After reading all of the comments, I am struck by the feeling that the pro gets reamed for doing the same thing everyone else is doing, giving their opinion. Give the pro some slack, she just makes her money taking pictures. She's not an un compensated EXPERT like many on the forums. Do a few raw conversions and relax.
Tomrood: Anyone using the words hate or puke in a review does not really sound like a professional. And to top it off she wrote 25% about a ridicules feature that no camera in existence has. And if u ask me no pro cam wil ever have this... can u imagine how it would look if all the photographers during a sports game where talking to their camera..hilarious!
I really don't understand why DPR even published this..
i don't think you know pro cameras very well. Both Canon's and Nikon's top of the line cameras have voice recording for EXACTLY the reason she mentioned.
Stephan Def: Just out of curiosity, what cameras do have sound recording per image?
I think its a very important function that has very many uses, to capture the atmosphere of some situation its very important. Technically it seems like a no brainer to me. So what is it about marketing departments that are intentionally crippling functions in Cameras?
I believe the 1D series has this feature.. Basically for the reason she spoke of.
Yannick KREMPP: That's... not helpful at all. Replace 7D Mark 2 by iPad, or purse, or screwdriver and it all makes sense. Come on, voice tagging ? Crop sensor a negative for sports ? That wifi thing again ? I take it for what it is, a woman's point of view on something she uses as just another tool. Now please read me correctly, I have nothing against her, nor am I being sexist here. It's just like I said, of no interest here: ask a formula 1 or nascar driver what he expects from a car, and post this on a consumer website to help mr lambda choose his next car, you'll get the same.
Now if you're a pro, you shouldn't be reading this, you should already know what to expect or don't care at all. Or be out shooting, or whatever.
I would love voice tagging, beats having to jot down peoples, teams, etc. names when shooting.
AksCT: I am not a pro, but find it quite odd to see everything she has listed as positive, copied below, is about functionality,form, and features. What about image quality? Perhaps the assumption is that these features improve image quality!!
-Low cost-Feels sturdy in my hands, very similar to the EOS 5D Mark III-Weatherproofing is improved and Canon claims that the shutter is good through 200,000 actuations - this is very important for working sports photographers-AF fast and responsive, and seems to perform as advertised-Cropped sensor is a pro when you need a little more reach on lenses, like a 70-200 in the end zone-Shutter feels fast and light - not nearly as noisy as the original 7D-Video is improved, (although I didn't get to test this in depth) - better AF, choice in codecs, better resolution-Lighter weight than the EOS-1D X, which is heavy as a rock by comparison
It seems that these forums are the home of people focused solely on image quality. Many, many others are concerned with the whole package of which image quality is just one piece.
Hopefully, those in search of a 40mp high tech sensor with 4K video at 60fps, tilt +swivel+removable touch viewscreen complete with wifi, gps, and facebook all in a mirrorless body with EVF and weighing less than 6oz for a cost of only $799 have collectively decided that the 7DMKII is not the camera for them and will move on to complain tirelessly about some other camera body so that those who want a solid brick body, awesome AF, dual range MFA, speedy fps AND heavy lens to attach to it can appreciate this APS-C monster in peace.
Can't wait until November 29th.
Anastigmat: The Nikon D7100 is about $800 cheaper than the 7DMKII. That is a lot of money to pay for an additional 4 frames per second. The Nikon D750 is $500 more than the 7DMKII, but it has a full frame sensor. The 7DMKII faces some stiff competition.
I own a 7D and have pre-ordered the 7DMK II. Stopped by Costco yesterday to handle a 70D and the D7100 and found the bodies much more similar to the 60D which I sold than to the 7D. Sensor tech aside, there is a lot more to the total package than comparing the d7100 or 70D to the 7D. Its about how the camera functions in your hand as much as it is about specs.
Richard Murdey: I think we can all agree that 70-200 on ASPC crop isn't all that wonderful.
Despite 50-135~ f/2.8 zoom lenses for ASPC being around for a long time however (Tokina 50-135 comes to mind), they are not, as Richard Butler notes, particularly good sellers.
I'd venture to suggest it's because most people with an ASPC dSLR rationalize against a f/2.8 lens in favor of a much smaller, lighter "consumer telezoom" which gives more reach and costs perhaps 1/3 or 1/4 of the f/2.8.
The people who really need f/2.8 - have the budget, and are willing to lug it - have mostly moved to full frame and 70-200s.
Mirrorless might change that dynamic a little, as the lenses are a bit smaller, especially for 4/3, but I think the fundamental sticking point remains: most people don't use a telezoom all that often and are unwilling to invest in a heavy, premium model.
PS: I had the Tokina for a bit, until the day came when I compared it with my AF Nikkor 85/1.8. The Tokina was on eBay within 24h...
I guess I don't really need versatility in a telephoto. I need quality and reach. I pull out my 24-105 when reach is not important. If I need wide, I just pull out my EOS-M. Wides are just not that important to me.
Well, I cannot agree. I use a 70-200mm f2.8 on APS-C because its much lighter than carrying a 300mm f2.8 and way more versatile. Seriously, not everyone wants a FF camera.
Koemans: I am going to be honest here, i did troll early today commenting on how canon is 4 years behind its peers, how the sensor is inferior with its 20.2 megapixel etc.
Funny how some people still comment on it..
Lets look at the facts : -99% of your clients dont print stuff larger than your wall.
-20.2 megapixel is not worse than 28 megapixel. 28 megapixel is only for geeks and gear fagotery. Lets be honest : does 28 megapixel really make your image better than 20.2 on your personal website, flickr and facebook? Lets say, ALL OF THE photographers i personally know only publish digitally, with the exception of a few who do weddingphotography. 28 megapixel does mean not **** on a 30x40cm photoalbum.
-ALL OF YOUR non-professional clients will not notice ANYTHING in dynamic range lacking behind, only professionals and companies. Funny thing is, most people who comment here are hobby photographers and dont earn a living with it.
It doesn't matter how fast that NX1 is if you don't have the fast glass to support it. Canon has that glass. 70-200 f2.8, 500mm f4, etc.
I love this paragraph from http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/product/cameras/eos_7d_mark_ii.do?utm_source=newsletter_september_3_14&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter
The EOS 7D Mark II has been designed to capture split-second action. It offers photographers stunningly fast autofocus and response speed in a tough and customisable body that’s designed to perform at the limit. The EOS 7D Mark II will appeal particularly to sports and wildlife photographers and with filmmakers thanks to Dual Pixel CMOS AF technology and a host of other movie making features that fit into their workflow.
Guess that's why us sport and wildlife people are not complaining.
sneakyracer: Well, while the 7D2 seems like a superb camera, but large DSLR style crop sensor cameras still reminds us of the time when Full Frame sensors were too expensive so most manufacturers adapted 35mm DSLRs for use with smaller sensors. The Fuji S2 pro is an example.
Only the most recent crop (no pun intended) of mirror less cameras take advantage of the smaller (crop) formats and gives us great cameras in a MUCH smaller package and most importantly, fast, really superb optics in small packages as well. The smaller sensors then make sense since the user gets size and weight savings across the board.
I would have liked to see a fast, pro build, mirror less body with industry leading (mirror less) AF performance along with a new line of lenses for said camera including FAST and affordable telephotos.
Maybe in ten years Canon will do that, if we are lucky!
Agree with PVCdroid. Longer lens get very expensive very fast. Crop keeps the costs down a bit.
Boomanbb: Hard to believe the complaining is still going on. Sounds like most people want a full frame 4k swiveling screen $1000 camera that connects to facebook and weighs only 4oz. Funny all the talk about the M4/3 cameras and their impressive specs but no mention of the lens they will be using with them. I cannot wait to put my 70-200mm f2.8 lens on this and crank the iso above 3200 so the indoors finally open up to cleaner images. Not to mention the extra reach that 1.6x crop does for me. Fast AF and high quality super responsive zoom lens are the other half of the equation for many of us stills shooters. For everyone else, you got your 6D and your 5DMKIII... give the sports shooters a break!
I think about Canon because I am invested in Canon, who wants to give up thousands in lens just to change brand and then spend thousands in lens? Especially when Canon has some of the best lens.
Hard to believe the complaining is still going on. Sounds like most people want a full frame 4k swiveling screen $1000 camera that connects to facebook and weighs only 4oz. Funny all the talk about the M4/3 cameras and their impressive specs but no mention of the lens they will be using with them. I cannot wait to put my 70-200mm f2.8 lens on this and crank the iso above 3200 so the indoors finally open up to cleaner images. Not to mention the extra reach that 1.6x crop does for me. Fast AF and high quality super responsive zoom lens are the other half of the equation for many of us stills shooters. For everyone else, you got your 6D and your 5DMKIII... give the sports shooters a break!
FrankS009: As someone who has moved into "enthusiast" photography from point and shoot, I am trying to come to grips with this camera. Actually, I should literally grip one to try a camera that weights more than twice my Panasoniic GX7 - plus a 24-200 lens. This is a design and cultural statement from an different and older world of photography.
In an age when IQ is becoming the same for practical purposes between m4/3rds, ASP-C and FF, I can now go much lighter with the new Panasonic GM5 at one end of the spectrum, or medium format at the other with the 645z. What is this then?
I conclude that a camera like this is a fashion accessory, something to make a statement of a particular kind. It says "big honking camera" to people who are impressed by big cameras in a similar way that big watches are impressive, or pickup trucks or SUVs. What what does it do - significantly - that a GH4 or a Sony A7R cannot do, or the GM5 for that matter? To each his or her own preferences and purposes.
Well when someone creates a m4/3rds lens that can equal the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 in speed, quality and build I would be happy to try it out. An awesome camera is nothing without awesome lens at a price that mere mortals can afford. This camera gives me a boost with lens I already have.
Donnie G: What we have here is a Canon 1D X done with an APS-C sensor. Just like the original 7D, this new Canon 7D mk2 will be the king of the hill in pro grade APS-C cameras for the next 5 or more years. Pros and hardcore enthusiasts will be very happy with and very loyal to the 7D mk2, just like they were with the original. A lot of that loyalty will be due to Canon wisely sticking with a body style and control layout that the targeted buyers are already familiar with. Unlike some amateur and most casual camera users, pros require consistency in the layout and design of their tools. That's why Canon's 1D, 5D, and 7D cameras will all look, feel, and operate the same from one upgrade to the next. Great job Canon!
Thank you Donnie, you understand me very well. I shoot a 7D for specific reasons. I need: 1. The extra reach that APS-C gives. 2. high iso for indoor sports. 3. Fast accurate AF. 4. Big buffer and high burst rate for sequences. This camera appears to give me all I want in a body style I am used to. It seems like almost everyone complaining about it really wanted a 6D.
I think innovation is cool. Just because I may not want it (but I do) doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. I always curious why so many individuals complain that some new product is unnecessary, unneeded, silly, useless, etc before ever even giving it a try. Kind of reminds me of when Pentax and Nikon introduced autofocus slr cameras. People wondered why they were necessary, everyone was perfectly happy manually focusing.
Speaking only for myself, I love the new app. I can now upload smart previews to the cloud from my laptop and desktop and later I can access them from my iPad. While I realize some don't want to ever pay a subscription model for anything, I accept that I already own several items that are subscription model (alarm system, cell phones, my house, etc) and they all cost far more that 10 dollars a month. For those who have no problem with this, its a great deal.
These look like great additions and maybe I'm in the minority but I am enjoying the Photoshop CC.
This is very similar to focal reducers used on telescopes to make it easier for astrophotography. Very common and been around a long time.