"as many people will start out with it"

If you were talking about a rebel or the lower end M's I'd agree with you but this is an XXD. It's really hard to imagine someone plunking down nearly a grand for this and not picking up either the 24mm F2.8 or 50mm F1.8.

Well, that is why I said we'll be using other lenses on it. But if it's going to be sold as a kit, showing the capability of the kit would seem to be pretty important to me anyway. But we can of course agree to disagree.

Also, the differences between the Rebel T6s and T6i are pretty similar to the types of differences between the T7i and this 77D, so I'd argue that, price aside, it's close enough to a Rebel that plenty of people will buy the kit.

One possible answer is:

a) This [publication one] is a review of the kit

b) This [publication two] is a review of the camera body

...seeing as how they are separate products intended for separate audiences.

Just a thought.

Mmm.

"But if it's going to be sold as a kit, showing the capability of the kit would seem to be pretty important to me "

Is this why you highlight the aweful 16-50 on your sony reviews... NOT! 13 of 95 pictures in the A6300 review were with the kit, the rest with high end botique zeiss or G series glass.
If you were really concerned with showing how the kit performs you should apply the same logic to all brands.

I never got used to the standard zoom kit lenses. I had the Canon EF-S 18-55 IS II (sold it) than the STM version (sold it again)... I preferred to make photos with my RX100. Photos turned a bit better in terms of sharpness.
Now I have the EOS M with the EF-M 18-55 IS STM and the lens stays only in my camera bag. If I wanted flat images my iPhone 6S is just in my pants pocket. :)

Can the iPhone zoom from 18-55? How are the images "flat"?

Zoom range is too small. Flat images when everything is in focus

In focus = "flat"? I supposed if you've been brainwashed to believe something ridiculous like that. Artsy fartsy photography strikes again.

it is 30'c here

KP image look sharper and have more detail (but it is not completely fair since they use ACR converted image in KP and OOC JPEG in 77D), but as you can see, Pantex KP image is sharper and has more detail also no fatel color error right? 77D's image is very soft like a low-end DSLR and even switch in multiple lens it is still very soft, colors looks dry, no better than 750D. This DSLR should call 770D not 77D i think.

The 77D images aren't 'very soft' ,, what are you babbling about?

See image 26, taken with the STM 24mm. It's nice and sharp. The softness is coming from the Canon 18-135, which really isn't doing the camera any favors here and is clearly outclassed by the the DA 16-85.

I take you think I am boasting about my camera ability. Sorry but I most definitely am not. I am pointing out that using the automatic scene modes on the camera really doesn't highlight the camera's capability at all.

Trolling? Sorry I thought I was contributing to the discussion about this sample gallery. I firmly believe that when shooting samples that the photography should be highlighting the best a camera is capable of regardless of the make or model.

Just as some have suggested that better lenses would have shown how the camera might perform better, I am suggesting that using M,Tv,Av, and P settings to their full advantage would indicate the camera's true capabilities.

I find it sad that you are reducing my commentary to mere trolling.

I take that back. After reviewing the posts of both of you, it is clear that your singular purpose here is to criticize other posters whether there is a point to be made or not.

Pentax have been around since before you were born, if you are under 98 years old. The Pentax name (derived from PENTAprism refleX) was the first Japanese made camera to incorporate a pentaprism viewfinder and a reflex mirror system.

@avicenanw: The Pentax brand name is still around, but that brand name is now on its third owner.

Pantex is now a Ricoh company, but it is still using the Pantex name.

Ouch. And I am a Pentax owner. There are a few us around still. Oh well, at least we are not at the alpha level yet.The 77D looks nice except for the viewfinder. Photo quality is about the same for all apsc, except jpegs which I guess Canon is probably the best, still not huge differences. Then you are down features, ergo, support, apsc lens selection, tele lens selection etc. Canon is slicing and dicing the lineup to max out sales in a declining market, but really they are all on a sinking ship demand wise. Hopefully it will level out. I want to the remaining brands to stay alive.

Toyota has a lot of models too, because they have a pretty big market share.

But that doesn't prevent BMW from making nice cars too. Think of your Pentax as a BMW and you will feel a whole lot better.

My point was that "number of models" has a lot to do with market share and volume, and you could make a good case that Canon doesn't have too many models when you consider how many cameras they sell.

In any case, it's pretty hard to argue with success....

Agreed. Pentax and BMW ? Ha that is a little too generous. How about Subaru WRX?

Yes... perhaps BMW was a bad example. Subaru works better!

Fujifilm have a grid look

@maxnimo,
Frankly, I agree with you, but I did not want to be too severe : Canon fanboys are not far away... ;-)
( Note that I own an EOS 600D and considering the many added/improved features of the EOS 77D, I am considering an upgrade...if this softness is not inherent to the body)

"Canon fanboy" is a term that can be used interchangeably with "a majority of the world's photographers". That's why we are never far away.

:)

SOOC jpegs will almost always look soft on Canon APS-C (and even on some FF) because the jpeg sharpening settings favor large radius sharpening. Even when you read the 5DIII review here in DPreview, one of the cons is lack of fine detail in the jpegs.

Use a sharp lens and process it in RAW and the softness is gone.

OR with many of Canon's recent bodies, you can significantly alter the jpeg output by changing the sharpening "fineness". The first thing I did to my 80D was to change it to my liking (reducing fineness). You can bring back fine detail to jpegs that way.

However, it is true that it's never going to be as sharp as a body with no AA filter.

I would be 9/10 people would actually make focusing worse by twiddling with Micro AF adjustment. Especially if they shoot zooms.

jnd people like to vent their day to day frustrations in the comment section of this website by means of writting comments that are nonsensical.

Look on the studio comparison tool against a D5500 for example. Also not venting, just stating facts. It is called DP "Review" isn't it? DP themselves have addressed this in reviews. https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-80d-review/11

Almost forgot about this! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRQpueEvb-U&t=1123s

Absolutely hilarious! CallumG says that the JPEGs are "crap", claims that DPR have "addressed" this in reviews, and then links to a page containing the following statements:
When shooting in daylight using default JPEG settings, color is a tiny bit less saturated than in the 70D, specifically, in the yellows and reds... This, in turn, has an impact on skin tones, which end up being less flattering than we're used to from Canon... The reds are less muddy than we're seeing from the Nikon D7200, though, and less yellow-tinged than the Sony a6300's output.. When it comes to JPEG sharpening, the 80D's algorithm appears to be slightly more aggressive than the 70D, with sharpening halos showing up around the black text on the grey background.
Perhaps we have different definitions of "crap", but I hardly think that pointing out subtle differences in the default (notice) settings constitutes agreeing with the assessment as crap. And how about changing the JPEG settings if you don't like them?

OK, here's what they say about noise reduction:

"Noise reduction has very little impact at base ISO. But by ISO 400 some fine detail is being smoothed away. At 3200, noise is still being kept in check but at the cost of noticeable detail loss. By ISO 12,800, noise reduction is very aggressive and wipes out much more detail than the Nikon D7200 or the probable class leader, the Sony a6300. "

So, default level noise reduction removes a lot of detail at high ISO. Big deal. You can change the defaults. If you think that's crap, you're out of your mind. As for contributing, all you've contributed so far is crap (since you seem to be so fond of that word), so you could hardly contribute any less.

@George1958,
I do not agree. There are some affordable Canon prime lenses (24mm, 40mm and 50mm STM lenses for instance) that many EOS 77D buyers can buy, and that are better than the 18-135mm zoom lens used in this gallery. As a potential upgrader myself, I am interested to know what this body can do with them.

We'll be adding a bunch more images taken with those inexpensive primes as we work through the review - I agree that the kit zoom, while offering a good zoom range and super fast autofocus, isn't the sharpest option around.

"Some shots look like smartphone-soft"

I'd say they look more like plush teddy-bear soft.