Twice as good? What you need to know about the Canon EOS 7D Mark II

both old 5D2 and old 7D are capable DR 14 EV capture, uncompressed RAW video, or dual ISO (hdr) video

the newer 5D3 has DR 14.5 EV for those who know how to take advantage of what's there.

one can expect the new 7D2 to be close to the same, or hopefully better.

if ANYONE does post-processing of ANY KIND, no one can complain about the nature of whether one is 'fixing shadows' the 'wrong noisy black frame' way, or one is extracting real time DR 14EV LOW NOISE RAW sensor data for HDR video
(multi-shutter speed, or multi-gain/ISO)

Why not take the new PDF explaining the 7DII autofocus in depth:
http://www.brochures.canon-europe.com/getFile.php?productid=9090&languageid=-111

So forget Canon, why bother posting, Canon is not for you.

Hey, at least Canon has not got the Sony reputation of inglorious unreliability...

At least in the new G7 X we see a 1" Sony Sensor ;-)

Canon sensor in the 7D MKII is MUCH better now than the 7D and is a lot better than Nex 7 so far. It is as close as Sony A7 for the high iso noise and the shadow noise. Your comment of sensor being a sub par is utterly nonsense! And in fact Canon AF is much better and the lens line up are excellent. Sony isn't. Grow up!

"start innovating to catch up", Canon has gone a big step forward with its dual pixel AF system. In my opinion it will eventually be much better than Sony's translucent mirror technology. You really get the best of both worlds with Canon's. What more is there to in innovate? As for "Sub-par sensor performance" I really don't know what you are talking about, maybe Sony is close to Canon, but not as good. Do you know what you are saying?

The D7100 can't do what the 70D can and the 7D Mark II will outperform the 70D. So, the D7100 is quite outclassed by the 7D Mark II.

Yes Jonathan, but not in the sensor. The D7100 is much better than 70D or 7D Mark II. That's is the problem with Canon. The have the technology: 1DX, but they don't give to APS-C so easily... in the other hand, Nikon use the best sensors in APS-C.

"much better" huh? mmm.... I think you're overstating it. There's about 2 stops worth of shadow recovery difference when processing RAW images to the extremes. If that's your bag... awesome. Me? I don't push my images that hard because I don't need to. HOWEVER, I do depend on the AF capabilities of my camera and I'd rather nail the image I want and only be able to push it about 3 stops in post vs miss the image entirely. Your needs may be different. If you enjoy Nikon... go enjoy it. Push those shadows until your heart is content. I'll continue enjoying my REALISTIC looking images.

@ Jonathan , 2 stops of shadow recovery is unrealistic? There are plenty of scenarios where trying to lift the shadows in post without having horrible base noise is a necessity. I wished i could have as clean images with my 7D and 5DmkIII as Nikon, Sony users have with the Exmor sensor. Credit where credit is due. If Nikon and Sony users want to do astrophotography, night time photography, street photography, even landscapes, any kind of photography where they have no control over illumination and might find themselves dealing with a scene dynamic range exceeding vastly the sensor/film capability, then the fact is that Nikon and Sony users are better positioned to be able to address these shortcomings in post than Canon users. That is a fact, nothing wrong with this. Let's just hope Canon addresses this as soon as possible instead of continuing trying to milk their customer base to the last penny with the same sensor technology over and over again.

The original poster clearly wrote his intention : 'AF speed and Accuracy' .
Every reply talks about fps.

The 7D mkII's AF looks to be one hell of a beast based on first tests. As far as Nikon and image quality is concerned, I have never had a problem bringing shows up in post if I need to from my RAW files with my Canon cameras, Canon recovers shadows very well in their newest cameras.

Jonathan Brady nailed it up top- the 70D is a more consistent tracker than the D7100 (itself no slouch), and the 7D II is likely to be 1D X class- as in competitive with Nikon's newly released and top of their line D4s.

The 7D II have same or upgraded AF from the 1D series, which is very good. If you have large set of Nikon system lenese I would not go for Canon just because of a camera. If you have yet to choose, then it is a matter of taste and what subject matter you do. For sports and wildlife, the 7D II is about the best that have been presented, ever. And at a very reasonable price.

Pure software. Costs (almost) nothing.
Highly usefull in live events.
Or for instant portraits in difficult (ie interesting) lightings...
One could live with(out) that, for sure. Just MY disapointment. I use it a lot.

Absolutely ! But marketing won't allow it. Or it would have been there from the start.
DON'T ask me why; for me it is just plain stupid :
It will have them sale LESS 7DII camera instead of more 1DX.
People (like me) wanting the 1DX will buy the 1DX anyway.
People (like me) wanting a second APS-C body to go with 1DX will NOT buy the 7DII.
Well, LESS people wanting a second APS-C body to go with 1DX will buy the 7DII.

Hum. Almost there: Sony A7R. Well, if you forget the 15fps. Rather 1.5fps.
OK, forget phase AF too... ;-)

I did run out and buy the first 7D when it was released. I had just returned from a trip to Alaska and realized the value of a video option that my 40D did not offer. That said, I have concluded that camera manufacturers are now (maybe always?) upgrading their equipment pretty much on the margins, leaving people like Mr. G wonderful opportunities to pick up great equipment at low prices. I see no sufficient improvement to the 7D Mkii that would motivate me to sell off my old 7D, like I did five years ago when I sold my 40D. Even though I've sold off almost all my Canon equipment last month so I could "go light" with the Sony RX100 and RX10, the old 7D remains in my camera bag...just in case. A fantastic camera that will more than meet the needs of 95% of the picture-taking population.

@ Serious Sam,

While you dream of some day owning a FF mirrorless camera that maybe, somehow, almost, might eventually be the equal in performance to Canon's APS-C pro-grade 7D MKII, I prefer to dream bigger. What if there were a 7D MKII equivalent pro-grade mirrorless medium format camera equipped with an all electronic lens mount that accepted ultrasonic autofocusing, image stabilized lenses and did 4K video too? I'd be willing to bet that such a camera would take over the medium format market practically overnight. Never mind that the market for medium format is shrinking and there's practically no chance to make a profit from the new camera system. It's my dream, so some company should (innovate) and make my pipe dream come true too. See, I can relate. :)

A tad on the small side...

I use the Sony A77 II with 70-400 GII and Tamron 150-600. It has one weakness when shooting at 12 FPS. The camera has to be at maximum aperture. The problem is that most lenses, especially the Tamron 150-600, really need to be stopped down to at least F8 to get maximum sharpness. It's not so much a problem with the Sony 70-400 as it is reasonably sharp at maximum aperture.

How much FPS you end up with if you shoot at F8??

...and then you'd have to attempt to shoot action through an EVF.

It'll work for some people, while it'll be absolutely useless to others. And then you'd have to live with Sony's glass selection :/.

A tilt-screen is for live-view; useless for an action focused camera, and compromises durability.

Wifi- sure, not sure why they left that out, but it's also extraneous.

Canon worked on making the sensor more useful at high ISOs, where it meets and possibly exceeds the D7100 (as a benchmark); it's no low ISO king, but again, it's not a landscape-focused camera either.

Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Sony, Pentax, and Samsung (at least) have to throw in every bullet-point feature they can to drive sales. The 7D II is about being an excellent action camera, not about winning bullet-point battles.

(at least that's what Canon would have us believe)

Tell you what, Scott: you and me, shoulder-to-shoulder, shooting (say) Grand Prix, Super Bikes, or the like - me with a 7D Mk II, you with any Sony you want to choose.

I'll.

stomp.

you.

into.

the.

ground.

But it could have been twice as good. Upgrade the 2009 era sensor performance (just buy the stupid Sony sensor please) - and everyone would be clamoring for this thing. I think most people who would want this body care more about stills IQ than they do about the dual pixel AF thing.

@brownie314 - about that 2009 era sensor performance
Copy / Paste (one of my previous posts):
"I have learned that: using Irfanview you can open the CR2 files from the 7D Mk II, available on the Imaging Resource site. Opened the high ISO and compared with 7D,70D and a6000. My current conclusion, as already posted, is as follows:
"OK... Here is what I SEE at ISO 6400:
a) vs 7D - clearly better;
b) vs 70D - marginally (but quite visibly) better;
c) vs a6000 - draw, because, indeed, there is LESS visible noise on the a6000 image but there is also visible loss of detail in some instances, too.
That's it for now. Temporary verdict: possible winner."

So, what do you think? Check that and please tell me about your subjective (or objective) opinion.

@ Joe Mayer

You are right. The 7D Mk2 is an improvement to the 7D. It does not have to be revolutionary. If one want a high performance camera they can get the 1DX but as usual the average joe would not want to pay for it. Professional requirements are also very different from amateur ones. The 7D Mk2 closes the gap further for those on a budget.

Good that Canon remain focus on the need of its target market.

Cook the RAW to cheat DXO. I prefer to see the picture noise and the detail rather then just the number from DXO.

"Oh look. That photograph must have been taken with a 3 generations old sensor".

Said exactly no one when looking at a professionally captured image, from any manufacturer.

I see a lot of commenters on Canon products complaining about the age of Canon's sensor technology. I'm not too sure what their current technology is, or what anyone else's is and frankly I don't give a monkey's cuss!

I have a 5DMKIII as my main camera and the results I get from it are great. I also have, and still use, an original 5D which also gives me great results. Its sensor is less than half the resolution of the MKIII, but for one thing it's a great backup camera, secondly I never had a client complain I was using an old camera with old tech inside, and thirdly I know inside and out what that camera will do in any given situation. Which is far more important than worrying about whether it has some technology which has no bearing on what my clients pay for my work.

I'm sure Sony, Nikon and all the others make lovely cameras, but I cannot express deeply enough how very little I care about sensor tech and how much I DO care about photography.

"next generation" - how is this next generation. It is like putting a racing stripe on an old cavalier and calling it a new model. New AF - great - good job Canon (no seriously). But all for nothing when they have the oldest, worst sensor tech in the business.

I agree with you, photomonkey. I shoot and have shot travel and nature photography for many years. If I want a lightweight good quality DSLR I use my 60D, which is still excellent by the
If I'm working 12 hours days at 10,000 feet I want a brick solid DSLR that will handle almost anything that comes at me or it.
Flip out screens/touch screens have little value if they can break or cannot be used with gloved fingers at 0 degrees.
Canon made this for serious pros that can't afford the weight, or don't want to invest their money in 1D series gear when they can buy better lenses.
Most of my investment is with L series lenses. The camera will always be secondary for most applications.

Thank you Canon for creating a serious tool for people who need to depend on their gear and NOT making a toy that wont last 5 YEARS.

Tim, I think the problem is that you actually care about taking photos, many here just care about looking like they are photographers.

Mkiii is indeed awesome if the person behind the viewfinder knows what they are doing :-)

I can just go buy a Hoodman Cinema Kit Pro for $150 and snap it right on to the 7DII and instantly have a HUGE and bright 720x480 EVF.

kangoo1707 - lag matters very much indeed. It's the difference between an oh so close but not quite image and a keeper.

Further to my post:

1. EVF makes me personally feel somewhat detached from the subject. With an OVF I can much better transform my imagination into the image I want.

No.2 is also not exhaustive: start-up and zoom in are only examples. Everything on the Sony reacts only after a shorter and sometimes longer lag. Even changing the aperture doesnt feel smooth. In addition, the camera feels very unfomtable with longer and heavier lenses. A 70-200 for example is downright a pain to use, except from a tripod.

As to the other mirrorless option: I actually need the high IQ because I print for galleries and agencies. I also do a lot of portriature, so FF is kind of a necessity. The only alternative to Sony would be Fuji. They indeed have great lenses. But the EVF is kind of the same and I dont like the rendition of foilage and greenery. Looks sort of plasticy in all usable raw converters.

I think mirrorless are not really a replacment of a DSLR and lack the universailty of usages.

His opinion is perfectly justified and not peculiar in any way. The Samsung NX1 looks to be a remarkable camera, which can compete with the D7100, XT1 and the 7D Mk II. One could easily argue that the NX1 is the most revolutionary camera at Photokina, which certainly can not be said about the Canon!

Yes,but you forgot to note one thing: NX2 will have 66 core processor and direct pizza button.

I really hope Samsung doesn't screw up NX 1 with a disastrous jpeg engine that turns everything into water-paintings (the first samples on the web looked like this).
If you have any connection to Samsung, please remind them this little (very important) thing!

It's common practice to use quotations when directly lifting content from the web. Otherwise it's called plagiarism.

On a more constructive note, let's see your sample images. I'm curious how they compare to Canon.

It's more than evident that the guy is a Samsung advertiser:

http://www.dpreview.com/members/9524664271/overview

No activity older than 1 week and all (and only) posts about the nx1, even in other forums.

Samsung is used to this, forums and blogs are full of this kind of ppl. It's easy to spot those, they simply will talk about how good Samsung nx is, negating all the defects and hoping that prices will never drop :-)

Your talking a load of BS
I'm a Pentax k3 user that see's the NX1 for what it is
A great camera that beats the 7DMk11 for features
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH Samsung
as a Pentax K3 camera user which also beats Canon aps-c
why are you telling lies I posted on the Pentax forum today and yesterday and 4days ago so ur talking CRAP
because your a Canon user no doubt??????????????

Don't be offensive. In the list of your messages, only 1 is on the Pentax forum and starts like this:

"I'm happy with my K3 my next camera will be the Samsung NX1,...."

So, as you see, not very Pentax related :-D

You are probably right, heck, not probably but sure :). I really hope They don't screw up NX 1. Anyway, 7D mark 2 is a very nice photographic camera and will make a lot of Canon shooters happy, I'm sure of it.

Hmmm... Two camera that I am bashing lately, what do I do...

OK seriously, from field reports the AF on the NX1 is just not going to cut it and even you can say that there are so much feature on the NX1, the name Samsung and the term pro camera just don't mix.

The AFC between NX1 and 7DMk2 i am guessing the 7D2 witll win but if I am picking these type of camera, I am still more likely to buy an A77 Mk2.

Agreed. I read several reports of terrible AF performance for nx1, when the subject moves towards/backwards (while the AF seems decent when the subject swings left/right on the same plane, but in that case...even manual focus could do!!!).

Previous nx cameras are pretty poor in tracking/continuous AF and I don't expect wonders here.

Besides, at 15fps the buffer fills in one second and takes a good while to clean, so it's a no-no for action/sport photography.

Last (bnl) the IQ of the pictures posted on several websites is really low. OK, it's beta fw, OK, it's jpg, but how mhuc better can it be in one month, when it's released??

At that price, I don't see anyone jumping on Samsung's bus, just to try!

We are living in the world where "Ecosystem" is the primary key to success. Give us lenses, Samsung! LENSES...

"is ready to capture life as it happens'

Technically, with an EVF it's capturing life after it happened.

Anyway, what sort of person writes "is ready to capture life as it happens". Troll.

Well, other brands have fanboys to do the same job, Sony in particular. Poor Samsung, everyone still regards them as fridge makers so they have so few fanboys they need to pay them.

(tongue in cheek)

One can put phase detectors to the edge of the sensor, but the question is whether they actually work when so far off center...
Samsung has no lenses comnpared to Canon and do any of their snesors have good IQ? Specs looks fantastic but I would hope people on here know better than buying based on specs.