Canon 7D Mark II announced

[Rory]

Hey, if your MBP is still running and isn't broken why fix it.  You aren't going to lose a shooting opportunity waiting for your card to upload to your computer

[jjj]

Hey, if your MBP is still running and isn't broken why fix it.  You aren't going to lose a shooting opportunity waiting for your card to upload to your computer

Have you forgotten how sloooooow USB 2 can be to transfer?  
That's why I suggested the Delock FW reader, it's much quicker than USB2 on my MBP.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I suggest hiding his posts. I do as I got fed up with his constant nasty, unpleasant posts ,along with personal attacks on people. I'm amazed he's still on here as people have been ejected for far less.

There was a guy here in Illinois who got jailed for a few days for yawning in court (no, seriously!). I bet you'd like to see me jailed for my "yawn" comment too.

By the way, for those who see a single-word comment "yawn" as a "personal attack," I only have another single-word comment: "wow!"

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... for some it's more important to find out what's "wrong" instead of what's "right".

Some camera-folks spend a great deal of time with spec-sheets and hypothetical situations in order to come to their conclusions. It would seem as though the joy of actual images just isn't there and it's all about comparing gear, not really using it...

Hi Herman,

Since you replied to a question directed to me, are you referring to me for the above?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

So I'm still waiting to hear what is wrong about the MKII...

Nice handle, btw, my favorite film from the years gone by.

I never said there is something wrong with MKII. I said that Canon Photokina announcements are uninspiring, long-time overdue (five years!), me-too, catching-up, too-little-too-late, and thus expected, and thus yawn-inducing. It is like buying a 2015 car model and being excited it has a built-in GPS (or ABS, or air-bags, or..).

Canon has become complacent, treating its loyal customer base as hostages (for our investment in lenses, flashes, etc.), taking us for granted. I feel like as if they are pissing on us, and it will work for them as long as there are enough people that will say it is raining gold.

[allegretto]

So I'm still waiting to hear what is wrong about the MKII, instead of your pontificating.

Hey, hang on. You're not understanding me.

I'm not "pontificating" at all. Merely pointing out the way some approach evaluation of gear

Lighten up Francis. I might even get one as a compliment to my 6D. Lord knows I have the EF glass

Do you always try to bring negativity to a new situation? Or is this special?

[allegretto]

Hi Herman,

Since you replied to a question directed to me, are you referring to me for the above?

Hell no. I get you loud and clear.

I much prefer taking pictures to going on about things I've never used

You're all good in my book

Is there something in the water here…? Geez, I'm just a photo geek, don't take my observations too seriously. Most folks know quite well when I am needling them, I'm not smart enough to be subtle.

[kodachrome]

Nice handle, btw, my favorite film from the years gone by.

I never said there is something wrong with MKII. I said that Canon Photokina announcements are uninspiring, long-time overdue (five years!), me-too, catching-up, too-little-too-late, and thus expected, and thus yawn-inducing. It is like buying a 2015 car model and being excited it has a built-in GPS (or ABS, or air-bags, or..).

Canon has become complacent, treating its loyal customer base as hostages (for our investment in lenses, flashes, etc.), taking us for granted. I feel like as if they are pissing on us, and it will work for them as long as there are enough people that will say it is raining gold.

I agree with much of what you said, particularly regarding Canon's complacency and LONG delay in upgrading. I can't help but wonder if Canon wasn't thinking about discontinuing the line, as Nikon did with the D300. However, I really like the improvements in AF and hopefully in lower noise. In the end we have to try the camera when it's released. Or not.

[spidermike]

I think too many people expect a new model to be revolutionary with heaps of new gadgets and specifications. I think the problem for the camera companies have hit a plateau with so many parts of their technology that maybe Canon should be aplauded for only updating the 7D when there were genuine significant upgrades rather than piffling tweaks. And let's face it, the 7D is their premium camera for shooting action with APS-C sensor - if you want studio or landscape there are the 60D/70D as well as the 6D. So looking at the 7DII as a sports/action camera, the areas for developments (for me) are:

AF - bringing the 1Dx AF system to a model costing less than half the 1Dx is quite something. The only question is have they crippled some of the functionality (out of choice or necessity)?
Sensor resolution - not a massive revolution but then again no manufacturer has had signifcant improvements in sensor performance in the last 3-4 years
Sensor noise - this was one signifcant weakness on the 7D for me and where, after release, it quickly got left behind. If they have improved the noise to even approaching the 5DII I will be one happy bunny

Beyond that I do not see many other features that would make me sit up and eager to upgrade, and without those (especially the AF) I may as well by the much cheaper 70D.

[Ajoy Roy]

I had heard that CF cards clear buffer faster on 5D3, probably due to higher speed of fastest UDMA7 card (write speed of 150 MB/sec, vs fast SD write speed of 95 MB/sec).  Thanks for comments on reader - Yep, I know I will be sticking a USB 3.0 reader onto a USB 2.0 computer and watching the grass grow...That's the other upgrade I will be looking at in the next year or so, a computer. Typically I max out the specs on a computer and then use it for 5 years until it becomes too-slow-for-evolving-code-bloat-ware, then replace. The MacBookPro is a superannuated mid-2010 model with only dual-core processors and an aging graphics card, etc.

I have no idea of Macs, but with my 7 year old desktop, I just installed a USB3 card. It works perfectly.

[Ajoy Roy]

For those who need fast burst speed, but no need to blow up the image to 36 inches or more, a 20MP, 10fps camera is an excellent choice. This is what Nikon users of D300 have been hankering for since ages.

There is no doubt that Canon's main USP is their lenses and Professional Services - way ahead of competition. There are a lot of bodies with high sensor resolution - 36MP in 35mm and upto 80MP in MF, but very few with 10fps or more in burst rate, and that is the target audience for Canon.

[allegretto]

For those who need fast burst speed, but no need to blow up the image to 36 inches or more, a 20MP, 10fps camera is an excellent choice. This is what Nikon users of D300 have been hankering for since ages.

Couple of thoughts if I understand

20MPx in APC is equivalent to what density in FF…?

APC already is a crop, no? Not sure why you feel you "lose" out in printing size to a similar scene and lens with this combo vs. FF

I must be missing something so please help...

[Ajoy Roy]

Couple of thoughts if I understand

20MPx in APC is equivalent to what density in FF…?

APC already is a crop, no? Not sure why you feel you "lose" out in printing size to a similar scene and lens with this combo vs. FF

I must be missing something so please help...

24MP on an DX sensor is equal to about 54MP on an FF sensor.

For printing it is not the sensor surface area, it is the number of pixels. If you print at 250 dpi, then the Nikon 24MP sensor, which is 6000x4000 will result in a print of 24x16 inches. A 20MP sensor will be slightly smaller. Now 36MP (7360x4912) will ramp up to 30x20 inches approximately, while an 80MP (10328x7760) 41x31 inches. Of course if thing that a lower resolution, say 150DPI is sufficient then your prints will be larger.

[allegretto]

24MP on an DX sensor is equal to about 54MP on an FF sensor.

For printing it is not the sensor surface area, it is the number of pixels. If you print at 250 dpi, then the Nikon 24MP sensor, which is 6000x4000 will result in a print of 24x16 inches. A 20MP sensor will be slightly smaller. Now 36MP (7360x4912) will ramp up to 30x20 inches approximately, while an 80MP (10328x7760) 41x31 inches. Of course if thing that a lower resolution, say 150DPI is sufficient then your prints will be larger.

Thanks for the reasoned reply, that seems clear. however, isn't APC a "crop" from the start? Assuming the same distance and lens if you get the whole subject you want isn't it roughly equivalent to getting the FF and then cropping it?

[Ajoy Roy]

Thanks for the reasoned reply, that seems clear. however, isn't APC a "crop" from the start? Assuming the same distance and lens if you get the whole subject you want isn't it roughly equivalent to getting the FF and then cropping it?

You are right. The 24x36mm frame of 35mm film is cropped to 24x16mm, but with higher density of pixels, you get more resolution. In case your subject is smaller than the cropped sensor; as in wildlife and macro; you are better off with a cropped sensor as compared to a full frame sensor of the same mega pixels. This is what makes cropped sensor the idol of wild life, you just get more resolution (or as some would say magnification) from you long lenses.

[jjj]

I have no idea of Macs, but with my 7 year old desktop, I just installed a USB3 card. It works perfectly.

They are available but can be expensive. Here's a much cheaper solution.

[Rory]

20MPx in APC is equivalent to what density in FF…?

70D sensor dimensions: 22.5 x 15mm = 337.5 square mm.
Full frame dimensions:   36    x 24mm = 864    square mm.

864 / 337.5 = 2.56, which is the increase in area of full frame over the 70D sensor.

The crop factor is lineal, so the square root of 2.56 = 1.6.

2.56 * 20.2MP = 51.7MP equivalent full frame.

[John Koerner]

For those who need fast burst speed, but no need to blow up the image to 36 inches or more, a 20MP, 10fps camera is an excellent choice. This is what Nikon users of D300 have been hankering for since ages.

There is no doubt that Canon's main USP is their lenses and Professional Services - way ahead of competition. There are a lot of bodies with high sensor resolution - 36MP in 35mm and upto 80MP in MF, but very few with 10fps or more in burst rate, and that is the target audience for Canon.

Exactly. It's funny, because back when both were in the sensor "size" war, everyone was crying (bitching, moaning) about "full functionality" over sensor size.

Now everyone is complaining about "single image resolution/DR," as if that is the only consideration for all photographers.

Now that Canon has produced a camera that is more focused on full-functionality (and less on "the best sensor") everyone is crying (bitching, moaning) about the sensor 

The 7D II may not have the best single-image production capability of any camera, but it has the, broadest "high level" capabilities of any ASP-C camera, with the availability of the most lens choices. It rivals (and in some cases exceeds) full-frame sports cameras for 1/4 the cost.

That makes it a pretty useful tool for a broad scope of users.

Jack

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... back when both were in the sensor "size" war, everyone was crying (bitching, moaning) about "full functionality" over sensor size.

Jack, that was THEN, and then it made a perfect sense, because bigger sensor (i.e., more pixels) meant simply worse noise and dynamic range. After that, Nikon/Sony came up with a bigger AND better sensor, including pixels, noise and dynamic range.

In other words, today we are not talking about the same "sensor size" as then.

[John Koerner]

Jack, that was THEN, and then it made a perfect sense, because bigger sensor (i.e., more pixels) meant simply worse noise and dynamic range. After that, Nikon/Sony came up with a bigger AND better sensor, including pixels, noise and dynamic range.

In other words, today we are not talking about the same "sensor size" as then.

I understand, and am sympathetic enough to consider switching to Nikon myself.

Still, from (say) a sports photographer's perspective, the resolution/DR of the D810 is not going to mean as much as the overall capabilities of the 7D II.

In other words, they just need "a clear, good shot" of capturing the action, they don't necessarily need to capture every possible color/tonality at the highest resolution possible.

As a macro shooter, I *do* want the ultimate clarity/DR, but many won't really need what the D810 offers as much as what the 7D II offers.

Jack