Zerg2905: OK: the first one that will post a high ISO picture (at 6400, say...) from the new 7D II will get a beer from me, as I am curious if this is the 70D, or something else.
tbcass fyi @ ISO6400 the Sony sensor in your A77II is no better than the Canon, meaning they are both crap.
Lab D: First I read this and then I saw the new Samsung. I don't know anyone who buys Samsung, but it seems to beat the 7D in every spec.For example 10 FPS is not exciting when others are offering 11,12 and 15 FPS. "Full HD" video is boring when other shoot 4K.I just hope the 7D does use the same technology in this new sensor as found in the Rebel T2i.
@ tbcass LOL @ world class.
Geomaticsman: If Nikon doesn't respond with (or even leak news of) a DX competitor by the time the 7DII is available for purchase, I dare say is sayonara Nikon for me. No doubt the "70D" sensor is a disappointment, but virtually everything else in the 7DII is exactly what I'm looking for in a DX body. Add Canon's superb supertele selection to the mix and superior TC's, plus the fact that Nikon killed my favourite post processing engine (CNX2), and you know...I think I could live with the sensor performance everything else being considered. Certainly nothing wrong with the 1Dx or 5DIII as a backup either.
Sorry Nikon, I only have so much patience...life is short and death is long.
@ tbcass Don't embarrass yourself.
A77II's 15 crosstype vs 7D2's 65 crosstypes (with dual cross in middle), with a whole array of custom AF configuration and HUGE buffer depth.
The 7D2 simply excels in what it's meant to do best. Don't even put the Sony in the same sentence.
photo nuts: Same old same old 11+ stops of dynamic range at base ISO?
Sigh Sigh Sigh
@ 3tagebart you can't?
Then this camera clearly isn't for you.
lol no target audience buys this camera to shoot at base ISO nor care much about the DR. Learn to identify the right tool for the right job.
severely underexposed too.
SiliconVoid: I was not aware DPR, or the photographic community in general, had begun evaluating camera equipment on the basis of whether the user, or subjective audience, is instantly elevated to being a better photographer simply by holding/using or viewing images taken with said equipment... O.oAn image does not need to awe its audience in subject, composition, or creative lighting in order to represent a technical example of what the equipment is capable of providing. These are 'real-world' shots after all, that means just like the bulk of your 'real-world' shots sitting on 'your' computer there are any number of images that would not impress anyone photographically..Just as one can strip a nut with a $75 wrench, someone else can get the job done with a $5 pair of pliers - the tool is being evaluated here, not the wielder... Enough already.
@ Ranford Stealth - at the end of the day, it's d preview that looks bad by posting these mediocre samples.
If I'm Fuji I would stop sending pre-production Fuji to d preview, they just make camera look bad than what they really are...
I have to disagree.
Fuji gave d preview to showcase their camera. Therefore the photos make a huge impact for us readers to determine whether or not to purchase the product.
Uploading mediocre samples really isn't helping Fuji.
Thanks D preview, your samples helped me NOT to buy this camera.
Zigadiboom: You see the Mazda 6 is a very good quality car in its own right. However if you try and price it the same as a BMW 5 series or Mercedes E class then it doesn't seem like such a good deal anymore.
This is like when netbook first came out. It was meant to be cheaper, lighter and easier to carry compared to normal laptop.
As time goes by, they are packing more features, getting faster, bigger and heavier, and priced it the same as a well featured laptop, and that's how it all went wrong....
So let me ask you - where is netbooks now? :P
white shadow: A reasonably good selection of shots in a variety of situation. Keep it up for other camera reviews like the coming 70D.
A good pocketable camera for travel but the price is rather expensive.
I am using a similar setup for travel; using a Zeiss ZE 35mm f/2.0 on the Canon 5D MkII. Seems to get better results.
Maybe DPR should do a comparison, if not with the 5D MkII then with the 5D MkIII with a Zeiss ZE 35mm f2.0 lens. If the result is on par or better then this IS the camera to go for if one want to travel light.
I just had a look at the samples too, pretty impressive, but I think my 5D3 + Sigma 35 combo is sharper.
I know it's a different beast, but just sayin...
nofumble: Supersize your sensor please
Not gonna happen...
I sort of agree thou, no matter how feature-rich it is, it's still just a 16mp 4/3 sensor. That will always be the bottleneck.
Wow so according to DxOMark the best combo with the highest sharpness prime is Sigma 85!? What a surprise!
Maybe I should re-purchase it :P
Anaxagoras: No built-in flash - disappointingNo built-in GPS - disappointing
No viewfinder - APPALLINGLY BAD, Canon
Funnily enough, no professional photographers use mirrorless, regardless of whether it has an EVF/OVF or not.
So what's your point??
'And as far as I know, ALL Canon's dSLRS (professional or amateur) have viewfinders.'
And this isn't a DSLR...so your point again?
t ait: Great that they copied the big sensor and the compatibility to their "standard" lenses from Sony. But they are making a big mistake by positioning this camera as a "beginner's" device. They should not be trying to protect their budget DSLRs, but should replace them with much compacter cameras. No enthusiast photographer buys big cameras anymore, they simply make no sense anymore...
'No enthusiast photographer buys big cameras anymore'
um define enthusiast??
Peter Sills: Well, let's see.
No EVF. No tilting display. No real controls (physical thumb dial).
Camera aimed at the amateur. Camera aimed to knock Nikon's V1 out.
Too expensive for what it is. Canon, you need to cannibalize your own market in order to succeed. Why should I buy this vs. the Sony offerings? Are you going to have a "pro" version in time for Photokina?
You seriosuly think an EP2 + Pana 20f1.7 combo is better than this?? The EVF for the EP2 is crap anyway, I wouldn't even bother with that.
Sure m43 has more lenses available if you are building a COMPLETE system.
A lot of people are buying this as a smaller, lighter second package alongside a ff setup. I am more than happy with the EF-M and the 35mm FoV pancake only.
expensive compared to what?
It's about the same price as an EPM1 + Pana 20 1.7.
I take the Canon offering anyday. Larger sensor, standard 35mm FoV pancake, touch screen, 31 AF points, AF with all EF/EF-S lens via adapter.
What's not to like??
jimr: For a consumer level camera the lack of a built in flash is surprising and a mistake. The NEX 3F would be the example to follow given the road that Canon is going down.
Built in flash is for noobs anyway...
And with a fast pancake @ 35mm, flash is rarely needed.
Boris F: Canon and Nikon have to join the m43 community! Otherwise they will find themselves on the Nokia's today's position. Times when every camera's company develop their own mount's system are over. Imagine to yourself that each computer's motherboard company will develop their own PC extension connections, instead use the PCIe and the USB. And using this way try to limit their customers to chose extensions (lenses) from the only one manufacturer. These times are over! We are in the 21 century now! Wake up, make better products and customers will choose you. Don't limit a customer by "inventing" new mounts!!!
um m43 only consists of Pana and Oly. Hardly a community when there's only 2 parties in it imo...
Thoughts: It is hard to believe a lens annoucement gets such attention. Why bother this equivalent thing? It says the lens can take shoots in low light in concerts etc and portraits. That is it.
I have to say as others. Olympus lenses are the prettiest. But surely they should make some black version ones for that black OMD EM5.
@Mssimo - you are so wrong...
According to dofmaster, 150 f3.6 on ff gives -
Depth of field Near limit 9.86 ft Far limit 10.1 ft Total 0.28 ft
And 75 f1.8 on ff -
Depth of field Near limit 9.73 ft Far limit 10.3 ft Total 0.57 ft
So how is it the same again????
Sergio DS: There's much talk about the aperture, dop, etc stuff... First of all equivalent aperture does not mean equivalent light transmission, I'm sorry but even in the same camera two 50mm lenses with the same aperture might have different light transmission characteristics, albeit similar, however, the dop values should remain the same. In the case of the FF vs APS vs m4/3, I ain't even go there... But from a dop point of view we can say that this 75mm is, from a dop perspective, equivalent to a 100mm 2.4 APS-C lens, and simiilar to a 150mm F5 lens on fullframe, only regarding to the DOP! If you don't believe it just check for yourselves http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html
@ NetMage I like your explanation and that was my original thinking.
At low ISO, NO WAY ff is 4x better than m43 say an EM-5. So it is only half right.
No deny on the dof thou. 1.8 on m43 = 3.6 on ff dof -wise.