This topic is in the 2009 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2009Canon 7D
p.11 #1Canon 7D
Relocation of the on/off for the new, super-duper screen they will/should put there (articulating?).
-Eric
-Eric
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:44 AM
p.11 #2Canon 7D
I guess you guys are right, the location right at the bottom of the on/off switch would make it liable to getting turned off accidentally. I was thinking of the 1 series which is nicely recessed and located further up the body.
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:46 AM
p.11 #3Canon 7D
I prefer the on/off switch up the top, I always ended up switching the rear dial to the off position accidentally on many occasions while walking around (On a few different models) I like the switch on my 500D though.
Maybe they moved the on/off switch to make room for some video controls?
Maybe they moved the on/off switch to make room for some video controls?
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:47 AM
p.11 #4Canon 7D
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I wonder if they moved the on/off switch to make room for a new feature on the back?
M.Fn sounds like a programmable button to me.
Maybe it's an overboost type function. Press it and you briefly get the digic IV overclocked or another 11 AF points
Overboost? First DSLR to be water cooled!
I wonder if they moved the on/off switch to make room for a new feature on the back?
M.Fn sounds like a programmable button to me.
Maybe it's an overboost type function. Press it and you briefly get the digic IV overclocked or another 11 AF points
Overboost? First DSLR to be water cooled!
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:50 AM
p.11 #5Canon 7D
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I wonder if they moved the on/off switch to make room for a new feature on the back?
M.Fn sounds like a programmable button to me.
Maybe it's an overboost type function. Press it and you briefly get the digic IV overclocked or another 11 AF points
Yes, Remember those "Turbo" buttons on the old 286/386 computers?
I wonder if they moved the on/off switch to make room for a new feature on the back?
M.Fn sounds like a programmable button to me.
Maybe it's an overboost type function. Press it and you briefly get the digic IV overclocked or another 11 AF points
Yes, Remember those "Turbo" buttons on the old 286/386 computers?
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:51 AM
p.11 #6Canon 7D
musclepics wrote:
Also, since there is already a "7D" DSLR out there (Minolta), I don't think Canon is going to use the same model name.
Canon had the D60 in 2002ish.... Nikon currently has a D60. I don't think it's farfetched for Canon to settle on the 7D name.
roanjohnnyc wrote:
Nice. Let's dissect that picture :-) Definitely not a Rebel because of the top illuminated LCD.
No scene modes (ala Rebel, xxD) - so targeted for pro's?
Not necessarily targeted specifically at pros, more like advanced photographers, similar to those who would buy a 5DII, which would be amateurs and pros.
Also, since there is already a "7D" DSLR out there (Minolta), I don't think Canon is going to use the same model name.
Canon had the D60 in 2002ish.... Nikon currently has a D60. I don't think it's farfetched for Canon to settle on the 7D name.
roanjohnnyc wrote:
Nice. Let's dissect that picture :-) Definitely not a Rebel because of the top illuminated LCD.
No scene modes (ala Rebel, xxD) - so targeted for pro's?
Not necessarily targeted specifically at pros, more like advanced photographers, similar to those who would buy a 5DII, which would be amateurs and pros.
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:52 AM
p.11 #7Canon 7D
brainiac wrote:
According to people round here you shouldn't bother. Nobody prints above 6x4", and you can only see the difference at A0. No client ever wants his pictures cropped, and any surplus quality is unprofessional ;-)
The two people I shoot weddings for do 8x10's all the time and have done some 20x30's.
Will Patterson wrote
I shoot full raw during formals and big group shots.The two people I shoot weddings for do 8x10's all the time and have done some 20x30's.
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:55 AM
p.11 #9Canon 7D
It won't be FF with that kind of a top-plate (if it is genuine). The prism wouldn't be big enough for FF mirror box. Most likely 1.6 I'd say.
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:57 AM
p.11 #10Canon 7D
Eric Gottesman wrote:
Relocation of the on/off for the new, super-duper screen they will/should put there (articulating?).
-Eric
After the G11, distinctly possible
Relocation of the on/off for the new, super-duper screen they will/should put there (articulating?).
-Eric
After the G11, distinctly possible
Aug 20, 2009 at 08:58 AM
brainiac
Offline
[X]
Details
p.11 #11Canon 7D
Will Patterson wrote:
According to people round here you shouldn't bother. Nobody prints above 6x4", and you can only see the difference at A0. No client ever wants his pictures cropped, and any surplus quality is unprofessional ;-)The two people I shoot weddings for do 8x10's all the time and have done some 20x30's.
I'm on your side Will. I have been shooting weddings for 15 years and I find preposterous the suggestion that I should settle for 12 Mpixels when my current 21 Mpixel cameras are the best wedding cameras I have ever used. Real weddings are punctuated by moments of perfect panic as the bride and groom accidentally leave the church early (happened to me a month ago), or some quaintly-dressed page boy decides to perform improvised modern dance in the aisle during the vows. The congregation are getting their shots of it, but you only have your 85 f1.2 mounted and the memory card just filled in your other body. You've got 2 seconds to react, if that. Give me 21 Mpixels every time, because it gives me the versatility to crop when I don't have time to change lenses, or when the bride's brother gets dumped by his Russian girlfriend and they don't want her in the shot any more. I switch to sraw when it makes sense, but shoot 21 when it counts. I do not intend to be one of those wedding photographers that people bitch about because I cynically do the minimum.
brainiac wrote
Will Patterson wrote
I shoot full raw during formals and big group shots.I'm on your side Will. I have been shooting weddings for 15 years and I find preposterous the suggestion that I should settle for 12 Mpixels when my current 21 Mpixel cameras are the best wedding cameras I have ever used. Real weddings are punctuated by moments of perfect panic as the bride and groom accidentally leave the church early (happened to me a month ago), or some quaintly-dressed page boy decides to perform improvised modern dance in the aisle during the vows. The congregation are getting their shots of it, but you only have your 85 f1.2 mounted and the memory card just filled in your other body. You've got 2 seconds to react, if that. Give me 21 Mpixels every time, because it gives me the versatility to crop when I don't have time to change lenses, or when the bride's brother gets dumped by his Russian girlfriend and they don't want her in the shot any more. I switch to sraw when it makes sense, but shoot 21 when it counts. I do not intend to be one of those wedding photographers that people bitch about because I cynically do the minimum.
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:06 AM
p.11 #12Canon 7D
MaxiKana wrote:
It won't be FF with that kind of a top-plate (if it is genuine). The prism wouldn't be big enough for FF mirror box. Most likely 1.6 I'd say.
..............................
It won't be FF with that kind of a top-plate (if it is genuine). The prism wouldn't be big enough for FF mirror box. Most likely 1.6 I'd say.
..............................Aug 20, 2009 at 09:09 AM
p.11 #13Canon 7D
michael49 wrote:
So, do you guys think it will be FF, 1.3X or 1.6X?
I think I'm 90% sure it's full frame - direct competition with D700 and a850. And the bundle of a regular EF lens (28-135) is an even bigger tell tell sign it will go this direction.
But then, I could be wrong..............
So, do you guys think it will be FF, 1.3X or 1.6X?
I think I'm 90% sure it's full frame - direct competition with D700 and a850. And the bundle of a regular EF lens (28-135) is an even bigger tell tell sign it will go this direction.
But then, I could be wrong..............
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:09 AM
p.11 #14Canon 7D
roanjohnnyc wrote:
I think I'm 90% sure it's full frame - direct competition with D700 and a850. And the bundle of a regular EF lens (28-135) is an even bigger tell tell sign it will go this direction.
But then, I could be wrong..............
I really wish, but I doubt it's FF. And Canon has bundled the 28-135 with 1.6X crop in the past if I remeber correctly.
michael49 wrote
So, do you guys think it will be FF, 1.3X or 1.6X?But then, I could be wrong..............
I really wish, but I doubt it's FF. And Canon has bundled the 28-135 with 1.6X crop in the past if I remeber correctly.
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:12 AM
p.11 #15Canon 7D
brainiac wrote:
........... I switch to sraw when it makes sense, but shoot 21 when it counts........
Ummm........kay.
........... I switch to sraw when it makes sense, but shoot 21 when it counts........
Ummm........kay.
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:14 AM
p.11 #16Canon 7D
I don't know where you guys are getting these cheap FF ideas from. It would cost Canon just about as much money to produce the old 5D chips as it does for them to make the 5d II/1ds3 chip. They would lose money, IMO, to establish a new FF line due to economies of scale. Until a major paradigm shift in sensor fabrication occurs, the marked for a FF will remain higher end with features outside the sensor becoming the distinctions.
This was a couple weeks ago, but a good primer--focus on what JohnJ80 and myself talk about in terms of wafer fab.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/800908/0
There are 3 FF sensors on the market, and the products they are delivered in are differentiated on body and read-out/data processing electronics, primarily.
D3/D700
1ds3/5dII
D3X/A900
This was a couple weeks ago, but a good primer--focus on what JohnJ80 and myself talk about in terms of wafer fab.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/800908/0
There are 3 FF sensors on the market, and the products they are delivered in are differentiated on body and read-out/data processing electronics, primarily.
D3/D700
1ds3/5dII
D3X/A900
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:15 AM
brainiac
Offline
[X]
Details
p.11 #17Canon 7D
roanjohnnyc wrote:
And the bundle of a regular EF lens (28-135) is an even bigger tell tell sign it will go this direction.
That's a very good point. Does the picture of the top-plate categorically rule out full-frame? It seems like it does, but we don't really have an indication of the height of the prism.
And the bundle of a regular EF lens (28-135) is an even bigger tell tell sign it will go this direction.
That's a very good point. Does the picture of the top-plate categorically rule out full-frame? It seems like it does, but we don't really have an indication of the height of the prism.
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:15 AM
p.11 #18Canon 7D
MaxiKana wrote:
It won't be FF with that kind of a top-plate (if it is genuine). The prism wouldn't be big enough for FF mirror box. Most likely 1.6 I'd say.
Really?
This was full frame.
It won't be FF with that kind of a top-plate (if it is genuine). The prism wouldn't be big enough for FF mirror box. Most likely 1.6 I'd say.
Really?
This was full frame.
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:17 AM
p.11 #19Canon 7D
I don't think it will be FF, and I seriously doubt it will be 1.3. I'm expecting a really nice 1.6 crop, if any of this is true.
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:17 AM
p.11 #20Canon 7D
I'm going to suggest that we're talking about two different cameras here (assuming both photos are genuine). The top plate camera really looks like it will have a crop factor, but I just don't see Canon releasing something marketed as a 7D that has crop, pop-up flash etc. Maybe, but I think it makes better marketing sense to release a higher-end FF 7D to compete with Nikon's offerings. The top plate camera could be a 60D (although the lack of scene modes seems to contradict this).
Anyway, just speculating here....
/isn't that what these threads are all about?
Anyway, just speculating here....
/isn't that what these threads are all about?
Aug 20, 2009 at 09:18 AM