would only be able to use focus points reflected by the mirror - though I guess with software smarts could be combined with the dual-pixel AF - particularly when a subject moves just outside the centre.

So what does full frame bring to the equation? Well I guess this is where there is alignment with video, and landscape, portrait, architectural type photography where you can primarily use the LCD screen for adjusting framing and reviewing shots.

To have a decent megapixels for the birders you will need to have presumably 50MP (or more) across the full frame. I guess they could do some clunky separate pixel resolution between the centre-crop and full-frame portion.

The problem is that Canon being Canon, will look at it taking away from people buying 5D, 1D, 6D, and 4K video camera sales. However if Canon are smart then it is an opportunity to sell wide angle EF lenses, and more lenses designed for video.


----------



## gsealy (Apr 16, 2018)

tron said:


> They all have a place. The rebels support the EF and EF-S series of lenses and can be a backup to a higher end camera.



I agree. I just used my t4i today to do some quick shots at a juniors golf tournament. It's light and I can throw it in my small bag. These shots were not for artistic purposes. They were for Facebook and personal use. The main thing was to capture a lot of stuff. I didn't need to carry around the 5DIII and L lenses. Just shoot with a light zoom lens and that is that.


----------



## jolyonralph (Apr 16, 2018)

Scumbag said:


> The only thing that I can imagine would be a shake-up would be integrating support for full frame and crop within the one body.
> 
> The mirror would be sized for APS-C, and would only show the centre crop of the image. If you have an EF-S lens attached, then it would enforce cropping.



I really can't see this working. You'd be buying a 50mpx full-frame camera but not be able to view the full frame through the viewfinder.

Why bother when you could replace the mirror entirely with an EVF and have a system that switched automatically between FF and APS-C depending on the lens attached?


----------



## ScottyP (Apr 16, 2018)

Maybe they're just going to do a major re-naming of the cameras. They are getting close to having to do that. 90d will be the end of that line's naming convention. T9i will end another naming convention at the model after next. Not at all sure where they think they are going to go, name-wise, after 77d. 

They may also be reconsidering why they would have different number-names in the US vs Europe. (600d, 650d, 700d instead of T3i, T4i, T5i, etc). Numbers are numbers, no need to have different names in different languages if the names are numbers instead of words. 

Maybe Canon are going to shake up the crop sensor line by resetting the model names/numbers in a way that makes sense and gives them room to continue.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 16, 2018)

One of the shake-ups long overdue is more efficient lossless compression particularly on sensors giving 30 - 50MP and beyond. The larger files require more memory, more storage and faster processors in a perpetual arms race. Those file sizes multiple after heavy post in Lightroom & Photoshop ultimately slowing everything down. More MP without reviewing this will frustrate more people and give the tech a bad name.


----------



## Velo Steve (Apr 16, 2018)

jeffa4444 said:


> One of the shake-ups long overdue is more efficient lossless compression particularly on sensors giving 30 - 50MP and beyond.
> ...


One of the best ideas I have seen here. It seems obvious, yet we're all carrying around needlessly huge raw files. Even at 20MP or less, why waste the space?


----------



## tron (Apr 16, 2018)

There is a limit to how much can improve lossless compression. For example compare a compressing program like winrar, 7z, etc when you use to compress normal versus best compression. The difference isn't huge and you spend more time to do it.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Apr 16, 2018)

What does the market need/want in a new DSLR? Finer resolution? Faster frame rate? Better low light performance? Less menus/options? Lighter weight? Faster autofocus? Improved video? Better audio?
Today's offerings do pretty well in all these areas given differences in price points. Pack the new ones with more
not photographic features? GPS? NFC? Bluetooth? Or maybe better in-camera editing? Improved remote
operation? None of the prime manufacturers seem to be particularly customer sensitive (except perhaps Fuji)
as to market requirements. We'll get what they give us, when they give it to us. The rest is chasing rainbows.


----------



## Talys (Apr 16, 2018)

dickgrafixstop said:


> What does the market need/want in a new DSLR? Finer resolution? Faster frame rate? Better low light performance? Less menus/options? Lighter weight? Faster autofocus? Improved video? Better audio?
> Today's offerings do pretty well in all these areas given differences in price points. Pack the new ones with more
> not photographic features? GPS? NFC? Bluetooth? Or maybe better in-camera editing? Improved remote
> operation? None of the prime manufacturers seem to be particularly customer sensitive (except perhaps Fuji)
> as to market requirements. We'll get what they give us, when they give it to us. The rest is chasing rainbows.



Specifically regarding the 7D2, a little bit of everything, as most would agree that it is behind the D500 in featureset - and even the 80D in some areas. A flip screen would be nice 

More broadly, cameras do get slight improvements even now, and there is no reason NOT to implement that into bodies for new purchases, because there are a multitude of reasons that people buy new cameras, and after all, camera manufacturers are trying to stay in business. 

This doesn't mean that buying a new camera will have any meaningful benefit for an existing owner of a flagship in terms of producing better photography, which may be what you're driving at. But that is a reason not to upgrade; it isn't a reason not to iterate the product.


----------



## BillB (Apr 16, 2018)

Talys said:


> dickgrafixstop said:
> 
> 
> > What does the market need/want in a new DSLR? Finer resolution? Faster frame rate? Better low light performance? Less menus/options? Lighter weight? Faster autofocus? Improved video? Better audio?
> ...



Also, the 7DII has a dual pixel sensor, but it does not have the current technology with the Analog to Digital conversion on the sensor itself, which has lower noise levels at low ISOs.


----------



## Talys (Apr 17, 2018)

Scumbag said:


> The only thing that I can imagine would be a shake-up would be integrating support for full frame and crop within the one body.
> 
> The mirror would be sized for APS-C, and would only show the centre crop of the image. If you have an EF-S lens attached, then it would enforce cropping. If you have an EF lens attached then you would have the option of centre crop (you get what you see through the optical viewfinder), or entire frame.
> 
> ...



This... makes zero sense. The camera would need a full frame sensor, but APSC mirror/prism. That's nearly all the cost of full frame, without a way of seeing the field of view in the viewfinder. You also couldn't use the autofocus sensor beyond the APSC mirror's boundaries, since no light would be reflected downwards.

If you want a crop capture on a full frame sensor, mirrorless will be the way to go, because the viewfinder can switch between crop and full frame with a push of a button. The Sony implementation of this is excellent.


----------



## fingerstein (Apr 17, 2018)

Maybe the "big shakeup" will be WI-FI/NFC for 7D Mark III (!)


----------



## sanj (Apr 17, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> "The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."
> _—The dSLR_



Matter of time. Sooner than anticipated.


----------



## Treyarnon (Apr 17, 2018)

Any chance the 'extra' camera is a 7D3 with the AA filter removed?

The real surprise here is that the 7D3 has been delayed (when was the last full calendar year without a marquee 'xD' camera release?). I guess Canon have decided the camera needs more time in R&D - but the idea that releases are effectively being held for the moment, and then a big rush of new models next year (5Ds, 7D, 80D, the 'new' model - maybe a full frame mirror less too) ... kind of makes me wonder if Canon has some new tech in the pipeline that they want to get into the market as soon as possible


----------



## padam (Apr 18, 2018)

It's not going to be as big as an upgrade as the 7D II was compared to the original for stills (just like the 1DX II compared to the 1DX), but it will be very solid.
More speed (12 fps?) and faster card support for that, better IQ and AF (more high-precision cross-type points, more points at f/8) and better video features will be the main upgrades.
Maybe it will remain around the 20MP mark with a similar 1.4x crop to the 1DXII (in addition to the 1.6x) for 4k, maybe with 60fps as well (if CFast 2.0 is included), and 1080p at 120fps.
All these video features mean the AA filter is there to stay, nothing wrong with that, really.


----------



## tron (Apr 18, 2018)

So it seems 7DIII will be announced in 2019 which means that Canon will keep more or less the 5 year gap between the 7D systems. It will not be a problem if the improvements are on the same scale like the ones from 7D to 7DII.


----------



## Talys (Apr 18, 2018)

tron said:


> So it seems 7DIII will be announced in 2019 which means that Canon will keep more or less the 5 year gap between the 7D systems. It will not be a problem if the improvements are on the same scale like the ones from 7D to 7DII.



The only thing the 5 year gap is tough on is people who have the _need_ to buy something every year or two


----------



## tron (Apr 18, 2018)

Talys said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > So it seems 7DIII will be announced in 2019 which means that Canon will keep more or less the 5 year gap between the 7D systems. It will not be a problem if the improvements are on the same scale like the ones from 7D to 7DII.
> ...


Correct! Apart from some sensor improvement though which could be welcome sooner. Everything else can wait! But even so, I guess the more we wait the better the sensor will be


----------



## zim (Apr 18, 2018)

tron said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



and people with the 7D waiting patiently as the difference between original and 3 should be significant to cost justify, so not really correct


----------

