Canon 7d mk ii, why so many for sale

MalVeauX wrote in post #17660798
I kind of doubt it, resolution is hardly why people are attracted to the 7D2 in general (it's barely a wee bit more than the original 7D). I would guess, loosely, that most people going after the 7D2 want it's AF engine (which the 5DR/S lacks) and FPS (which the 5DR/S lacks).

Very best,

Agreed. I was not expecting much from resolution or noise. I was pretty happy with the 7D in that area. I figure we got about ⅔ stop noise improvement which I'll take.

My main interest was the AF. Zone is far better than the 7D which I have up on. Now birding is like shooting fish in a barrel. Just that new AF mode lever is a big - little addition that changed things for me. Now every time I pick up my 5D3 I have to scratch my head for a few seconds to remember how to change the AF mode.

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=17656554

digital paradise wrote in post #17660876
Just that new AF mode lever is a big - little addition that changed things for me. Now every time I pick up my 5D3 I have to scratch my head for a few seconds to remember how to change the AF mode.

I got my 5DIII after owning the 7DII for a few months, very disappointed it didn't have that lever, and like you have to think for a moment after I switch bodies.

EnglishBob wrote in post #17660991
I got my 5DIII after owning the 7DII for a few months, very disappointed it didn't have that lever, and like you have to think for a moment after I switch bodies.

I Canon offered a retro I'd send my 5D3 in and pay to get that installed. I sent my 7D in for get the locking mode dial installed. It was worth every penny - to me.

mwsilver wrote in post #17658878
Keep in mind that in several respects the 7DII is also being compared favorably as a not so little brother to the 1DX. Not too shabby when you consider the 7DII is available at B&H for $1500, and the 1DX for 3 &1/2 times more at $5300.

There's no doubt that if you fill the frame the same way with different lenses, with the same exposure, the 1Dx yields better IQ than the 7D2, can shoot a little faster, etc, but when you are focal length-limited with the same lens, the 7D2 is the better camera, IQ-wise. At high ISOs, it only has a little bit more measured noise but has less noise than an equivalent crop from the 1Dx at low ISOs.

If I had to chose between just the 7D2 or just the 1Dx, and price was not different, I would still choose the 7D2, because I find myself focal-length-limited most of the time. If I were shooting mostly larger or closer subject, then the 1Dx would have more utility.

There was once a time when one could argue that a larger sensor with a TC makes up for the low pixel density of a FF camera with a similar number of pixels, and that is still true for manual focus, but now that the 7D2 is here with f/8 AF, too, this argument fails as the 7D2 clearly puts almost 3x as many pixels on target as the 1Dx at f/8, with the same lens. One less 1.4x of TC also means slightly less haloing and slightly better contrast.

digital paradise wrote in post #17660876
Agreed. I was not expecting much from resolution or noise. I was pretty happy with the 7D in that area. I figure we got about ⅔ stop noise improvement which I'll take.

The mark II has a full stop less pixel-level read noise at high ISOs, and a hair less at base ISO. It is also a hair more efficient, giving slightly less shot noise. Not only that, but the read noise is less patterned than the 7D2. In a practical sense, I would say that the 7D2 is at least a stop better across the range of ISOs, maybe more. A while back, I compared the black frames from both cameras, and the 7D2 had a lot less "salt and pepper" outlier noise pixels. IOW, independent of the amount of noise, the shape of the noise histogram on the 7D2 is more narrow, and centered, while the 7D has stronger tails.

John Sheehy wrote in post #17661030
The mark II has a full stop less pixel-level read noise at high ISOs, and a hair less at base ISO. It is also a hair more efficient, giving slightly less shot noise. Not only that, but the read noise is less patterned than the 7D2. In a practical sense, I would say that the 7D2 is at least a stop better across the range of ISOs, maybe more. A while back, I compared the black frames from both cameras, and the 7D2 had a lot less "salt and pepper" outlier noise pixels. IOW, independent of the amount of noise, the shape of the noise histogram on the 7D2 is more narrow, and centered, while the 7D has stronger tails.

I have read about this on other forums, etc. I went ⅔ because sometimes not all agree in the real world but that simply comes down to correct exposure and is subjective without measuring. I have noticed an improvement. Thanks for the info.

ICee wrote in post #17658633
Mine was because of focus errors that Canon couldn't or wouldn't fix. I didn't sell it I traded it in as I didn't want to pass the fault onto somebody else without some warranty.

You have restored my faith in humanity.

wisv1k wrote in post #17658675
Where did you work a trade? I may consider this if mine comes back poor again.

Wex here in the UK.

Lol.. Thanks. I didn't notice you were across the pond. I think a trade here would be financially painful to swallow.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17660798
I kind of doubt it, resolution is hardly why people are attracted to the 7D2 in general (it's barely a wee bit more than the original 7D). I would guess, loosely, that most people going after the 7D2 want it's AF engine (which the 5DR/S lacks) and FPS (which the 5DR/S lacks).

Very best,

Yes but the 5D S/R and the 5DIII share AF systems, which are very similar to that in the 7DII. As far as I can see the main difference being the number of cross type sensors. If you can afford the camera, and the computing power to store/process those images, then the real differentiator between the cameras becomes the frame rate and buffer size.

Alan

jay125 wrote in post #17661080
You have restored my faith in humanity.

The right thing to do. Maybe I got lucky with the repair. I have hundreds of these from today. No MFA

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=17661613

MalVeauX wrote in post #17660798
I kind of doubt it, resolution is hardly why people are attracted to the 7D2 in general (it's barely a wee bit more than the original 7D). I would guess, loosely, that most people going after the 7D2 want it's AF engine (which the 5DR/S lacks) and FPS (which the 5DR/S lacks).

And to save money....

The number of used 7DII bodies here and elsewhere is a tiny fraction of those purchased new. I suspect that you are correct, and that those who purchased a 7DII hoping for something it was never intended to be were disappointed. I also suspect that many of those for sale used are from people whose criteria for a camera include pixel-peeping satisfaction, rather than the qualities that make the 7DII so useful to many of us.

pknight wrote in post #17663391
And to save money....

The number of used 7DII bodies here and elsewhere is a tiny fraction of those purchased new. I suspect that you are correct, and that those who purchased a 7DII hoping for something it was never intended to be were disappointed. I also suspect that many of those for sale used are from people whose criteria for a camera include pixel-peeping satisfaction, rather than the qualities that make the 7DII so useful to many of us.

Granted, for anyone who can get close enough to their subject or has the focal length necessary to use a bigger recent sensor, 7D2 IQ is going to be somewhat inferior than the larger sensor at the same exposure, but people who think that a 1D3, 1D4, 5D3, or 5Ds gives better results in focal-length-limited situations are just fooling themselves, IMO; they are not doing rational, equitable comparisons. I left out the 1Dx, because it does, in fact, have slightly less read noise per unit of sensor area of the 7D2 at high ISOs, but none of the other Canons do. It has more noise than the 7D2 in focal-length-limited situations at low ISOs, as do all the other Canon options.

The AA-filter-less 5Dsr gives higher pixel contrast than the 7D2 with the same size pixels, so it has some utility over the 7D2 for those who like the aliased pixel look with very sharp optics, and even for those like myself, who don't like aliasing, but appreciate the lack of an AA filter when using optics in the small range where AA filters add visible blur, but are not necessary, such as using a sharp telephoto lens with a 2x TC or a 2.8x stack.

Those are the only ways in which any other Canons are superior in IQ to the 7D2 when they are cropped to APS-C; more acuity with the 5Ds, and slightly less read noise at high ISOs with the 1Dx; all the other cameras give lower IQ in focal-length-limited situations at all ISOs (the "I" in "IQ" referring to the subject displayed at the same visible size). There are disadvantages to those cameras, too, however - 1/3 stop more noise at all ISOs with the 5Dsr, and much less resolution with the 1Dx.

As someone looking to possibly buy a 7Dii, I say the more the better. The more for sale, the lower the price. I'm all good with that. i have a 5D2 and I'm looking to get better AF and performance for sporting/auto racing/air show shots. Can't afford a 5D3 at the moment and certainly not a 1Dx, so this should suit my needs at a decent price.

I picked up one of the 7D2 that were for sale, and am about to do one of my mini-reviews between the 7D2 and 5D3.

I am learning the new characteristics of noise on each channel with the 7D2, and think I can put together some noise removal actions to add to my current CG Denoiser suite.

First round of testing at ISO 12800 looks promising.