Suave: I sure hope they made it a bit faster.
For software, shouldn't 'faster' always be relative to other softwares found the same task? The relative difference between them doesn't change with cpu speed.
As a programmer, I'm a bit embarrassed for the profession when progress in hardware performance is just consumed by lazy programmer's. After all, it is the end user that invest in the hardware, not the programmer, so don't use it on your behalf.
Donnie G: The Canon 7D Mk II will consistently outsell the mirrorless brands, month after month, and year after year, for as long as Canon chooses to produce it, because the camera meets or exceeds all of the expectations of its target audience. Those folks who simply want a camera that has every new and trendy tech gadget ever made built in would probably be happier with a Sony or whatever, because the 7D Mk II definitely was not built for them. The good news is that there is something in the marketplace for everybody. :)
As mirrorless is about 25-30% of the market, I highly doubt that. 7DII is to much high end to sell in those numbers, except for the first months, when all the starving upgraders buy.
Serious Sam: Oh dear…… What a total different reception when compare to the D750. I have read about ⅓ of the comments and how different the comments are. Fanboys fighting, product and brand bashing, reviewer criticism. Compare to most of the comments on the D750 when the majority is just happy to see a solid good product.
Lets start with DPR, I think the only mistake they have done is not comparing 7D2 with A77M2. These two are (imo) the only two current model that can compare head to head. Many requested this before but the DPR team seems to have ignored this. VERY DISAPPOINTING!!
I do love the test DPR do with the EV pushing of the RAW files. It shows what I had been saying for a long time that when you rate noise performance, you have to look at the RAW file (except Fuji). If ones RAW file is junk, you will end up with junk.
"but we'd like to start the conversation about how good subject tracking can really do wonders for 24mm or 35mm fast prime photography (especially fast-paced, e.g. wedding, kid, pet, baby photography)."
Interesting twist. I've (incorrectly) thought that for WA accuracy would be valued over speed, whereas telezoom have to be quick and good enough. Focus with WA also becomes a matter of lens design with respect of focal plane. Which in turn leads into a discussion of whether the body or the lens it at test. Especially when lenses can rely on in-body motors or in-lens motors.Maybe the solution is to start honestly and slow, i.e: Be clear that the tests presented is "at beta stage" and full disclosure on the procedure and what you aim for. And accept (and create an understanding for) that it is not something that will bring you the Nobelprize at day one.And then allow the community to come with constructive feedback, and see where it goes.Anything that is repeatable is a good start.
@Rishi, I guess all brands have lenses that are fast focusers, whilst some are slow. Some have mechanical screw drive AF (Canon is blessed) some use internal motors, or SSM etc. I guess most brands that claims "Worlds fastest AF" does so with a specific lens, for a reason.Some lenses are known to be notorious back focusers.And the list goes on.
From a testing perspective, how do dpr pick lenses for AF testing, or general shooting?
Hans von der Crone: Very much considering this one instead of the 7DII.
This one with a grip still leaves you with $1000 for other fun stuff compared to the 7DII. I'm sure there are things that 7DII gives you that you don't get here. - But you can buy a lot of beer for $1000! :) ( Amazon US pricing... )
Serious Sam: Now can we have our 7D2 VS A77ii performance test??
True that. Pricing on lenses have always been a special skill Sony have.
tecnoworld: I hope they'll test the new improved AF against the samsung nx1 and the top performer Nikon D750.
Wouldn't it be great to have that in figures? In a repetitive test?
Eleson: A review site that can perform repetitive AF testing in various conditions will get lots of clicks!Testing on DR and noise really makes very little sense right now, except to differentiate iPhone's from FF dslr's.
Testing of AF would also drive the industry forward a lot. Much as noise comparisons have done before.
You scared me! Was there one out there ...Yes, that is a good start, but I'm more looking for tracking abilities.
Just build an Arduino robot that carries an AF target and drive it in a repetitive path in a long corridor at the office. And arrange LED strips for the whole distance so the light can be changed and controlled.And show us keeper ratios at different car speeds for the different tracks it runs.
Anything is better that "It feels a bit sluggish"!
"@Eleson, my 'source' for the A77 II is that it's an SLT, and that the EVF introduces lag"
So, you accept a solution where the AF is disengaged and blind when the shoot is taken (and basically guesses), but reject a solution where the photographers view lag a fraction of a second. Each to his own, I guess. I'd say both solution have its problems.
In the same time you also dismiss (or have never gotten used to) the possibility of shoting full action using liveview on a tripod.
As for the lens stuff, there is a gap for sure. How many stabilised primes do C offer that are faster than 2.8? Last I counted it was two. All Pentax and Sony primes are stabilized.For sure, Sony, Pentax and Olympus (and more) will never have as many lenses as C&N, simply because half of the C line up is not stabilised. And IBIS eliminates those lenses alltogether.
A review site that can perform repetitive AF testing in various conditions will get lots of clicks!Testing on DR and noise really makes very little sense right now, except to differentiate iPhone's from FF dslr's.
So, John, how does a77II AF performance compare to 7DII perormance? Preferably after firmware update.
The only thing I've seen so far is:"These excellent performances allow the Alpha 77 II pass the Nikon D7100 , Canon EOS 70D and even in the very recent Canon EOS 7D Mark II" from lesnumeriques.com
But maybe you have other sources as well?
mpgxsvcd: I find it very interesting that Canon basically has a stranglehold on the Astrophotography world when their dynamic range is at such a HUGE disadvantage to other competitors. However, the fact that we stack multiple RAW images to remove the noise puts the Canon cameras on a more even playing field for Astronomy.
The stacking process relies on the fact that the noise is random and the signal(Light coming into the lens) is consistent. This means that we can easily isolate and remove the random read noise that plagues the Canon cameras in single exposure shots. We also use dark frames to further identify the noise that is present if there is no signal.
"with Canon and proper stacking" I guess you mean with any camera?
mpgxsvcd: It is remarkable that despite all of the valid issues that Dpreview and its readers have pointed out the owners of Canon cameras continue to produce impressive results.
Does this mean that Canon camera owners have to work harder to get great images? Does it mean they have to avoid difficult situations more than other camera owners would have to? Or does it simply mean that they don’t find themselves in situations that often where the disadvantages of their camera are relevant?
It could mean that some of those payed quite a few $$$ to much to accomplish their results.
lightmatters: Very informative review, kudos to DPR.I don't care much about the overall score or silver medal attached. 7D2 is great for what it is intended to be.The price seems to be high but it will be down for sure.Some just complain it alone without considering the whole system. People buy EF mount with lots of great lenses.
Now Nikon, your move!
It would be great if Nikon would take D7000 sensor into a pro DX body and calls it D400 :-)
"7D2 is great for what it is intended to be." - True!
But did the review tell you enough to make an educated choice between it, and its competitors? Yes, I know, invested in a system ...
- But if we let the "invested" argument rule, there is never any need for cross brand comparison tools, is there?
vscd: With a 50mm f1.8 there is no size or weight-advantage left (f.e. against a Canon 6D):
Does "Not suitable for longer lenses" become more true if it is repeated more times?
In short, Great video!
Ontario Gone: Good video, but I question the "pro" guy about one thing. He's shooting the dead fish and just about breaking his own back to get the shot. Why not just use the flippy LCD to compose?
Same when crouching and shoting salmons in the stream. It takes some time to accept that AF isn't automatically painfully slow when you use the LCD.
mpgxsvcd: Did the GH4 survive the water? It is supposed to be weather proof with the 12-35 and 35-100m F2.8 lenses. Did it have either of those lenses on it when it took the bath?
I beg to differ, it sure looks like it was submersible. Not even hard to do. :)
Michael Piziak: This makes one think that Sony keeps changing mounts. Is that the case ?
Not really. Mirrorless systems allow for shorter flange distance, so NEX introduced a new mount. the e-mount , NEX is gone but the mount remains. Exactly the same mount is used on the different A7 models. Alongside with that there is 2 types of lenses for both a-mount and e-mount: Those that support fullframe, and those who support APS-C sensors.For a-mount, the APS-C lenses have the designation DT.For e-mount FF lens, the designator is FE.
GoneMirrorless: IMHO, IBIS is more for crop cameras where focal lengths are longer. @ 24mm IS is not a big deal. @300mm it is. That's why most long zooms and many long primes already come with IS.
I'm lost.All Anti shake solutions depends on accelerometers to detect movement and to give input to a regulator, or correction loop.If it is the sensor or a piece of glass that moves, doesn't change that. All lens systems communicate FL to the camera and the (probably) PID regulator. And most cameras also allow for manual entry of FL for other lenses. All these regulators filters out a certain frequency span to act on.Frequency below that span could for example be panning, an above, is a possibly a erroneous signal from the sensor.
Glass may be a smaller mass to move, and allow for a higher frequency. On the other hand, IBIS allows for handling rotational shake, for instance from handling of shutter press.
Calling one solution "Real VR" is almost hilarious.Especially if one of them only offers two stabilized primes faster than 2.8 .