# 7d2 stuff



## jaomul (Oct 7, 2014)

Real World Field Report on the Canon 7D Mark II | Scott Kelby's Photoshop Insider


----------



## snerd (Oct 7, 2014)

Good grief, that was a 1-hour love fest!


----------



## jaomul (Oct 7, 2014)

Well done in watching an hour video 12 mins after it was put up


----------



## snerd (Oct 7, 2014)

Well, easy for you to say. Now my GAS is getting restless. 


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## ronlane (Oct 7, 2014)

^^Snerd, can you believe that I saw a deal yesterday for a 5D Mk iii with a 24-105 for less than $2,900 (which is the setup I thought I wanted two months ago) and I said, nice but I still want the 7D mk ii.


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 8, 2014)

But but but but it doesn't have wifi.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 20, 2014)

I'm really stuck as to what direction to take here. I shoot mostly landscape photography and I have a vacation in Iceland coming up at the end of November for which I must have a new camera (I'm currently sporting a Rebel T2i and it just isn't good enough anymore).

I'm loathed to buy a 5D Mark iii now in the knowledge that the Mark iv will likely be out in March '15, but definitely need something for my vacation next month. I looked at the 7D Mark ii, which technically looks like an excellent camera at a great price point that I would have little trouble selling on/trading in in March ready for the 5D Mark iv, but I feel this camera is geared mostly towards sports/wildlife photography. If I bought a Mark iii the sell-on value will likely plummet the minute they announce the Mark iv.

Anyone have any advice?


----------



## ronlane (Oct 20, 2014)

Have you thought about getting the 6D? The cost is about the same as the 7D mk ii but it's full frame. The cost on it should stay pretty level with the announcement of a 5D mk iv.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 20, 2014)

Thanks Ronlane. I did consider the 6D as an option. Do you know how well this camera performs in low light? I tend to shoot at night quite a lot. This is quite an old camera now, obviously it has a full frame sensor but I am wondering if the sensor is otherwise inferior to the brand new sensor in the 7D Mark ii?


----------



## goooner (Oct 20, 2014)

What kit do you have at the moment? Why not rent a 5Dii or iii, and get the camera you really want in March next year. I'm planning on getting the 7D2 when I get my tax return next year, around April. Should be a bit cheaper by then as well.


----------



## ronlane (Oct 20, 2014)

phild2k said:


> Thanks Ronlane. I did consider the 6D as an option. Do you know how well this camera performs in low light? I tend to shoot at night quite a lot. This is quite an old camera now, obviously it has a full frame sensor but I am wondering if the sensor is otherwise inferior to the brand new sensor in the 7D Mark ii?



All reviews that I have seen or people I've talked with say it is good with low light. It's not an old camera, maybe 2 years now. Everything that I understand about the full frame vs cropped sensors is a full frame will pretty much beat a crop every time in low light situations.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 20, 2014)

I have a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and a Sigma 50mm F1.4. Presumably I would need to replace both of these with new lenses should I switch to a full-frame sensor?

Unfortunately, given the length of time I will be in Iceland, the economics of hiring a camera make little sense. It would cost me roughly the same amount of money I would lose in depreciation on a 7D Mark ii and possibly 6D also.

Maybe I should skip all of these and go straight to the 1DX?


----------



## goooner (Oct 20, 2014)

phild2k said:


> I have a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and a Sigma 50mm F1.4. Presumably I would need to replace both of these with new lenses should I switch to a full-frame sensor?
> 
> Unfortunately, given the length of time I will be in Iceland, the economics of hiring a camera make little sense. It would cost me roughly the same amount of money I would lose in depreciation on a 7D Mark ii and possibly 6D also.
> 
> Maybe I should skip all of these and go straight to the 1DX?



Ok, I guess it all depends on your budget. I've also been thinking of going full frame, but it will be just too expensive to replace all my lenses as well. If you have to get new glass anyway, why not go full frame on a Nikon ? I think you can get something better than the 6D for not too much more...


----------



## ronlane (Oct 20, 2014)

I'm not 100% sure you'd have to change the Sigma 50. That may possibly work on FF. I'm pretty sure that the Tokina is a crop lens.

Hey, if you've got the money, the 1Dx is the bomb for canon. Get it and a 50mm f/1.4 or f 1.2 and go on your trip.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 20, 2014)

Well I definitely don't want to start off a Canon vs Nikon flame-fest, from my understanding, generally speaking on balance both brands are as good as each other, they just have different strengths in different areas. From the reading I've done, I believe Canons tend to be the better low light camera with higher ISO performance. Therefore they suit the photography that I do better than Nikons.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 20, 2014)

ronlane said:


> I'm not 100% sure you'd have to change the Sigma 50. That may possibly work on FF. I'm pretty sure that the Tokina is a crop lens.
> 
> Hey, if you've got the money, the 1Dx is the bomb for canon. Get it and a 50mm f/1.4 or f 1.2 and go on your trip.



Yeah I'm shooting the Northern Lights so I need the fastest wide-angle lens on a camera with phenomenal ISO performance. I went to Alaska with my wife last year to shoot the lights armed with my T2i and the Tokina, talk about bringing a knife to a gun fight. I was so bitterly disappointed with the sheer amount of noise in all my Northern Lights pictures. Soft and noisy.


----------



## D-B-J (Oct 20, 2014)

ronlane said:


> I'm not 100% sure you'd have to change the Sigma 50. That may possibly work on FF. I'm pretty sure that the Tokina is a crop lens.
> 
> Hey, if you've got the money, the 1Dx is the bomb for canon. Get it and a 50mm f/1.4 or f 1.2 and go on your trip.



The Tokina is in fact a DX lens, but will work at 16mm on a FX body with no vignetting. I swear--tried it on my D800. [emoji106][emoji106] which iteration is the sigma? The art? Or non-art?

Jake


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 20, 2014)

phild2k said:


> From the reading I've done, I believe Canons tend to be the better low light camera with higher ISO performance. Therefore they suit the photography that I do better than Nikons.



This is totally opposite of everything I have read and seen in almost all my days (3 years) of camera geekness.

Be sure of what it really is you need and want.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 20, 2014)

D-B-J said:


> The Tokina is in fact a DX lens, but will work at 16mm on a FX body with no vignetting. I swear--tried it on my D800. [emoji106][emoji106] which iteration is the sigma? The art? Or non-art?
> 
> Jake



Thanks Jake. I have the non-art version.


----------



## D-B-J (Oct 20, 2014)

phild2k said:


> D-B-J said:
> 
> 
> > The Tokina is in fact a DX lens, but will work at 16mm on a FX body with no vignetting. I swear--tried it on my D800. [emoji106][emoji106] which iteration is the sigma? The art? Or non-art?
> ...



DP review says it's a FX lens. So you could definitely rent a 6D and see how you like it.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 20, 2014)

D-B-J said:


> DP review says it's a FX lens. So you could definitely rent a 6D and see how you like it.



The economics of renting a DSLR for the trip don't make sense unfortunately. Given that I am in Iceland for a long time, the total cost of renting the camera offsets the depreciation in value of a 7D Mark ii and 6D were I to buy either. I think the best options are:

1. 7D Mark ii - Cheapest option, crop sensor so no definitely no lens issues, high resale value when I sell it on the announcement of the 5D Mark iv, but isn't geared towards landscape photography
2. 6D - Marginally more expensive than the 7D Mark ii, possible lens issues meaning new glass, depreciation should be minimal on announcement of 5D Mark ii, definitely geared towards landscape photography
3. 5D Mark iii - Most suitable camera for the job but will suffer massive depreciation on announcement of the 5D Mark iv, will also need new glass
4. 1DX - Uber expensive option but a fundamental solution to the problem


----------



## goooner (Oct 20, 2014)

phild2k said:


> The economics of renting a DSLR for the trip don't make sense unfortunately. Given that I am in Iceland for a long time, the total cost of renting the camera offsets the depreciation in value of a 7D Mark ii and 6D were I to buy either. I think the best options are:
> 
> 1. 7D Mark ii - Cheapest option, crop sensor so no definitely no lens issues, high resale value when I sell it on the announcement of the 5D Mark iv, but isn't geared towards landscape photography
> 2. 6D - Marginally more expensive than the 7D Mark ii, possible lens issues meaning new glass, depreciation should be minimal on announcement of 5D Mark ii, definitely geared towards landscape photography
> ...



Go for the 7D2, then sell it to me when you buy the MK IV  Just kidding. If your budget allows it, get the 1DX. There really is only one camera in that class imo.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 20, 2014)

Rebel T2i to a 1DX, not a bad upgrade?


----------



## centauro74 (Oct 21, 2014)

Nikon d750


----------



## curtyoungblood (Oct 21, 2014)

If you're buying a camera with the main goal of shooting landscapes, I'm not sure the 1DX is really your best choice. It is very expensive, very heavy, and a lot more camera than you need. 

I think the 6d is probably the best camera for your situation. It gives you full frame, which I think is important because you're shooting landscapes and need wider angles. I've always heard that the 6d performs as well, if not better than, the 5diii in low light, too. I think the 5d is also more camera than you need to shoot landscapes.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 21, 2014)

The research I’ve done on that Nikon D750 suggests that it is truly a beast of a camera, it is very new and so does represent a fundamental long-term solution for me. The only issue I have is that I’m lead to believe that Canons are a lot more user-friendly and intuitive than Nikons. I’ve never used a Nikon, I’ve been with Canon for the last decade.

1DX probably is more camera than I need. The 6D seems like a great option, but that also will be getting a refresh within the next 6 months…


----------



## Braineack (Oct 21, 2014)

TIL:

The 7DmII takes sharp pictures.
The build quality is feels good
Canon shooters are impressed by finally being able to shoot at 1000iso


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 21, 2014)

So wait for all the refresh systems, hold off because something is going to depreciate and never buy an upgrade camera.  Then you are in the same boat and never go anywhere.


----------



## snerd (Oct 21, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> So wait for all the refresh systems, hold off because something is going to depreciate and never buy a upgrade camera.  Then you are in the same boat and never go anywhere.


Exactly! Kind of like waiting to have kids until you can afford them!!


----------



## phild2k (Oct 21, 2014)

I think you've misread my posts. Regardless, let me clarify my situation. This camera that I am going to buy will represent my main body for the next 5+ years minimum, meaning that I need to make the best possible choice based on currently available information. We're not talking about iPhones here that get refreshed before you've un-boxed the latest one, and it makes no sense at all to buy a DSLR that will depreciate horribly and become obsolete only months from now because there is a refresh right around the corner. If I buy a camera now I want to make sure that it is the best in its line for at least a few years. Ordinarily I would just wait, but I have a very big vacation in Iceland coming up and I need something considerably better than my 4 year old Rebel T2i.

It is all moot now anyway, I have found the perfect solution, the Nikon D810, I'm going to buy it right now


----------



## snerd (Oct 21, 2014)

phild2k said:


> ............. It is all moot now anyway, I have found the perfect solution, the Nikon D810, I'm going to buy it right now


Are you serious?! From all I've read and heard, that's a F A N T A S T I C camera!!

Well, for a Nikon, anyway.


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 21, 2014)

snerd said:


> phild2k said:
> 
> 
> > ............. It is all moot now anyway, I have found the perfect solution, the Nikon D810, I'm going to buy it right now
> ...



Yup, he went for the camera maker that he read was not as good in low light and high iso performance like Canons, which were factors more suited for his type of photography.  Ooopsie.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 21, 2014)

I watched that Scott Kelby love-fest, all 59 minutes of it last night. The  SOOC 2.7 MB JPEG file from the Tennessee football game in BLINDING light at ISO 640 and 1/1000 shows LOW-resolution. Same thing with the Eli manning/NY Giants shot they printed: ISO 1,000, at 1/1000 second, with a 400/2.8-L lens,another *LOW detail* shot.

Just LOOK at the images: there's no fine detail whatsoever. He mentions "low noise, low noise", but the fine detail sucks...it's utterly absent.

A two-month pre-prder period for this thing? Canon has had years, then months, to get some production up for a release. This is NOT the way Canon releases a landmark model...the Photokina premiere, then the basically two-month wait time, with STRICT control over the release of actual samples? I have serious doubts about how this camera is going to fare once it is released. Maybe the RAW captures when converted will be great. I hope so, because the few samples I have seen are NOT that impressive.

*Canon doesn't even have its OWN RAW converter yet?* So all we here is, "These are all straight out of camera JPEG files," does not compute either. This type of image quality with a 400/2.8 would not cut the mustard for birding or wildlife.


----------



## snerd (Oct 21, 2014)

Is it supposed to be a "landmark model"? It's not much of an upgrade to my 7D1, and I know plenty of folks not happy about the ho-hum sensor after waiting so long for something comparable to the newer Sony sensors.


----------



## phild2k (Oct 21, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> snerd said:
> 
> 
> > phild2k said:
> ...


 
Yes, I did further research on the basis of your initial post and because admittedly my information was old. I needed to make sure and found out that in fact now both the Nikon D750 and D810 are much better suited to me than the Canons. At that point it became a no brainer.

Messages Boards are wonderful things, we exchange information and ideas, we become more knowledgeable, we extend our minds' parameters and... Make better camera purchases.


----------



## TCampbell (Oct 22, 2014)

I refuse to buy it.  I hear they're coming out with the 7D mk III soon and I hate owning obsolete gear.  I'm holding out a while longer.   ;-)


----------



## Derrel (Oct 22, 2014)

Should be here 4th quarter of 2019!!!


----------



## D-B-J (Oct 22, 2014)

phild2k said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > snerd said:
> ...



Enjoy! I absolutely love my D800. Just make sure you get some good quality cards, and a lot of them!


----------



## Braineack (Oct 22, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Just LOOK at the images: there's no fine detail whatsoever. He mentions "low noise, low noise", but the fine detail sucks...it's utterly absent.




I just clicked the full size images, the image detail is disappointing to say the least.

I honestly think the noise looks a lot worse than my D600 at a much higher level.

I'm thinking his 1.4x is a junk piece of plastic.


----------



## centauro74 (Oct 22, 2014)

I don't think the 7d m2 high ISO performance gonna be much difference from the 70D. I'm really disappointed in my 70D ISO performance.


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 22, 2014)

I am 100% convinced the camera will SUCK.  Thank goodness for choices and passion.


----------



## snerd (Oct 22, 2014)

Which camera?! But yeah, I've been told that since all of the newer technology is coming out, what we have now sucks. And has always sucked! They will now no longer make good images! 


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## ronlane (Oct 22, 2014)

snerd said:


> Which camera?! But yeah, I've been told that since all of the newer technology is coming out, what we have now sucks. And has always sucked! They will now no longer make good images!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk Pro



That is 100% true, so you should send me your "junk" and go get new gear.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 22, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> I am 100% convinced the camera will SUCK.  Thank goodness for choices and passion.



Can't tell if you are being serious or not...

I find it very suspicious that this camera is being given a two-month pre-order period, and that "final, production" images are not yet available for a camera that has been six years in the making. I find it highly unorthodox that Canon has no raw converter software available yet. Both Canon and Nikon have each had disastrous camera launches of dud products: Nikon first with the D2h, then Canon a few years later with the bad-focusing 1D Mark III. I'm tired of these excuses: It's pre-production. All these were shot JPEG, there's no way I can convert RAWs. The final camera will be better.

I am starting to wonder about this camera's actual performance capabilities. Something seems just "wrong" about how this thing has been under wraps to such an extent. This thing is supposed to be out in November.* Soooo--let's see what it can REALLY do, damnit!*


----------



## jaomul (Oct 22, 2014)

A member on the Canon forum says dpp is relevant for the 7d2 now, and has done 7d vs 7d2 comparison maintaining 1/2 to 2/3 stop improvement in iso. Not sure how scientific the comparison is


----------



## Derrel (Oct 22, 2014)

jaomul said:
			
		

> A member on the Canon forum says dpp is relevant for the 7d2 now, and has done 7d vs 7d2 comparison maintaining 1/2 to 2/3 stop improvement in iso. Not sure how scientific the comparison is



Well, if that is true, just a half stop to a two-third stop improvement in ISO performance, that is a pathetic improvement over a span of six years. Maybe some day Canon will move its sensor fabrication technology into the later part of the prior decade....as Sony and as Toshiba have done. I still want to see some VALID and RIGOROUS tests of the 7D-II's sensor performance. I wasn't swayed by the gushing I saw on the Scott Kelby video, and ALL of the the photos I have seen so far have been underwhelming.

I saw Matt granger's Photokina samples shot with the model and the 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM lens, and half the frames were out of focus; one of the dangers of using a macro at portrait distance. I have seen the London acrobats stuff shot on an overcast day....meh...

LET'S SEE SOME DECENT IMAGES from this thing! Or is the idea to gather up as many pre-orders as possible, and then ship them allllll out in one big slug, and try and get them delivered and sold on days 1,2,and 3? That is the way absolutely horrible Hollywood movies are handled...endless promos, hype for months on end, then one weekend of sales in an effort to recoup the budget costs, then into the toilet.


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 22, 2014)

Derrel said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > I am 100% convinced the camera will SUCK.  Thank goodness for choices and passion.
> ...



I'm totally not serious.  I seriously hope this thing is in my hands within a couple of weeks.  There is a lake near that fish are starting to be stocked and my understanding is the Osprey put on quite a show.  Exactly the reason I purchased it for - the af system and tracking options.  It should be a significant jump from my 60d.  Getting pretty much the same af system that the 1dx has for $1800 bucks does the trick for me.  Different story if I was into shooting landscapes or people in pretty dresses and tuxedos.

As for the image quality stuff - I don't really get it.  Maybe because my eyes are 50 years old.  I see fantastic photos all over the webs produced by even Canons old sensor cameras.  I guess it really depends on how well you can see or what you want out of it.   This is what I want out of it Flickr: bmse's Photostream  I have no clue what the dynamic range is of his 7dmk1 or how much he does in post etc., but he produces the kind of results I would like to produce.  They may not be great, but they are good enough for me.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 22, 2014)

Yeah...his pics are good. Everything is front-lighted in bright sun, and has about a 3:1 lighting ratio, perhaps 4:1 on super-sunny days. He puts the sun at his back, the way they recommended in the 1880's.Bird-shooter standard lighting. It's the standard way to shoot birds. It's almost all subject matter that makes the shots look good.

His *Large* size images are 1,024 pixels wide x 683 tall. SO, if what you want is 0.69 megapixel images, then whatever he's shooting is plenty good. Less than one-megapixel images. Anything will be fine for that.

Where I live, it's dark much of the year. RIght now at 12:30 in the afternoon, the exposure on my 5D classic is 1/100 second at f/4. By extension, I'm dead in the water on action without a clean ISO 3,200 or better here in Oregon for the next few months.

If you live in California and shoot along the coast, sure, whatever, you don't really *need* a very good sensor. Dope out the exposures from f/4 at 1/100 at ISO 640 today (meaning, extending them up to f/2.8 and then down to say...oh...."f/6.3").


----------



## snerd (Oct 22, 2014)

I think it's a great upgrade for Jack! It will do fantastic for what you're wanting it for.


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 22, 2014)

Yup - try to pinpoint your needs and get what works for you.  Hopefully work around the shortcomings.  

We do have our June gloom days down here.  It aint always Sunny Southern California.  I will have to take my lumps.

Heck, if I lived in the PNW I'd be doing landscapes like Majeed.  Well, maybe not.  A bit too old and rickety to be climbing and hiking to attempt to get shots like his.


----------



## TCampbell (Oct 22, 2014)

I did watch a Scott Kelby video on YouTube about the 7D II.  Canon loaned him a couple of pre-production bodies.  He gushes on about the camera performance and it's ISO performance.  He could only show JPEG images since nobody actually has a RAW converter for a camera that isn't even shipping yet.  But he did show some images that he did at very high ISOs.

We won't know what it does until it "ships" and people can do some testing.  

Of course we will not be reading "scores" from DxO.  Those guys suffer from delusions of adequacy.


----------



## goodguy (Oct 24, 2014)

phild2k said:


> The research I’ve done on that Nikon D750 suggests that it is truly a beast of a camera, it is very new and so does represent a fundamental long-term solution for me. The only issue I have is that I’m lead to believe that Canons are a lot more user-friendly and intuitive than Nikons. I’ve never used a Nikon, I’ve been with Canon for the last decade.
> 
> 1DX probably is more camera than I need. The 6D seems like a great option, but that also will be getting a refresh within the next 6 months…


 I just got the D750 and while I still cant give you any serious feedback on it as its too new I can tell you getting it will probably solve all your problems!!!

Not trying to move you from Canon to Nikon, just a suggestion.
I said the 6D is the right choice for you and I still think it is, you cant live your life waiting for the next big thing.
In today reality every few months the next BIG things comes out and honestly there is very little REAL improvement from one model to another.
If you are not willing to move to Nikon then go for the 6D, it will still be a good camera after it will be replaced, it will still give you all you need!
Who said it will be replaced in 6 months ?
I promiss yuo Canon will not share this info with anybody, it might be 3 months or another year.
Trust me you will drive yourself nuts in choosing what camera to buy this way, just make your mind and pull the trigger, this really isnt so complicated.

Good luck and let us know what you chose.


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 24, 2014)

He said he chose the D810.  That should make him a happy camper for a while and automatically a great photographer.


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 24, 2014)

I can only imagine how spastic I would look trying to track anything the size of a parakeet or smaller.  

Speed and Autofocus Performance - Canon EOS 7D Mark II Preview | PCMag.com


----------



## snerd (Nov 2, 2014)

Okay......................... I'm really starting to lick my chops over the 7DII.


----------



## JacaRanda (Nov 4, 2014)

More stuff.

I plan on ripping mine apart soon.  LensRentals.com - Cracking Open the 7D II

A little more stuff 




I took a shot of one of my cats at iso 16,000 and for me it was impressive.  I'm sure for others it won't be, but whatever. LOL

Will maybe post that and a couple of others tonight if I don't get caught up in an NBA game or two.


----------



## jsecordphoto (Nov 4, 2014)

I love my 6D. Great landscape camera and it's amazing in low light. Using the 11-16 at 16mm on full frame you'll lose a bit of image quality but it works. You could also look at the tokina 16-28, it's what I switched to from the 11-16 once I moved to full frame and it's amazing. In my opinion it's sharper than the 11-16.


----------



## a_auger (Nov 5, 2014)

@Jsecord:

I think you replied on the wrong thread!


----------

