Is a Canon 7D mkII coming soon?

<blockquote>

<p>There are only so many people who are willing to pay $1800 to $2000 for a DSLR, in any format; Canon and Nikon can no longer sell enough higher-end APS-C DSLRs to make any new $1800 models profitable.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is certainly likely, and most likely that fear/concern has driven Canon's decision not to issue a marginally improved 7D2.</p>

<p>However, many if not most of those who own DSLRs can be convinced to upgrade if the feature set is right. For example, even though I chose not to upgrade my 5D2s once the 5D3 was announced and reviewed, it was <em>only</em> because there was no compelling feature that would give me better pictures. If the 5D3 had been issued w/ a D800 sensor and ECF (or just ECF ;) ), I would have dropped my 5D2s like they were hot, and picked up a couple of 5D3s. I was certainly ready to do so. But the marginal (at best) improvement in IQ certainly was not compelling (esp. since my 5D2's AF works just fine)</p>

<p>I think it may be a matter of Canon waiting until it is cost effective (ie can be sold at a specific price point) to sell a 7D2 (or whatever) with a truly compelling improvement in features. Hard to do! But until the 7D2 can do something the 7D can only dream of, I wouldn't expect to see or hear about it.</p>

<p><em>"But until the 7D2 can do something the 7D can only dream of"</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

I agree that a marginal update of the 7D would be a failure, which is why it's taking so long. The EOS 70D actually comes pretty close to an updated 7D in some respects, but not in all respects.</p>

<p>I'll say again that the 6D, while it may come close in price to the 7D (or a 7D MkII) , is no substitute. If anything the 70D is closer to the 7D in features and performance than the 6D is.</p>

<p>Take the hybrid sensor design and live view/video AF from the 70D, add in WiFi and GPS, throw in the 5D MkIII AF system for still photography, include the pro video firmware features of the 5D MIII, use the new Digic 6 processor (or two) and use two card slots and you've got a 7D MkII that will do lots of things a 7D (or a 6D) can only dream of. A fully professional APS-C body. Icing on the cake would be 4K video, and Panasonic with their new Lumic GH4 have shown that you can put 4K video in a camera that doesn't break the bank like the EOS 1D C does. Probably price on the GH4 will be in the $1500 region. 4K video will be the next "must have" for cameras, whether you want it or not. Prices are coming down, you can get a 39" 4K TV for under $400 now. It's coming, even if you don't need it or want it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>To make a new high end 1.6x/1.5x would result in requests for more sensor size optimized lenses for them.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Why? Every L series EF lens Canon has ever produced works perfectly well on 1.6x bodies. The only lens that was really considered necessary for 1.6x bodies was the 17-55mm f/2.8 as there was no viable Canon alternative (i.e. the 17-40 was f/4, the 16-35 was too short and the 24-70/105 were too long.)</p>

<p>If you use a full frame wide lens on 1.5x/1.6x, and if you shoot into the light in such a way that the light source is just outside of the small sensor frame, you are likely to get flare and ghosting in the image that you wouldn't get if the lens had been designed for the smaller sensor size. Lenses for small sensors can be optimized to perform better in a small image circle than lenses designed for larger image circles. Those lenses which are already designed to have larger than full frame image circle (i.e. tilt/shift) show more limitations. Finally there are the matters that wide angles for full frame when used on small sensors are unnecessarily slow, large, heavy and expensive, compared with purpose made small sensor lenses. Telephoto lenses don't have much of an aperture problem on 1.5x/1.6x as shorter lenses can be made faster e.g. 200/2 on 1.5X vs. 300/2.8 on full frame, and so on. However, for wide angle, there is no equivalent of 24/1.4 on 1.5x/1.6x, it would have to be 16/1.0 or in fact a bit faster and if <em>that</em> is made in full frame variant, what would the cost be? Zooms made by Sigma for example are already f/1.8 (18-35) and for other small sensor systems, f/2 is used on some standard zooms (Four Thirds). Now, by ignoring these needs on 1.5x/1.6x, Nikon and Canon are opening the competition to other manufacturers to make fast short focal length lenses for small sensors, and also making the mirrorless cameras more attractive because the dedicated lenses for smaller sensors are compact and fast, and less expensive than they would be if designed for full frame.</p>

<p>Most people don't care. A lot of serious APS-C shooters also have a full frame camera. They're perfectly happy with full frame lenses. If the APS-C lenses were 1/2 the price of the same FF lenses, it might be a different matter, but they aren't. A dedicated line of fast, long APS-C optimized lenses makes no economic sense. A few optimized wideangles and wideangle zooms do make sense.<br>

Yes, a 200/2 for APS-C might be nice, but unlikely to be a big seller. It would cost way more than the full frame 200/2.8 and likely be heavier and more expensive. A 200/2 would have a front element almost as large (and expensive) as the 300/2.8 does. Just look at the full frame EF 200/2. An APS-C version would need the same size front element (100mm in diameter). Overall it probably wouldn't be much cheaper, if any cheaper, than the EF 200/2L ($5700). So why bother making it?</p>

 

<p>Certainly, you can make lenses which 'optimize' the fact that their image circle only needs to be large enough to cover an APS-C sized sensor. But I'd expect (as Bob alludes) that their cost would be on par with EF & L offerings - certainly Sigma and Tamron's offerings reflect that. Since you could only use the lenses on APS-C though, paying a similar price for a lens which can only be used on half your gear doesn't make good sense to me (or, I'd suspect, many customers). For us, cost is only half the picture though, adding the weight and volume of another lens to our kit is just as important.</p>

<p>Anybody who is even remotely considering considering going FF, or already has a dual format kit, would be unlikely (at best) to drop any serious scratch on a lens that was only very marginally improved, and couldn't be used on FF cameras.</p>

<p> A great example of that in the wild is the 50-150/2.8 OS HSM. By all reports a stunningly sharp lens, and a heckuva deal @ ~$1100 for that length/speed/ w OS. ...not a huge seller though. And a lens few of us would even consider - despite IQ on par w/ a 70-200/2.8 L II ! Frankly, I'd be very interested in it if it could do duty on a FF body. as a GP portrait lens, while not as fast as is ideal, the flexibility of the zoom and +20 mm on the wide end (!) would certainly have it replacing the 70-200/2.8 for much in my kit. ... but, it's a lens I'll never try, and certainly never buy. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The EOS 70D actually comes pretty close to an updated 7D in some respects, but not in all respects.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is actually the best indicator that Canon has no plan at all to update the 7D to this so called 7D Mark II. And we pointed that out when the 70D was introduced 7 months ago. If Canon had plans for this 7D Mark II, they would never put so many features on the 70D to make it come close to an updated 7D at all so that there is room for the 7D Mark II for more product differentiation.</p>

<p>By the same token, as soon as I learned that Nikon put their best AF system on the $1200 D7100, I immediately realized that there would be no D400 because there isn't much room left for another APS-C format DSLR with higher specs and price.</p>

<p>By the latter part of 2014, most people will finally figure out that this 7D Mark II isn't coming, ever, and the rumors for it will gradually die down because few people would still believe in it by then.</p>

<p>Regardless of what you call it, I don't think that there is any argument that there <em>is</em> room to fill the 'king crop' spot in <em>Canon's</em> line. And Canon has gone to great lengths to differentiate their product line, and create such a spot.</p>

<p> The 70D is by no means that camera. IMA the 70D confirmed that there <em>will</em> be a 7D2 (whether you call it that, or a 'yellow submarine')... There is certainly plenty of space for it, and plenty of money to be made...</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I bet you didn't think there'd be a Rebel T5 either....</p>

<p>In terms of features for still photography, the 70D is still well below the 7D. It's big advantage is in video AF performance. The 70D AF is pretty good, but nowhere near Canon's best AF system.</p>

<p>To paraphrase Bob's first sentence, "never say never..."....I commented earlier how there were guys here and dpreview swearing their first-born's life that Canon was "never ever" going to produce a successor to the G1x....</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A great example of that in the wild is the 50-150/2.8 OS HSM. By all reports a stunningly sharp lens, and a heckuva deal @ ~$1100 for that length/speed/ w OS. ...not a huge seller though. And a lens few of us would even consider - despite IQ on par w/ a 70-200/2.8 L II ! Frankly, I'd be very interested in it if it could do duty on a FF body. as a GP portrait lens, while not as fast as is ideal, the flexibility of the zoom and +20 mm on the wide end (!) would certainly have it replacing the 70-200/2.8 for much in my kit. ... but, it's a lens I'll never try, and certainly never buy.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sigma thought they were stealing a march on the OEMs by providing a crop-format lens with the equivalent of the traditional 70-200 range. If it had been cheaper and smaller that might have been well and good. But it wasn't, and then they added stabilisation to it, and now it has exactly the same length and filter size of the 70-200, and even the price is almost the same! ! They've been afflicted by a kind of madness in an effort to fill a very small niche. At least with the Canon 70-200 you can put it on 1.6x/1.3/1.0 sensors and use it in slightly different ways.</p>

<p>I find it funny that there is no market for a type of camera everybody wants.<br>

Look at the buzz around the K3 until it turned out to be slightly disappointing. The first manufacturer which comes out with a D7II/D400 equivalent should make a killing. And as for FF lenses somehow being inappropriate for this camera? That's just nonsense. Crop sensors <em>benefit</em> from being use with FF lenses. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>A great example of that in the wild is the 50-150/2.8 OS HSM. By all reports a stunningly sharp lens, and a heckuva deal @ ~$1100 for that length/speed/ w OS. ...not a huge seller though. And a lens few of us would even consider - despite IQ on par w/ a 70-200/2.8 L II!</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Why would anyone buy a Sigma 50-150mm (as an alternative to the Canon 70-200mm) when Sigma also do an <em>excellent </em>(I know - I've got one) 70-200mm?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>That is actually the best indicator that Canon has no plan at all to update the 7D to this so called 7D Mark II. And we pointed that out when the 70D was introduced 7 months ago.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Remember to post up your address, Shun - I want to make sure that the crow I send you to eat when the 7D Mk II is announced, gets to you.</p>

<p>Five days ago, I posted this challenge:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I think those who still claim that there will be a 7D Mark II should:</p>

<ol>

<li>Explain why Canon hasn't updated the 7D after 4+ years, which is much longer than your average update cycle.</li>

<li>Set a deadline for themselves. If by that date no 7D Mark II is introduced, they will admit in public that they have been wrong all along. Otherwise, they can keep claiming that there will some 7D Mark II for another 2, 3 years, as people have been doing for that elusive "D400" for several years already. By now, most people have finally realized that this D400 is not going to happen.</li>

</ol></blockquote>

<p>Canon announced the 7D on 1st September 2009. 2, 3 years ago, by 2011/2012, most people thought Mark II was due and they have been providing the same reasons why there would be one.</p>

<p>While a few people have stated confidently there will be a 7D Mark II, and since it is so overdue, it cannot possibly be all that far away, yet absolutely no one has the guts to post a deadline for themselves. Therefore, let me propose a date: if by the end of 2014 (December 31, 2014) and the 7D will be well over 5 years old, and Canon still has not announced a 7D Mark II, will you guys acknowledge that I have been right all along?</p>

<p>No, but give it two more years and I'll consider the possibility!</p>

<p>The EOS 1Ds MkIII was current from mid 2007 to late 2012 (over 5 years), after which it was replaced by the 1D X (there was no 1Ds MkIV). The 7D will hit that point by the end of the year, so you are right that if we don't see something by the end of 2014, the 7D will be the longest lived EOS model name.</p>

<p>Another way to look at is is that Canon did do a major firmware update a couple of years ago, which actually added a lot of new features to the camera (faster operation, much larger image buffer, plus a lot of new controls) rather than just fixing problems. Maybe that was the EOS 7D Mk1.5? That's sort of the way that Canon played it - see http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/EOS7D_firmware. Canon referred to it as "The next evolution of the EOS 7D". That was in mid 2012, so the "EOS 7D Mk1.5" is only two years old.</p>

<p>The v2 firmware included:</p>

<ul type="square">

<li>Improved maximum burst for RAW images (up to 25)</li>

<li>In-camera RAW image editing</li>

<li>In-camera Image Rating</li>

<li>In-camera JPEG resizing</li>

<li>Maximum Auto ISO setting (ISO 400-6400)</li>

<li>Manual audio level adjustment in movie recording</li>

<li>GPS compatibility</li>

<li>File name customisation</li>

<li>Time zone settings</li>

<li>Faster scrolling of magnified images</li>

<li>Quick control screen during playback</li>

</ul>

<p>The real question is whether Canon have given up on making an advanced, professional level APS-C DSLR. Of course give it long enough and the EOS 80D might just be that!</p>

<p>Rumor sites predict the advent of the EOS 7D Mark II, but what does Mr. Masaya Maeda, Managing Director and Chief Executive of Image Communications Products at Canon Inc.have to say? At the CP+ 2013 (in February 2013) he noted the upcoming arrival of the EOS 70D and the future of the APS-C cameras. You can read his statement here: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0336328811/cp-2013-interview-with-canons-masaya-maeda<br>

He doesn’t come out and say, “no EOS 7D Mark II will be produced,” but I think that’s what he’s getting at when he says “in the future, I think we will see an increase in the number of full-frame models.”</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The EOS 1Ds MkIII was current from mid 2007 to late 2012 (over 5 years), after which it was replaced by the 1D X (there was no 1Ds MkIV). </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Bob, I would use these dates for those camera models:<br /></p>

<ul>

<li>The 1Ds Mark III was announced on 20th August 2007: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2007/08/20/canoneos1dsmarkiii</li>

<li>The 1DX, which Canon claims to be the merge of the 1D and 1DS camera lines, was announced on 18th October 2011: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/10/18/canoneos1dx</li>

</ul>

<p>In other words, the official successor to the 1Ds Mark III was announced 4 years and 2 months after the initial 1Ds III announcement. The actual shipment of the 1DX suffered numerous delays in 2012, but that is a separate issue. (IMO, it is also quite a bit of stretch for Canon to claim that the 1DX is the "successor" to the 1Ds III, but that is also a separate topic.)</p>

<p>As of today, the original 7D was announced 4 years and 5+ months ago such that it has actually exceeded the elapsed time between the 1Ds III and 1DX.</p>

<p>And since the 7D is so old, its value in the used market has dropped quite a bit. Currently they are below $900 in like-new condition at KEH: http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-Digital-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-DC029991118450?r=FE</p>

<p>Private sales can only be cheaper.</p>

<p>In other words, essentially nobody with the right mind is going to buy a new 7D at $1500 from B&H today: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/646908-REG/Canon_3814B004_EOS_7D_SLR_Digital.html<br>

as new 7D simply cannot compete against used ones in great condition. Therefore, Bob's question is already answered:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The real question is whether Canon have given up on making an advanced, professional level APS-C DSLR.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Since Canon cannot possibly be selling a whole lot of new 7D, if any at all, they have already given up on the high-end APS-C DSLR. Otherwise, the time to introduce a 7D Mark II to renew sales in that market category was a couple of years ago, before the 7D has gotten so out of date and so cheap in the used market.</p>

<p>I wouldn't bet that Canon aren't selling 7Ds. No camera can really compete with used ones in good condition or refurbs. I haven't bought a brand new camera in a long time.</p>

<p>It's not whether people are buying used. The deciding factor will be how the 70D has affected 7D sales. I don't know the numbers but I'm sure Canon does. If the 70D is sucking away 7D sales, that might be more reason for a 7d MkII. Before the 70D the 7D had no real competition in Canon's lineup.</p>

<p>BTW the actual B&H selling price on a new 7D is $1399 (below Canon's MAP). The best deal is around $940 for a refurbished 7D. That's what I'd buy. At that price it's a bargain.</p>

<p>New camera models can certainly compete against used one, easily. Obviously, initially, there is no used ones to begin with, so if you want a new model, buying new is the only option. After that, in the first couple of years, refurb and used prices are 10% to 20% below new prices so that some people would opt for the warranty and less hassle.</p>

<p>I just went back to check KEH again. Currently there is no used 70D available (not too surprising since it is quite new). There is one used 1DX @ $5599: http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-Digital-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-DC024017636020?r=FE</p>

<p>A new 1DX is $6799 @ B&H: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=cae1dx&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=</p>

<p>In other words, the used price is 82% of new, which is typical for a model that is about 2 years old.</p>

<p>It is when a model that has become so old that its value drops drastically in the used market and the price gap between new and old becomes huge, like the refurb 7D is 67% of the cost of a new one, and used ones are almost half the new price. When you reach that point, it makes no sense to buy new any more.</p>

<p>That is why camera companies need to update their models every 2 years or so, 3 years tops.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If the 70D is sucking away 7D sales</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

There was a brief period of time a few months ago when B&H had the 70D for $250 less than the current price. At that price, it was in the same range as a used 7D and a good deal. I shoot with a 7D at work and use the 70D as a second camera at home. The 7D is definitely more rugged but that's about it at this point. 70D noise at high ISO (which is important to me) appears to be better with the 7D, at least when I process them. And with live view, which I didn't use much before the 70D, it's significantly better.<br>

<br>

I don't prognosticate about cameras, it doesn't do anything for me, but it does seem like the sensor technology in the 70D will be useful in new cameras.</p>

<p>Canon have a history of introducing new technology in lower end cameras and migrating it up the chain. For example there are several current powershots using the DIGIC 6 processor which has yet to show up in any DLSR. The 70D dual hynrid sensor (with every pixel capable of phase detection) will no doubt work its way into both the Rebel lineup, the 7D MkII (if I dare to suggest one my exist one day...) and I presume the 6D MkII will have a full frame version.</p>

<p>Not quite sure why this is but it could be that they use the introductory model to test the new technology before putting it in higher end products.</p>

<p>The 7D could certainly be updated by using only existing parts. The 70D sensor, the new Digic 6 processor, the existing WiFi (and GPS) modules and the AF hardware from the 5D MkIII.</p>

<p>Right now there's nothing in Canon's lineup that tempts me to move from using the EOS 7D as my primary camera. The 70D doesn't do it, the 5D MkIII is too expensive and the 6D doesn't do it. </p>