EOS 70D verses the 7D2. Can you shake my logic.

[daveinwilton]

<p>In June 2007 I purchased my first Canon digital EOS, a 30D. It has served me, and now my son, for a good number of years. In April 2009 I was tempted by nearly twice the mega pixels and the sensor shake offered in the 50D, and made that purchase. For over four years the 50D has been a work-horse for me, but it is begining to be long in the tooth, and I am feeling the urge to upgrade. I will be retaining the 50D as my back up camera, and gifting permanently the 30D to my son.</p>

<p>In mixed use I am feeling quite limited by the resolution of the 50D, truly happy with images at no greater than an ISO of 800 for an 8x10 or 8x12 print. I generally like to print at the next size up, 11x14 or 12x18. If you are not aware, I shoot a mix bag of landscapes, seascapes, flowers, and wildlife (including birds in flight). I use the current assemblage of glass: EFs 10-22mm, EF 24-70mm f2.8L, EF 100mm f2.8 Macro, EF 70-300, and the Sigma 150-500mm (that I shoot mostly hand-held or with a mono-pod). Most of my need for higher ISO, is my need for greater shutter speeds in the wildlife category, and primarily for the birds in flight.</p>

<p>With the specifications announced of the 70D, I am tempted to pull back from my prior goal of purchase of the 7D2. Appealing to me is the apparent gain by 4 fold in ISO resolution, and a 5 mega-pixels gain for greater cropping potential. An additional bonus would be the tilt screen, that I can envision its use in taking “ant eye” perspective shots on an inverted mono-pod. I do somewhat dislike the switch to SD memory cards, but can find them cheap enough. With the current trend in Canon pricing, I expect a retail price for the 7D2 to come in at around 1800 USD, while the 70D has came in at just under 1200 USD. These savings would take me better than half way to my MP-65mm purchase, saving me essentially half a year in time before that lens purchase.</p>

<p>Thank you for your opinions.<br /> -Dave</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>I think your logic is sound. While normally I would recommend waiting a few months (assuming we see an announcement for the 7D2 within that time) to see what the 7D2 is capable of, the 70D represents a significant improvement over the 50D, and since auxilliary features like a flappy LCD are ones that you'd want (and I highly doubt the 7D2 will come so equipped), for your shooting, I wouldn't expect a huge benefit from any of the suggested & proposed improvements in 7D2 over the 70D.</p>

<p>I expect that the sole tangible improvement that you'd benefit from would be improved AF, but the 70D (based on the 7D's AF) AF will already give you a better result than the 50D's AF.</p>

[daveinwilton]

<p>Marcus, thank you for your response. Do you not think there will be tangible ISO improvement over the last four years? The 50D was rated 100-3200 ISO, while the 70D is rated at 100-12800 ISO, on "paper" that seems like a 4x improvement. Additionally, the gain in 5 meg pixels should decrease my "pixelation" (grain) of my imaging, or do you think it might just be marketing fluff?</p>

[paddler4]

<p>I am in the same position as you. I have been shooting with a 50D for 4 years, and I plan to upgrade. Unlike you, I don't feel constrained by the 15 MP resolution of the 50D, but I would like better AF and less noise at ISO>400. I do some ground-level macro, so the flip screen would be nice, but it is not a deal-breaker for me.</p>

<p>I plan to wait. First, we have no idea what the 7D2 will be. The rumors are not even consistent about whether it will have the same sensor as the 70D. Second, we don't yet have any information about how the 70D itself performs. Maybe I have missed it, but I have not even seen a full set of specs for the 70D. For example, I would find the internal levels in the 7D extremely useful. I looked on the Canon site but could not find any mention of this for the 70D.</p>

<p>The maximum ISO figures that Canon publishes are of no interest to me. The 50D goes high enough. what matters to me is how images look at different ISOs, and that remains unclear. I'll be surprised if either body gives a 4 stop improvement in ISO relative to the 50D. The 50D is virtually noise-free at ISO 200 if exposed well. A 4 stop improvement would be a sensor that is virtually noise-free at ISO 3200, which would be amazing for a crop-sensor camera. Here's hoping! </p>

<p>So, my strategy is that as long as my 50D is working fine, I would rather wait and see what the choice really entails. At this point, we simply don't know.</p>

[phule]

<p>[[i would find the internal levels in the 7D extremely useful. I looked on the Canon site but could not find any mention of this for the 70D.]]</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>98% viewfinder coverage, 0.95x magnification, switchable gridlines and electronic level display</p>

</blockquote>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-70d</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>The 50D has an available ISO range of 100-12800 (utilizing H1 and H2), however, having owned it, I share your conclusion that at anything beyond 800/1600 (depending on light levels) is pretty noisy. Luckily 15MP gives you plenty of room to cleaan things up in post.</p>

<p>While I have never owned a 7D, I compared it when I was replacing my 50D, I found that it was about 1-1.5 stops improved over the 50D in terms of noise. I would expect the 70D will have improved noise characteristics over the 7D, though I would expect maybe .5-1 stop in improvement. Keep in mind that 4 stops of improvement would imply that a 70D image shot @ ISO12800 would be ~ the same as one shot on the 50D @ ISO 800. That's a tall order, and I certainly would <em>not</em> expect to see that. Instead, I think it's a bit more likely that natively, a 70D's ISO 3200 imagery will be about the same as the 50D @ ISO 800. Once you have imported the files, NR software will also be more effective given the increased pixel count. This could potentially give you an additional stop of effective NR. <br>

...<br>

However, expecting 4 stops of improvement is, I think, overly optimistic.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>Since there is yet no 7D2 you don't know what you will be giving up. However if the 70D fills all your needs, then by all means go for a 70D. Looks like a great camera assuming it lives up to the paper specs. I'd just note that while it seems to have the 7D AF hardware, the AF firmware will be different (it uses a singe digic 5+ processor vs. two digic 4s) and AF performance and options may not be the same.</p>

<p>I'd agree that hoping for a huge improvement in ISO noise is overly optimistic. Just because you can set ISO higher by 4 stops does not imply that. I'd agree that you'd be lucky to see a significant improvement over the 7D. Maybe a 1/2 stop. However since nobody has really tested a 70D yet, it's not possible to say for sure.</p>

<p>The slightly increased pixel count would be expected to have a negligible effect.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>For BIF, wait for the 7D2; otherwise, the 70D should do fine.</p>

<p>Wait until you see actual independent tests before you decide that the new sensor is the cat's meow. I've got my fingers crossed along with you and plan on a future 7D2.</p>

[matthijs]

Dave, if I read correctly you expect a fourfold improvement, not a four stop improvement.

 

I think that's a reasonable expectation, yielding good results at ISO 3200 and with some skill/luck 6400.

[JDMvW]

<p>I just upgraded <em>to</em> a 50D (for APS-C) from a 20D, so I'm clearly not the one to ask, but do you really <em>need</em> more pixels to go to 11x14?<br /> Are your images being viewed with the tip of the viewer's nose touching the print? ;)</p>

[dcstep]

<p>The 7D's AF, as implemented in the current 7D, is no great shakes when in AI Servo mode. It hunts and is very inconsistent vs. the 5D MkIII. I'm hoping that the 7D MkII will gain the AF system from the 5D MkIII.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<blockquote>

<p>I just upgraded <em>to</em> a 50D (for APS-C) from a 20D, so I'm clearly not the one to ask, but do you really <em>need</em> more pixels to go to 11x14?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>IMO, you don't. But that is only when shooting in circumstances where you can control ISO. I have printed up to 24x36 from the 50D, but a) was shooting @ ISO 100, and b) still applied light NR in post. By ISO 1600, 11x14 is the largest I think I'd consider printing, and then, only if I could a) overexpose by ~2/3 a stop, and b) w/ some heavy NR,</p>

<p>But of course all this is sooo subjective... And of course for something like that, and knowing I'd be pushing it, I'd frame instead of cropping</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>There is absolutely nothing wrong with <em>wanting</em> more pixels, I was just musing on the need to do so. :)</p>

 

[daveinwilton]

<blockquote>

<p>I just upgraded <em>to</em> a 50D (for APS-C) from a 20D, so I'm clearly not the one to ask, but do you really <em>need</em> more pixels to go to 11x14?<br />Are your images being viewed with the tip of the viewer's nose touching the print? ;)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Granted JDM at full captured size it would not be required for those print sizes. However, about 50% of my wildlife photography requires at minimum 50% crop as 800mm equivalent is not enough for some species, particularly wild raptors, in my experience thus far. <br>

<br>

Additionally, many of my clients are purchasing prints at elbow length from folding tables at craft fairs and flea markets. At this close distance, they expect to see a non-pixelated image, they are not interested in an education that they will never notice it at a normal viewing distance, they see it right now in their hands. To them this sounds like nothing more than an excuse. I am not a salesmen, quite unable to sell water to a man dying of thirst (there is a free water fountain down the hall on the right), so I have to let my images do the speaking for me.<br>

</p>

[daveinwilton]

<p>I am sorry, I was formulating my response JDM while Marcus was righting his. I have shot some wonderful stuff at ISO 100, but rarely do birds in flight allow ISO that low as shutter speeds need to exceed 1/1000 sec at the minimum IMHO. Even though I think I got lucky on a pan at 1/800 sec once.</p>

[daveinwilton]

<p>Cropping and NR are two areas I am really hoping my next camera might help me excel. I am on a tight budget. My photography is not my sole means of income, but a hobby that has attracted the attention of others.</p>

<p>I do thank each of you for your responses. I value all of your opinions.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>DL said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I have shot some wonderful stuff at ISO 100, but rarely do birds in flight allow ISO that low as shutter speeds need to exceed 1/1000 sec at the minimum IMHO. Even though I think I got lucky on a pan at 1/800 sec once.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>ISO 800 is my default ISO for BIF and most wildlife. On really bright days I can lower it to ISO 400 and maybe even stop down some more, but on cloudy days it goes to ISO 1600 and almost wide open.</p>

[dan_south]

If you need to buy a new camera now, you have one choice. Buy what is available today. If something that you desire more comes out

later, you can sell the one that you budget to help finance the new one. Will you lose some money? Yes, but not that much. If you really

need that to be announced camera, then you can wait for it or fill the gap with a temporary solution.

[sarah_fox]

<p>So you're not happy with prints from the 50D larger than 8" height. That means you require approx. 400 ppi of your images. Putting this into perspective, 10 pixels height makes a reasonably readable font -- not pretty, but minimally readable. At 400 ppi, that minimally readable font would be 1/40 of an inch high -- about 2/3 of 1 mm -- only slightly higher than the width of a 0.5mm mechanical pencil lead. Can you honestly read print that small? I can't -- not without an optician's loupe or a dissecting microscope. That means my naked eye can't really discern all those tiny pixels. If it could, then I could read the print.</p>

<p>EDIT: I just read about your 50% crops. Still, we're talking about 1/20 inch print. My eyes aren't that good either, so I'd say the pixels still generously run together at that resolution. But perhaps other folks have better eyes than mine (quite possible).</p>

<p>FAIW, I've found that a TC gets me much farther in resolution than cropping. A longer lens would even work better. If I were you, I'd invest in the optics before upgrading to higher resolution.</p>

 

[daveinwilton]

<p>Sarah Fox said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>So you're not happy with prints from the 50D larger than 8" height.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Actually Sarah, I stated I am frequently unhappy with pixelization on prints at half again over that size with a crop of 50%, taken with an ISO of greater than 800.</p>

<p>I am also confused as to how you feel an addition of a TC will improve things for me. Even a 1.4x TC will increase my f stop to a minimum of 8 which will remove AF, and increase exposure time, which can only be remedied by increasing ISO. I believe cropping is my only available option unless $8,000 to $12,000 lenses are put into the equation, and they are well outside of my budgetary constraints.</p>

[daveinwilton]

<p>I wish to thank everyone for their input. I believe I will wait into the new year. I am not pressed by time, so I will see what pans out with the 70D, there will probably be at least one software upgrade by then anyway. I hope to see an announcement by the end of the first quarter of 2014 regarding the 7D MRKII, otherwise I just might start believing that the model will never be coming. </p>

<p>-Dave</p>

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>The 7D's AF, as implemented in the current 7D, is no great shakes when in AI Servo mode. It hunts and is very inconsistent</p>

</blockquote>

<p><em>Sigh...</em></p>

<p>And <em>yet again:</em> mine doesn't do any of that in AI Servo mode; it's rock solid and scarily reliable.</p>

<p>And bloody good.</p>

<p>David, <em>your </em>7D might have had a problem, but the implication that <em>all </em>7Ds behave similarly, is utterly unfounded. Indefensible, unsupportable sweeping statements like that belong on DP Review, not on here.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>The main problem with the OP's logic is that the comparison is between the 70D, which has just been announced and not yet independently tested on production models, and this so called "7D Mark II," which is not even announced so that its specifications, price, and availability time frame are all unknowns. In fact, in my opinion, Canon will not even bother with a 7D Mark II as I pointed out on the 70D introduction thread.</p>

<p>I sure hope you have no time restriction, as waiting for something that may never happen with a lot of unknowns is a questionable move.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Shun, the OP said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>...I believe I will wait into the new year. I am not pressed by time,...</p>

</blockquote>

[dcstep]

<p>Keith said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>David, <em>your </em>7D might have had a problem, but the implication that <em>all </em>7Ds behave similarly, is utterly unfounded. Indefensible, unsupportable sweeping statements like that belong on DP Review, not on here.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Many, well several, on Bird Photographer.net have the same issue and the same experience when they move to the 5D3 or 1DX from the 7D. My personal keeper rate doubled instantly when I attached my 5D3 to my 500/f4.</p>

<p>What I say is based on my actual experience. Within a month of coming out, people were demonstrating the "hunting" of the 7D's AI Servo mode. I ignored that, bought the camera and fought the AF for a couple of years, thinking that I was making mistakes, but it's the camera.</p>

<p>I'm glad that you have a 7D that works like it's supposed to.</p>

<p>Even if all 7Ds performed as they were designed to, the 5D3's AF system provides superior AF pattern choices, AF at f/8 and quickness, if installed in the 7D2, would make the 7D2 a very in demand camera for BIF.</p>

<p>I love DPReview, but they never stress the AF systems enough in their tests to provide meaningful feedback for BIF photographers.</p>