jaykumarr: readers who are angry about the pricing should see the pricing of 80-400mm II Nikon AF-S. That is 20% higher. ( As per the feedback from users, that Nikon lens is extremely fast focusing and almost as sharp as prime. So I neither blame that price).
Lol! you are really obssessed by the D7100. If the 7D II is a great camera go buy it and get happy.
@jaykumarr: Why should I care about the D7100? I compare the 7D II and my 7D at low ISO. You care about the D7100 so you do your search for it yourself.
Bananasplit: I have no doubt that the lens is nice, well build and awsome optics. But the price is not worth for me..
I think the strategy of Canon is to earn more monry by making their product as expensive as possible, just a bit above what one would expect to pay. I believe it is a bad marketing strategy.
Tella Day "at a price that practically costs the same as the near 20 year-old version"2199 euros is the same as 1404.9 euros. "to make a nice profit" says it all.
DXOmark has made measures, not just guessing by looking at pics. The results show no improvement at low ISO (which I always use).I have used a few cameras and own some. DXOmark sensor ratings correspond to what I see in real life, so I trust them for sensors (it is not the case for all my lenses).
@ ozturert: I let you buy the 7D II, it does not offer to me what I need. I bet you do not own it.
@ Teila Day, your mistake is to believe people think and act as you do. I bought Canon 7D and lenses few years ago to take portraits of my kid and it did the job. Well, now sensor technology got better and I find the level of noise of the 7D at low ISO too high and Canon did not make an effort to improve it in the 7D II.
Nikon lenses have always been more expensive, and it is the reason I went Canon. That was a mistake, I know. Nikon offers now similar lens price with better sensors. But, it is too late for me.
I have no doubt that the lens is nice, well build and awsome optics. But the price is not worth for me..
Pentax = Fisher Price?
The announcement was about "Canon" changing name to "Cannot".
Canon "saw the impossible": people stop claiming Canon is the best because "pros use Canon gear". People bought Canon and now they see the difference with their friends gear. They spent $$$ on Canon lenses and they are looking how to adapt them to use Sony sensors.
Canon "did the impossible": they sell less for more. Just sell 2008 technology for more money.
Canon offers the "impossible to buy": 8k$? or a useless printer to carry in the subway for a quickly printed selfie?
Pics do not look convincing. Too much noise (as much as my 7D) and not satisfactory colors (where 7D is excellent). Great mechanical engineering may be, but for the price, I want better IQ.
People that own a small sensor camera vote for such cameras. I do not see the aim of such a poll as physics dictates that the larger sensors are better. It is not a matter of opinion.
More one asks from his gear, bigger sensor one needs.
He believes that Canon sensors are at the level of Sony sensors, lol!
CeleryBeats: My Fuji XE-2 produces better looking high iso shots. At least in JPEG.
A7 looks to be a great camera. But damn Fuji got some magic going on.
Just comparing for example the pictures for the lower color wheel, I see that your comment is non-sense both for the details and colors.
Put the aooming square on the black paint tube. Then compare:1) A7 best2) A7r secondD800 and 5D mark III behind. D800 gets very noisy above 3200 ISO while the Canon loses details but has less noise.Newer models are better tanks to progress or is it due to the better lenses used?
I was thinking to upgrade from 7D to 5DmkIII. Now, I will wait and see if Canon reacts with something a bit smarter than a white painting. If not, I will buy an A7r and a metabones adaptor. I will then forget Canon bodies keeping only my beloved Canon lenses.
The part with the strings on the bottom is sharpest with the K5IIs. K5II is sharper than K5. Some extra in-camera sharpening?
Moiré is too present in the K5IIs for my taste.