Have a 7d, should I upgrade to 7d2?

I heard from a reliable source that the Canon 7d2 is the BEST camera in the ENTIRE lineup. WANT!!

I'm surprised to hear good reviews of the 7D's ISO above ISO320...

While I love the 7D , it's hopeless past ISO320...

Wow, you must have other problems, I shoot mostly wildlife and birds and rarely get down to 320 ISO. Lots of ISO 1600, if exposed properly to the right, about 2/3, usually no noise at all after light pp. I set 3000 ISO limit in auto ISO and TV quite a lot to keep shutter speed up for Bif and works great. That said I'm probably going to go to mark 2 myself and keep 7D for backup. It was either that or 5d3 and for what I do 7D2 makes more sense. Hope you figure out ISO problem!

320 or 3200? you'd have to be doing some serious pixel peeping to have a problem at iso 320

Micro5797 wrote in post #17594820
With how big the step up is from the old 7D, i don't see why everyone has not already upgraded to the 7D mk2.

No matter how big the step up is Not Everyone can afford the jump in cost from a 7d to a 7d2, the same could be said for your lenses, don't know why you haven't exchanged your 70-200 f2.8 mk1 to the mk2 version or your 85 f1.8 to a f/1.2 or even upgrade your 50mm.

daverator wrote in post #17622170
Wow, you must have other problems, I shoot mostly wildlife and birds and rarely get down to 320 ISO. Lots of ISO 1600, if exposed properly to the right, about 2/3, usually no noise at all after light pp. I set 3000 ISO limit in auto ISO and TV quite a lot to keep shutter speed up for Bif and works great. That said I'm probably going to go to mark 2 myself and keep 7D for backup. It was either that or 5d3 and for what I do 7D2 makes more sense. Hope you figure out ISO problem!

To add to this, if the lighting is there iso 1600 is very doable on the 7d. I've taken indoor shots during mass and midday ISO1600 shots look great.

Upper limit for me on the 7D is ISO800, even then, it's just for pics for me...I'd never use a file off the 7D above ISO200, just too much noise!

I have to laugh when I see comments on here about having usable ISO at 6400 etc...then, the ISO6400 image is posted and it's unbelievably bad, it makes me wonder if anyone is looking at their hi-ISO images on a screen larger than the back of the camera, because when you do (especially at 100%), they are shocking...

Reminds me of some of the submitted photos we used to get at the magazine...people would send in pictures of their car (which was a nice car and, sure, we wanted to feature it), taken by a 'mate', but the images were awful...and they just couldn't see why we needed to re-shoot it for the magazine...

I shoot at 1600 ISO all the time on the 7D in light-challenged Oregon. Also did the same in the tropical jungles in Costa Rica earlier this month. Of course, my 6D is better, but the 7D isn't quite as bad as you suggest.

The 7D's sensor and processor is completely useable at ISO 6400. Lots of folks shoot it at that level. The 7D, and every camera Canon has released since, is completely useable at its highest native ISO. To artificially limit the camera to lower values is to waste potential.

Oh, I know it's usable...

I just spin the dial to some ridiculous ISO setting and click the shutter...usable...but​, the results are horrendous...The resulting images are worse than my old 2.1MP Cybershot...

As someone who used to shoot a lot of B&W ISO1000 film, the 7D @ ISO1000 can't even come close to competing in quality...

STIC wrote in post #17640046
Oh, I know it's usable...

I just spin the dial to some ridiculous ISO setting and click the shutter...usable...but​, the results are horrendous...The resulting images are worse than my old 2.1MP Cybershot...

As someone who used to shoot a lot of B&W ISO1000 film, the 7D @ ISO1000 can't even come close to competing in quality...

That is my point. The results obtained by a user who knows how to work those ISO levels are not horrendous. I am struggling to not be rude here. If you search some of the "7D high-ISO" threads, you will see shots at ISO 6400 that will blow you away. POTN member TeamSpeed has tutorials on getting the most out of high-ISO work. He gets much better results than I do out of my 60D, and I can post (have posted) ISO 6400 shots from a 60D that have no visible noise in them. The camera (any modern Canon) is quite capable of producing low/no noise results at ISO settings considered extreme 5 years ago. Any ISO limitations are coming from the user, not the camera. ISO is, to lots of folks, simply not a factor any more. Of course, tastes and tolerances vary, but that has nothing to do with the native abilities the camera brings to the table.

EDIT:
https://photography-on-the.net …read.php?t=1079​217&page=5
Look at post #73 in this thread to see the 7D at ISO 12,800. The 60D uses the same sensor and processor. I can get results almost this good out of the 60D at ISO 6400. This guy is a master. You just can't make the claim that the 7D, or any modern Canon body, is 'horrendous' at ISO xxxx. If that were true, those of us using them at those levels would not be getting such good results. The limitation is self-, not camera-imposed.

EDIT-2:
I've posted these before. Both from 60D @ ISO 6400. Horrendous? Not in my book. EXIF intact. ISO 6400 and f/2.8. 1/30 & 1/50 respectively. I am looking at full-res shots on a 22" monitor. I struggle to find anything that looks like noise. The camera is capable of better. I am not. Lots of folks are.

Here is a demo shot from the 60D at 6400. The 100% crop is from the darkest (noisiest) part of the frame, in pretty heavy shadow. For what it is, the noise is minimal, and I don't find it distracting at all. Detail retention is very good.

I have usable images at 6400 iso and higher in my gallery. And I really dont' have the processing skills that others do. Prints 4x6 fine, 8x10 will show the grain but to any non photographers is also just fine.

Colors are wonderful, in any sort of good light. Needs ETTR to get the best out of the sensor.

If you can't stand any sort of grain, then renting and seeing what you think first, may be a good idea. But if you are good in post, and have good exposure technique, then it is a no brainer.

one example here, this is about 1/3rd - 1/2 of the sooc image - which is right above it.

https://photography-on-the.net …07&mg=265650&i=​i200104159

you must be a serious pixel peeper STIC, this shot was at iso 4000 in the rain and it's very usable, I've actually had a local sign writing company ask if they can use it for their shop front

I don't think it'd worth the effort folks, we have seen the same attitude before, and given the signature quotes, it is clear that he/she must then be from the US. No matter how much we argue and show how to get better results, they will continue to be difficult. Remember mike55?