PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

For those UHH who are real Canon People and those UHH who are real Nikon people and those who are just interested, here is a comparasion


Comparison Table
Canon EOS 7D Mark II Nikon D500
Manufacturer Canon Nikon
Lens
Effective Magnification 1.6x 1.5x
Image Sensor
Pixels 20.2Mp (Megapixels) 20.9Mp (Megapixels)
Pixels (W) 5472 5568
Pixels (H) 3648 3712
Sensor Type CMOS CMOS
Sensor Size APS-C DX
Sensor Size (width) 22.4mm 23.5mm
Sensor Size (height) 15mm 15.7mm
Aspect Ratio

3:2
4:3
16:9
1:1



3:2

LCD Monitor
LCD Monitor 3in 3.2in
Screen resolution 1040K dots 2,359,000
Touch Screen No Yes
Focusing
Focusing modes

Autofocus
Manual
Spot
Face Detection
AF Tracking
Multi
Centre
AF Fine Tuning (Micro Adjustment)



Autofocus
Manual
Face Detection
AF Tracking
Spot
Multi
Centre
AF Fine Tuning (Micro Adjustment)

Exposure Control
Shutter speeds shortest 1/8000sec 1/8000sec
Shutter speeds longest 30sec 30sec
Exp modes

Program
Aperture-Priority
Shutter-Priority
Manual
Scene modes
Program Variable



Program
Aperture-Priority
Shutter-Priority
Manual
Program Variable

Metering

Centre-weighted - Average
Multi Pattern
Centre Spot



Centre-weighted - Average
Spot
M

ISO sensitivity 100 - 51200 50 - 1640000
White balance

Auto
Manual
Bracket
Outdoors/Daylight
Cloudy
Incandescent
Fluorescent
Shade
Flash



Auto
Manual
Bracket
Outdoors/Daylight
Cloudy
Incandescent
Fluorescent
Flash

Exposure Comp +/-5 +/-5
Shooting Options
Continuous shooting 10fps 10fps
Video
Movie mode Yes Yes
Video Resolution

1920x1080



1920x1080
1280x720 720p
4K

Video FPS 60p, 50p, 30p, 25p, 24p 30,25,24fps
Stereo Sound No Yes
Optical Zoom with Video Yes Yes
Other Features
Image Stabilisation No Yes
Interface
HDMI Yes Yes
USB USB 3 USB 3
Storage
Card Type

SD
SDHC
CF
SDXC



SD
SDHC
SDXC
XQD

File Type

RAW
JPG
RAW + JPG



RAW
JPG
TIFF
RAW + JPG

Power Source
Battery Type Rechargeable Li-ion Battery LP-E6N Lithium Ion
CIPA Rating 670 1240
Box Contents
Box Contents No Data No Data
Dimensions
Weight 910g 760g
Width 148.6mm 147mm
Height 112.4mm 115mm
Depth 78.2mm 81mm
View Full Details View Full Details

insman1132 Loc: Southwest Florida

Interesting, Stan. Thanks. How do they compare on price?

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Good Question. My guess is that the Nikon will be more expensive.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The Canon 7D Mark II , originally released at $1799 has been selling regularly for $1499 since last Spring. On top of that, It was generally available for around $1299 to to $1399 at Christmas and will likely go back down there on a more permanent basis is there is too much sales pressure from the Nikon D500. The D500's initial price is $1999, and its hard to say when the price might come down, if it comes down at all. There is no question the D500 is spec'd at a much higher level than the 7D II, but the 7D II will still be able to capture the same great images it always could. For me as a 7D II shooter, the new D500 is intriguing, but there is nothing I see that would make me jump ship.

Since I rarely feel the need to shoot above ISO 6400, the really high ISO capabilities of the D500, are lost on me. And the real issue is when noise starts to creep in, and not the highest ISO it can attain. The touch screen has limited functionality from what I've read, and its not a feature I'm really interested in, but others will certainly like it. The same for the partial articulation of the LCD screen. Even though my old Canon 60D has a fully articulating LCD I rarely used that feature. The 4K video looks great, but if like me, you rarely use it and are primarily looking for a stills cameras, its not a determining factor.

I suspect that for most advanced shooters, in most shooting conditions, the quality of the results achieved by either camera will be more similar than different. For those who will regularly be taking advantage of the D500's more advanced capabilities, the choice between the two bodies will be obvious. Remember, at the end of the day, the quality of the results you get from any camera is based more on the eye and brain behind the viewfinder rather than how its spec'd.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

I agree with all your points. It is the camera in the persons hands and their vision is what counts. The camera is just a tool. Not trying to convert anyone or make them JUMP SHIP.

JPL

There is still lot of specs missing from this list. But maybe it does not matter so much. What I am waiting for is side by side field test of those cameras, and dxomark score for the sensor in the D500, to verify if it is really as good as I am tempted to believe.

AntonioReyna Loc: Los Angeles, California

You can buy the 7DII, now for around $1,300 and the D500 will be in at around $2,000. No doubt, the D500 has better specs, but you need to decide whether the differences are worth the extra cost. Ultimately, the images will have comparable megapixels, so it is the other differences that will or won't make a difference to some of the Hogs. I am a Canon guy, formerly a Nikon guy, and I admit that the D500 has very impressive specs. A pro crop sensor body just as the 7DII is a pro level crop sensor body. To each his own. Lots of good choices.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

It probably is just as good as you suspect, and maybe even better, but as I stated above, will the differences in the hands of an experienced user in most situations be as significant as the numbers imply? I think most of the time in most situations it's superior specifications will probably result in visually marginal improvements at best..

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

:thumbup:

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

How can you compare a camera that's not even on the street yet to a camera that's proven in actual use. You can't.
What we can say is that Nikon shooters have desperately needed this camera for a long time. People where comparing the 7200 to the 7ll, that's like comparing a boy to a man.
I'm glad for Nikon shooters. Now they can stand right next to the Canon big boys at Cowingo and not feel sheepish and ashamed!!
The 500 will fill a HUGE hole in the Nikon line-up. Nikon should be ashamed for what it put its sports shooters through. I'll bet Nikon didn't even have it on the drawing board before the 7ll came out! Maybe even Nikon really thought that Canon would never release a 7ll!!
While all you paper shooters are debating the differences, 7ll shooters are actually out in the field enjoying what came out 14 months ago!! ;-)
SS

Jim Bob

Exactly. And to add insult to injury you have a bunch of idiots on this and other sites actually recommending it before it even hits the streets.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The potential is certainly there, but it's not proven yet, and in the end, other than a numbers game, how much better will it be in the real world? That's still an unanswered question.

JPL

Well, maybe according to the specs posted we are talking about marginal improvements at best.

But if we take into account what was not posted, it may be a lot more than marginal improvements we are talking about.

For example, the D500 has a buffer size of 200 photos, meaning it can shoot at 10fps for 20 seconds before the buffer is full. But then again it has the fastest memory card solution available today. So if this is working well together with the camera firmware this camera may practically be a non stoppable beast for shooting action, at least until the battery is empty.

Another thing is the new autofocus system. No one really knows yet how good it is, we can be sure it is an improvement from the best Nikon has offered so far so it is surely really good. But how good?? This is one of the most important features of this camera and the specs tell little about it, except the name and number of focus points. I mean, we have no info on usable pic rate from this system. That is what counts a lot in the end.

Then of course 4K video with in camera stabilizing is more than marginal video improvement. And so is the "on the go" lens auto fine tune. One more thing the specs tell little about.

And the high ISO is of course very interesting, still we need to see how high we can go and still find the pics usable. If they are usable at 2-3 stops higher ISO than we are used to it is more than marginal improvement in that area.

Those are all things I find very interesting, maybe revolutionary, and yet the specs tell little about most of those things. What I need to understand those things better is hands on reviews and camera to camera field test.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

I agree that the potential is there, but it is thus far unproven and even then its hard to know without a direct side by side comparison in normal use, not in tests.

For example, the D500 has a buffer size of 200 photos, meaning it can shoot at 10fps for 20 seconds before the buffer is full.
That is impressive, but I've only attempted a burst on my 7DII that exceeded its buffer on one occasion. Most bursts I take are within 5 to 15 images. I can't even imagine a circumstance that I would need the ability to capture 200 raw files in burst mode. And remember sports and action shooters very often shoot Jpeg, and the 7D II can record up to 1000 Jpegs in burst mode!

Another thing is the new autofocus system. No one really knows yet how good it is, we can be sure it is an improvement from the best Nikon has offered so far so it is surely really good. But how good?? This is one of the most important features of this camera and the specs tell little about it, except the name and number of focus points. I mean, we have no info on usable pic rate from this system. That is what counts a lot in the end.
Agree, this is still an unknown. So we're really talking about the potential of a camera that's just coming on the market. And if its better, how much better? And under what shooting circumstances?

Then of course 4K video with in camera stabilizing is more than marginal video improvement.
Not all 4K is of equal quality so it will take a while to sort that out. And for those who are primarily stills shooters it may not be a ground breaking achievement.

And so is the "on the go" lens auto fine tune. One more thing the specs tell little about.
This is the single feature I'm most interested in. Its still a guess how effective it will be and whether it will work better with some lenses than others.

And the high ISO is of course very interesting, still we need to see how high we can go and still find the pics usable. If they are usable at 2-3 stops higher ISO than we are used to it is more than marginal improvement in that area.
Again on paper this sounds very impressive. I for one, rarely have a need to go above ISO 6400 so ISO 1.6 million is a bit overkill. What it comes down to is how the noise is handled.

Any lets not forget the D500 initially will cost $500 to $700 more than the Canon 7D Mark II. Bottom line: Its too early to say if the incredibly spec'd D500 can live up to the hype in normal usage and is worth the premium price for experienced sports and action shooters. Time will tell.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

No doubt, the Nikon will be better than the Canon, especially on paper!!
We all know that no Canon can even sneak into the top 100 in ANY category on paper.
YET, more pros prefer Canons over every other brand, no matter how poorly they behave on paper. In the real world what photographers need and use work exceptionally well on Canons, that's why pros use them, not because they are all glassed up.
Maybe, just maybe, Nikon shooters will be able to talk real photography again and not just parrot out DR numbers. It's good to see Nikon shooters getting a real tool again. As MT put it, they've been EMBARRASSED for SOOO long!!!
But hey, they sold a boatload of those crappy little 7200's. So now what, you gotta dump the little toy and get a real camera??? I'd be pissed off!!!! It's the Nikon way! :lol: :lol:
SS