A new rebel is coming. How will it be better than the last?

Oilman wrote:

thanks for the informative reply

First off - image quality: In good light there is very little difference in image quality between the 450 and the 7D. That is not true however, for the 5D3 along with the 24-70 F2.8 lens. Pictures are far sharper than with either the 450 or the 7D with a comparable lens –the 17-55mm F2.8.

agree, that's why my plan was to move to a Canon FF body instead of a better APS-C body; it gives much bigger jump in IQ. But I don't like the currently available Canon FF bodies, the 5D3 is not my taste.

But image quality is not all there is to the equation. I do a lot of bird shooting and the 450 is really not very suited for that task. The AF was painfully slow and the buffer filled after only a few shots in RAW (I never shoot JPGs) Out of 20 BIF shots, I was lucky to get one keeper. Using the 7D is like night and day. The AF is blindingly fast and I can shoot as many shots as I like on high speed continuous. Now I am deleting keepers because I have too many. That is not to say you can’t get good BIF shots with an xxD. Many people do. But the 7D makes it much easier.

I agree, one of my subjects is DIF (flying dragonflies) and the AF of my 450D is useless for that unless they are hovering. But I can get pretty good shots using MF, and I haven't seen anyone who gets good quality DIF shots using AF (with good percentage of keepers). They just move too erratic and the angular velocity is too fast for the tracking. Would love to try if the 7D2 is better than MF, but again not my taste of camera because of weight and lack of tilt screen.

Obviously, a faster camera would help me but 8 instead of 4 images would probably not be a major game changer - if I want really high speed it would make more sense to chose something like a Panasonic FZ1000 that can shoot 30 fps at 8 MP resolution (and accept the lower IQ).

The 7D is my preferred body for long range wildlife photography in good light. The 5D3 is for everything else. The low light performance of the 450 sucked. Maximum ISO was 1600. The 7D is not much better. You can shoot at higher ISO’s but the shots are very noisy.

Agree, and even the 7D2 isn't much better than 7D. With my 450D 800 ISO (RAW) is the max for decent quality, judging from 7D2 shots I have seen 1600 ISO is the max there, maybe a bit more with good noise removal software. Anything higher and IQ is starting to suffer.

Add in the better overall image a quality and having a full size sensor make a huge difference. Low light performance has improved with recent Rebels but it is nowhere near the performance of the 5D3

FF definitely is better, but of course there is a catch: you need a longer, heavier and far more expensive lens for the same result, when you are 'focal length limited'.

Weight for me is a non-issue. When I head out to take photos in the bush I always carry at the very least, a tripod, my 100-400mm and one of my wide angle lenses. I commonly bring my flash as well for HSS shots. If I am bird shooting, I also take my 500mm, which by itself weighs 8.5 pounds. Add in the usual filters, and any difference in weight between the bodies is noise level. I almost always use all of the lenses in my bag. After shooting birds all day. I like to put the wide angle on and shoot the sunset. I also get s lots of opportunities to use my walk-around lens during the day. You don’t play golf with only one club and I would rather hump a couple of extra pounds than miss a lifetime shot because the lens I need is sitting at home.

Those practical factors are important indeed. I travel mostly by bike or walking and cannot carry a lot of gear. A DSLR with a macro lens and a 300 or 400 mm prime is about the max I will take. My maximum for handheld shooting is 2-3kg, so even the extra weight on a 'tougher' body counts.

I am often surprised reading about all the photographers who shoot birds or other wildlife from their car window (are they from the US, traveling in special wildlife reservations or something? I cannot imagine any wildlife in my area that one could shoot from a car window ...).

I think that if you look at Canon’s advertising, you will see the Rebel is aimed at first time DSLR buyers. I know that many owners, such as yourself, are NOT beginners, but Canon really wants to sell you a 70D or better. All cameras are seeing declining sales. The cell-phone is replacing them. But I believe that the DSLR will remain as an important niche product for the reasons that you suggest. That product will become increasingly for enthusiasts. That makes it even more important that Canon sell you an upgrade. You ALREADY own a DSLR. As an enthusiast, it is more likely that you will upgrade than simply buy another Rebel. And you will get MFA in the upgrade.

Canon can take my money if they have a more powerful, light and compact DSLR (or maybe even an ILC, with the right features). Otherwise my money will probably end up with Sony or Nikon. I would hate to give up Canon lenses, but a Nikon D750 with that new 4/300VR and a few other lenses looks quite attractive to me ...