Canon 7D Mk II - Specifications (90%)


High ISO test by Mattgranger.

It is not really scientific and I don't expect it to be highly accurate, but from that test, the pic looked quite clean and usable even at ISO 128000.

http://mattgranger.com/7d2

Hmmm... The temptation getting stronger...
 

Canon's Chuck Westfall provides a general overview of the Canon 7D Mk II:

[video=youtube;U07tgCXmJn4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U07tgCXmJn4#t=112[/video]
 

7D2 RAW file here opened with IRFanview and pushed by 3.5 stops.

Promising. There is hope yet. :bsmilie:
 

7D2 RAW file here opened with IRFanview and pushed by 3.5 stops.

Promising. There is hope yet. :bsmilie:

Is there any proof that it was shot with 7D2 taking into consideration that it hasn't been launched yet and not many people has had the golden opportunities to really test and use it.
 

7D2 RAW file here opened with IRFanview and pushed by 3.5 stops.

Promising. There is hope yet. :bsmilie:

This is encouraging. I hope that further testing bears this out.

Nonetheless, this whole issue of "DR" and "pushing shadows" 2 or 3 stops and beyond is lost on me. The amount of times that this is needed is rare. In the real world, I would try my best to prevent it in the first place. The more that shadows are lifted the more that the resulting photo becomes very flat and lifeless. Here's another example (which... even for me... is quite impressive) achieving a 5 stop lift on shadows:

Canon 7D Mk II - 5 Stop Push

Personally, the vast improvement in the AF technology from 19 pts to 65 pts is far more significant. I remember a study that Lens Rentals did in 2012 in which the original 7D fared quite badly in terms of AF consistency. In fact, of the camera bodies tested, the original 7D came in last place. This makes me wonder about the fuss that was made after the 7D launch in 2009 regarding AF issues. In the same study, the 1Dx and 5D3 were among the best in the industry. The new AF in the 7D Mk II is more in line with the 1Dx and appears to be far superior than its predecessor and perhaps the best in the industry.

The low light capabilities of the new 7D Mk II appear to be vastly improved although further testing in real world scenarios is still needed.

The low light improvements, as well as the AF superiority are far more desirable attributes for me personally.
 

Last edited:
This is encouraging. I hope that further testing bears this out.

Nonetheless, this whole issue of "DR" and "pushing shadows" 2 or 3 stops and beyond is lost on me. The amount of times that this is needed is rare. In the real world, I would try my best to prevent it in the first place. The more that shadows are lifted the more that the resulting photo becomes very flat and lifeless. Here's another example (which... even for me... is quite impressive) achieving a 5 stop lift on shadows:
This is needed when you try to get everything right, but the dynamic range is still too large for you to get a good shot. In landscapes you can always bracket, but if you're shooting moving subjects, bracketing is not really an option. So you have to choose whether to overexpose and recover highlights, or to underexpose and push shadows in post. If you don't want to blow highlights, you have to underexpose - and traditionally this has been a weak point for Canon cameras because shadows become very noisy very quickly when you push them, even at ISO 100.
 

This is needed when you try to get everything right, but the dynamic range is still too large for you to get a good shot. In landscapes you can always bracket, but if you're shooting moving subjects, bracketing is not really an option. So you have to choose whether to overexpose and recover highlights, or to underexpose and push shadows in post. If you don't want to blow highlights, you have to underexpose - and traditionally this has been a weak point for Canon cameras because shadows become very noisy very quickly when you push them, even at ISO 100.

Yes, you make a good point. Hopefully the evidence we've seen so far in early examples from the 7D2 will help to alleviate some of these weaknesses.
 

This is needed when you try to get everything right, but the dynamic range is still too large for you to get a good shot. In landscapes you can always bracket, but if you're shooting moving subjects, bracketing is not really an option. So you have to choose whether to overexpose and recover highlights, or to underexpose and push shadows in post. If you don't want to blow highlights, you have to underexpose - and traditionally this has been a weak point for Canon cameras because shadows become very noisy very quickly when you push them, even at ISO 100.

Is the shadow problem only seen in Canon cameras,I thought it is a problem for most digital cameras? I know this is one reason that many expose to the right(ETTR).
 

Is the shadow problem only seen in Canon cameras,I thought it is a problem for most digital cameras? I know this is one reason that many expose to the right(ETTR).

In ISOless cameras (Sony sensors), raising exposure in post is equivalent to raising in-camera ISO. If you raise ISO by 1 stop in-camera, you lose 1 stop of highlights and gain nothing in the shadows. In such cameras, you should expose such that you don't blow the highlights, and then raise the shadows.

But you can't do this for Canon cameras, because raising the shadows in post (digital gain) is less efficient than raising the ISO in-camera (analog gain), which results in more noise.
 

Is the shadow problem only seen in Canon cameras,I thought it is a problem for most digital cameras? I know this is one reason that many expose to the right(ETTR).

Most complaints are directed at Canon's non-competitive dynamic range for base or low ISO. Sony's recent EXMOR sensors are about 2.5 stops better. This means for low ISO photos, one can brighten the shadow areas by as much as 3stops for photos taken with Sony's sensors. Not so for Canon sensors: noise becomes quite visible without NR.
 

Most complaints are directed at Canon's non-competitive dynamic range for base or low ISO. Sony's recent EXMOR sensors are about 2.5 stops better. This means for low ISO photos, one can brighten the shadow areas by as much as 3stops for photos taken with Sony's sensors. Not so for Canon sensors: noise becomes quite visible without NR.

why is sony sensors bdetter than canon one?
canon and sony should combine power to make camera with super af and super sensor
 

Hope to pre order this soon....so far now still not available for pre order.
 

I'm wondering when this would really get to Singapore's shores. It is still not available for pre-order yet nor are pricing details available..
 

why is sony sensors bdetter than canon one?
canon and sony should combine power to make camera with super af and super sensor

Then, there will be no more need to buy the next update. Not good for business. :bsmilie:
 

Some shops i asked and they say normally will wait up to 6 months.
 

The photo below is a picture of Romy Ocon's (a.k.a. Liquidstone) pre-production Canon 7D MKII. Here are his comments from DPReview:

"I just finished shooting BIFs until sun down, in light as low as 1/400, f/4 and ISO 6400 (mode 2 IS on), and the central group of AF points (either 5 or 9 points) just stuck to the bird like super glue, even with terrestrial BG. It looks like this might be a candidate for the best focusing DSLR I've ever used at BIFs, IMHO at least equal or better than my 1D4 or 5D3 (I haven't used the 1Dx though). I posting with my mobile phone at a remote location, so I won't be able to upload images till tomorrow night. But oh boy, I'm really stoked with the AF performance."

Canon%25207D%2520Mark%2520II.jpg
 

Looks like a great deal at Canon Canada. A discount of C$920 on the relatively new 24-70 f/4 lens when bought with the 7D2 plus C$228 worth of free gifts.

Canon Canada 7D MkII deal
 

Back
Top