The 7DmkII Thread.

David_S85David_S85 Spotter of Dgrin Spam and OdditiesChicagolandAdministrators Posts: 12,492 moderator
edited December 1, 2014 in Cameras
Looks amazing! The early photos (if true) of the camera show exactly the same button/controls layout as the 5DmkIII. Other than the built-in flash, just about identical outside.

We'll know more in the next coming days.

Who's planning on getting one?
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
«13456789

Comments

  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USARegistered Users Posts: 2,977 Major grins
    edited September 14, 2014
    I have a 5D3 and a 300/2.8, among other things. I'm considering selling the 300 and getting the 7D2 to use with my 70-200/2.8II to use for sports. I figure I could pocket about $2000 in the process. I wonder if anyone else has done something similar. I'm afraid I'd regret it, but 10fps is tempting.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • cmasoncmason Old dog, new tricks Raleigh, NCRegistered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited September 14, 2014
    I have been contemplating a 5DMK3 for some time now, with the cost causing hesitation of course. The 6D initially appealed, but I prefer the larger body 40D/50D/5D layout. While I want to go full frame, it would mean replacing quite a bit of glass.

    IF the new 7D can provide much better low light capability over the 7D today, I am in. If its just a small improvement, then I have to do a rethink.

    The Nikon 610 and new 750 are also in the mix, since if I have to replace glass with the full frame Canon anyway. I do have a 70-200L f/4 I hate to lose, but that Nikon kicks the 6D to the street.
  • pathfinderpathfinder Drive By Digital Shooter western IndianaSuper Moderators Posts: 14,496 moderator
    edited September 14, 2014
    If the new 7DMkII really matched the rumors from Canon Rumors, that will be just fine - http://www.canonrumors.com/category/photography/canon-7d-mark-ii/

    I rather doubt the low light high ISO ability will come close to that of a full frame body, however. I wish the laws of Physics would permit it, but I think FF bodies will always fare better with lower noise at higher ISOs.

    One reason I suspect this may be true, is that the 7DMkII is only showing a high ISO of 16000, as if Canon is not trying to suggest using the 7DMkII in the rarified air of ISO 25000 and up, which they do support for their full frame bodies these days.

    Still, if the new 7DMkII is useable at ISO 3200 or 6400 that will be just fine with me, not much really happens when shooting in absolute darkness anyway.

    I don't see it referenced in the link I posted, but I know I saw that the 7DMkII was "supposed" to have the dual phase AF of the 70D along with the iTrac color ability of the 1Dx. If true, that will convince me that the 7DMkII deserves to take a seat on my gear shelf. 10fps doesn't hurt either. and 20Mpxls
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • David_S85David_S85 Spotter of Dgrin Spam and Oddities ChicagolandAdministrators Posts: 12,492 moderator
    edited September 14, 2014
    When I first saw that the high ISO was 16,000, I immediately thought that maybe they'd be using a new 3-color depth sensor. Probably not true though.
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USARegistered Users Posts: 2,977 Major grins
    edited September 14, 2014
    I think a 1 stop improvement over the 7D would be a reasonable expectation for ISO. Nothing more.

    I shot some soccer today with my 5D3 and 300/2.8 and with the 7D2 on my mind. I think I'm ready to move on from this lens. Yeah it's the ultimate, but it's so huge. 10fps, zoom, more portability, less conspicuousness, and $2k back in my wallet will be welcome.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • David_S85David_S85 Spotter of Dgrin Spam and Oddities ChicagolandAdministrators Posts: 12,492 moderator
    edited September 15, 2014
    I shot some soccer today with my 5D3 and 300/2.8 and with the 7D2 on my mind. I think I'm ready to move on from this lens. Yeah it's the ultimate, but it's so huge. 10fps, zoom, more portability, less conspicuousness, and $2k back in my wallet will be welcome.

    Maybe trade the 300 for one of those new fancy 200-400 +1.4TC Canon lenses and you'll be all set! :D
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • studio1972studio1972 Cheshire Photographer Registered Users Posts: 249 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2014
    David_S85 wrote: »
    Looks amazing! The early photos (if true) of the camera show exactly the same button/controls layout as the 5DmkIII. Other than the built-in flash, just about identical outside.

    I think you have a low amazing threshold :)
  • mercphotomercphoto Bill Jurasz Registered Users Posts: 4,550 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2014
    I have a 5D3 and a 300/2.8, among other things. I'm considering selling the 300 and getting the 7D2 to use with my 70-200/2.8II to use for sports. I figure I could pocket about $2000 in the process. I wonder if anyone else has done something similar. I'm afraid I'd regret it, but 10fps is tempting.

    I understand the eight issue of the 300/2.8 lens. I sold mine back in 2006, and honestly, I've regretted it. Think hard before doing that!
    Bill Jurasz - Mercury Photography - Cedar Park, TX
    A former sports shooter
    Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
    My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USARegistered Users Posts: 2,977 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2014
    David_S85 wrote: »
    Maybe trade the 300 for one of those new fancy 200-400 +1.4TC Canon lenses and you'll be all set! :D

    Riiiiiiight. rolleyes1.gif
    mercphoto wrote: »
    I understand the eight issue of the 300/2.8 lens. I sold mine back in 2006, and honestly, I've regretted it. Think hard before doing that!

    Yeah? I'm on the fence, but about to fall on the 7D2 side I think. I'm retiring from my side business as LL photographer, so I no longer have a real need for it. Now it's just nice to have. Is it really worth $2000 to me to have that last 5%? I'm not sure. It would be nice to be able to be just a soccer dad and sling a bag over my shoulder with a 7D2 and 70-200 inside, rather than carrying that bag plus the friggen suitcase for the 300.

    I was shooting soccer yesterday with it, and with the 7D2 in mind, and I came to the conclusion that the 300 was just too cumbersome and that zoom and 10fps would be nice. But then I got home and saw the bg melting results. Sigh.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • cmasoncmason Old dog, new tricks Raleigh, NCRegistered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2014
    Scott Kelby says its the best high ISO crop sensor camera ever. Still waiting for some comparison images, and DPreview.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M03hu1diCqE
  • pathfinderpathfinder Drive By Digital Shooter western IndianaSuper Moderators Posts: 14,496 moderator
    edited September 15, 2014
    mercphoto wrote: »
    I understand the eight issue of the 300/2.8 lens. I sold mine back in 2006, and honestly, I've regretted it. Think hard before doing that!

    The solution to the weight and cost of the 300 f2.8 IS L, is to buy the 300 f4 IS L in its place. Is is lighter and cheaper than the 70-200 f2.8 IS L too.... And as sharp as its faster, larger, heavier and much more expensive sister.

    One of Canon's L's that rarely gets much love, but is truly great lens.

    The 70-300 variable aperture IS L is a pretty nice lens too, but weighs about the same as the 70-200 f2.8 IS L

    It looks like B&H has stopped taking pre-orders for the 7D MkII, as I cannot seem to get it to come up on their website, and the other day it would pop right up. Anyone else notice this??
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • jonh68jonh68 Major grins Registered Users Posts: 2,711 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2014
    I think a 1 stop improvement over the 7D would be a reasonable expectation for ISO. Nothing more.

    I shot some soccer today with my 5D3 and 300/2.8 and with the 7D2 on my mind. I think I'm ready to move on from this lens. Yeah it's the ultimate, but it's so huge. 10fps, zoom, more portability, less conspicuousness, and $2k back in my wallet will be welcome.

    I think this is the very reason why Nikon has not come out with a D400. Sure, the pro guys are going to be buying the flagship cameras and 300mm to 400mm pro glass.

    For everyone else, a cropped DX body with great AF and ISO usable at 3200 to 6400 and 70-200 a makes an appealing combo. Sports shooting has become a commodity. Unless you are a staffer, I am going to get the same price on a photograph freelancing if I shoot with a D4/300 2.8 combo or the mythical D400/70-200 combo. Doesn't make sense to get a high dollar sports setup when a cheaper option would be good enough.

    It will be interesting to see if Nikon introduces the mythical D400. It will be a good indicator of how Nikon feels about DX.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USARegistered Users Posts: 2,977 Major grins
    edited September 15, 2014
    pathfinder wrote: »
    The solution to the weight and cost of the 300 f2.8 IS L, is to buy the 300 f4 IS L in its place. Is is lighter and cheaper than the 70-200 f2.8 IS L too.... And as sharp as its faster, larger, heavier and much more expensive sister.

    One of Canon's L's that rarely gets much love, but is truly great lens.

    Of this I have no doubt. However my options would be A) sell 300/2.8 and buy 300/4 to use with my 5D3, or B) sell 300/2.8 and buy 7D2 and use my existing 70-200/2.8II. I think B has more value added. Zoom and 10fps will be nice.

    I suppose with the funds raised from selling the 300/2.8, I could buy both the 7D2 and the 300/4, but that would be rather extravagant!
    The 70-300 variable aperture IS L is a pretty nice lens too

    Too slow.
    It looks like B&H has stopped taking pre-orders for the 7D MkII, as I cannot seem to get it to come up on their website, and the other day it would pop right up. Anyone else notice this??

    Buy local. I bought my 5D3 locally before anyone got theirs from B&H.
    jonh68 wrote: »
    I think this is the very reason why Nikon has not come out with a D400.

    Indeed, Canon just killed a number of sales of 1DXs and 5D3s, and the market for used 1D4s is now all but eliminated.
    It will be interesting to see if Nikon introduces the mythical D400. It will be a good indicator of how Nikon feels about DX.

    If the timing of the D800 announcement in 2012 was any clue, we will see a D400 in the next few days. Otherwise it will be another 6 months. If not by then, I think a number of Nikon DX shooters will be switching.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • pathfinderpathfinder Drive By Digital Shooter western IndianaSuper Moderators Posts: 14,496 moderator
    edited September 15, 2014
    N one has commented on the new Canon 400mm DO f4 IS II either.

    I think that may be a very interesting lens. We shall soon see.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Still learnin'still lovin Super Moderators Posts: 21,572 moderator
    edited September 16, 2014
    DO lenses are great if you have a very simple background to shoot against. (Empty Sky background for one.)

    In a more typical application, diffraction optics produce a somewhat "busy" background bokeh, although it's easier to fix in post-production using background selection and Gaussian blur than a mirror lens "donut" bokeh, for instance.

    Canon-70-300-DO-Bullseyes.jpg
    (Image attribution: the-digital-picture.com and Bryan Carnathan)
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms *and Olympus Boston, MARegistered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2014
    If the timing of the D800 announcement in 2012 was any clue, we will see a D400 in the next few days. Otherwise it will be another 6 months. If not by then, I think a number of Nikon DX shooters will be switching.

    There have been rumors of a D7200/D9XXX (AKA D400) floating around but we'll see. I definitely would welcome a larger buffer and a bump in high ISO IQ like they got from the D800-D810.

    But I'm excited to see what the 7D mkII can do. I've got my full Nikon kit so I'm not likely to change systems but I am a big proponent of APS-C cameras for a lot of uses especially with how well my D7100 has done so having a benchmark camera like this will be great. And as long as they don't drop support for DX at least in terms of IQ if the 7D II has any big advantages over the D7100 Nikon will likely have them matched or exceeded in the next generation as they play leap frog with each other. Hopefully this market heats up clap.gif
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USARegistered Users Posts: 2,977 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2014
    Glort wrote: »
    The way some people go on about ISO and noise etc youd think no one ever took a pic in daylight anymore and everyone needed perfect 100,000 ISO. If I run out of ISO on my present 7D, it's time to pack up and go home. I really wonder how many people actually use the features they harp on about with new cameras more than a few times a year, if that?

    Seriously. Bench racers. I have never needed more than ISO 6400, and even that is rare. If one needs more ISO than that, I'd like to know what they're shooting. Nocturnal hummingbirds or something.
    One thing that I REALLY don't get with new cams is why people rush to buy them. They drop $1000 a year after their release and the manufacturers bring out a bunch of firmware updates to fix all the problems with them that become apparent.

    Untrue. I had the first 5D3 in the state because it came out in March and I wanted it for baseball season which starts in April. I keep an eye on its list price, it has only recently come down a little.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms *and Olympus Boston, MARegistered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2014
    Seriously. Bench racers. I have never needed more than ISO 6400, and even that is rare. If one needs more ISO than that, I'd like to know what they're shooting. Nocturnal hummingbirds or something.

    Concert/performance venues, 3,200-12,800 is the range I'm in most of the time and that's with 2.8 zooms. An extra clean stop or 2 of high ISO would be great for those very poorly lit venues where I need to go to ISO 25,600 just to get the shot, or to give me room for a smaller aperture.
  • cmasoncmason Old dog, new tricks Raleigh, NCRegistered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2014
    Glort wrote: »
    I gotta admit, I have never usderstood all the hype and technical nit picking and waffle that accompanies any new camera release these days. ....The way some people go on about ISO and noise etc youd think no one ever took a pic in daylight anymore and everyone needed perfect 100,000 ISO. If I run out of ISO on my present 7D, it's time to pack up and go home. I really wonder how many people actually use the features they harp on about with new cameras more than a few times a year, if that?.

    I think folks fawn on about camera gear because they are interested...its far easier to type about camera gear than purchase it...some do purchase it.

    As for me, I am in the market to upgrade my 40D. My biggest issue is low light capability. At the moment, when the light gets low, I indeed have to pack it up, but unfortunately, that is when many things I am shooting are getting started: late afternoon cross country meets, soccer matches, indoor basketball, and concerts. Now, none of these are professional, just events my family is involved in which I would like to have photos. But when I am shooting at ISO1000 and not getting the shutter speed I need for action, its incredibly frustrating.

    So, low light capability is required for my next purchase. I don't need to shoot by candle light, but I do need to push ISO to 6400 at least at dusk and still be able to stop motion, or take tripod assisted shots of a school concert without it being more noise than signal.

    The 7dMkII is interesting because it would require no other changes to my kit: body only. 5DMkIII will require new lens purchases to replace APS-C only lenses, while a switch to Nikon is a full kit swap.
  • mercphotomercphoto Bill Jurasz Registered Users Posts: 4,550 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2014
    Glort wrote: »
    I gotta admit, I have never usderstood all the hype and technical nit picking and waffle that accompanies any new camera release these days.

    Because I have a 40D on its third shutter and I want to know what I should be replacing it with maybe? Glort, why does all this bother you so much?
    Bill Jurasz - Mercury Photography - Cedar Park, TX
    A former sports shooter
    Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
    My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
  • cmasoncmason Old dog, new tricks Raleigh, NCRegistered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2014
    First images I have seen of high ISO. Unfortunately, it seems they were taken fairly wide open, so focus issues are a distraction. I had to open the photo in a new tab to get a larger version. Even with these limits, the noise is lightyears ahead of where my 40D is. If you have a 7D now, please comment on how it compares relatively to the MkI.

    http://mattgranger.com/7d2
  • pathfinderpathfinder Drive By Digital Shooter western IndianaSuper Moderators Posts: 14,496 moderator
    edited September 16, 2014
    I agree, those highly saturated red and pinks may not be ideal to evaluate image quality, and the focus was off as well ( I hope that was the photographer and not the camera - my 7D can do a lot better job of focusing than that ) - Having said all that, the color noise seems quite low. I am encouraged some

    Something not much talked about, that I think is fantastic is the BUILT IN GPS!! That is a $250 option on the 1Dx or the 5DMkIII. isn't it?

    It is also sporting a built in Intervalometer, for those time-lapse star shots.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USARegistered Users Posts: 2,977 Major grins
    edited September 16, 2014
    pathfinder wrote: »
    and the focus was off as well ( I hope that was the photographer and not the camera

    I think we can assume it was the photographer. There is something suspect about a photog who would invert the opening banner image on his website. And he is a Nikon shooter, so perhaps there is a slight agenda. Whatever, it's very careless.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • KikopriceKikoprice Major grins Registered Users Posts: 153 Major grins
    edited September 18, 2014
    Jack, rent the 7D/2 before you sell the 300 2.8. You know the 5D3 and 300 2.8 is magic....
  • Brett1000Brett1000 Major grins https://www.flickr.com/photos/photoscw/Registered Users Posts: 819 Major grins
    edited September 18, 2014
    Kikoprice wrote: »
    You know the 5D3 and 300 2.8 is magic....

    sure, that combo is great - but not a magical price
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft GWC for hire Portland.ME.USARegistered Users Posts: 2,977 Major grins
    edited September 18, 2014
    Kikoprice wrote: »
    Jack, rent the 7D/2 before you sell the 300 2.8. You know the 5D3 and 300 2.8 is magic....

    If by 7D/2 you meant 7D or 7D2, I've already owned the 7D and I felt it wasnt up to snuff. The 5D3 is, I think due in large part to the AF which the 7D2 now has, and then some.

    The 300 is magic, but only when players are within its range. I feel I bring home fewer keepers during a soccer game, although the keepers I do get are magic.

    I know renting a 7D2 first would be the smart thing to do. It's just that I think it would be easy to sell the 300 now because it's football and soccer season. Also $2k back in my pocket would take care of Christmas. I could use the 7D2 skiing too.

    Argh.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • photodad1photodad1 Photodad Registered Users Posts: 566 Major grins
    edited September 18, 2014
    I am very interested in how well the 7D2 will do in low light situations while shooting sports. Shooting high school sports in low light is very challenging at times.
  • codruscodrus Big grins Registered Users Posts: 71 Big grins
    edited September 18, 2014
    Seriously. Bench racers. I have never needed more than ISO 6400, and even that is rare. If one needs more ISO than that, I'd like to know what they're shooting. Nocturnal hummingbirds or something.



    Untrue. I had the first 5D3 in the state because it came out in March and I wanted it for baseball season which starts in April. I keep an eye on its list price, it has only recently come down a little.

    I suspect most people looking for better ISO performance aren't coming from a 5D3 -- in fact, I'd be surprised if the 7D2 is even close to the 5D3 in that regard. That full frame sensor buys you a lot of low-noise light.

    Personally, I'm coming from a 50D. I've never quite been willing to make the jump to full frame, and the 7Dmk1 didn't offer enough of a performance boost over the 50D to be worth the money. The 50D might technically do ISO 6400, but it's nothing I'd ever want to share, even ISO 1600 is getting into significant quality loss due to noise. ISO performance is really my only significant complaint about the 50D -- sure, better AF performance would be nice, but I don't shoot movies and the only time I'm really let down by the 50D is when I'm at f/2.8 and ISO 1600 and I'm still not getting enough light. Indoor kids sports is the main such thing.

    As for pricing, Canon has clamped down a lot on contractual minimum pricing in recent years, so the 5D3 hasn't dropped in price as quickly as previous cameras did.

    --Ian
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Wedding Photographer Southern CaliforniaRegistered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited September 19, 2014
    Seriously. Bench racers. I have never needed more than ISO 6400, and even that is rare. If one needs more ISO than that, I'd like to know what they're shooting. Nocturnal hummingbirds or something......

    Indeed. Never under-estimate peoples ability to figure out a use for something!

    http://photos.matthewsaville.com/Portfolio/matthews-favorites/i-bKSbjth
    My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug PortfolioMy Astro-Landscape Photo BlogDgrin Weddings Forum
Sign In or Register to comment.