7D Re: 7D Mark II

PegLeg Media said:
for video id still save $800 and get the 70d, flip out screen and more video features, and since not a FF sensor probably wont be better for video.

For stills, id get the full frame 6d over this. I dont see the point of this camera?
Click to expand...

for video...i couldn't agree more. i bought a 70D mostly because of "face detection" AF tracking and the touch flip screen. the face tracking is better than any camera out there that i researched. still its canon quality video which means its not very detailed and has moire & stair stepping. i bought the mosaic engineering filter and does a very good job of wiping out almost all of the artifacts so i can at least sharpen in post. i only plan to use this for mid to upper body shots on a steadicam or gimbal (face tracking) which its doing a decent job of.

i saw a comparison video of 70D vs 7DmkII and the mkII was slightly improved but not by much but did seem to improve as to artifacts.
 
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
Finally a proper test!

http://vimeo.com/m/106524090

So here we go:

-The 7D mk II solves the aliasing and moire issues just like the 5D mk III. No line skipping.

-Low light performance is improved by 1.5 to 2 stops from the 70D, approaching 5D mk III level,

-Resolution is not improved over the 5D mk III level, which was a bit disappointing on the 5D and sure is disappointing here.

All in all, this seems like a 5D mk III twin in terms of the image, for much less money. lacking full frame yet adding 60p, DPAF, distortion correction, etc
Click to expand...

aliasing and moire looks to be similar to the 5DmkIII's as to artifacts which is good. to call this a 5DmkIII twin is a bit of a stretch IMO.

i don't think low light performance is much over the 70D and nowhere near the 5DmkIII in fact its almost identical to the 70D according to DXOmark specs.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...0D-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III___977_895_795

this shows there hasn't been much improvement at all over the original 7D.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...non-EOS-70D-versus-Canon-EOS-7D___977_895_619

david
 
of the 5 DSLR's that I've owned that shoot video the the parallel of video noise compared to photo noise (not shooting in RAW) is a solid indication of noise performance.

DXOMark is just a measurement of noise performance in photos which easily carries over to video.

david
 
Except when it doesn't.

Though I'll give you that comparing current same-manufacturer models, there's a real chance it will be a good indicator. Not in every case, still, so it's better to just compare them in video mode. Someone must have done that already.
 
I know lots of people are hating on the 7D Mark II. But I just had the opportunity to take a look at the camera at a local store and I was EXTREMELY impressed with the HANDLING and INTERFACE.

I was considering the GH3/GH4 as my new upgrade because I heard a lot about how they are true video cameras. But after fiddling with the 7D Mark II, I would say that I would have to categorize it as a video friendly DSLR - yes it doesn't have 4K, extreme low light and high DR, but the feel of the camera should earn it some merit too.

Unlike the GH3/GH4, the 7D Mark II outputs to an external monitor in FULL 16:9 (not windowed) WITH overlays for shutter, aperture and iso AND it does NOT disable these overlays after a few minutes. They actually STAY ON. For me this is huge because I prefer using an external monitor.

Secondly, you can adjust audio levels while recording using the HARD BUTTONS. On the GH3/GH4 you have to use the touch screen interface to adjust audio which I found very cumbersome especially when using an external monitor since your eye is not focused on the touch screen. The touch screen also lacks a tactile feel so you don't really know where you are pressing without having to look.

Also the option to switch to 24p mode for the 7D Mark II is logically WITHIN the framerate menu whereas the GH4 is illogically in a separate menu altogether called "SYSTEM FREQUENCY".

Canon should definitely get some credit for designing the interface more intuitively.
 
I agree with above, but mostly for stills as I tried out the camera in the store today.

DSLRs might be on the way out in the future, but it's pretty cool to handle this camera. Canon obviously had the same kind of product since the first DSLR they developed. Refined and refined over the years, this camera has a very good mechanical precision and very reliable digital innards. It's just a really nice solid shooting block with everything in the right place. The shutter is so smooth, and it seems to handle these 10 frames per second with so much ease. The autofocus is just ridiculous. Even in video (just tried a minute or so) it seems to just go, especially with the AF optimised kit lens. Seriously, pick one up, it's as close as it get's to a modern day Leica (film, not the digital ones) for me.

Yes the video is soft and low DR. But I'd rather use this image OOC over the OOC A7s image, where the colours just don't give the same pop. As apposed to some photo cameras that come out which try to cover ground where you are probably better off with a cinema camera anyway, this camera manages to touch the lower end pro market (which doesn't mean low income BTW) very focussed. It's great for web content where you don't need 4K (or often even HD), it's useful for events with both great video and photo focussing. It's not an inadequate photo camera while focussing on video (Sony/panasonic?).

It is specialised in GETTING THE SHOT, no matter what. And the colours always look good, without needing to spend a lot of time in post.
What percentage of video is being watched on phones or in a browser window nowadays? For these purposes I don't mind a softer image, and though the DR is low, at least is rolls off naturally, and doesn't give any distracting elements like Moire, which can actually be quite noticeable if you don't watch full res.

I'm sure sure we are all upcoming directors and need that 4K image for the big screen and crazy image IQ to pass on to our pro colourists, but make no mistake, this camera is going to make great paid content for a LOT of people.
 
david_p said:
for video...i couldn't agree more. i bought a 70D mostly because of "face detection" AF tracking and the touch flip screen. the face tracking is better than any camera out there that i researched.
Click to expand...

I just saw this tracking test on the Samsung NX1. Looks like it works along with being a 4K that shoots 120fps at 1080p. I have a GH4 on order arriving next week and it made me think twice, but auto tracking isn't on my need to have list, but getting rid of moire is. I already tested the GH4 tracking via the touch screen and it doesn't work well, maybe for a planned shot I would have more luck. If the Samsung is this accurate it should be a real selling point. Time will tell.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DigAgYD-QY
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top