Read the full press release at Canon announces EOS 7D Mark II at DV Info Net (http://www.dvinfo.net/news/canon-announces-eos-7d-mark-ii-digital-slr-camera.html)


Pre-order link via B&H is here:

Canon 7D Mark II EOS DSLR Camera (Canon 7D Mark II Body) 9128B002 B&H Photo

Not that it was expected to have 4k, but the hour is late and 4k continues to be the buzzword and headline feature of much of what is being released these days. in any case, it'll surely be great at what it does...

20.2MP APS-C CMOS Sensor
Dual DIGIC 6 Image Processors
3.0" 1.04m-Dot Clear View II LCD Monitor
Full HD 1080p/60 Video & Movie Servo AF
Dual Pixel CMOS AF with Live View
65-Point All Cross-Type AF System
Native ISO 16000, Extended to ISO 51200
Continuous 10 fps Shooting
Magnesium Alloy Body Construction
Built-In GPS Receiver & Digital Compass

I was just about to post the press release and Darren beat me by about five minutes. I didn't want two separate discussion threads, so I've edited Darren's post to include the press release link so that it's at the top of the thread.

Some 7DMkII sample footage.

Canon 7D Mark II Sample Footage - YouTube

For video people who want a sensor closer to Super 35mm and want the following:

Canon
Clean HDMI out
1080p60
Headphone Jack

Then the 7Dii will be appealing. Otherwise, I predict this camera probably won't get too much attention.

I highly doubt it, but it'd be amazing if it had low noise at high ISO and low moire / aliasing similar to the 5Diii, but only time will tell when a few of them hit the wild.

Too little too late maybe? Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see any mention of peaking, zebras, built in ND. Was thinking of getting the 7D mkII, but now that the specs have been released, really leaning toward switching to Sony A7s instead. Especially since I'm getting more and more used to shooting with the Sony RX10. Lately I'm finding that I actually prefer to use it over my 5DmkIII.

It's not revolutionary, but we're getting a bit carried away with lusting over video features - it is an amazing sports stills camera. Although, it could have been released a year or two earlier, but most Canon users are afraid to jump ship, so they wait patiently.

Video comparing the 7Dii to 5Diii to 70D

Comparing 7D Mark II Video to Its Fellow Canon DSLRs (http://reframe.gizmodo.com/comparing-7d-mark-ii-video-to-its-fellow-canon-dslrs-1636490542/all)

Pretty impressive that the 7Dii holds it's own against the 5Diii. It also shows that the 7Dii has a new chip & didn't re-use the same chip from the 70D.

Personally I really wish this camera was about 30-40% cheaper when you look at the price & offerings of the GH4 & NX1. But I can see the 7Dii being good for people who want to stick with Canon & don't need full frame (or just want 5Diii ISO & moire performance at half the price).

I own a 7D. I primarily use it for sports photo stuff. But I do on occasion use it for video projects.

What I am curious about is how the new 7D Mkii is going to perform in video mode with the dual pixel AF system. As I understand it, this version is a build on what the 70D brought to the table in terms of AF tracking in video mode. I've seen great videos on how the AF works in video on that model and have a friend who also owns a 70D, so I have tested it a little. With the 70D in video mode, you touch the screen and the camera locks in on the subject and keeps the subject in focus as it moves on screen. How is that supposed to work on the 7D Mkii when the screen is not a touch screen?

Derek,

Probably much as it does on my Canon C100 with AF upgrade - it'll use a central letterbox as the focus target - and on the C100 there is no way to move that target around (with the joystick - as it too lacks a touchscreen). You can use a Focus Hold feature (i.e. then reposition the framing of the shot) and that's very useful.

I too have an original 7D. It's a truly great stills camera and that's what I'll continue to use it for - I had a brief foray with it in video (when it was new) but found it compromised for reasons many understand. I won't be spending any money to replace it with the Mk II version to get the new video capabilities this latest model has. Sure, there are lots of little improvements - but against the recent competition it has in the DSLR sector it already looks like too little too late. For me, the image quality won't cut with what my C100 and PMW-300 now give me.

I have an XA20 that I shoot the bulk of my video on. I shoot a lot of wildlife video work. And one of the nice things is that when an animal walks into frame, I can touch the screen on the animal and the AF locks on. Similar to how the 70D works that my buddy has. I was going to buy a 70D for video, but I kept telling myself I would just wait for the 7D 2.0 because surely it would do this. I'd like a 7D Mk ii simply for the ISO in the cruddy lighting that most gyms seem to have for photos, but at the same time I really want the AF tracking in video that the 70D was showing great promise. The specs on the 7D Mk ii say this is the case, but I just don't see how I can get it to lock onto one particular subject as it moves across the screen. Maybe the AF points and processor can distinguish what is to be in focus ... I don't know ... seems though to leave a lot out of my control as an operator.

I guess I should just be patient and wait to see more when more of these cameras are out there in the real world being put through their paces.

How is that supposed to work on the 7D Mkii when the screen is not a touch screen?

If Canon added a swivel touchscreen, everybody would rant how that can only compromise its build quality and that this is not a PRO feature, yada yada. Canon just needs a reason for the 70D to coexist with 7D.

If they are using a 7D they probably aren't a pro. More like a wannabe pro.

Hmmmm.... I'm using a 70d. So what does that make me?

If they are using a 7D they probably aren't a pro.

Sorry, I have to disagree with that. If they're using a 7D, chances are that they're probably a pro.

Not every pro photographer who chooses Canon can afford to shoot with the flagship 1D X. So the next tier down from the very top of the Canon line is the 5D / 7D level. The 5D and 7D share the same mag alloy body and build quality, and their feature sets are very similar. The only real difference between the 5D and the 7D is that one is full frame for portrait work and the other is a crop sensor for telephoto work.

Together they make a great combination because they look and feel the same. I don't think anyone would argue that the 5D isn't intended for pro-level use. The 7D is the same type of camera as the 5D except its sensor is optimized for long-range shooting. It's intended to be "the second pro body" for anyone who already owns a 5D or a 1D X. Because a real pro always has at least two cameras. No backup body? Not a real pro.

There are some people who will choose the 7D as their primary camera for pro work if they can't afford the 5D, because the 7D is in many ways a superior camera to the 6D, Canon's least expensive full-frame body. Put an EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens on a 7D body and you have the same coverage and very nearly the same optical quality as an EF 24-70mm lens on a 6D body, but with a far more advanced set of features, and a much tougher construction (and, come to think of it, you get image stabilization as well).

I don't think I could judge whether a person is "pro" or not by the model of their camera. I know an equestrian photographer in N.E. Texas who shoots with the Nikon version of the Rebel, and she gets plenty of business because she's good at what she does.

Hmmmm.... I'm using a 70d. So what does that make me?

Do you charge for your work? You're a pro.

If people are buying the images you create, then that makes you a pro.

A toy guitar in the hands of a master will sound infinitely better than a pro guitar in the hands of a hack, proffessional or not.
I'm no master, but I am using a 70d professionally in the toughest environment here in Mali, and it is doing just fine.

I'm not "pro" anything. Just a dad who shoots photos in crappy lit gyms of his daughters sports and enjoys shooting photos and video of wildlife and other outdoor subjects. I shoot photos and video for friends and associate if they want or nothing. If they "pay" me through a meal, or case of beer, or other product that is their doing. I just enjoy the hobby and obsess about a quality result.

I'm not criticizing the specs of the 7D 2.0 or crying about what was or was not included in the build. I am simply trying to understand how one aspect of the camera will work. At the end of the day I will most likely buy one regardless if for no other reason than for the improved noise issues in those poorly lit gymnasiums that my daughters plays sports in. I would rather shoot video on my XA20. But there are times that I like to do documentary stuff on my DSLR ... as an example I shoot/produce videos for my church and love the DSLR feel that I get on those projects.

the term Professional gets thrown around too often in the wrong context.

Traditionally, it just meant you get paid for your work. but nowadays anyone can buy a camera, do one job for their aunt, and call themselves professional.

But profession implies trade skill, and how skilled you are at that trade is your level of professionalism.

Calling someone a Pro is saying they're good at what they do, not that they're just getting paid for it.

And acting Professional is used to say that someone is doing their job with a good manner/attitude/etc...

in other words, it's a frickin mess of terminology, and being a bit more descriptive can avoid confusion.

hugs & kisses,

That Guy.