Is a Canon EOS R7 Mark II coming this year? [CR2]

[Del Paso]

First, a Mark ii crop will have the same dynamic range as, or very close to, the current R7. A crop sensor has 1.36 stops less DR than a FF because of its smaller area. The R7 has very good DR, the same as the R5 or any other top quality FF in crop mode - see the photons to photo graph. Secondly, for telephotos for bird and wild life, the R7 outresolves the R5 nicely with the RF 100-500mm, RF 200-800mm and RF 100-400mm but I wouldn't put a TC on. In practice, the main draw back is the slow read out speed that causes rolling shutter and has a negative impact on the AF speed. In practice, I find the AF easily good enough in most circumstances. I personally find 45 Mpx on the R5 much better for cropping for bird/wild life than 30 Mpx - it's about as good as having a 1.4x added on when the loss of IQ and narrower aperture come int to it.

View attachment 215018

What I do not understand is this DR drop around ISO 550 for all three cameras. Is there an explanation a physics dummy (me!) could understand?
Does kind of a critical ISO value exist?

 

[tbgtomcom]

My research shows the R6 came out in July 2020 the R6 II in Nov 2023, nearly 3.5 years later.
Original 6D released Sept 2012, 6D II June 2016 (I believe the RP was considered the mirror less version of the 6D when it came out Feb 2019)

 

[koenkooi]

What I do not understand is this DR drop around ISO 550 for all three cameras. Is there an explanation a physics dummy (me!) could understand?
Does kind of a critical ISO value exist?

I think at ISO400 the 'hardware' noise reduction in the sensor turns itself off. Bill used triangles to denote 'fake' DR that has seen processing.

 

[AlanF]

Thanks for that. I have assumed that noise creeps in at lower ISO for sensor with smaller pixel in general. This seems to translate into a shorter 'useable' DR before noise reduction in post. Looking at the chart, the R7 seems to have shorter DR compared to the R5(APS-C) - the closed symbol for R7 ends about a stop earlier than the R5(APS-C). Am I reading this correctly? Having said this, that 1 stop at the high ISO end would likely not make much material difference which very good denoising software available, and that most shots would likely not reach that ISO level.

There's no change in DR between the iso50 and iso100 points for the R5 - it's an artificial trick to lower the amplification of the signal - and the R7 at iso 100 has very close to the DR of the R5 (APS-C) at iso 50.

 

[AlanF]

I think at ISO400 the 'hardware' noise reduction in the sensor turns itself off. Bill used triangles to denote 'fake' DR that has seen processing.

The triangles go through the jump in DR for the R5. I am no expert but it may be due to a change in the amplification.

 

[3kramd5]

What I do not understand is this DR drop around ISO 550 for all three cameras. Is there an explanation a physics dummy (me!) could understand?

Firstly, those are two cameras, not three. The drop isn't noteworthy, that's normal. To maintain exposure, each step up in sensitivity is accompanied by a proportional decrease in photon conversion to charge. Lower signal = less dynamic range.

It's the increase that's of interest. R5 has a dual-gain sensor. It switches at ISO 400. You see about 1-stop increase (half that in crop mode), and then it goes back to the nearly ideal decrease.

I don't know what to make of the R7 curve. Maybe these adjacent points are not actually different sensitivities despite camera settings (as Bill Claff notes, he does not measure sensitivity per the ISO standard, the x-axis is simply what the camera is set to).

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Canon would be wise to look at the success of this stacked sensor camera at the price point to see there is a market. The H2S is heavily favored as a hybrid video platform and it shoots open gate.

The X-H2S does not seem to be a great-selling camera.
The OM-1 seems to have sold well though.

 

[nunataks]

Canon was worried their APS-C lens to camera ratio was getting too even so they must tip the balance back towards cameras this year.

 

[JESPhoto]

Yes, how many would actually pay $3,000 US plus for this stacked sensor mark II? Not me. Happy R7 user. Would I like a faster readout speed, sure. But I love that thumb dial location, but I will make no claims like most people here that my opinion is universal.

Not sure I would pay $3K+ But I could go $2500 for a stacked sensor 32.5mp R7 with current generation AF and a deeper buffer. Body on current R7 is fine with me. Yes, I am a R7 shooter.

 

[JESPhoto]

Nikon D7200 to D7500? That's all I can think of. I'd accept lower resolution in exchange for faster e-shutter readout for sure

I shot a D7200 for a couple years and went to the D500. I always thought the IQ on the 7200 was better. The 500 had faster frame rate and better AF but I did not sell the D7200 and kept it as a backup. Every time I used it, I thought (and comparing images side by side) the 7200 had better colors and just a better quality image.

I shot the D500 for a few years and sold it to get an R7. I think the R7's image quality is superior to the D500 and about the same as the D7200. Overall, though, the R7 is a better camera than both the D500 and D7200. I haven't shot the Z9 or Z8 so I cannot make an honest personal comparison.

Back to the original story, I would welcome a stacked sensor to reduce rolling shutter and a current state of the art AF and deeper buffer. Otherwise, the R7 is fine for my needs.

 

[LSXPhotog]

The X-H2S does not seem to be a great-selling camera.
The OM-1 seems to have sold well though.

You base this on what information? Not being funny, what makes you believe this?

Several retailers have reported strong sales. Fuji themselves claimed “In the Professional Imaging business, revenue increased significantly due mainly to strong sales of X-H2, X-H2S, and X-T5, which were launched in the previous fiscal year.”

The X-H2S is rarely reduced in price and inventory was hard to find at periods of time. It’s also extremely popular for rental. It has also received a lot of very good firmware updates. Granted, the numbers of any Fujifilm camera are likely dwarfed by Canon sales, but this camera seems like it was very successful for Fujifilm. Without knowing exact numbers, they’re not struggling to sell these - especially considering it’s a $2,500 APS-C camera from a more boutique brand.

 

[grilled_rooster]

Put the R7II into an R6II body (including Grip-Option), put a stacked sensor in it (like Fuji H2s), 24MP, AF of the R6II.

I would pay up to 2.500 €, depending on the specs.

 

[John Wilde]

You base this on what information? Not being funny, what makes you believe this?

Several retailers have reported strong sales. Fuji themselves claimed “In the Professional Imaging business, revenue increased significantly due mainly to strong sales of X-H2, X-H2S, and X-T5, which were launched in the previous fiscal year.”

The X-H2S is rarely reduced in price and inventory was hard to find at periods of time. It’s also extremely popular for rental. It has also received a lot of very good firmware updates. Granted, the numbers of any Fujifilm camera are likely dwarfed by Canon sales, but this camera seems like it was very successful for Fujifilm. Without knowing exact numbers, they’re not struggling to sell these - especially considering it’s a $2,500 APS-C camera from a more boutique brand.

From the financials that Fujifilm released this month.

 

[Grockle]

It's great, the body just needs a third wheel on the top plate like the R5/R6

Actually, the only thing I don't like is the on/off switch. It's too easily knocked getting it in/out of my bag. The R6ii has a much better one.

 

[LSXPhotog]

From the financials that Fujifilm released this month.

Yeah, hard to know how those sales are distributed amongst the three models, but the X-H2S has sold pretty darn well from what can be observed. Again, relatively speaking. Fujifilm sells like 5-6% of then entire camera market versus Canon at over 46%, so I'm sure it sells much fewer units than an R6 Mark II, but it has been a success and proof of concept for Fujifilm for sure.

 

[EricN]

I've been very happy with the 24MP in my R8, but when doing things like focus stacking, I'd really like to have a lot more MP. With static subjects like lego sets, IBIS multishot would help. I did try with the 400MP gimmick in the R5 and it 'worked', but it was a big hassle, more automation would massively improve this.
With subjects like dragonflies, I'd like a lot more megapixels and the most FPS you get get. I see no reason why the R3 can't use its 195 FPS feature during focus stacking, my R8 limits it to 30fps, while it can do 40fps in non-stacking mode

There might be something related to the differences in how the camera body prepares, computes, and records between auto focus shots and stacking. Canon has been working on auto focus about 35 years, but when did they start focus stacking?
Or cripple hammer

 

[neurorx]

Does anyone wonder what the order delay time is going to be with 3 camera launches?

 

[HMC11]

There's no change in DR between the iso50 and iso100 points for the R5 - it's an artificial trick to lower the amplification of the signal - and the R7 at iso 100 has very close to the DR of the R5 (APS-C) at iso 50.

Thanks once again - appreciated please. Just for my own education, this is how I understand DR. The drop in DR in R7 vs R5 is due primarily to the pixel size being smaller (not the sensor size), i.e. if the same pixel size is used in an apsc sensor (for R5, that would be an apsc mpx of about 18), and assuming the same technology used, then the DR of the apsc and its FF cousin would be essentially the same. For sensor with BSI technology, the pixel size can in fact be larger because larger area is available to pack the same number of pixels. In this case, the DR would again improves when compared with a Front-stacked sensor with identical mpx (all other things being broadly equal, that is). As such, a BSI sensor in R7II with 32mpx or a FSI sensor with lower mpx would theoretically have a better DR.

 

[neuroanatomist]

As such, a BSI sensor in R7II with 32mpx or a FSI sensor with lower mpx would theoretically have a better DR.

You may want to compare the FSI R5’s DR with a few FF BSI sensors in the same MP range. That doesn’t fit well with your theory.

 

[HMC11]

You may want to compare the FSI R5’s DR with a few FF BSI sensors in the same MP range. That doesn’t fit well with your theory.

You are right, as usual. Thanks. The Nikon Z7 and Z9, also 45mpx, have a lower DR performance as measured by 'Photons to Photos' compared to the R5. In fact, the Nikon D850, which is also BSI but released in 2017 and performs almost identically to the Z7, performs better than the Z9 at ISO settings up to about ISO500, and thereafter comparable to the Z9. I also tried to compare the Z5, FSI but only 24mpx, has comparable or better DR performance as the Z7 . As it is not 45mpx, I am not sure if that is due to the effect of pixel size (improve DR compared with 45mpx) counter-balanced by the Z5 using a 'cheaper' sensor. Overall, it does seems that the R5 has one of best DR despite being FSI. It would be interesting to see how Canon's BSI perform in terms of DR when they appear. Based on Nikon, however, the BSI does not seem to confer a DR advantage, but again, the comparisons might be flawed as I don't quite know how the 'quality' of the sensors compared. Overall, it is perhaps better to just stick to actual measurements rather than making assumptions about DR performance based only on written specs.