# 7D2 theory



## Tugela (Oct 9, 2014)

I was reading this thread on DPReview today (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54525945) and noticed that some had observed that the person doing the video review repeatedly referred to the 7D2 as having a 24 Mpixel sensor, and that got me thinking. If you all recall from the numerous rumours leading up to the 7D2, there were two sensors being talked about, a 20 Mpixel one and a 24 Mpixel one. So, the idea occurred to me that there were two development cameras, one using a modified 70D sensor to test the other components and design of the body, and a second camera with a more advanced 24 MPixel sensor that was supposed to go into the final body. And then perhaps during testing it became clear the more advanced 24 Mpixel sensor was not quite ready for prime time yet - maybe there were issues in read speed/timing, that sort of thing. since the 7D2 was already way behind schedule, Canon may have decided to go with the prototype using the 70D sensor instead so they could get it out of the door.

If that is the case then the 7D2 we got is not the camera Canon originally intended, but it became the final product so that it could be moved out the door and Canon could move on, even though it arrived already essentially obsolete.

So maybe there might be a 7D3 in the not too distant future if they can get the 24 Mpixel sensor to play nice.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 9, 2014)

It is possible that there were two prototypes 7D Mark II, with 20 and another with 24 megapixel. However, Canon would not give for someone to do a review, a camera that was not properly tested to be produced on a large scale.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 9, 2014)

Maybe the reviewers have simply tested too many Nikon APS-C bodies recently...


----------



## Tugela (Oct 9, 2014)

Don't forget that rumours of the 7D2 were around for quite some time, so something was going on.

In that scenario they would have originally tested with a modified 70D sensor to evaluate the body and other systems in the camera, and then later with the more advanced sensor included in the camera. If they then started seeing issues in use with testers, then the second version would have been ganked and the first version became the final product.

Or, it might simply have been a problem with making the second sensor in quantity so it was not practical as a product. Then they would have reverted to the camera version with the old sensor.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 9, 2014)

jrista said:


> I don't see why Canon would release a camera model that is going to have at least a three-year shelf life, and not use the latest technology. Canon delayed the 1D X quite a considerable amount of time after the paper launch, to make it right. The 7D II was such a hotly anticipated camera, I don't see why they wouldn't have put in the same effort to make a 24mp sensor work.
> 
> I don't see a rapid 7D III followup to the 7D II coming. I mean, anything is possible, but it just doesn't fit with Canon's MO.
> 
> I think the 24mp rumors were just that, rumors. Sadly.



You would think it would be pointless, but actually Canon does have a history of doing exactly that with their camcorders. In 2013 at CES they released the Vixia HF G20, then three months later its successor the HF G30 was announced at NAB. I think anyone who bought a G20 in those three months would have reasonable grounds to be a little peeved.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maybe the reviewers have simply tested too many Nikon APS-C bodies recently...


+1


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 9, 2014)

You're thinking too much.

He published some images he took with the camera he had in his hands, and they were 20MP images. He just misspoke or forgot. He got a few other things wrong in the review. I wouldn't read too much into it.


----------



## Harv (Oct 9, 2014)

It's also possible that the reviewers simply misquoted the sensor pixel count.


----------



## coreyhkh (Oct 9, 2014)

O my God Scott already posted in the other thread that he just made a mistake, Canon would not give a camera out for review that was not the one people would buy!!

I am 100% sure Canon does have a 24mp prototype as well as a 40+mp and who knows what else but for what ever reason they didn't make it in.


----------



## Tugela (Oct 9, 2014)

Well, he would have to change it, firstly because the 7D2 does have the slightly changed 70D sensor, and secondly he would still be bound by the NDA regarding the other prototype, if it existed.

So saying it was a "mistake" means nothing, especially since you would think that someone reviewing a new camera would know enough about it not to make that sort of mistake.

IMO he knows something else, and that is what caused the slip.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 9, 2014)

Tugela said:


> IMO he knows something else, and that is what caused the slip.



I heard it was a lone cameraman.


----------



## TeT (Oct 9, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > IMO he knows something else, and that is what caused the slip.
> ...



...in the parlor with the lead pipe.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 9, 2014)

Check the grassy koll. 8)


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 9, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> It is possible that there were two prototypes 7D Mark II, with 20 and another with 24 megapixel. However, Canon would not give for someone to do a review, a camera that was not properly tested to be produced on a large scale.



I'm positive there were more than just two prototypes as the 7d2 seems to be delayed a lot - from a marketing point of view, it should have come before the 70d using the 7d1's af system.

Most of all, with Nikon being at 24mp, it's reasonable that Canon tried to catch up - but probably found that their 24mp sensor underperformed and would also endanger the 22mp 5d3 as a lot of "dumb" Internet tech rankings and quick reviews only compare a handful of core specs like af point number.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 9, 2014)

Tugela said:


> IMO he knows something else, and that is what caused the slip.



People make mistakes. Not everything is a conspiracy.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 9, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > IMO he knows something else, and that is what caused the slip.
> ...


+1

The man shot Nikon.... and he shot Nikon..... and he shot Nikon..... and then he flipped over to Canon. He is probably so used to saying 24Mp that he said it without thinking....


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 9, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> Not everything is a conspiracy.



Denial even strengthens the suspicion that there might be something about it and agents of the system are trying to squash the truth. I'll be watching out for further patterns of people trying to make us believe Canon delivers the best cameras to us asap.


----------



## Nethawk (Oct 9, 2014)

It's a massive conspiracy. If I were you I might switch to Nikon or Sony ;D

Seriously, if the lack of megapixels is a huge bother then the 7D2 is probably not the right tool for the job.


----------



## mkabi (Oct 10, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > Not everything is a conspiracy.
> ...



There is a "Glitch" in the system ;D

And, since Kelby said it twice, its a "Deja vu" ;D


----------



## PLP (Oct 10, 2014)

Wow! How things get going. Let's use KISS (Keep It Simple S.) He was looking at the back of the camera's INFO screen. I have a 7D. The Image Size is 5184x3456 or 17.9 megs. However, the RAW "File Size" all depends. I have RAW files over 26 megs yet my 7D is still just a 18 mega pixels camera.

He was talking FILE SIZE. 

Sorry no conspiracy


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 10, 2014)

PLP said:


> He was talking FILE SIZE.



Then why did he say, "megapixels" instead of "megabytes"?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 10, 2014)

PLP said:


> He was talking FILE SIZE.
> 
> Sorry no conspiracy



No, he wasn't. But there's still no conspiracy.


----------



## PLP (Oct 10, 2014)

Again with KISS, maybe he misspoke. Or maybe he is not a math wiz. Darn what is 200 x 1.6 if you do not have an iPhone? We are not in his head, therefore we just do not know. I could try to give you a "Googol" worth of other reasons. Nevertheless, some people would think I just misspelled that. Or maybe the 7DM2 24MP had other issues, other than not coming in under $2000 target MSRP.

Move along, these are not the "Mega Pixels" you are looking for.....

For the record; I have used Canon since the A1 manual focus film days. 

My next camera will be a 7DM2.


----------



## Larry (Oct 10, 2014)

PLP said:


> Again with KISS, ... Darn what is 200 x 1.6 if you do not have an iPhone?



It is twice 100 x 1.6 (160), ...i.e. 320.

KISS


----------



## PLP (Oct 10, 2014)

Larry for what it is worth, in the video, Scott Kelby asked Brad Moore to use his iPhone to do the math.


----------



## Steve (Oct 10, 2014)

A lot of people aren't fast with doing even simple math in their heads. I'm in a third term calculus class and I still use a calculator to do a lot of arithmetic. Meanwhile, the Indian guy in my class is taking vector cross products in his head because where he went to school calculators were too expensive for most students. Its more about reliance on technology than being a "math wiz" and people nowadays are very reliant on technology for answers. 

The dude just misspoke in the video, I don't understand why this is such a huge thing.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 10, 2014)

To produce stunning images, a professional doesn't need to understand the science of light, they just need to know what works for their images. Some photography educators are charismatic story-tellers, some are technically accurate, very few can be both at the same time.

And yes, people do make mistakes. I know in my previous job I used to offer technical training sessions and I would often find mistakes in my materials often while I was presenting something newly put together. I've heard a couple of pro photographers in seminars who claim to love using their Canon EF 24mm f/1.2 L or Canon EF 24-70 f/1.4 L or (2.8 IS)... I just let it slide because it's more important to get the gist of what they're really trying to convey rather than nitpick the little details and derail their communication process.


----------



## slclick (Oct 10, 2014)

StudentOfLight said:


> To produce stunning images, a professional doesn't need to understand the science of light, they just need to know what works for their images. Some photography educators are charismatic story-tellers, some are technically accurate, very few can be both at the same time.
> 
> And yes, people do make mistakes. I know in my previous job I used to offer technical training sessions and I would often find mistakes in my materials often while I was presenting something newly put together. I've heard a couple of pro photographers in seminars who claim to love using their Canon EF 24mm f/1.2 L or Canon EF 24-70 f/1.4 L or (2.8 IS)... I just let it slide because it's more important to get the gist of what they're really trying to convey rather than nitpick the little details and derail their communication process.



You can't just come along spouting common sense and rational responses to everyone here!
Next we'll all be singing Kum Bay Ah


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 10, 2014)

StudentOfLight said:


> To produce stunning images, a professional doesn't need to understand the science of light, they just need to know what works for their images.



Understanding the science would make them better.


----------



## Larry (Oct 11, 2014)

PLP said:


> Larry for what it is worth, in the video, Scott Kelby asked Brad Moore to use his iPhone to do the math.



No offense (or assumption of superiority) intended. :

I didn't even see "the video".

...just a note that the particular math in question could be "kept pretty simple".


----------



## slclick (Oct 12, 2014)

do we really have to do 'the math'? Aren't crop factors and TC factors impregnated in our heads?


----------



## Marauder (Oct 12, 2014)

I've suspected that there were multiple configurations being tested as well. The "1DX top plate, 24MP and 12FPS" rumours were quite consistent for a very long time, and CR seemed to be getting those stats from sources they considered quite reliable. Moreover, for a long time the rumours stated that the camera would NOT be called 7D Mark II, which would fit if the product diverged so significantly in form from the original 7D. I suspect that two (or more) vastly different groups of prototypes were in the field, testing different types of technology and format. 

As to the reason the existing form was chosen for production, there could be a host of reasons. It might be technical. It's possible the noise performance of the modified 20.2 MP sensor was better than the tested 24 MP. It's possible that a 12 FPS body didn't give the desired 200,000 shutter life, or it may have failed on other technical grounds. It's also possible that the 1 series design ethic didn't fit the expectations of the target market--enough people on here complained about the concept that similar complaints from focus groups may have resulted in Canon deciding to go with a more "5D" look and feel prototype. 

It's also possible that the decision to go with the model chosen had something to do with target pricing. Many of the rumours associated with a "1DX" design ethic, 12 fps and a 24MP design also speculated on a $2000-$2500 retail price. That had a lot of people balking here in the forums, and also possibly in Canon's focus groups and market analysis. As a result, the winning design in the competition was one that could meet the requirements of the target market, yet still achieve a desirable sub two thousand dollar MRSP. 

Pure speculation of course, but I think it makes a certain degree of sense. Not a conspiracy at all--just a pragmatic decision on what can be delivered for a given price point to the intended target market, without making that market too narrow to ensure success. 

I don't concur though that the 7D II we are getting is in any way "obsolete" at all! I think it's going to be a phenomenal and well thought out wildlife/action/sports camera for the shooter who cannot afford a 1DX! 


I also think the notion that they didn't go with a 24MP sensor to protect the 5D III is demonstrably fallacious. At the time the 7D introduced the 18MP crop frame sensor, the top of the line 1D III only had a 10MP sensor. And the 1DIV that followed in 2010 only had a 16MP sensor!


----------

