Canon EOS R7 Mark II: What We Know

[Philnick]

Has anyone else here asked DxO to support the new Sigma Canon RF DC DN crop lenses as I asked?

"go to DxO's supported cameras page and request that they support Sigma's two RF-S f/2.8 zooms and four f/1.4 primes released last year with Canon's blessing. (Sigma calls them RF lenses, but they're for crop-sensor use.)"

They don't seem to respond to my solitary requests - it takes a chorus of requests to move them.

 

[Slappy_G]

Isn’t this noise shot (photon) noise, just physics of light - random photons etc coupled with the small capacity pixels ? Same complaints came from some people moving up to the 60mp Sonys. Imagine what the 100mp FF sensor would be like that all these mp hungry people want !
Regarding the shutter, I’m sure it’s just to remind you that you didn’t fork out for a R5. (A bit like the RP.)

Don't forget that a lot of the AF missing issues are not from the noise level but rather the extremely slow readout speed on the sensor. Canon confirmed officially that the camera cannot reliably autofocus at its max speed settings and advised cranking down the FPS setting. So I think people often (incorrectly) state that the noise level on the sensor is the cause of the bad AF, as I think AccipiterQ was implying.

Source is the well-known Duade Patton video on this which shows direct quotes from Canon.

As to the sensor size, as others have said, if you have gapless lenses above the sensor plane, that issue is minimized.

 

[Sporgon]

Don't forget that a lot of the AF missing issues are not from the noise level but rather the extremely slow readout speed on the sensor. Canon confirmed officially that the camera cannot reliably autofocus at its max speed settings and advised cranking down the FPS setting. So I think people often (incorrectly) state that the noise level on the sensor is the cause of the bad AF, as I think AccipiterQ was implying.

Source is the well-known Duade Patton video on this which shows direct quotes from Canon.

As to the sensor size, as others have said, if you have gapless lenses above the sensor plane, that issue is minimized.

I’m not sure what any of that has to do with my post !

 

[mpb001]

Nowhere have I heard whether a future R7II will have a vertical grip? That was a sad omission for the R7. What was Canon thinking. A vertical grip is really needed for sports and wildlife shooters with huge lenses. Even the new Nikon Z5II accepts a Nikon vertical grip and that camera is entry level full frame.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Nowhere have I heard whether a future R7II will have a vertical grip? That was a sad omission for the R7. What was Canon thinking.

Most likely, Canon was looking at their data on the number of battery grips sold for APS-C bodies, relative to the price they would need to charge to make a return on the development investment. I suspect the math was against them releasing a grip for the R7.

 

[David - Sydney]

Most likely, Canon was looking at their data on the number of battery grips sold for APS-C bodies, relative to the price they would need to charge to make a return on the development investment. I suspect the math was against them releasing a grip for the R7.

probably the same maths for 3 R5ii grips vs a separate model with an integrated grip.... but I do wonder if marketing had a bigger say than finance in that respect.

 

[SvO2]

Most likely, Canon was looking at their data on the number of battery grips sold for APS-C bodies, relative to the price they would need to charge to make a return on the development investment. I suspect the math was against them releasing a grip for the R7.

Now if the mark ii returns to the 7D paradigm and is updated to have the same general body as the R5/R6, then there is no longer an additional development cost.

 

[Sporgon]

Now if the mark ii returns to the 7D paradigm and is updated to have the same general body as the R5/R6, then there is no longer an additional development cost.

The trouble is (if that’s the camera you want) Canon may have data suggesting such a camera would reduce R5 sales, in which case they won’t do it.
When we had the 7DII / 5Diii combo the later didn’t have the resolution to crop or speed whereas now the R5/R6 does.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The trouble is (if that’s the camera you want) Canon may have data suggesting such a camera would reduce R5 sales, in which case they won’t do it.
When we had the 7DII / 5Diii combo the later didn’t have the resolution to crop or speed whereas now the R5/R6 does.

Indeed. Personally, as I’ve said before I consider the R7 to be the successor to the 90D. That means the 7-series was effectively abandoned after Cannon launched the 5Ds…and since the R5/R5II combine high speed and high resolution, I have my doubt that we will see a true 7-series successor.

 

[DhlcadR6]

Unpopular opinion here, with modern AF and lightweight telephoto lenses, there's no need for a "pro" build APS-C camera from Canon. R6-series should be the upgrade 7Dii guys are looking for. R7 being prosumer/semi-pro are fine.

As for the battery grip. I just want Canon to make all battery door detachable so we can either use dummy battery or install 1st/3rd party grips.

 

[EricN]

Indeed. Personally, as I’ve said before I consider the R7 to be the successor to the 90D. That means the 7-series was effectively abandoned after Cannon launched the 5Ds…and since the R5/R5II combine high speed and high resolution, I have my doubt that we will see a true 7-series successor.

I disagree regarding your statement of high resolution because in crop mode r5 series is less than the current R7 and the rumor suggests R7ii would be higher resolution (and up market from the current model).

Somewhat off topic, could you say R10 and R8 cannibalize? Would it be analogous if R7ii becomes more similar to the R6 series?

 

[Sylvester]

Unpopular opinion here, with modern AF and lightweight telephoto lenses, there's no need for a "pro" build APS-C camera from Canon. R6-series should be the upgrade 7Dii guys are looking for. R7 being prosumer/semi-pro are fine.

As for the battery grip. I just want Canon to make all battery door detachable so we can either use dummy battery or install 1st/3rd party grips.

Not necessarily an unpopular opinion – although one I don’t agree with. I think it all comes down to individual use cases. While accepting that mine may not be that large a market segment for Canon.

The 5Diii / 7Dii has been the ideal combination, pretty much exactly the same body, control layout and capabilities, with the 7Dii being a bit further ahead and faster FPS.

Having two bodies that are seamless to switch between and importantly have the same memory card configurations was ideal.

Shooting a lot of aviation and motor sport being able to have a FF body with a shorter telephoto (24-105 or 70-200) and an APC-C with 100-400 and quickly switch is invaluable.

At a push they also with some angle of view compromises provide a good backup body combination and limit having to swap lenses in less than ideal conditions.

For me a return to the 7Dii build and capabilities in the R series would not cannibalise R5 sales, as I’d be unlikely to put two of those in my bag. And although I have though about using the R5 in crop mode, it would still be short of an R series APS-C by about 10M pixels.

However the lack of a proper R series successor for the 7Dii has held me back from making he leap from my current combo. So at least in my case it’s actually delayed sales of two bodies and probably a few native RF lenses.

I was quit excited about the initial R7 announcement but combination of body style layout – memory card configuration and rolling shutter, pushed a decision to await and hope for the next generation.

Again I recognise that my use case is more limited than many peoples but across both Canon and Nikon the lack of direct replacements for the 7Dii and D500 to pair with a 5Diii D850 type body has been sadly missed by many in the Aviation community.