You are at netAirspace : Forum : Spotting and Photography Forums : General Photography

Just announced, or released, or whatever:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_can ... 2480cfe661

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/ ... 7d_mark_ii

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... rk_ii.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/7d-mk-ii.htm

Probably not a huge draw for me (if I were even in the market for a new camera). I still think I'd prefer to go full-frame for my next camera (probably a used 5D2 or 6D or something). Still pretty happy with the 50D as of now.

vikkyvik wrote:Just announced, or released, or whatever:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_can ... 2480cfe661

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/ ... 7d_mark_ii

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1 ... rk_ii.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/7d-mk-ii.htm

Probably not a huge draw for me (if I were even in the market for a new camera). I still think I'd prefer to go full-frame for my next camera (probably a used 5D2 or 6D or something). Still pretty happy with the 50D as of now.

Ditto on all points, except I'm still pretty happy with my 20D. The pixel densities of newer sensors keep getting higher and higher, and this isn't exactly comforting for dynamic range and noise issues...Call me conservative, but I prefer knowing that the range and clarity of my image was more naturally captured with larger pixels than artificially manipulated right out of the hardware with newer, fancier processors and software.

What I have now is essentially an extension of my arm, with extremely predictable, satisfying, and repetitive results, with little forethought required anymore for almost any shot. And that didn't happen overnight. At this point, the only thing a newer body would do for me is increase my storage requirements and learning curve. Live View? Just feels weird with a large camera/lens and would shift my center of gravity uncomfortably further away from my body in most instances. Video? My cellphone shoots at 1080 with very good storage capacity. Wifi? Already have an Eye-Fi card and it works great in my camera with a CF-SD adapter (contrary to what Eye-Fi says about 20D compatibility).

And as they say, it's more about good glass than a good body. When I started on the DSLR platform, I began on the long end with aviation, but slowly learned that the wide end is where the most photographic satisfaction (at least for me) comes from. The super-wide EF-S 10-22mm lens is the best thing that ever happened to this camera, and the best investment I've made for the kit (short of the camera itself). Unless I'm specifically shooting something long (which is now rare since I've mostly moved on from aviation), I don't find myself ever wanting to take the 10-22 off the camera. It's just that good with such wide-ranging possibilities. It won't help if I ever go full-frame due to EF-S mount, but it can always be re-purposed for cash.

KFLLCFII wrote:and this isn't exactly comforting for dynamic range and noise issues

Noise, yes. DR I'm guessing has been steadily improving with each generation of camera.

KFLLCFII wrote:Call me conservative, but I prefer knowing that the range and clarity of my image was more naturally captured with larger pixels than artificially manipulated right out of the hardware with newer, fancier processors and software.

OK, but let's be real here - there's no such thing as a "natural capture" with pixels. No matter how you capture the image - even with film - what you're getting is the scene filtered through some medium or other, and processed - whether in a darkroom, or in hardware/software.

When I went from my old Rebel XS up to the 50D, I was actually surprised at how much better the images looked. Not so much from a more-megapixel perspective, but better color, better contrast, and such. Some of the same stuff that I saw when I upgraded lenses also happened when I upgraded cameras.

KFLLCFII wrote:And as they say, it's more about good glass than a good body.

Certainly. But at the point where I am now - I have good glass - a body upgrade would be helpful. I love shooting low-light / night shots (panning shots, so no long exposures), so high-ISO performance is a matter for concern, as is focusing ability in very low light.

KFLLCFII wrote: The super-wide EF-S 10-22mm

I've heard many good things about that lens.

KFLLCFII wrote:Live View

Like you, I never use it either. Even when I'm on a tripod taking long exposures, I still look through the viewfinder.

Today I saw a photography magazine at the library, headline was saying "Canon 7D MkII : we've waited for 5 years !". To speak frankly, when looking at the specs I don't find it a big revolution compared to the actual 7D. When you own something it's always a bit frustrating to see a new version on the market, but I think my 2 years old 7D has still some good years to come.

The new features on the MkII all make sense, but none of them is important enough to justify an upgrade.

If you have an older camera and look for an upgrade, the 7D MkII is definitely an excellent option.

But as the owner of a 7D MkI, I will also definitely not change camera any time soon.

Zak wrote:The new features on the MkII all make sense, but none of them is important enough to justify an upgrade.

If you have an older camera and look for an upgrade, the 7D MkII is definitely an excellent option.

But as the owner of a 7D MkI, I will also definitely not change camera any time soon.

I'm waiting for the 5DMiii to go down to around the $2500 range. My friend has a 7D and I am impressed, but I have too much L glass and am trying to work up to being semi-pro or pro. I need the full frame.

Seriously, Canon?

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EO ... ind-rivals

On paper, the Canon EOS 7D Mk II looks to be a solid choice for sports and action photographers, but its sensor performance is somewhat behind the best in class, at least at low ISOs. Relatively high noise, less discriminating color, and below-average DR at base ISO all continue to hold back Canon sensors against rivals, but that’s not the case at higher sensitivities.

I love good high-ISO performance, but the LAST thing I want is noisy low-ISO performance! My 50D is great at low ISO, and reasonably usable at high ISO.

Not that I was considering a 7D2 anyway.

vikkyvik wrote:Seriously, Canon?

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EO ... ind-rivals

On paper, the Canon EOS 7D Mk II looks to be a solid choice for sports and action photographers, but its sensor performance is somewhat behind the best in class, at least at low ISOs. Relatively high noise, less discriminating color, and below-average DR at base ISO all continue to hold back Canon sensors against rivals, but that’s not the case at higher sensitivities.

I love good high-ISO performance, but the LAST thing I want is noisy low-ISO performance! My 50D is great at low ISO, and reasonably usable at high ISO.

Not that I was considering a 7D2 anyway.

It's becoming clear that for prosumers invested in Canon who primarily prefer the subtle qualities of a polished image versus lightning-quick, edge-of-envelope, won't-look-at-the-pixels-anyway type shooting, the 6D is the (more) obvious choice. For everything else, there's the 7D(mII).

Something told me way back that putting too much stock in the EF-S line may lead to a costly proposition later. Luckily, I only have one, but it's more than served its purpose already.

Here's a bit of a differing viewpoint on the 7D2:

http://www.clarkvision.com/reviews/eval ... anon-7dii/

Some of his astroimages with it are quite amazing...

http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/ga ... n4x4s.html

and

7D2: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/ga ... x3-c1.html

versus 7D1: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/ga ... 3x3c1.html