EOS 70D announced!

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Good points, Bob. We'll have to wait and see.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Some time ago I wrote about what I'd expect to see in a 70D and 7D MkII - <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/Canon_EOS_70D_7D_II_thoughts.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/Canon_EOS_70D_7D_II_thoughts.html</a> - so far I'm pretty much on track!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Bob, we'll see.</p>

<p>IMO, if Canon had plans for this so called 7D Mark II, they would never put the 7D's AF system onto the 70D. Likewise, as soon as I saw the specs for the Nikon D7100, I was certain that there would not be any continuation for the Nikon D200-D300-D300S series. And the higher-end model should be introduced before the lower-end one. Once you have those top-of-the-line APS-C features on a 70D/D7100 caliber, $1200 models, it would make the more-expensive, $1800 or so model very difficult to sell.</p>

<p>However, I am sure some people will never be convinced. People have been talking about this Nikon "D400" for like 3, 4 years. They would still be expecting that 2, 3 years from now.</p>

[robin_sibson1]

<p>What could be really interesting is the appearance of the 70D sensor in the next-generation EOS M. If coupled with a really good EVF it could prove to be a class-leader.</p>

<p>Is there any reason not to have some pixels split horizontally and some vertically to provide cross-type AF? My impression, which may be wrong, is that this has not been done in the 70D sensor.</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>If there is a 7D mk II, I suspect it will have the same AF system as the 5D3 / 1D-X. Which appears to be what Bob predicted as well.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p><em>IMO, if Canon had plans for this so called 7D Mark II, they would never put the 7D's AF system onto the 70D</em><br /> <br /> Well, I don't know that they have. It appears to be the same hardware, but the 7D uses dual processors while the 70D uses one and as yet there are no details of the 70D AF firmware options. Granted the 70D has the DIGIC 5+, but the sophisticated AF systems usually dedicate one processor to AF and one to other camera operations. Canon also have better AF modules than the one in the 7D, e.g. the ones in the 5D MkIII and 1D-X. Also, the DIGIC 6 is out (used in the SX-280) and the 70D "only" uses the DIGIC 5+, so an EOS 7D MkII could use the DIGIC 6 (or even two of them, or two DIGIC 5+ units).</p>

<p>So even with existing technology, there's lots of room for an EOS 7D upgrade.</p>

<p>I can certainly see a 7D MkII with upgraded AF systems (for both still and video modes) as well as built in WiFi and GPS. There's certainly room for a "professional" APS-C camera. The 6D doesn't really cut it for pro level sports and action photography. I'm not sure yet that the 70D will rival the existing 7D for still imaging, though it will certainly come closer than the 60D did.</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Oh, I'm pretty sure we'll see a 7D Mk II.</p>

<p>Aside from the points Bob has already made (it's quite a big difference from the 70D for the 7D having its own dedicated processor purely for AF work, and we don't know yet whether a Digic 5+ on its own has the horsepower to out-process the two processors in the 7D), these cameras <em>don't </em>have Canon's best AF (for all that it's bloody good) - I honestly believe that the 7D Mk II will have either a version of the AF in the 5D Mk III, or a reworking of the AF in the Mk IV, if only to address the perception that Canon short-changes its users compared to Nikon in the AF department.</p>

<p>I also <em>suspect </em>that - if this isn't what's in the 70D already (I think it unlikely, but we'll have to see) - we'll see another new sensor, using technology akin to what Sony uses (digital on-chip column-parallel ADCs, smaller-than-xx µm sensor fab), to produce more DR at low ISO/in the shadows: that (according to the noisier forums out there) is <em>the</em> must-have next step for Canon's sensors.</p>

<p>Besides, Canon is already on record as saying that there will be a 7D replacement - and that it will be "groundbreaking".</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>y'know, if you're a Nikon user and you must have a bigger-than-D7100 buffer, buy a different (read: "<em>more expensive</em>") camera...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Would you please point that camera out to me in the Nikon line-up? Ah, yes, the D4. Null problemo as I suspect everyone looking to spend $1200-$1800 is perfectly willing to drop some $6K instead. /sarcasm filter off/ But wait - many buy the D3200 or D5200 or D7000 instead of dropping only 1.5-2x the amount for the much better D7100...<br>

The D7100 is a well-rounded camera with one glaring wart - the shallow buffer. The missing AF-ON button can be substituted for by the not perfectly placed AE-L/AF-L button. I am not commenting on video as I don't care to use it - but it seems that the 70D will be the better option.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>but their specs do not drop the ball in any major way that will alienate potential upgraders And I think the Nikons do...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I wasn't trying to initiate a Nikon vs Canon debate nor do I believe that the grass is always greener on the other side (I've been shooting Nikon since 1979). </p>

<blockquote>

<p>and even more pointless to take the lack of this or less of that, as <em>personally </em>as some seem to do... ...some people are simply never happy...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I hope I didn't convey that impression - because I don't take it personally and I decided to be happy with what I have. If Nikon's offerings don't appeal to me then I simply do exactly what Nikon does NOT want me to do - I don't purchase.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>There is certainly a role for the "pro-level" APS-C camera, even if it does cost the same as the "entry level" full frame body!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think the same - as do quite a few others that I know of. Time will tell - and if I learned one thing as a Nikon shooter, than it is to have patience. </p>

 

[horse]

<p>Keith you are a fine water boy (keep up the good work). And Shaun Bob trumps (on the 7d ll anyway) and his opinion stands on two key factors--PLASTIC/VARI-ANGLE.</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Hi Dieter,</p>

<p>I was actually thinking that the D300s is still a pretty good candidate if a deeper buffer is a must - or the D400 of course, when it arrives.</p>

<p>And no, you can rest assured that not a single word I wrote was directed at (in the sense of being <em>about</em>) you. The thing I like most about this forum is that Nikon and Canon users can discuss this stuff without it becoming petty and fanboyish, and my comments were definitely about the hoards out there on other forums who aren't cordially chatting here, and who would appear to be incapable of doing so.</p>

<p>Incidentally, Wouter's a long-time Nikon guy too, as far as I'm aware.</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>I have no idea what being a "fine water boy" involves, or whether it's a good thing..!</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<blockquote>

<p>Is there any reason not to have some pixels split horizontally and some vertically to provide cross-type AF?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They bin by doubling the number of column lines and adding switching transistors to connect adjacent column lines together. If they were going to do rows, too, they'd have to double the number of row lines and add row switching, an at that point, they might as well just do 2x2 squares. We'll probably see that in the next generation.</p>

<p>I imagine it's not as big a deal because the AF "sensors" are more than a single line tall, and the math is probably 2D FFTs, so you can get by with a lot less texture than you need for line sensors. I've pulled depth maps from small-base stereo in areas that had very little visible detail.</p>

[nico_morris]

<p>Has anyone stopped to think how many cameras that nearly four-year old 7D 18mp sensor had been put in... maybe 5 with the Rebels included. Since Canon sensor development has slowed down and they have been recycling their sensors, it seems to me unlikely they'll spring a new one for the 7D II. Maybe the 70D sensor will filter down to the digital Rebels and there will be no 7D II.<br /> As for D300, the FX D3s seems to have displaced the D300 even for close daylight telephoto applications where the press would have to carry several kilos less of lenses on DX format on 3 cameras. I came across local press using the D300 but the national sports eventers heavily preferred the D3(S/X). It even seems more prevalent than Canon now. It probably varies from sport to sport but I found Nikon full-frame surprisingly popular compared to four years ago.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Another comment on</p>

<blockquote>

<p>IMO, if Canon had plans for this so called 7D Mark II, they would never put the 7D's AF system onto the 70D.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't see that this follows from either historical or logical premises.<br>

Canon has often introduced new features in a "hop-scotch" sort of way. The XTi had 10 MP when the 20/30D line were still at 8MP, for example.<br>

Moreover, why wouldn't they upgrade the "pro-am" model line if they planned some other new whiz-bang features for the more "professional" model?</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<blockquote>

<p>Has anyone stopped to think how many cameras that nearly four-year old 7D 18mp sensor had been put in...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I doubt it's exactly the same sensor in all of them, but the same sensor size and resolution of 5184 x 3456 pixels is used in the EOS M, SL1, T2i, T3i, T4i, T5i, 60D, and 7D. So, eight cameras altogether.<br>

<br>

That large-scale reuse of a sensor design is confined to APS-C. Every full frame camera Canon has ever released has a different resolution.</p>

[dogbert]

<p> A nice upgrade to the 60D, but I probably won't jump at this. On the other hand I probably would have if it were metal.<br>

It also reminds me of how compromised the 6D was with its one cross-type AF point. This thing has got 19!<br>

I wonder if it has touch screen shooting like the OM-D? It seems like the AF should be built for it.</p>

 

[Marcus Ian]

<blockquote>

<p>That large-scale reuse of a sensor design is confined to APS-C. Every full frame camera Canon has ever released has a different resolution.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Except for the 1Ds3 & 5D2? 5616x3744 for both FF with near identical image characteristics, any difference in the sensors is about the same difference as the eight (or so ;-) ) APS-C cameras equipped with the 18MP CMOS - ie, different processor/processing.</p>

<p>I'm also not sure I see why the conclusion is that the 70D precludes the 7D2, it is in nearly every way a <em>downgrade</em> from the 7D, and an <em>upgrade</em> from the 60D. This is where I would aim if I intended to continue to offer a 'flagship APS-C camera' ie, 7D2 w/ same MP, faster FPS, better buffer, better AF, maybe even bells and whistles (like dual card?)</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>Marcus, I had been checking the tables at the-digital-picture.com, which show the 1Ds3 and 5D2 having almost, but not quite, identical resolutions. 1Ds3 at 5632 x 3750, 5D2 5616 x 3744.<br>

<br>

However I doublechecked with the Canon Museum, and it appears tdp.com is incorrect. Canon lists both cameras as 5616 x 3744.<br>

<br>

IQ was generally reported as almost identical, though some reviewers found subtle differences. That might have been processing or software, as you say. So those two could be identical sensors.</p>

[bobatkins]

<blockquote>

<p>On the other hand I probably would have<em> (upgraded)</em> if it were metal.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Why? Do you want to use it to hammer in nails? Have you ever had a "plastic" body fail on you (i.e. the body, not the camera)? Has anyone had their plastic bodied 60D fall apart?</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Yeah, I'd have no qualms at all about a plastic body these days.</p>

<p>A significant proportion of the barrels of both my Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS and 70-200mm f/2.8 OS lenses are made of a plastic/composite material, and I have absolute confidence in their robustness and longevity - and structural rigidity is far more important for "long" lenses than for camera bodies.</p>

[nico_morris]

<p><em>"I'm also not sure I see why the conclusion is that the 70D precludes the 7D2, it is in nearly every way a downgrade from the 7D, and an upgrade from the 60D"</em><br /> <em><br /></em>Based on the lack of competition Canon has. The Nikon D300(s) is a very old camera now and those looking for an update did not find it in the build and buffer of the D7100. Canon's top APS-C only needs to go up against the D7100 with vestigal metal plates and a small 6 raw buffer. I don't see a reason for Canon to rush an update from 18 to 20+MP in the 7D and I think people will still be asking about it in 12 months. But we'll see.</p>

[ed_avis2]

<p>Clearly there are some people who need metal construction (or think they do), otherwise Canon would build all their cameras out of plastic, including the 1DX.</p>

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>or think they do</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>No question that it's a perceived "added value" factor, but the plastic used for lot of photographic equipment these days is much like the material used to make military equipment, including weaponry like the Glock pistol.</p>

<p>"Think" is probably the salient word in that sentence, Ed.</p>

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>The Nikon D300(s) is a very old camera now and those looking for an update did not find it in the build and buffer of the D7100.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Which is why some of us anticipate a scary-good D400 sooner rather than later.</p>

<p>Speaking personally, I'm not remotely interested in the concept of "competing" with Nikon - that's they're business, not mine - and I remain as impressed with my 7D today as I was in December 2009 when I got it (good grief - I've had it for 3 1/2 years!), at <em>any </em>ISO, well into 4 figures.</p>

<p> </p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Duuh...</p>

<p>"<em>their</em> business", not "<em>they're</em> business..."</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>I remain as impressed with my 7D today as I was in December 2009 when I got it (good grief - I've had it for 3 1/2 years!)</blockquote>

<p>You made me look - own my D300 now for almost 5 years (come August). The poor ergonomics of the D7000 precluded an upgrade and now the shallow buffer of the D7100 does so again. I would be fine with the build of those bodies - it's the current trend to "miniaturize" that causes problems. Quite surprising that 5mm in width can make the difference between good and bad ergonomics. As far as DX camera handling goes, Nikon set the bar quite high with the D200 and D300 - and hasn't met that standard with any of the subsequent releases. </p>

<p>I also came to realize that the rapid upgrade cycle the camera manufacturers want to impose on us is something I don't really have to follow - I upgraded from a D70 (which I purchased only to get my digital feet wet) to a D200 and then to a D300 - which was a real upgrade in every aspect (and I sold my D200 bodies only a few months back). Since then, there hasn't been a Nikon DX camera released that can make the same claim - I could use some MP (mainly for my avian photography) but they always came with an - so far unacceptable - trade-off.</p>

<p>Even if the mystical D400 appears on the scene anytime soon and turns out to be exactly the camera I hope it to be - I may not feel the need to rush out and buy one right away - I feel I haven't "used up" my D300 yet. In any case, given the recent history of Nikon's problems with freshly released cameras, it seems prudent to wait for at least 6 months after a release before purchasing - and I may decide to wait even a bit longer.</p>