I'm guessing (as are you) that the cost of the sensor isn't all that significant.
They put 18mp sensors in $700 cameras. They put a full framed sensor in a camera that costs less than the 7DMKII.
I would guess that even if a large mega pixel sensor was 3 or 4 times the cost of a crop sensor. The cost of the camera
could be kept down. (if they wanted to do that)
It would be interesting to know what the breakdown is for the different parts of a camera.
What bring the cost up faster.
Sensor size?
Af speed, af points, and frame rate?
The build, plastic or mag., weather resistant?
What else is there?
IQ?
From what I've seen, (don't own one) the 6D may have the best IQ, yet it costs less than the 5DMKIII and the 7DMKII.
So IQ can't be the big factor.
AF speed, points and frame rate must be it.
But, the 7DMKII is half the price of a 5DMKIII, yet it has better specs. That can't be it.
I think you can see where I'm going with this.
It appears the determining factor for what a camera costs is how much can they make us believe that we "need" something.
For me, do I need 10 FPS over 7 FPS? (7DMKII vs 70D) No I do not.
The only thing this is going to do for me is fill up my hard drive faster. I probably won't have any more keepers
just because I can rattle off 3 more frames/second.
I'm sure the more and better AF points will help quite a few people, it will probably help me also.
Tougher body? I've yet to break a camera, and I routinely have a 300LF2.8is with a 2X tc hanging off the front of a camera
while walking through the woods with the camera grip in my hand. (rebels, XXD's and 5DMKII)
For me to get excited about the 7DMKII, the AF is going to have to give me an 80% dead on focus rate.
Without that, I think my 70D will do everything that I need it to do.
It's late, and I'm rambling, so I'll say goodnight.
Yeah, I think all your rambling still just proves my point- A full-frame 7D mk2 wouldn't be possible for less than $3K.
It sounds as if you're saying Canon is throwing in the sensor for free on the 7DMKII, and just charging for the sensor on the 6D.
I'd guess that this camera "should" sell for $2499, after a couple of months there would be sales for $2299.
It's possible for it to be under 3k, but I do agree that it would be unlikely.
dave.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
0
Matthew SavilleRegistered Users, Retired ModPosts: 3,352Major grins
It sounds as if you're saying Canon is throwing in the sensor for free on the 7DMKII, and just charging for the sensor on the 6D.
I'd guess that this camera "should" sell for $2499, after a couple of months there would be sales for $2299.
It's possible for it to be under 3k, but I do agree that it would be unlikely.
But still I ask, HOW? THE 7D series has always, historically speaking, been far superior to it's "affordable full frame" counter part. Forget the 6D, the original 7D was also vastly superior to the 5D and 5D mk2 even, despite their ~$3K price tag and their ONE redeeming quality, a superior full-frame sensor.
The 7D mk2, in keeping the tradition, is for all intents and purposes a vastly superior camera to even the 5D mk3. Or even more shockingly, it may even contain the next generation of flagship AF system, a gimpse of what the 1DX mk2 may offer.
As such, part for part, any full-frame 7D mk2 (5D mk4?) simply MUST be priced at $3K or $3300, at the least.
Canon could, of course, pull a Nikon D750 move, and take a handful of the 7D mk2 specs and slap them in a 6D-esque housing. That, ideally, could cost about $2500 or so. However it would be FORCED to omit a handful of less important flagship functions / features, such as the higher shutter speeds / flash sync ceiling, PC port, and some of the 5-series style control layouts.
Personally that sounds like a great camera, but it would still be different from a 5D mk4...
But still I ask, HOW? THE 7D series has always, historically speaking, been far superior to it's "affordable full frame" counter part. Forget the 6D, the original 7D was also vastly superior to the 5D and 5D mk2 even, despite their ~$3K price tag and their ONE redeeming quality, a superior full-frame sensor.
The 7D mk2, in keeping the tradition, is for all intents and purposes a vastly superior camera to even the 5D mk3. Or even more shockingly, it may even contain the next generation of flagship AF system, a gimpse of what the 1DX mk2 may offer.
As such, part for part, any full-frame 7D mk2 (5D mk4?) simply MUST be priced at $3K or $3300, at the least.
Canon could, of course, pull a Nikon D750 move, and take a handful of the 7D mk2 specs and slap them in a 6D-esque housing. That, ideally, could cost about $2500 or so. However it would be FORCED to omit a handful of less important flagship functions / features, such as the higher shutter speeds / flash sync ceiling, PC port, and some of the 5-series style control layouts.
Personally that sounds like a great camera, but it would still be different from a 5D mk4...
=Matt=
First, the 7D Superior to the 5DMKII? Not a chance. The only thing it could do better was fps.
The AF in my hands was no better than the 5DMKII's.
The higher iso's of the 5DMKII was way better than the 7D.
I don't get noise in the skies at iso 400 with 5DMKII like I did with the 7D.
I have the 70D, seeing as the sensor in the 7DMKII is similar to the 70D's, I'll go out on a limb and say
that the noise levels will be similar.
In real world use, my 5DMKII has less noise than my 70D.
So, the new flagship crop won't beat out a 4 year old full frame.
And as for forgetting the 6D, no.
You brought up the part about "Affordable Full Frame Counter Part." So it's in the discussion.
The 6D (from what I hear) will basically focus in the dark, let's see if if the "flagship" can do that.
Remember, a lot of people will be buying this camera for high school sports, or wildlife shots. (pros aren't buying it)
Both of those can be tough to have enough light.
I was out today with my 70D and a Canon 100-400 2 hours before sunset taking photos in the woods of deer.
I was shooting wide open at iso 3200 to get a shutter speed of 1/200th.
Being able to go up another stop would have helped.
As for the 7DMKII being Vastly Superior to the 5DMKIII, that remains to seen.
To many people have anointed this camera as the savior. Lets wait and see if that really pans out.
Real world. (good thing he was standing still)
70D, 100-400, iso 3200, f5.6, 1/100
But still I ask, HOW? THE 7D series has always, historically speaking, been far superior to it's "affordable full frame" counter part. Forget the 6D, the original 7D was also vastly superior to the 5D and 5D mk2 even,
Matt. I respect your experience and your incredible gallery of favorites, but now your anti-Canon bias has you simply making stuff up. I owned a 7D and a 5D2 at the same time. It got to the point where I used the 7D only for field sports and the 5D2 for everything else, including some sports. Furthermore, I have never heard this 7D > 5D/2 claim anywhere else, not even on dpreview. Come on man.
Canon could, of course, pull a Nikon D750 move, and take a handful of the 7D mk2 specs and slap them in a 6D-esque housing.
Of course, this already exists. It's called the 5D Mark III. All Canon has to do to compete with the D750 is drop the price on the 5D3. But I suspect they'll wait until the D750 is properly vetted and deemed oil free and competent in AF.
Dave, sweet 9 pointer.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
It's strange, I've never been interested in the 6D until the 7DMKII was announced.
I go to the sites and compare the noise at high iso's and I'm just amazed at how clean the 6D shots look.
When Canon comes out with a 6DMKII that has 30mp with a noise level similar to the current 6D, 11 AF cross points, 6 FPS, a touchscreen,
and the ability to focus at F8. All for the price of $1799, I'll be all over it.
But in the mean time, I may have to look real hard at the current 6D. (but what do I do with all my crop lenses)
I have a 70D right now, and I'm really having a hard time figuring out how there is anything
on the 7DMKII that I just gotta have.
One more shot of the two of them together.
dave.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
0
Matthew SavilleRegistered Users, Retired ModPosts: 3,352Major grins
Matt. I respect your experience and your incredible gallery of favorites, but now your anti-Canon bias has you simply making stuff up. I owned a 7D and a 5D2 at the same time. It got to the point where I used the 7D only for field sports and the 5D2 for everything else, including some sports. Furthermore, I have never heard this 7D > 5D/2 claim anywhere else, not even on dpreview. Come on man.
First, the 7D Superior to the 5DMKII? Not a chance. The only thing it could do better was fps.
The AF in my hands was no better than the 5DMKII's.
Like I said, the only thing the 5D and 5D mk2 had going for themselves was the sensor. That's it. I'm not just ragging on Canon, I've spent years working with all of these cameras and I know them very well.
Both 5-series cameras had, aside from their center AF point, the focusing power of a rebel. The 7D had 100% cross-type AF points, and they were spread all over the viewfinder. The 7D had a weather-sealed magnesium alloy body with a 150K shutter rating and a PC sync port, a 100% viewfinder, etc. etc. It also was the first Canon camera to include the completely re-designed camera button customization menu, not seen elsewhere until the 5D mk3.
Simply put, I'd challenge anybody to list a spec on the 5D / mk2 that was superior to the 7D, that doesn't have to do with FF vs APS-C. I'm not a fanboy, I just like to collect information... Shutter lag time maybe? Seriously, I'm trying to find something, but I can't.
Of course, this already exists. It's called the 5D Mark III. All Canon has to do to compete with the D750 is drop the price on the 5D3. But I suspect they'll wait until the D750 is properly vetted and deemed oil free and competent in AF.
I suppose, if you ignore image quality, yes the 5D mk3 combats the D750 quite well, and even gives the D800 and D810 a run for their money.
Regardless of all that, my point is still: what will Canon do next in the FF arena, with the 7D mk2 offering the specs that it does? Will the 1DX mk2, or 5D mk4 have this same new all-cross-type AF system? Will the 5D mk4 have ~8 FPS? Or will it stay at 6 FPS, and aim for 40-50 megapixels? (Which could result in 7D mk2-esque high ISO performance, in a full-frame sensor?) Will we see the new 40-50 MP sensor first in a 1-series, or a 5-series? Lastly, what could a 6D mk2 be? Does it merely need to trump the D610, or does it need to take some specs from the 7D mk2 and aim to be as much of an FF 7D mk2 as it can be?
Folks may or may not have seen this - but Scott Kelby shot a 7DmkII at two NFL games recently and this is a long video describing his experience with the 7DMkII. Now Scott is a Canon user, and noy unbiased, but he does show some ISO 16000 frames that are going to be quite useable - so it is long and a bit slow, but informative.
Folks may or may not have seen this - but Scott Kelby shot a 7DmkII at two NFL games recently and this is a long video describing his experience with the 7DMkII. Now Scott is a Canon user, and noy unbiased, but he does show some ISO 16000 frames that are going to be quite useable - so it is long and a bit slow, but informative.
I wish he'd have zoomed in on more images, but from what I can tell, the image quality is pretty dang impressive... That ISO 16,000 image really encourages me about the ISO 3200 / 6400 performance!
"I think this is what ISO 400 looked like on the 7D"... NICE!
Folks may or may not have seen this - but Scott Kelby shot a 7DmkII at two NFL games recently and this is a long video describing his experience with the 7DMkII. Now Scott is a Canon user, and noy unbiased, but he does show some ISO 16000 frames that are going to be quite useable - so it is long and a bit slow, but informative.
I have one on pre-order and am very excited that it should arrive in time for gymnastics season. This camera was just made for indoor sports. The servo recognizes not only shapes, but also color now, which was a feature only the 1DX had previously. This should immensely in staying locked-on to my gymnast instead of migrating to the (busy) background. The 10 frames a second will be amazing for dismounts of the apparatus.
But one of the very best features, and is unparalleled in the history of cameras (correct me gently if I'm wrong) is the anti-Flicker mode. Anybody who regularly shoots indoor sports at venues with sodium lights will LOVE this. Sodium lights are extremely popular in indoor athletic venues and are absolutely horrible to photograph under, unless you're allowed to use flash (never in gymnastics). The reason is that many times per-second, sodium light cycle through a variety of different colors and intensities. You can literally fire consecutive shots which will require different white balance and exposure corrections. The way I understand it, anti-Flicker mode waits until the exposure reaches its peak value before it takes the shot. Sheer genius.
And oh yeah, high ISO, so I can shoot faster shutterspeeds for sharper shots. That won't be too shabby either.
But one of the very best features, and is unparalleled in the history of cameras (correct me gently if I'm wrong) is the anti-Flicker mode. Anybody who regularly shoots indoor sports at venues with sodium lights will LOVE this. Sodium lights are extremely popular in indoor athletic venues and are absolutely horrible to photograph under, unless you're allowed to use flash (never in gymnastics). The reason is that many times per-second, sodium light cycle through a variety of different colors and intensities. You can literally fire consecutive shots which will require different white balance and exposure corrections.
So THAT"S what causes this...
Hopefully, the anti-flicker mode can be switched on or off, so arty shots like above can still happen.
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Yeah. I'm in. Gonna sell my 300/2.8 and get a 7D2. Tired of lugging that thing around and missing shots due to no zoom. It was awesome for little league baseball, but I'm out of that business now, and I'm not really enjoying it for soccer. Looking forward to having a more portable 112-320/2.8 zoom in the form of my 70-200/2.8, 10fps, about $2k back in my pocket, and AF which could be even better than my 5D3.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
After watching Scott Kelby's Real World Field Test the 7D Mark II looks to be the state of the art for sports and wildlife. My only head scratcher is why the CF card and SD card combo instead of dual SD cards?
After watching Scott Kelby's Real World Field Test the 7D Mark II looks to be the state of the art for sports and wildlife. My only head scratcher is why the CF card and SD card combo instead of dual SD cards?
Looks like CF cards still have faster read/write speeds.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
After watching Scott Kelby's Real World Field Test the 7D Mark II looks to be the state of the art for sports and wildlife. My only head scratcher is why the CF card and SD card combo instead of dual SD cards?
yes, seems everything uses SD cards or Micro SD cards nowadays - tablets, cell phones, cameras etc.
Looks like CF cards still have faster read/write speeds.
And people who have had higher level Canon/Nikon cameras (or 4/3) still have a bunch. When I went to a dual SD camera it sucked that I couldn't use my CF's since I had so much invested in that format with my previous 3 DSLR's using it.
After watching Scott Kelby's Real World Field Test the 7D Mark II looks to be the state of the art for sports and wildlife. My only head scratcher is why the CF card and SD card combo instead of dual SD cards?
My guess for the combo of the 2 different formats is because the folks that had a 7D and upgrade
have a few CF cards, and the folks that are moving from a Rebel to the 7DMKII have SD cards.
So really, I think Canon did this right by helping people at both ends of the upgrade to save a few bucks.
yes, seems everything uses SD cards or Micro SD cards nowadays - tablets, cell phones, cameras etc.
That's only true for consumer level products. Look at any of the Canon or Nikon pro bodies and you'll find they use CF, either exclusively or in conjunction with another card type.
CF is faster and a has more robust package. Plus I believe the connector for a CF in the camera is better suited than the SD connector for frequent removal/insertion cycles as you might find in a professional sports shooting environments where they have runners to swap your card at frequent intervals. Not to mention that CF seems to be the preferred format in those environments, but that might just be because all the shooters are using pro bodies.
CF is faster and a has more robust package. Plus I believe the connector for a CF in the camera is better suited than the SD connector for frequent removal/insertion cycles
I'm not sure about that. CF's pin/hole interface is delicate. I've bent a pin before. Said a prayer and bent it back with an eyeglasses flathead mini screwdriver. It worked.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
I'm not sure about that. CF's pin/hole interface is delicate.
Agreed, it is delicate. The SD interface is more robust in that there are no pins, and far fewer contacts. It is a sliding interface, not an insertion one. The downside to SD is the contacts are exposed to static discharge, but I think that fear is probably not warranted in my head. Personally I'd prefer SD cards and its nearly enough to make me sell the 40D and get the 70D.
Agreed, it is delicate. The SD interface is more robust in that there are no pins, and far fewer contacts. It is a sliding interface, not an insertion one. The downside to SD is the contacts are exposed to static discharge, but I think that fear is probably not warranted in my head. Personally I'd prefer SD cards and its nearly enough to make me sell the 40D and get the 70D.
Well, again, contacts have springs, and all springs eventually wear out. With CF cards, the springs are in the card. When you replace the card, you're replacing the spring contacts. In the case of SD cards however, the springs are in your camera. So the penalty for those wearing is quite high: a broken camera.
For P&S cameras where cards are rarely changed, that's most likely not an issue. However, professionals are swapping cards much more often. I shot an event recently for 10 hours a day over six days where I needed to swap cards hourly. I would be leery of that my insertion cycles with SD cards in my camera, but I have no problem doing that with CF cards. As a data point, look at how often you change cards in your card reader. I've never had a CF socket in a card reader go bad, but I have an SD socket in my computer that's flaky now. So it does happen.
As for breaking CF socket pins in your camera, the only time I've heard of this is when somebody inserted a card the wrong way into the camera -- probably sideways, as cards can't be inserted backwards. I can't see how this would happen otherwise, unless perhaps the card was damaged and had a clogged hole or something. That's not wear, it's damage.
But one of the very best features, and is unparalleled in the history of cameras (correct me gently if I'm wrong) is the anti-Flicker mode. Anybody who regularly shoots indoor sports at venues with sodium lights will LOVE this. Sodium lights are extremely popular in indoor athletic venues and are absolutely horrible to photograph under, unless you're allowed to use flash (never in gymnastics). The reason is that many times per-second, sodium light cycle through a variety of different colors and intensities. You can literally fire consecutive shots which will require different white balance and exposure corrections. The way I understand it, anti-Flicker mode waits until the exposure reaches its peak value before it takes the shot. Sheer genius.
Yeah, Nikon's had this for a while now in some of their cameras. As well as the built-in intervalometer and timelapse feature, also with flicker reduction, the intervalometer being a feature that Nikon has had for maybe 10+ years now . Sorry, Canon shooters! Party like it's 2005...
Comments
it would be called a 1Ds discount
It sounds as if you're saying Canon is throwing in the sensor for free on the 7DMKII, and just charging for the sensor on the 6D.
I'd guess that this camera "should" sell for $2499, after a couple of months there would be sales for $2299.
It's possible for it to be under 3k, but I do agree that it would be unlikely.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
But still I ask, HOW? THE 7D series has always, historically speaking, been far superior to it's "affordable full frame" counter part. Forget the 6D, the original 7D was also vastly superior to the 5D and 5D mk2 even, despite their ~$3K price tag and their ONE redeeming quality, a superior full-frame sensor.
The 7D mk2, in keeping the tradition, is for all intents and purposes a vastly superior camera to even the 5D mk3. Or even more shockingly, it may even contain the next generation of flagship AF system, a gimpse of what the 1DX mk2 may offer.
As such, part for part, any full-frame 7D mk2 (5D mk4?) simply MUST be priced at $3K or $3300, at the least.
Canon could, of course, pull a Nikon D750 move, and take a handful of the 7D mk2 specs and slap them in a 6D-esque housing. That, ideally, could cost about $2500 or so. However it would be FORCED to omit a handful of less important flagship functions / features, such as the higher shutter speeds / flash sync ceiling, PC port, and some of the 5-series style control layouts.
Personally that sounds like a great camera, but it would still be different from a 5D mk4...
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
First, the 7D Superior to the 5DMKII? Not a chance. The only thing it could do better was fps.
The AF in my hands was no better than the 5DMKII's.
The higher iso's of the 5DMKII was way better than the 7D.
I don't get noise in the skies at iso 400 with 5DMKII like I did with the 7D.
I have the 70D, seeing as the sensor in the 7DMKII is similar to the 70D's, I'll go out on a limb and say
that the noise levels will be similar.
In real world use, my 5DMKII has less noise than my 70D.
So, the new flagship crop won't beat out a 4 year old full frame.
And as for forgetting the 6D, no.
You brought up the part about "Affordable Full Frame Counter Part." So it's in the discussion.
The 6D (from what I hear) will basically focus in the dark, let's see if if the "flagship" can do that.
Remember, a lot of people will be buying this camera for high school sports, or wildlife shots. (pros aren't buying it)
Both of those can be tough to have enough light.
I was out today with my 70D and a Canon 100-400 2 hours before sunset taking photos in the woods of deer.
I was shooting wide open at iso 3200 to get a shutter speed of 1/200th.
Being able to go up another stop would have helped.
As for the 7DMKII being Vastly Superior to the 5DMKIII, that remains to seen.
To many people have anointed this camera as the savior. Lets wait and see if that really pans out.
Real world. (good thing he was standing still)
70D, 100-400, iso 3200, f5.6, 1/100
Real world.
5DMKII, 100-400 iso 3200, f5.6, 1/100
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
Matt. I respect your experience and your incredible gallery of favorites, but now your anti-Canon bias has you simply making stuff up. I owned a 7D and a 5D2 at the same time. It got to the point where I used the 7D only for field sports and the 5D2 for everything else, including some sports. Furthermore, I have never heard this 7D > 5D/2 claim anywhere else, not even on dpreview. Come on man.
Of course, this already exists. It's called the 5D Mark III. All Canon has to do to compete with the D750 is drop the price on the 5D3. But I suspect they'll wait until the D750 is properly vetted and deemed oil free and competent in AF.
Dave, sweet 9 pointer.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Thanks Jack.
Here's his running mate.
70D, 100-400, iso 3200, f5.6, 1/160.
It's strange, I've never been interested in the 6D until the 7DMKII was announced.
I go to the sites and compare the noise at high iso's and I'm just amazed at how clean the 6D shots look.
When Canon comes out with a 6DMKII that has 30mp with a noise level similar to the current 6D, 11 AF cross points, 6 FPS, a touchscreen,
and the ability to focus at F8. All for the price of $1799, I'll be all over it.
But in the mean time, I may have to look real hard at the current 6D. (but what do I do with all my crop lenses)
I have a 70D right now, and I'm really having a hard time figuring out how there is anything
on the 7DMKII that I just gotta have.
One more shot of the two of them together.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
Both 5-series cameras had, aside from their center AF point, the focusing power of a rebel. The 7D had 100% cross-type AF points, and they were spread all over the viewfinder. The 7D had a weather-sealed magnesium alloy body with a 150K shutter rating and a PC sync port, a 100% viewfinder, etc. etc. It also was the first Canon camera to include the completely re-designed camera button customization menu, not seen elsewhere until the 5D mk3.
Simply put, I'd challenge anybody to list a spec on the 5D / mk2 that was superior to the 7D, that doesn't have to do with FF vs APS-C. I'm not a fanboy, I just like to collect information... Shutter lag time maybe? Seriously, I'm trying to find something, but I can't.
I suppose, if you ignore image quality, yes the 5D mk3 combats the D750 quite well, and even gives the D800 and D810 a run for their money.
Regardless of all that, my point is still: what will Canon do next in the FF arena, with the 7D mk2 offering the specs that it does? Will the 1DX mk2, or 5D mk4 have this same new all-cross-type AF system? Will the 5D mk4 have ~8 FPS? Or will it stay at 6 FPS, and aim for 40-50 megapixels? (Which could result in 7D mk2-esque high ISO performance, in a full-frame sensor?) Will we see the new 40-50 MP sensor first in a 1-series, or a 5-series? Lastly, what could a 6D mk2 be? Does it merely need to trump the D610, or does it need to take some specs from the 7D mk2 and aim to be as much of an FF 7D mk2 as it can be?
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
http://youtu.be/CAckPcKK76U
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I wish he'd have zoomed in on more images, but from what I can tell, the image quality is pretty dang impressive... That ISO 16,000 image really encourages me about the ISO 3200 / 6400 performance!
"I think this is what ISO 400 looked like on the 7D"... NICE!
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Thanks for sharing. Way too long though.
They sure slam anything over ISO 400 on the original 7D. That was true on the 30D, not the 7D. I'd say the 7D was good to 1600.
They really need a calculator to figure out that 200 x 1.6 = 320? Wow.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Yep ...
Didn't watch it all, but prob cut down to approx 25 - 30% if irrelevant drivel was exorcised.
Maths / calc bit
Almost in the same league as a cashier at a local post office I went to to buy stamps.
!00 x 1p
100 x 2p
100 x 5p
Had extreme difficulty not saying anything as a calculator was produced, each sub-total worked out, written down, then all 3 added for the total ...
pp
Flickr
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
But one of the very best features, and is unparalleled in the history of cameras (correct me gently if I'm wrong) is the anti-Flicker mode. Anybody who regularly shoots indoor sports at venues with sodium lights will LOVE this. Sodium lights are extremely popular in indoor athletic venues and are absolutely horrible to photograph under, unless you're allowed to use flash (never in gymnastics). The reason is that many times per-second, sodium light cycle through a variety of different colors and intensities. You can literally fire consecutive shots which will require different white balance and exposure corrections. The way I understand it, anti-Flicker mode waits until the exposure reaches its peak value before it takes the shot. Sheer genius.
And oh yeah, high ISO, so I can shoot faster shutterspeeds for sharper shots. That won't be too shabby either.
So incredibly stoked!
Link to my Smugmug site
So THAT"S what causes this...
Hopefully, the anti-flicker mode can be switched on or off, so arty shots like above can still happen.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Link to my Smugmug site
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Yeah. I'm in. Gonna sell my 300/2.8 and get a 7D2. Tired of lugging that thing around and missing shots due to no zoom. It was awesome for little league baseball, but I'm out of that business now, and I'm not really enjoying it for soccer. Looking forward to having a more portable 112-320/2.8 zoom in the form of my 70-200/2.8, 10fps, about $2k back in my pocket, and AF which could be even better than my 5D3.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
I would say the 7D was good to 3200 !
60D
ISO 3200
( same as the 7D sensor)
http://youtu.be/1OtXB3bH5i4
Link to my Smugmug site
Looks like CF cards still have faster read/write speeds.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
yes, seems everything uses SD cards or Micro SD cards nowadays - tablets, cell phones, cameras etc.
And people who have had higher level Canon/Nikon cameras (or 4/3) still have a bunch. When I went to a dual SD camera it sucked that I couldn't use my CF's since I had so much invested in that format with my previous 3 DSLR's using it.
My guess for the combo of the 2 different formats is because the folks that had a 7D and upgrade
have a few CF cards, and the folks that are moving from a Rebel to the 7DMKII have SD cards.
So really, I think Canon did this right by helping people at both ends of the upgrade to save a few bucks.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
Canon 1DX - CF/CF
Canon 5DMKII and 7DII - CF/SD
Canon 6D - SD/SD
Nikon 4DS - CF/XQD
Nikon D800 - CF/SD
Nikon 750 - SD/SD
CF is faster and a has more robust package. Plus I believe the connector for a CF in the camera is better suited than the SD connector for frequent removal/insertion cycles as you might find in a professional sports shooting environments where they have runners to swap your card at frequent intervals. Not to mention that CF seems to be the preferred format in those environments, but that might just be because all the shooters are using pro bodies.
Link to my Smugmug site
I'm not sure about that. CF's pin/hole interface is delicate. I've bent a pin before. Said a prayer and bent it back with an eyeglasses flathead mini screwdriver. It worked.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Agreed, it is delicate. The SD interface is more robust in that there are no pins, and far fewer contacts. It is a sliding interface, not an insertion one. The downside to SD is the contacts are exposed to static discharge, but I think that fear is probably not warranted in my head. Personally I'd prefer SD cards and its nearly enough to make me sell the 40D and get the 70D.
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
For P&S cameras where cards are rarely changed, that's most likely not an issue. However, professionals are swapping cards much more often. I shot an event recently for 10 hours a day over six days where I needed to swap cards hourly. I would be leery of that my insertion cycles with SD cards in my camera, but I have no problem doing that with CF cards. As a data point, look at how often you change cards in your card reader. I've never had a CF socket in a card reader go bad, but I have an SD socket in my computer that's flaky now. So it does happen.
As for breaking CF socket pins in your camera, the only time I've heard of this is when somebody inserted a card the wrong way into the camera -- probably sideways, as cards can't be inserted backwards. I can't see how this would happen otherwise, unless perhaps the card was damaged and had a clogged hole or something. That's not wear, it's damage.
Link to my Smugmug site
Yeah, Nikon's had this for a while now in some of their cameras. As well as the built-in intervalometer and timelapse feature, also with flicker reduction, the intervalometer being a feature that Nikon has had for maybe 10+ years now
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum