Anyone else getting excited for the new 7dii?

[waterjug]

As a nature photographer I'm pretty pumped about a new higher-end crop-body,and things like this are only whetting my appetite...

 

[CuriousMike]

I'm excited about technology in general. I find Sony's sensors to be continuously pushing the bounds, and look forward in the next few years when $500 bodies have their ISO 409,000 capabilities.

If Canon does even better, awesome.

 

[blastingcap]

As a nature photographer I'm pretty pumped about a new higher-end crop-body,and things like this are only whetting my appetite...

A lot of mistranslations aside (esp. the rumor of a high-res sensor), the reality is that Canon's APS-C sensors are so far behind that smaller Micro Four Thirds sensors are just as good. Sony has long since passed Canon in sensor technology when it comes to lower noise at base ISO, and Canon's mirrorless system is progressing at a glacial pace.

Canon has some interesting patents filed and such, but if I had to bet on what Canon is cooking up, it's simply putting the Dual Pixel technology into more cameras like the 7D MkII. Better autofocus is nice and all, but I don't often take telephoto shots so I care more about dynamic range, color, etc. for landscapes and people.

 

[waterjug]

A lot of mistranslations aside (esp. the rumor of a high-res sensor), the reality is that Canon's APS-C sensors are so far behind that smaller Micro Four Thirds sensors are just as good. Sony has long since passed Canon in sensor technology when it comes to lower noise at base ISO, and Canon's mirrorless system is progressing at a glacial pace.

Canon has some interesting patents filed and such, but if I had to bet on what Canon is cooking up, it's simply putting the Dual Pixel technology into more cameras like the 7D MkII. Better autofocus is nice and all, but I don't often take telephoto shots so I care more about dynamic range, color, etc. for landscapes and people.

Yeah Sony has been amazing, but all my glass is Canon at this point.

 

[blastingcap]

Yeah Sony has been amazing, but all my glass is Canon at this point.

Canon glass is really good bang for the buck. Good quality without paying the Nikon or Sony tax.

 

[waterjug]

Canon glass is really good bang for the buck. Good quality without paying the Nikon or Sony tax.

definitely agree there;

Also I'm using a T2i right now....so whatever they put in the 7Dii has pretty much GOT to be an upgrade, especially at higher ISOs, right? If I'm shooting at 400 there's barely anything I can do to the RAW in post production because it's already right at my tolerance threshold for noise. At 800? I pretty much have to nail the shot. Maybe less so if there's SOME light and I'm at 800, trying to get faster shutter speed or greater DOF. But for the most part 800 is useless.

 

[blastingcap]

definitely agree there;

Also I'm using a T2i right now....so whatever they put in the 7Dii has pretty much GOT to be an upgrade, especially at higher ISOs, right? If I'm shooting at 400 there's barely anything I can do to the RAW in post production because it's already right at my tolerance threshold for noise. At 800? I pretty much have to nail the shot. Maybe less so if there's SOME light and I'm at 800, trying to get faster shutter speed or greater DOF. But for the most part 800 is useless.

Sortakindanotreally. Canon's APS-C sensors haven't changed in like a decade other than pixel size, though better processing hardware/software has eked out small gains over time. Canon is still on 500nm sensors when Sony is on, what, 90nm with on-chip ADC? That frees up more surface area for photon detection as well as lowering noise at lower ISOs, though Canon catches up at higher ISOs (something like 1600 or 3200). http://www.sony.net/pressroom/sonytec/Exmor.html

Unsurprisingly everyone other than Canon buys Sony sensors and builds cameras around them, with few exceptions. Even archrivals Panasonic and Samsung buy Sony sensors for cameras like the Samsung NX-Mini, some Samsung smartphone cameras, and (reportedly) the Panasonic FZ1000 and Panasonic Micro Four Thirds cameras. Olympus, Pentax, and Nikon are regular Sony customers as well, e.g., the D7000 sensor is a Sony Exmor.

The real advantage of the newer APS-C sensor with DualPixel is that you can autofocus in video or live view (if they enable it in live view on the particular camera model) a lot better than before.

 

[waterjug]

ugh that's a good point. This is pretty disappointing actually; I don't want to switch to a full frame because then I'd lose the built in 1.4x the T2i has. I can't afford a 1 series. Maybe get a 5 or 6 and attach a 1.4 to it, but then I lose those first few f stops.

 

[blastingcap]

ugh that's a good point. This is pretty disappointing actually; I don't want to switch to a full frame because then I'd lose the built in 1.4x the T2i has. I can't afford a 1 series. Maybe get a 5 or 6 and attach a 1.4 to it, but then I lose those first few f stops.

I would wait till Photokina announcements in a couple of months, where Canon is expected to announce what some have said is big news. I think it's going to be just DualPixel (see above), but it's possible that they will announce some huge advancement in sensor tech instead.

 

[waterjug]

I would wait till Photokina announcements in a couple of months, where Canon is expected to announce what some have said is big news. I think it's going to be just DualPixel (see above), but it's possible that they will announce some huge advancement in sensor tech instead.

I'm hoping that's when they announce the 7Dii, which is rumored to not be 'evolutionary' but more transformative....

 

[AkumaX]

ugh that's a good point. This is pretty disappointing actually; I don't want to switch to a full frame because then I'd lose the built in 1.4x the T2i has. I can't afford a 1 series. Maybe get a 5 or 6 and attach a 1.4 to it, but then I lose those first few f stops.

Wat..? Do you mean the 1.6x crop factor of Canon's APS-C to full frame?

 

[waterjug]

Wat..? Do you mean the 1.6x crop factor of Canon's APS-C to full frame?

yeah; with the amount of pixels I'm putting on whatever my target is (usually small birds) the crop factor is basically an extender.

 

[iGas]

In reality you are not losing anything going from APS-C to FF beside gaining DOF, wider angle advantage with EF glass, ISO, and detail. Because, you can always crop to the center of frame with FF.

Not Canon, but the example of Nikon D800 vs D7000 shows the advantages of FF over crop sensor; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DLO9LxPxCs

And, IMHO Canon is just putting new lipstick on to the 7D and call it the 7Dii (unless Canon introduce a completely new sensor technology).

 

[AkumaX]

yeah; with the amount of pixels I'm putting on whatever my target is (usually small birds) the crop factor is basically an extender.

Ahh I see. Just making sure. You do realize that not only do you crop the lens length, but the aperture as well?

 

[ElFenix]

'bout time

edit: don't most of canon's small cameras use sony sensors?

 

[Scooby Doo]

Is this official or more rumors like the last 4-5?? years LOL

 

[waterjug]

In reality you are not losing anything going from APS-C to FF beside gaining DOF, wider angle advantage with EF glass, ISO, and detail. Because, you can always crop to the center of frame with FF.

Not Canon, but the example of Nikon D800 vs D7000 shows the advantages of FF over crop sensor; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DLO9LxPxCs

And, IMHO Canon is just putting new lipstick on to the 7D and call it the 7Dii (unless Canon introduce a completely new sensor technology).

Those are really good points; I think the issue I have is that I'm shooting smaller birdies typically. I'm afraid if I go to FF I'll lose out on detail, but then again the higher ISO performance on the T2i is killing me. I didn't know that about the gaining DOF...most of my issues seem to be with the fact that at 5.6 even the smallest bird's head isn't entirely in focus because of how shallow it is. I have a lot of shots with a tack-sharp beak and then a fuzzy eye

edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DLO9LxPxCs in this video she says full-frame gives SHALLOWER depth of field, which is the opposite of what I want

Ahh I see. Just making sure. You do realize that not only do you crop the lens length, but the aperture as well?

Actually....I never thought of that. So my depth of field is shallower as well, and I have to use slower shutter speed basically, to get the same lighting when I use a crop?

 

[iGas]

IMHO, most photographers welcome the DOF control (can always close down the aperture to gain DOF) and subject isolation quality of shallow DOF. However most people don't have the budget or want the extra weight for a small gain of FF over crop sensor.

As for me, I went straight for FF DSLR, because I enjoy the subject isolation of medium & large formats, but don't have the need or finance for digital medium format.

 

[Aharami]

I would wait till Photokina announcements in a couple of months, where Canon is expected to announce what some have said is big news. I think it's going to be just DualPixel (see above), but it's possible that they will announce some huge advancement in sensor tech instead.

Canon? Huge advancement? Hah! Yeah right!!

 

[Aharami]

ugh that's a good point. This is pretty disappointing actually; I don't want to switch to a full frame because then I'd lose the built in 1.4x the T2i has. I can't afford a 1 series. Maybe get a 5 or 6 and attach a 1.4 to it, but then I lose those first few f stops.

why do you say that? Too narrow of a DoF?

edit: nevermind. you already answered

 

[AkumaX]

Those are really good points; I think the issue I have is that I'm shooting smaller birdies typically. I'm afraid if I go to FF I'll lose out on detail, but then again the higher ISO performance on the T2i is killing me. I didn't know that about the gaining DOF...most of my issues seem to be with the fact that at 5.6 even the smallest bird's head isn't entirely in focus because of how shallow it is. I have a lot of shots with a tack-sharp beak and then a fuzzy eye

edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DLO9LxPxCs in this video she says full-frame gives SHALLOWER depth of field, which is the opposite of what I want



Actually....I never thought of that. So my depth of field is shallower as well, and I have to use slower shutter speed basically, to get the same lighting when I use a crop?

Yeah, technically since the sensor is bigger on a full frame body, it will use the bigger surface area of the lens at that aperture.

Say you have a 50mm f/1.4, and you take a picture like this on a FF @ 50mm f/1.4:

http://digital-photography-school.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/full-frame-crop-factor.jpg


The picture you get is 50mm @ f/1.4 on a full frame.

The picture you get on a APS-C 1.6x is still 50mm @ f/1.4, but after cropping the center out, the equivalent range/aperture ends up being as if I had a FF and used a 80mm lens @ f/2.24.

 

[blastingcap]

Yeah, technically since the sensor is bigger on a full frame body, it will use the bigger surface area of the lens at that aperture.

Say you have a 50mm f/1.4, and you take a picture like this on a FF @ 50mm f/1.4:

http://digital-photography-school.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/full-frame-crop-factor.jpg


The picture you get is 50mm @ f/1.4 on a full frame.

The picture you get on a APS-C 1.6x is still 50mm @ f/1.4, but after cropping the center out, the equivalent range/aperture ends up being as if I had a FF and used a 80mm lens @ f/2.24.

The above is correct. I would add though that virtually all cameras have limited numbers of autofocus points, so if you try to shoot a small bird with a FF camera, you might not have enough AF points on it to do a good job. Whereas a crop-frame camera may have more AF points on the bird and thus do a better job of tracking it. That's part of the reason why crop frame cameras are popular among birders. There are other reasons as well, including cost and more frames per second per dollar (in some cases).

 

[waterjug]

I guess I'll just have to wait and see what they're doing with the 7Dii before deciding. I'd go with a 6D if I went FF, that much I know

 

[ElFenix]

The above is correct. I would add though that virtually all cameras have limited numbers of autofocus points, so if you try to shoot a small bird with a FF camera, you might not have enough AF points on it to do a good job. Whereas a crop-frame camera may have more AF points on the bird and thus do a better job of tracking it. That's part of the reason why crop frame cameras are popular among birders. There are other reasons as well, including cost and more frames per second per dollar (in some cases).

iirc, the issue is that the autofocus sensors need to be within a certain angle of the len's centerline in order to function (because it has to see both sides of the lens, and one too far to one side will have a light angle too shallow to see the other side). so the spread has the same limit regardless of the sensor the camera is using. just so happens that the AF sensors can be far enough off-line to cover most of the APS image sensor. for the same lens, and a centered subject, the manufacturer could put just as many AF points on the subject regardless of the sensor.

that they choose not to is a different subject (i'm looking at you, canon)

:hmm:

 

[Railgun]

Nikon tax....that's funny...