[audiobomber]

Better than I expected. It's a slight improvement over the 70D, 70 points overall vs. 66. I thought they'd be tied.

Canon EOS 7D Mk II review: Low ISO performance lags behind rivals - DxOMark

---

Last edited by audiobomber; 11-05-2014 at 03:30 PM.

[starjedi]

Better than I expected. It's a slight improvement over the 70D, 70 points overall vs. 66. I thought they'd be tied.

Canon EOS 7D Mk II review: Low ISO performance lags behind rivals - DxOMark

It is lag behind pentax k3. Unfortunately it might still sell much well than k3 due to market...

[Miguel]

It is lag behind pentax k3. Unfortunately it might still sell much well than k3 due to market...

1. Since the camera's announcement a couple of months ago, I believe that more 7DMK2 models have sold than Pentax will ever sell of the k-3. Lots of predictable reasons why.
2. The target market for the 7D is sports and wildlife. The supporting lens system, as well as the camera's overall functional performance in what matters to the intended audience, are superior to the K-3. I don't know any of my peers who give much weight to relatively minor sensor differences. If you cannot get the shot, what does it matter?

M

[stevebrot]

Since the camera's announcement a couple of months ago, I believe that more 7DMK2 models have sold than Pentax will ever sell of the k-3. Lots of predictable reasons why.

Indeed! They probably surpassed the K-3 in the first two weeks of presale!


Steve

[Rondec]

1. Since the camera's announcement a couple of months ago, I believe that more 7DMK2 models have sold than Pentax will ever sell of the k-3. Lots of predictable reasons why.
2. The target market for the 7D is sports and wildlife. The supporting lens system, as well as the camera's overall functional performance in what matters to the intended audience, are superior to the K-3. I don't know any of my peers who give much weight to relatively minor sensor differences. If you cannot get the shot, what does it matter?

M

Sure. I guess I would just say that these aren't "minor differences," in the sense that there is a two point difference in the score between the K5 II and the K3. Ten points difference in the DXO Mark ratings will be visible in photos. The worst thing to me is that, other than faster read out speed, this sensor seems to test almost exactly the same as the original 7D sensor -- a sensor that was fine for the time, but clearly behind the times at this point.

Problem is of the other top APS-C cameras out there, the D7100 is crippled with a poor buffer and the K3 doesn't have a great lens line up for sport/wildlife, so probably Canon will continue to collect those shooters. Obviously it isn't just about a sensor performance, but about system performance.

[Miguel]

Ten points difference in the DXO Mark ratings will be visible in photos.

You really believe that? In real life? I'm very surprised.
I've never noticed any sensor-related problems or issues in any of my photos taken with any of my Canon or Pentax DSLRs. The most frequent and predictable cause of poor photographs is me.

M

[rawr]

I think the most interesting direct sports shooter comparison is with the Alpha 77 II:

- Total DxO score 82 vs 70 for 7D II
- same high-ISO score, interestingly
- 12fps continuous shooting with autofocus vs 10 for the 7D II
- 79 point AF module with 15 cross-type AF points vs 7D II 65 points, all cross-type
- flippy screen vs 7D II no flippy screen
- $900 vs 7D II $1800 (B&H pricing today)

Like the K-3 comparison, however, the choice for sports shooters between this Sony and the Canon largely comes down to lenses and AF system refinement. Canon has more to offer there than Sony.

[Miguel]

I think the most interesting direct sports shooter comparison is with the Alpha 77 II:

Another camera that has specs that look great on paper and on the Internet but in real life is second rate for action. I tried shooting not very quick movement with this and the EVF lag and resulting blackouts brought back unhappy flashbacks of black-light strobes at school dances. Very disconcerting when tracking and to me not as good as the K-3. Until the technology is improved this will prevent EVF-driven cameras from being taken seriously for sports and wildlife that moves. I tried the latest Olympus OMD models too but only the first shot of a sequence was accurate and reliable.
I'm hoping that both Nikon and Canon signify their seriousness in the mirrorless market by applying their primo AF secret sauces.

M

[Rondec]

You really believe that? In real life? I'm very surprised.
I've never noticed any sensor-related problems or issues in any of my photos taken with any of my Canon or Pentax DSLRs. The most frequent and predictable cause of poor photographs is me.

M

I do, but Miguel, I shoot landscapes (and photos of my kids) for the most part and I am shooting low iso images. Having high frame rate and super fast auto focus hasn't been something that I needed. On the other hand, I definitely can see a difference between even the K5 II at iso 80 and K3 at iso 100 with regard to ability to post processing -- the dynamic range is really amazing. I personally wouldn't like a camera that takes that backward, although, as I say, I am not shooting sports.