7D MKII OR 6D (Page 3): O Kay perhaps Great is not the correct word. That said for a crop sensor it is good, and for sports and wildlife it is better than a FF. At least that is my...

PCL92

O Kay perhaps Great is not the correct word. That said for a crop sensor it is good, and for sports and wildlife it is better than a FF. At least that is my opinion and Scott Kelby's. He called it a baby 5D MKlll

Chris F. Loc: San Francisco

I agree and your comment is spot on. I had the 5DII before getting the 5DIII. It's a great camera, but low light, low noise shots were certainly not it's strong point.

Chris

haroldross wrote:

I would not call the 7D MK II a 'great' low light camera. Compared to the original 7D, it is a little better but not by leaps and bounds. When compared to the 6D or 5D MK III, it clearly is not a great low light camera.

I have the 7D MK II and I really like the advanced AF and some of the other features but the low light performance s nothing to write home about.

rstrick2 Loc: Beverly Hills, FL

The 6D is as good as any camera out there in low light,

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

PCL92 wrote:

He called it a baby 5D MKlll

PCL, actually, I believe he called it the baby 1DX, not 5lll!!
It's been a while since I've seen that uTube.
SS

PCL92

You may be correct. SS I was not paying much attention because I made up my mind to buy the MKll and I am very pleased with its performance. I haven't tried the 100-400 with the 1.4 converter yet, but I will in the near future.

JLM

Art Morris has been using the 7D II and has written extensively about it on his blog. Art is renowned for his bird photography so his comments would probably answer you questions about wildlife, etc. I would definitely recommend you check his blog.

JLM

Art Morris has been using the 7D II and has written extensively about it on his blog. Art is renowned for his bird photography so his comments would probably answer you questions about wildlife, etc. I would definitely recommend you check his blog.

JLM

Art Morris has been using the 7D II and has written extensively about it on his blog. Art is renowned for his bird photography so his comments would probably answer you questions about wildlife, etc. I would definitely recommend you check his blog.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

JLM wrote:

Art Morris has been using the 7D II and has written extensively about it on his blog. Art is renowned for his bird photography so his comments would probably answer you questions about wildlife, etc. I would definitely recommend you check his blog.

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Somebody puhleeze help me understand. The 7D II is supposed to be awesome in low-light, but yet the low-light sensor rating as tested by DxOMark is not very good as compared to not only latest competition (D7100) but also as compared and stated with older and in some cases entry level models (D3300).
If this camera is being touted as a "mini-5DIII" or as stated a "mini-1Dx" how is this possible?

Possibly a different question, but as an example and using rounded numbers, the 5DIII is low-light rated at 2300 on a FF camera. The 7D MKII is rated at 1082. Isn't the low-light rating sub-par? If the sensor is 40% smaller would not a relative ISO rating be 40% less than the 5DIII or about 1280? Am I seeing this right, or is my math and rationale flawed?
So, is the 7DII awesome as compared only to the 7D? That I could understand a little better.
BTW - I am a Canon user.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

sirlensalot wrote:

Somebody puhleeze help me understand. The 7D II is... (show quote)

Tony Northrup does an nice explanation at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTuBr0W0Zhw

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

dsmeltz wrote:

Tony Northrup does an nice explanation at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTuBr0W0Zhw

Really appreciate the link. Watched it. Now understand more about sensors. First time I heard anything about sensor efficiency. Great info. Like Northrup's way he looked at it.
It did help make up my mind. Still not confident in Canon's lag behind Nikon and in some cases Sony, but this video helped.
Thank you for posting.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

sirlensalot wrote:

Really appreciate the link. Watched it. Now understand more about sensors. First time I heard anything about sensor efficiency. Great info. Like Northrup's way he looked at it.
It did help make up my mind. Still not confident in Canon's lag behind Nikon and in some cases Sony, but this video helped.
Thank you for posting.

It reminds me that a camera is not just a sensor. It is a system of which the sensor is just one part. And, at least for action photography, perhaps not the most important part.

Victor S Loc: SouthCoast MA

[quote=sirlensalot]Somebody puhleeze help me understand. The 7D II is supposed to be awesome in low-light, but yet the low-light sensor rating as tested by DxOMark is not very good as compared to not only latest competition (D7100) but also as compared and stated with older and in some cases entry level models (D3300).
If this camera is being touted as a "mini-5DIII" or as stated a "mini-1Dx" how is this possible?

It was the 6D touted as "mini-5DIII"

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

dsmeltz wrote:

It reminds me that a camera is not just a sensor. It is a system of which the sensor is just one part. And, at least for action photography, perhaps not the most important part.

I guess we'll have to disagree on that part. I'm going to hitch my wagon to Tony Northrup's view that ISO is the most important in relation to the other two tests, but I can see where others would have more use or need for other parts.