Canon EOS 7D Mark II: Real-world samples (beta)

While I have two Sony camera both A7 and Nex 7, dad have two both Nex 5n and Cybershot RX1, all of AF are inferior to Canon. I can prove that my ex Canon camera all 10D, 50D, 7D, my dad had 5D MKII and 400D. AF were much better in Canon.

Oct 7, 2014permalink

Just another Canon shooter

And these Canon 7D MKII Camera is not yet release to public and not yet final production camera to review properly so your comment about DR is dimissed here. Sorry.

Oct 7, 2014permalink

JPEG only shooters have many pictures styles to choose from and are not limited in DR. Lower DR with Canon is a concern for RAW shooters who need that extra DR.

Oct 7, 2014permalink

I am amazed that Canon sample is terrible compare to recently they just put up sample of Panasonic LX100 and it looks way much better! Whats the goes with absolutely pathetic sample shot of Canon 7D MKII Please explain!

Oct 4, 2014permalink

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

http://www.techradar.com/au/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/digital-slrs-hybrids/canon-7d-mark-ii-1264977/review/4#articleContent < This is a LOT better sample to compare for Canon 7D MKII!

Oct 4, 2014permalink

Marksphoto

I will be waiting for the Foveon analog, you can get the 5d mk2 for less than this new camera with outdated sensor technology.

What was all the fuss about patenting the new sensor technology and giving us an insignificant so called upgrade?
Canon, I am not impressed....
No Thank you!

Oct 3, 2014*permalink

Holger Drallmeyer

Foveon analog??? me let that sit for a while. The internet inspires a whole lot of nonsense terminology these days.

Oct 4, 2014permalink

Nukunukoo

Foveon Analog? Is that what they call a roll of film these days?

Oct 5, 2014permalink

Holger Drallmeyer

@Nukunukoo probably. Technically speaking the term analog doesn't refer to photography at all. It's been adapted over the years mainly by the Lomo movement.
It's more a term that's used in Acoustics but whatever :)

Oct 5, 2014permalink

autochrome

I'll be waiting for the price to drop, the camera isn't that bad judging from the specifications and files you can find around, but it's seriously overpriced for obsolete sensor technology it includes. Give it a year or two and expect the body to be at 800USd or so. It won't be the success the original 7D was, not by a long shot. Circumstances have changed, the marketplace has changed, and specially the user's expectations have increased leaving Canon unable to fulfill with their current products.

Oct 7, 2014*permalink

Marksphoto

а смысл, качество картинки одно и тоже, думал уже продавать свое оборудование на ибэе в случае кэнон решиться перейти на новый тип матрицы, видимо решили снять очередной куш, многие поведуться на незначительный апгрейд в смысле скорости фокуса, большинству это ненужно.

Я лично намерен ждать аналога матрицы Фовеон!

Oct 3, 2014permalink

Peter Gurdes

head over to :

and compare the 18MP sensor performace of the 600D to the 7D MK2 performance at ISO100.

then tell me if you see a noticable difference.
there is none!

so at LOW ISO nothing happend at canon for over 5 years.

Oct 3, 2014*permalink

Today had a good look outside without camera, this is pure blue skies I am looking with my own eyes. Not grey skies with no clouds and no haze. Those photos have problem with blue skies rendering.

Oct 3, 2014permalink

http://mattgranger.com/7d2

If you want to see samples from the 7D mkII, Matt Granger managed to get some nice examples of the IQ from the 7D mkII here:

One further note: These galleries are called "samples" galleries for a reason. They aren't supposed to be fully edited, ready for sale or exhibition images. They are examples of base photos shot with the camera. So know that they weren't shot in RAW and then converted, and there probably wasn't a $2000 piece of glass hanging off the end of it. So judging the camera based on a few sample images is pointless and a waste of time.

Oct 2, 2014permalink

So why DPREVIEW are posting these sample photos!!??

Oct 2, 2014*permalink

Because they are samples. If you look through all the other Camera reviews/previews, all of the galleries are samples. The camera hasn't shipped yet, so you aren't going to see professional photographers out there making images with it. Also, when they release a preview people are always clammoring for sample images. It's about demand. The public wants to see test shots. So here they are. :-)

Oct 2, 2014permalink

OK hope for the best....will wait for those professional who will make acceptable pictures in high ISO (specially low light shots).

Oct 3, 2014permalink

shutterbud

So, to test the new semi-pro sports camera which has been anticipated for yers, you go out on a sunny day and take portraits and landscape shots?
Pointless gallery, almost certainly designed to side-step the fact that the sensor is substandard compared to modern alternatives.
Can DPR please get their act together?

Oct 2, 2014permalink

Why does everyone sing the "sensor" song? You see a few photos in a gallery and suddenly the sensor is substandard? Have you even shot with the camera yet? Took photos with it? I'm going to guess "no." So how can we judge the sensor based on a few Jpegs in a photo gallery?

Oct 2, 2014permalink

shutterbud

You are absolutely correct. There is no point in a JPG gallery. Or DXO Mark.Or any relevance in anyone saying anything at all to anyone about any camera. Everyone should just buy the 7DII, no matter what anyone says, just, well just because. And if they don't like it, well they're obviously stupid.
Many Canonistas refuse to get it. They are on a mission of blindness. The number of excuses, half-truths and ir-relevant truisms spouted on a regular basis on the Canon forum to hide simple fact is absolutely ridiculous! Canon are NOTICEABLY behind in image quality! End of story!

Oct 2, 2014permalink

Well, first of all you are over reacting. My point was that everywhere you go all you hear is whining about the sensor, as if that is the only part of a camera that matters.

Take a look around at various photographers, pro or otherwise and see just how many of those people couldn't care less about the sensor. They look at whether the camera can deliver the goods that they need and then build their glass collection around it. They don't quibble over stupid details like DxO scores and sample photos from photo review sites.

If you want to judge the camera based on its sensor then that is your prerogative. For the thousands, or hundreds of thousands of Canon shooters that turn out exceptional images and continue to buy Canon, I would say that those people probably couldn't care less about the sensor either.

If you are a sensor nut, then buy the camera with the best sensor. You are your own person. You buy based on what you need and want. So go buy the world's best sensor.

Oct 2, 2014permalink

shutterbud

Talk about a lost cause!
"Sensor nut"?
Next you'll be talking about Pseudo Science that offers no benefits to a good Christian....on the internet!

Oct 2, 2014permalink

AbrasiveReducer

I think shutterbud is mostly correct. jpg galleries would be useful anywhere except DPR, where people are only interested in the absolute best a new camera is capable of. Nothing wrong with jpgs, and giants like Ken Rockwell prefer them over uncompressed data, but they're still jpgs.

As far as I can tell, the only practical use for DxO data is so that the owner of the product that scores 91 instead of 87 can tell himself he's got the best, even if the difference isn't readily visible.
I own a lot of Canon and some Nikon and readily admit the Nikon sensors are better. But the differences in images are much smaller than the differences in DxO ratings. If this wasn't the case, nobody would be using Canon.

Oct 3, 2014permalink

Marcelobtp

WOW, guys, if they are posting photos is so obvious that what matters is the sensor. when they post the entire review we will have an aproach about to the other things that makes a camera better than the other.
The image quality has an obvious importance and can't be downgraded for what it is, you buy an camera fundamentaly to take a good picture with quality.
I just don't think that sample pictures are representative, is like a "Petisco" to antecipate the main dish.

Oct 16, 2014permalink

Canon JPEG Algorithm is truly awful! Look at blue skies on a crystal clear day with no haze or so, it just look like almost grey instead of true blue skies. I think Beta is the cause. Canon need to fine tune it. Skin tone is fine and green foliage looks fine. It just the skies are the problem.

Oct 2, 2014permalink

jmajors

It has nothing to do with JPG algorithm.

Oct 2, 2014permalink

Yeah it does. Canon removes too much amount of blue off that photos to make it look so hazy skies and not much saturation of blue. Its a poor processing unfortunately when exporting to JPEG through their algorithm. Its only beta atm. Most other comment here above are not happy with this sample cos it is truly awful samples. My older Canon camera can do a lot better with landscape than that sample did.

Oct 3, 2014permalink

Stu 5

Oh dear you still don't get it. The colour does not have anything to do with the jpeg exporting.

Oct 3, 2014permalink

Try look at Pentax, Sony and others that renders blue skies much better through their own JPEG engine.

Oct 3, 2014permalink

Bruce ShrewsburyMA

naththo: I strongly disagree with you comment. The skies look like they were captured on a fairly typical day. These are straight off the camera JPEG samples. You can easily generate that vibrant, over saturated, Kodachrome look in post processing. Unless you have side-by-side samples from different cameras taken at the same time or under the same conditions (as dpreview does in their lab tests), its impossible to evaluate the sensor performance in either JPEG or RAW

Oct 4, 2014permalink

Yeah well in real life I have seen blue skies better than what those photos were taken. I have seen better sample of Canon 7D MKII elsewhere than here.

Oct 4, 2014permalink

Kevin DiOssi

I haven't shot a JPEG in over 5 years on any SLR I own, but I remember the camera taking visual liberties on the image its capturing. With a little tweaking to saturation and contrast within "Picture Style," I'm sure there wouldn't be any issue with the flatness of these images. These actually look a lot like RAW files after import. Canon seems to be very conservative with their out-of-the-box settings on all cameras and DPReview is notorious for providing good out-of-the-box examples.

My first observation to the sample shots was to go straight to the high ISO samples. I like what I see so far, and I think the RAW files will be even more fun to see. Other samples I've seen show good, usable results up to 6400 in jpeg.

Second, I noticed the excellent dynamic range in the "window" image. Lighting outside is obviously harsh, but there is detail information all across the image. Promising, but still not the greatest thing since sliced bread. Solid improvement though.

Oct 2, 2014permalink

Zigadiboom

Looks like Dpreview have made full use of Mark II's 65 point AF when taking these shots.

These samples is a bit like test driving a Ferrari in a straight line at 60kmh and then commenting on its performance and handling.

Oct 2, 2014permalink

Rishi Sanyal

But we're not commenting on its performance and handling in this gallery...

Oct 3, 2014permalink

HdwJunkie

The reason I own a 7D 1 is for its (relatively affordable) fast autofocus and peak frame rate. Is the beta not up to doing action photography yet? IOW, I was disappointed the sample gallery included no action shots.

Oct 2, 2014*permalink

bawbaw

I'm reading the comments here and I'd like to point out some simple points about pro range bodies.

1: Pro's understand how and when to use exposure comp as meters are never perfect... also with CMOS overexposure is less of a problem Canon is actually making up for muddy shadows pulling from bad data in underexposed areas. So complaining an algorithm is off when shooting directly into the sun is stupid.

2: Most people who buy a pro body find this interesting think called focus adjust. It means you take some time to use your expensive lens on your expensive body and match the 2 together. It's called workflow. Google can assist here.

3: Real world I have found in the market for this camera and for the actual intended use i.e sports and high speed applications is not taking pictures of miniatures backlit on a beach or pointing the camera into the sun. Real-world could replaced with " I had to post some stuff and left it on auto for a weekend"
Defeating many peoples hard work.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

bawbaw

I've used a D3s extensively and if I didn't calibrate a lens to the body, focus could be off a lot. This was with lenses that cost 4 figures to ancient manual lenses. If I pointed it into the sun and had area focus on it would overexpose as the algorithms that Nikon started with in the 80's and have persisted always take the dominant meter exception as the point of focus and expose for that, so therefore in most of these shots the metering is bang on for the dominant features.

Finally as a long time AP reader and having seen Barney's photos in the past in the print magazine it's disappointing to see that this has been allowed to be undertaken in this state, as I vividly remember an article on manual Nikkor lenses on an 35mm F and the virtues of learning how to utilise a meter correctly. Therefore, treating a camera with guide price of £1599 as a compact and demonstrating it in this way has really put me off ever treating what was once a very reputable photo journalist with any trust.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

@bawbaw - do you not think this might be something of an overreation...? You're also making a lot of assumptions here about how I used the camera. A couple of frames look a bit too bright for you, and this has eroded your trust in me entirely?

The only frame where the brightness verges into overexposure (in my opinion) is the image of the boat. I deliberately left this in to demonstrate the tendency of the 7D II to deliver rather PowerShot-ish exposures in bright conditions. It looked fine on the camera (on a very sunny day) but is rather too bright when viewed on a computer. The Raw file will (I suspect) be absolutely fine, with -1/3EV adjustment.

The other bright-ish frames (the miniature dinosaur and the rose) were deliberately brightened using exposure compensation to enhance detail in the shadows/midtones. They were shot in exceptionally bright, stark late summer sunshine. I could have shot everything in AEB mode and picked the best shot but what would you have learned?

Oct 2, 2014permalink

@Barney,

If Canon Evaluative Metering logic, without EC, has been used for these exposures (as it has been my experience with a 300D a 350D a 30D a 1DkMIII and the current 1DMkIV and EOSM2) , then the following samples are overexposed:

#2, #5, #7, #15, #19, #21, #24, #29, #33, #35 and #45.

As I saw them, I assumed the AE metering in this particular camera was off.

If, as you now inform us, you elected to editorially-induce an overexposure in some of the shots, you should have mentioned your option, together with the reasons why, in the introduction.

Failing to do so was a poor service to both the camera model and your readers.

In any case, thank you for getting and posting these.

Oct 3, 2014*permalink

It is probably a problem of this particular unit but I noticed a definite tendency to overexpose.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

It tends to happen when the settings aren't right. I could overexpose an image right now. Doesn't mean my camera is defective. :-)

Oct 2, 2014permalink

Ah, Scorehound...the unbearable lightness of the obvious...

Actually, when someone as experienced as DPR staff are come out with a series of overexposed shots like these it strongly indicates that that particular camera (not the model, mind you) has the exposure metering biased as such.

It is quite common in serial-production cameras and it is the reason why, in addition to the AMFA, Canon has recently introduced AE Microadjustment for their top cameras (don't know if the 7DII features it).

Oct 2, 2014permalink

I look at the samples and I do not see where this camera overexposes... unless you are talking about the shots pointing directly at the sun or at brightly lit scenes. Again, you are judging a camera based on trivial factors that most (and I do mean most) people wouldn't care about. These are sample shots, Jpeg right out of camera with no processing. Were you expecting Ansel Adams quality right out of the box?

Oct 2, 2014permalink

If you look at the samples and can not see the several that are overexposed, I would suggest you calibrate your monitor.

Alternatively and irrespectively of monitor calibration, you can download originals like, for instance, samples #2, #5 or #15 (just to reference 3 of them) open them up in PS, select "Levels" and see graphic and live proof of the overexposure.

...and no, I wouldn't expect "Ansel Adams quality out of the box" (...whatever that may be...). I just expect good metering and the correspondent non-overexposure as in most sample galleries, from most camera, from any brand right here, in DPR.

Oct 2, 2014*permalink

My monitor doesn't need to be calibrated, but thanks for the suggestion. Maybe some people just aren't as picky. Everyone is different. I see no problems with the images as they are, knowing that no real effort was put into making the images look their best. If the samples bother you, then do not buy the camera. Problem solved. :-)

Oct 2, 2014permalink

It WAS solved.

You were the one who elected replying to a commentary denying matter of fact.

As for "pickyness", if it was only to confirm that images were "generally OK" there would be no need for these samples galleries - much less commentaries, even less contradictory commentaries - because, in our day and age and no matter which camera, they generally are.

Oct 2, 2014*permalink

In my monitor I also noticed some pictures are overexposed.

Oct 3, 2014permalink

As per my observation,all the high ISO (1600+) shots have higher grains than older 60D and 6D (full frame),then what is the logic behind much hyped DIGIC 6 processor......a big question mark for Canon R&D.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

The processor has nothing to do with the grain in images, that would be the sensor. That is one of the big reasons why people complain about crop sensors and how inferior they are to FF - noise levels in High ISO situations. (total BS BTW)

The processor(s) in this camera allow you to have a very large buffer and excellent speed and power that the 7D series is known for. :-)

Oct 2, 2014permalink

DStudio

I'd say run - don't walk - away from that 18-135 if you want high IQ.

OTOH, that 16-35/4 looks like it may be pretty good - I'd like to see more.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

Hibiscusbloom

A better methodology is needed not random shots. I know it's easier to do it this way but it's difficult to assess the IQ of the sensor at a glance. Also, efforts should be put into trying out the AF capability. It's a website that attracts over one billion viewers, surely more resources should be incorporated into this department.

Oct 1, 2014*permalink

Over one billion viewers? I mean... that would be lovely, and I'm sure it's accurate over a certain period of time, but where are you getting that figure?

And you know this gallery was produced over a weekend, right? We have also been working with sports photographers and will share the results of that collaboration soon.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

Hibiscusbloom

I mean since the website was founded by PHIL in 1998, until it was sold to Amazon 2007, it must have well over a billion visitors. Reports published indicate an average of seven million visitors every month. True, a weekend is not a long time but enough to do a lot. Anyway, look forward to the forth coming action shots. Appreciate your efforts.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

JackM

Yeah, if you want "better methodology", go see (or wait for) the-digital-picture.com or imaging-resource.com, or wait for the dpr review if you want to stare at test charts and test still-lifes. These real-life samples (not test shots) are fun, even if several are overexposed or misfocused. It's a nice tease to see the camera actually being *used*. Looking forward to that AF test.

Oct 1, 2014*permalink

@ JackM - which are you seeing as misfocused? (genuinely interested).

Oct 1, 2014permalink

EcoPix

Well the grain here is a big improvement over my old 7D. Maybe there was something wrong with mine, but it forced me to stay with Nikon DX. This camera is a viable alternative to the D400!

Oct 1, 2014permalink

robmanueb

Urm yes, about that D400...

Oct 1, 2014permalink

sstinger

Nothing special. This camera was born for sports and flying bird shooting not for the still! BTW the in-camera JPG is not so good.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

fatdeeman

The first sample has some rather noisy areas considering it's iso 100, particularly in the vicinity of the model's earring.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Akpinxit

note to myself : MK2 out-of-camera JPGs are awful , shoot only in RAW

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Canon2

I try to answer the xiox8-questions:
1. As I understand it when you use spot metering, the camera focus firstly and then just before the picture is taken the light is messured around the AF point that was chosen. Either you chosed it or the camera did.
2. Your 400 mm wont use the center AF point in double cross mode, but in cross mode along with many other cross type AF ponits. Double cross neads 2.8.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Thanks for your answers. I subsequently saw "Paradoxically, spot metering is only from the center sensor; AF-point linked spot metering isn't there." from Ken Rockwell review, which is what I thought. I guess that may be ok for me since I usually have the bird in the center of the shot when not BIF. Cropping a little after the fact can give the desired composition.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Canon2

After I read your comments to my answers I doublechecked the 7 D Mark II manual, and I think Ken is right after all. AF linked spot metering does not seem to be there, although I have seen it mentioned in magazins and at internet sites. Just a rumour obviously :-(

Sep 30, 2014permalink

No worries...Thanks for replying and answering my focus question

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Dave Oddie

Spot metering means taking a meter reading from the centre of the frame. In true spot metering the "spot" will be 1% of the frame though many manufacturers who offer it have used up to say 5%. Some cameras have the spot metering circle etched into the viewfinder.

What it should never do is wander off and follow the focus point to elsewhere in the frame. That is NOT spot metering.

Wide area metering often works like that in that if you set wide area metering the camera will often link the metering to the focus point it chooses. Again, this is NOT spot metering.

If Ken Rockwell thinks it is a paradox the spot metering is only from the center sensor and "AF-point linked spot metering isn't there" just means he doesn't know what he is talking about or at the very least has his terminology totally screwed up.

If he means the metering is not linked to the focus point when wide area metering is selected then he describes this very poorly confusing it with spot metering.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

repdetect

"Spot metering means taking a meter reading from the centre of the frame."
Centre only? Says who?... besides you?

A spot is a spot no matter where it is in the frame.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

So three things I am interested in understanding before making the decision to buy.

1. As I understand it the spot metering does not use the actual chosen AF point? How would that work with birds?
2. I have a 400mm f5.6 lens and I noticed that some of the increased AF function in the center requires an f2.8 lens to be utilized. Is this going to neutralize the AF improvements for me?
3. I have read that the sensor is a derivative of the 70D which does not have stellar noise characteristics, so I want to see a DXO review. Although I saw a Matt Granger review that sounded favorable regards noise.

Any comments on the above would be appreciated.

Thanks

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Dave Oddie

You would never use spot metering with birds (in flight that is).

It does what it says on the tin and meters from the centre spot of the frame.

So with a bird in flight you might miss the bird with the spot and so end up exposing for the sky.

You typically use it on more static subjects in difficult lighting situations that may fool the metering. For example a back lit portrait you can spot meter the face to determine the correct exposure for the face locking the spot reading with the AEL button then recomposing.

Or you use it to take several readings from around the scene and average them out avoiding extreme lighting (some Oly camera let you do this).

There is nothing deficient here as regards the way the spot metering works. It is doing exactly as it should, metering from the centre spot always.

It could be argued with today's sophisticated exposure metering there is less need for it (and even less again if your camera has an EVF where what you see is what you get).

Oct 1, 2014permalink

Terminology sometimes gets in the way...What I meant was other camera manufacturers allow you to link the metering to the chosen AF point as "the spot/point of interest". This camera appears not to have done this. Yes, it is for perched birds not BIF that I had the concern. Having said that a work around I suppose would be to use the center point only and just crop to your desired composition. It is just good to know. The bigger concern is sensor noise since it is reported as a 70D derivative and that is way to early to know.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

Canon2

Are the gallery pictures JPEGs straight out of the camera? Or RAW-files converted to JPEG in camera? In computer? Picture style Standard? Sharpness zero? No PP what so ever? If we don't know basic data other then lens used and ISO settings, the pictures really tell you nothing about what the camera can do. Sorry guys if the information is there, and I just missed it.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

As always with our sample galleries these are out of camera JPEGs at default settings unless otherwise noted.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

BigBen08

Please excuse my ignorance, but why can't raw files be made available, say via dropbox?

Oct 2, 2014permalink

There's no 3rd-party raw support at present, so we're not posting images converted from Raw and I'm not comfortable making original files available from a beta sample camera. Different story once we get a final shipping sample.

Oct 2, 2014permalink

toni2

I said "perhaps better reflex aps-c camera, and worst aps-c sensor". And thats the fact. At iso 3200, it's better than 70d. But at iso 100 is as poor as 70d. That's all.
7dmk2 only for sports and nature? That's the way to say: this camera hasn't the image quality level of others manufacturers aps-c sensors. All this time waiting for that??

Sep 30, 2014permalink

mosc

Does anybody see any actually difference here over a 70D in those pictures? Like $800 (+80%) difference? Or am I supposed to laugh at people who think 7FPS is useful, they should demand at least 10FPS?

$800 for an autofocus array that it doesn't even need to use anymore with that OSPDAF they're hyping?

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

///M

can we get some samples of subjects in motion, as in, sports or nature that would highlight the new AF system's tracking, etc compared to the 1DX AF system?? Please? Who needs the new AF for static subjects??

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Alcantariya13yum

You need to read down, Barney responded to that.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

km25

I have looked at the photos, I think exposure and other setting would solve many of the dull look of some of the photos. The images of the female to be very good, skin tone and imaging look very natural. In APS-C, I feel this is going to nice camera in DSLR group. For Canon, this camera looks like a winner.

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

JackM

I usually try not to jump on the dogpile of whiners bashing DPR, but you really couldn't have had someone run towards the camera to test the groundbreaking AF just a little? You're aware that's the camera's #1 feature, right?

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Every whiner would just say that their entry level DSLR can do that as well (and they really should especially with center point). My 6D has really crap AF on paper but it will nail a runner with its 200mm f2.8 easy wide open.

I would trust DPReview's judgment that they will actually use a sports photographer to test it later...seems like the common sense thing to me. Do we really need another Tony Northrup, how well do I track my wife's face walking to me test? However I think having someone running in the water with somewhat wet clothing doesn't sound like a bad idea. We all want to see Barney do the baywatch run.

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

SETI

I'm a Canon user. I'll say that 75% of pictures are dull. Now blame me

Sep 30, 2014permalink

SulfurousBeast

Me too, long time Canon user, is it the atmospheric haze, but again Canon semi pro, pro DSLR colors were always conservative (true to real) compared to Olympus or Fuji etc.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

John _ Finn

75% of pictures in general or 75% of the beta samples? If the former, I think you are way off the mark - I would say that 99.99% of photos are not merely dull, they are downright rubbish. If the latter, don't judge jpeg samples straight out of this or any other camera. Post processing is required to make them shine. And, of course, the vast majority of users of this camera will invariably be shooting in raw mode and not jpeg thus significantly raising the quality quotient.

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

57even

It's quite hard to tell anything from these samples except that the kit lens is not very sharp and/or the default JPEG processing is not very sharp either.

But I don't think it says all that much about the camera itself. Have to wait for the RAW samples.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Peter Gurdes

The images look not better than the ones from my 600 euro Sony a6000.

I guess this is a DSLR for a niche of photographers.
A niche that is getting smaller and smaller.

I could see the usual prosumer buy the old 7D but there are so many more alternatives these days, for those who don´t need an action camera.

Why should someone who is not into fast action or birding buy the 7D MK2?
Don´t get me wrong the 7D MK2 is great for action... but it seem that DSLR of this kind have a way smaller market these days.

The stagnating image quality, compared to the 70D, does not leave me excited for this camera.

The 7D MK2 was rumored to be THE VIDEO dslr... but this is a disappointment for videographer.

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

brownie314

"Why should someone who is not into fast action or birding buy the 7D MK2?"
Answer - they would not. If you don't need the super advanced AF there is no case for this camera.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Achimogata

Good looking for me, even if some photos seem a bit overexposed.

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

SeeRoy

The one at the head of this page seems to have been exposed to favour the window frame...
I haven't looked at any others since just about every camera produced in the last few years is capable of outputting files that are more than adequate - if used competently. The whole subject of photographic hardware is becoming a huge bore.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Achimogata

You are right. Photography is not counting pixels

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Joe Dyer

The 7D and 7DII are not general purpose cameras they are sports cameras. The extra 2 stops of usable iso will make all the difference to me. I shoot show jumping in all weather and indoors.

Flicker detection will be a great feature indoors.

All cross point AF will also improve focus accuracy in portrait mode.

10 frames per second also welcome and impressive

Full frame is not a sports option for me as I would need to migrate to a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 3.4 Kg lens instead of the Canon 70-200 f/2.8
I have a 7DII on pre-order

If you don't need weather sealing / pro body build and frame rate and near 1DX autofocus a 70D will do the job at 50% of the cost

I use a 6D for all non action work and indeed the IQ is much better

From the previous comment the Samsung NX1 does look like a great camera

I won't get into any Canon, Nikon etc. arguments lets face it, we are blessed with an array of fantastic cameras from all these manufacturers.

Shoot and be happy

Sep 30, 2014permalink

tom1234567

images are Nothing special
Samsung NX1 will be a better camera in my opinion,
with 4kvideo plus many more enhancements
Canon needs to get there act together

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

sandy b

So can you show me where the sample pictures from the NX1 are, I would love to compare them.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Karl Gnter Wnsch

No lenses, no system! Samsung has a long long long way to go before they could become viable as a competition to the 7DII - by that time we will probably have the 7D Mark IV...

Sep 30, 2014permalink

JRFlorendo

It is just a matter of time before Shamsung gets caught mimicking one of its competitors again. EVF is NOT meant for sports/wildlife photography, not yet.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Alcantariya13yum

Oh, dont forget a camera needs to be able to focus the subject too...nx1..not

Oct 1, 2014permalink

JRFlorendo

Canon's old sensor tech will once again OUTSELL Sony sensors. Too bad Sony does not have the length and girth of the EF system. . . . Just cute little lens line up, ha ha ha, CUTE!

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Peter Gurdes

actually the 70D sensor is an improvement over the old 18MP sensors. so is th 7D MK2 sensor.

the shadow banding is gone with the 70D sensor.
one of my main complains.

thought sonys ability to push the shadow is still better.
canon has to work on DR and low iso performance... i can agree to that.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Abel89er

As if how many bodies canon sells made you a better photographer or made your picks better ;)

Have a nice day

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Maverickmii

thats because he is running out of arguments as far as IQ concerns so lets use that sales figure thing. Funny:-)

Oct 1, 2014permalink

hi Barney

thanks for the photos , really

i would really see photos taken with medium quality EF lenses

the 24-70 2.8 II is amazing sharp , i haven't tried the new 16-35 f4 II

but would really interesting see how the sensor work with medium quality EF lenses like the 17-40 or 24-105

will be added in the future?
thanks

Sep 30, 2014permalink

maboleth

As I already said, noise in 7D II looks more like a film grain, which is very very nice. There's no banding in the deep shadows. And these are JPEGs, the possibilities of the RAW will be endless.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

KW Phua

Canon Jpeg is one of the best. Not over balance quite well between details and NR. Like the ISO12800_030A922b.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

KW Phua

Sorry. Typo.
Overall balance quite well between details and NR. I like the ISO12800_030A922b.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Hank3152

Why do most of the lake scenes appear overexposed, especially 030A9552 ?

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Achimogata

I agree with this.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

So many bashers...first of all does anyone realize that a EF lens that can shoot sharp pictures on a 20MP 1.6 crop is a pretty strong endorsement that the affordable 16-35 F4L IS will handle future FF sensors for years to come? Second Canon jpegs since recent DIGIC processors have long moved over to a more analog look. People who made up the term 'pixel level detail' hate this look and prefer an ACR rendering. Canon's default is more like Capture One which is also more analog looking and less about seeing individual pixels and more about the picture. Finally the 18-135 kit lens is doing its job...anyone pixel peep the Pentax 18-135? Nikon's new 18-140 is good too, but most likely the STM focuses rather quickly, and is pretty much comparable with the Nikon. How many camera's will give you better jpegs in backlit shadow heavy scenes anyhow? Your iPhone? Prove it. These comments are just a case study of confirmation bias due to DxOMark scores. Lets see Nikon's 16-35 shot on crop

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

BTW please compare your smartphone to this picture as well - http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/2531668/?inAlbum=nikon-d7100-review-samples
According to DxOMark that picture is 2x better.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

quote :"Canon's default is more like Capture One which is also more analog
looking and less about seeing individual pixels and more about the picture."

are you talking about canon digital professional , capture one and dxo that give images more analog look?

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

I've tried DPP and Capture One, but not DxOMark so can't comment on the latter. DPP renders similar to OOC recent Canon DIGIC. The strength of this type of rendering is shown on
7DII_beta_ISO100_030A9560 http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/3034862/7dii_beta_iso100_030a9560?inalbum=canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-beta-real-world-samples

Plenty of detail...we are talking about a super zoom that isn't that fast here providing rather smooth transition from areas of focus, to background blur. Thanks in part due to this rendering that people hate because it goes against the pixel grain they so desire.

Here is a K-3 with its kit zoom btw -
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/2744911/imgp0089?inalbum=pentax-k-3-samples-gallery

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

Quote :"I've tried DPP and Capture One, but not DxOMark so can't comment on the latter."

hi
i can see what do you mean

about dpp do notice differents between v4 and v3?
i can't use v4 because i own a 5d mark 2 , so i can't even try

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Yes I hope Canon lets DPP4 work with all its camera's. There is an astounding difference in tonal curve manipulation and the UI/ease of doing so as well as shadow and highlight protection. It is comparable to LR in ease of use and power IMO and a big step above DPP 3.0. DPP 4.0 also does lens optimization without bloating your RAW files and is a huge improvement in speed and usability. I am having fun with Capture One as well. Capture NX-D makes me want to throw my laptop against the wall however.

Sep 30, 2014*permalink

why , can you use capture nx-d with canon raw files?

Oct 1, 2014*permalink

No you cannot, I am talking about in general as I am playing with not only different software, but different cameras.

Oct 1, 2014permalink

eyeport

i actually am quite happy with the IQ based on these sample photos. my 1dx might do a bit better but given the 1.6x crop factor, 7D2 is a killer camera for sports and wildlife.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

ok my mistake, I see there are some high iso samples. Thanks and my apologies for my misguided comment earlier!

Sep 30, 2014permalink

No problem, our galleries can be a little unintuitive.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Greg VdB

@Barney: maybe (probably...) this has been suggested before, but wouldn't it be a helpfull feature if one could filter the galleries based on settings recorded in the exif?

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Yessssss... I'd love to add that feature. It's on the list.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

I had a look at some 'original' size images at max magnification, which I presume would be at 100%

Images have that typical 'mushy' and unsharp look of Canon's default jpeg processing. Some edges have a weird looking double line...

I am not really sure what the point of these images are and what insights we can get from them re Canons 'new and improved' sensor....

I know that the files can look much better but for that we need Raw and it's not available yet

Could our esteemed reviewers not have tweaked the jpegs a bit in post? Or is this the best they can do?

Sep 30, 2014permalink

We never tweak JPEGs in post. But we will post adjusted Raw files once we have robust support for the files.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

ok I look forward to some RAWs now that DPP has been updated. When you say adjusted RAW what do you mean?

Sep 30, 2014permalink

I would have thought that the samples will include some high iso images...after all that's what we are all waiting to see - has the noise at high iso been improved or not? These images really don't tell us much.....all cameras perform pretty similar at 100iso, and that lens...is that the best we could do? And why shoot it wide open at all? Are these images supposed to show us the lens quality or the image quality? Come on Barney sharpen that pencil a bit more!

Sep 30, 2014permalink

There are several high ISO images in this gallery. And I shot with two lenses - the (kit) 18-135mm and the new 16-35mm F4.

Sep 30, 2014permalink

George Veltchev

here’s a compilation of the best selling DSLRs based on Amazon Reports, where Canon has managed to convince the users with 11 models, Nikon 4, Pentax 1 and Sony with a single model .... Long live 7D MarkII ...the rest is just a fudge.

1 Canon EOS Rebel T3i
2 Nikon D3100
3 Canon EOS Rebel T2i
4 Canon EOS Rebel T3
5 Canon EOS Rebel T1i
6 Nikon D5100
7 Canon EOS 60D
8 Nikon D7000
9 Canon Rebel XS
10 Nikon D3000
11 Pentax K-5
12 Canon Digital Rebel XTi
13 Canon Digital Rebel XT
14 Canon EOS 7D
15 Canon Digital Rebel XSi
16 Canon EOS 5D Mark II
17 Sony Alpha SLTA33L

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Gasp! My 6d is not on the list! should I sell it?

Sep 30, 2014permalink

Zeisschen

from which 2 Canon are actual cameras and the rest toys that are only every used with the kit lens??

Sep 30, 2014permalink