EOS 7D Mk 2

<p>After the rumour about the new 7D Mk2, I've just had an email from Canon with this link to the product<br>

https://comeandsee.canon-europe.com/en-GB/products/eos7d-mark-2 <br>

Ten fps would help a lot with sport photography.<br>

No sign of WiFi though</p>

<p>$1,799 at B&H. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1081808-REG/canon_9128b002_eos_7d_mark_ii.html</p>

 

<p>Doesn't this (from J.W.'s link) answer the WiFi question?<br>

"A USB 3.0 terminal is available for expedited transfer speeds between the camera and a computer or the optional WFT-E7 (Version 2) for Wi-Fi connectivity."</p>

<p>This is an awesome alternative to the 1Dx but I am still a little disappointed that it does not have at least 22 MP to put it on par with the Nikon alternatives.</p>

<p>I wonder how long it will take for this sensor to find it's way into the T_i series?</p>

<p>Ouch, $850 for that Optional WiFi module. They ought to be able to do it cheaper than that, I mean look at the competitors like EyeFi et al.<br>

<Chas></p>

Regarding the WiFi module, I also believe Canon should have a cheaper alternative, nevertheless this product is

specifically focused on live sports media coverage, where budget is less a concern (although then a 1Dx would be a

better option). In live coverage of sports, they use the WFT module to physically connect the multiple cameras in an arena

via a wired Ethernet, something impossible with the EyeFi or similar offerings in the market. But, again, I for one believe

Canon should also cater for mere mortals who just want a simple lower cost WiFi connection.

Something I didn't expect is the inclusion of interchangeable focusing screens in a camera with the "intelligent viewfinder",

which, by the way, with this version II seems to solve my major gripe about it: the dual axis level was very confusing to me

in the original 7D, so I hope it becomes more intuitive being a separate part of the viewfinder instead of sharing the

focusing points as level indicators.

<p>Wow Canon folks! Where are you. I am a 50 year Nikon shooter and I am as excited as I can be about this camera. It is a true game changer. Read the features carefully. It makes a professional sports shooters mouth water. Flicker control? Nice. 35 frame deep raw buffer! 1000 JPEG Fine at 10 FPS? 65 autofocus points all over the frame and the center points to -3EV!</p>

<p>Either the word hasn't gotten out yet or you folks are hard to please.</p>

<p>I am with Rick M on this. The specification of this camera is staggering. Just take a long hard look. Canon even fit dual card slots. How long have many asked for that? When prices settle, this camera will really raise the bar for Canon shooters. I look forward to reading user reviews once the dust has settled. </p>

<p>We're here, Rick M. And my mouth is watering. The specs are substantially impressive. I can't wait to get my hands on one!</p>

<p>Anti-flicker should make shooting in fluorescent lighting vastly easier, even has quiet shutter... 31 frame RAW buffer... Sounds like I may need to consider going back to a dual format kit for some added reach.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I am still a little disappointed that it does not have at least 22 MP to put it on par with the Nikon alternatives.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p><em>sigh</em></p>

<p>+1 Jamie</p>

<p>20.2 vs 22MP? That was a joke? I hope...</p>

<p>Pre-ordered.</p>

<p>I've been waiting over 4.5 years for the successor to my 7D and this one's it.<br>

Just a slight resolution increase but all of that other new & improved stuff -- wow!</p>

I like the focus features and finally f8 focus on a non-1d! Don't need to compete in the megapixel shoot out! It looks very

sweet!

<p>" <em>35 frame deep raw buffer! 1000 JPEG Fine at 10 FPS? 65 autofocus points all over the frame and the center points to -3EV</em>!"</p>

<p>There is really no innovation here just an improvement over what other manufacturers were already offering...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>There is really no innovation here just an improvement over what other manufacturers were already offering...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Only one other manufacturer in this price range as far as I know, and a very minor player in this market.<br>

Sony A77 Mark II has some intriguing specifications on paper, but when the conditions of achieving its highest framerate are met and the lag of the electronic viewfinder investigated, things are not so encouraging. That is even before their lens range is considered.<br>

And the D300 is a very old camera now.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>There is really no innovation here just an improvement over what other manufacturers were already offering...</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I'm all ears. Tell me which Nikon model this is. I have a D4 already. As they say...show me the money. </p>

<p>Okay, 22 MP vs 20 MP may seem trivial, and I don't mean to pick on this particular camera. However we are talking five years since the 7D was introduced and lets face it this could be Canon's premiere consumer crop body for another 5 years! </p>

<p>I had just hoped that Canon would make an attempt to surpass Nikon in every respect in both full frame and crop body rather than continue taking baby steps. Five years ago Canon truly set the bar with the 7D and I think this time they have left a lot of room for the competition to jump much higher.</p>

<p>I understand that the AF system could/should be a significant improvement but 5 years to get 2 more MP and 2 more fps? I would rather they stuck with 8 fps and pushed the IQ beyond the <em><strong>current</strong> </em>competition.</p>

<p>In this price range, if you're a wildlife photographer, this camera and Canon's associated super-telephotos blows away anything that Nikon offers in this price category. It's not even close.</p>

<p>Pixel-density is not what counts in this category, it's high-ISO performance, AF tracking accuracy and performance speed. This camera has it in spades. I suspect that IQ will be excellent for those of us that know how to expose and process the resulting files.</p>

<p>There is no appreciable difference between Canon's 20.2 and Nikon's 24 MP. In fact, if you think about the camera as a sports camera it out resolves Nikons D4s at 16MP a bit. </p>

<p>The deal is that PJs and sports shooters are ambivalent about high MP and the resultant workflow. Better image quality is the real deal and I have not seen what the 7DMKII can do yet. My guess is that it will be pretty nice. </p>

<p>Remember too that though we might get caught in the gearhead race for the top we often don't make much sense doing it. What if I were to say that the 7DMKII was no good because my D7100 out resolves it. So does the entry level Nikon D3300. You would be all over me with the marvelous features this new camera has.</p>

<p>Take it from this Nikon guy. I am envious of Canon shooters today. If Nikon had put out this camera I would have been all over it as a backup to my D4. </p>

<blockquote>

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=620661">hn Crowe</a>, Sep 17, 2014; 08:25 p.m.</p>

<p>Okay, 22 MP vs 20 MP may seem trivial, and I don't mean to pick on this particular camera. However we are talking five years since the 7D was introduced and lets face it this could be Canon's premiere consumer crop body for another 5 years!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>... it's been too long, but there's a better chance it can hold its own for the next 5 years than the 7D, with the wide AF point coverage for instance.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I had just hoped that Canon would make an attempt to surpass Nikon in every respect in both full frame and crop body rather than continue taking baby steps. Five years ago Canon truly set the bar with the 7D and I think this time they have left a lot of room for the competition to jump much higher.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>... not sure why you wouldn't think the 7D II surpasses Nikon in this market. Higher build values, more fps, even more AF point coverage, very similar pixel pitch for instance. But Canon did not really set the bar with the 7D, they responded to a D300 with 8fps and 51 focus points with a camera with 8fps and 19 focus points, with a more recent sensor.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I understand that the AF system could/should be a significant improvement but 5 years to get 2 more MP and 2 more fps? I would rather they stuck with 8 fps and pushed the IQ beyond the <em><strong>current</strong> </em>competition.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I fail to understand why you do not see how important a leap this generation is for the money, if you shoot racing cars. The megapixels are not necessarily important for sports as there are usually simple backgrounds with big areas of out-of-focus colour wide open. And a real and usable 10fps on a mass SLR as far as I know was first achieved with the Canon 1D III, which was a ~$5000 camera 7 years ago.<br /> Your perspective makes more sense for a general-shooter amateur with some money burning a hole in his pocket expecting high megapixels and flashy features. I struggle to care about features like GPS and hinged screens personally.</p>

<p>I think Canon hit a home run with this one. I think most of us have moved on from the idea that every new camera must have more megapixels. It seems rather quaint to even have such a desire these days - a very "early millennial" outlook.</p>