7D2-- Its HERE!

You will not see less MP, nikon, sony and pentax all went to 14 and 16mp sensor. The nikon d3s will get a high mp sensor when they update that one also.

MOkoFOko wrote in post #11820169
I'm going to agree with that. Comparing my t2i/7d to my old 1d2n ... absolutely no contest. What a difference 2-3 years can make.

Light capturing technology has made it possible to do this, but if you apply those same advances and principles to larger photosites noise drops exponentially. Everything we've learned in the past "2-3 years" about capturing light in smaller and smaller pixels can be used to turn a larger pixel into a light-gathering beast that can push noise down into the depths of hell and ISO performance into the stratosphere.

krb wrote in post #11819898
Improved ISO performance is always welcome but there's no reason to give up resolution to get it.

And to this point more MP has meant a higher degree of processing to get a sharp image due to the stronger AA filter needed.

Not everyone wants or needs more computer time.

If they add a folding screen to the 7D mark II then where do all the buttons on the left hand side go?

Terrible thread title... should be a law against that.

Anyway... I don't use the picture styles, info, quick control or print buttons on my 7D. However, I do use the joystick a lot! That cannot go away.

Here's a photo of a 7D

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

no folding screen...leave that for the toy cameras!

Staszek wrote in post #11818625
Exactly. Look at the pixel density on the 1D (16mp on 1.3x) or the 5D. Lower density = less noise. A 12-15mp 1.6x sensor would be great IMO.

Indecent Exposure wrote in post #11820145
Imagine how much they could decrease noise if they didn't increase density...

Not much, actually. If the 7D was 15mp, the difference in high-ISO noise would be a fraction of a stop at best.
If they wanted to build an APS-C sensor to the 5D2's image quality (based on the same technology), they'd have to go down to around 8mp. Who wants that today in a DSLR?

Anyway, I think that up to this day, improvements in sensor technology have played a far bigger role than pixel density alone, when it comes to image quality.

Pixel density increased tremendously over the last 10 years and yet Canon's 18mp APS-C-sensor is not only the one with the highest pixel density but at the same time their best-performing APS-C sensor in terms of high-ISO.


Before the 7D, every new APS-C camera was mostly compared against it's predecessor and competing models. But since the 7D came out, it seems that 90% of the comparisons are against FF cameras, mainly the 5D2. Where does that come from?

sth_ wrote in post #11824523
Not much, actually.

Says you. I've heard differently elsewhere. I don't know who is right, you or the Canon engineer. I'm just going to have to go with my gut on this one.

sth_ wrote in post #11824523
Pixel density increased tremendously over the last 10 years and yet Canon's 18mp APS-C-sensor is not only the one with the highest pixel density but at the same time their best-performing APS-C sensor in terms of high-ISO.

But not the highest performing sensor in terms of high ISO available. That distinguishment belongs to cameras with lesser pixel density.

The fact remains, people are less concerned about MPs and more concerned about ISO performance. Most will "sacrifice" pixel density for any increase in high ISO ability. When Canon is able to understand that they might regain their market dominance.

More importantly, is "distinguishment" even a word?

Indecent Exposure wrote in post #11820145
Imagine how much they could decrease noise if they didn't increase density...
.

That does require imagination as there is no way for any of us to prove that is true.

tkbslc wrote in post #11825016
That does require imagination as there is no way for any of us to prove that is true.

Not really--just look at the sample images from a D3s @25600 from only 12MP-- full frame.

dave kadolph wrote in post #11825053
Not really--just look at the sample images from a D3s @25600 from only 12MP-- full frame.

How does that prove that an 8MP D3s would be less noisy or a 16MP D3s would have been noisier?

Indecent Exposure wrote in post #11824968
But not the highest performing sensor in terms of high ISO available. That distinguishment belongs to cameras with lesser pixel density.

True, but as I wrote: The best-performing APS-C one.

And to achieve the ~1 stop better high-ISO performance of the 5D2, you'd have to go down to 8mp because that's where you reach that camera's pixel density. So just going down to 15mp probably won't do the trick.

Anyway, I was pretty shocked when I've read the 18mp in the 7D announcement, because I thought that high-ISO performance might be worse than the 50D's or the 40D's. However, since this turned out not to be the case, I'm no longer that worried to be honest. As long as the ISO performance continues to improve as well, I don't really care that much about the resolution.

High ISO is the new MP....

tkbslc wrote in post #11825068
How does that prove that an 8MP D3s would be less noisy or a 16MP D3s would have been noisier?

You're right, it doesn't.

But given the entire breadth of camera bodies available, comparing cameras from all manufacturers in a given generation established a pattern that has yet to break - there is no substitute for pixel size where high ISO performance is concerned. In a given generation one can simply look at sensor size and pixel density and get an idea where the camera will rank amongst other cameras from the same generation in ISO performance.

Perhaps not coincidentally Canon's fortunes have been progressively trending downwards as their cameras' pixel density have been moving upwards. (So regardless of the MP/ISO debate, if the new 7D comes out with a gaudy MP count the market will simply not care as that isn't why people buy their cameras, and hasn't been a top reason for half a decade now.)