It seems like the natural progression, given than Sony has been building a 40MP sensor for Fujifilm cameras for some time now. It also isn’t surprising that the Canon may have 39MP instead of 40MP, since Canon still uses the slighlty smaller 1.6x cropped sensor instead of the 1.5x sensors used by Fujifilm and others. (The difference between 39MP and 40MP is essentially immaterial.)
EB-1 wrote:
R7II needs CFe slots. SD UHS II is too slow now.
EBH
Yes , and atleast a partially stacked sensor. The R7 sensor is good but the ES readout speed is very slow. And give it the mechanical shutter of R5/R5II, The shutter mechanism shall not be inherited from R7..
It should have R5 II readout speed in ES, but I don't know how that R5/R5 II physical shutter would fit.
I don't like the vibrations of the R7 shutter with long lenses, so I have to use the ES on it.
johnctharp wrote:
I'm more interested in readout speeds. This thing basically needs to be a mini R6 III to be competitive.
We don't need another slow ~40MP camera like the ones Fuji has been releasing...
John, have you been using any of those Fujifilm 40MP cameras yourself? (I have.)
That being said, the Fujifilm 40MP cameras are not going to be the fastest on the block for things like sports and bird photography. I sometimes use mine for the latter purpose successfully, but it that’s your main thing then you might be looking elsewhere and not at a highest MP sensor body.
My bet is that whatever Canon comes out with that has the higher sensor resolution will be at least as fast as the lower MP model it replaced.
gdanmitchell wrote:
John, have you been using any of those Fujifilm 40MP cameras yourself? (I have.)
That being said, the Fujifilm 40MP cameras are not going to be the fastest on the block for things like sports and bird photography. I sometimes use mine for the latter purpose successfully, but it that’s your main thing then you might be looking elsewhere and not at a highest MP sensor body.
My bet is that whatever Canon comes out with that has the higher sensor resolution will be at least as fast as the lower MP model it replaced.
I wouldn't mind if a higher-resolution, slower-reading sensor was in another body, but that isn't what a 7-series is supposed to be .
johnctharp wrote:
I wouldn't mind if a higher-resolution, slower-reading sensor was in another body, but that isn't what a 7-series is supposed to be .
True. (I just think that calling the Fujfilm 40MP cameras "slow" is overstating things a bit.)
When you at considerable cost and effort find yourself in a unique situation with your dream subject, rattle off all those fps you payed for, and the distorted result gets you sick, no, then the manufacturer did not get it right. That was my experience with the R7.
The R72 is first and foremost a body for wildlife, which at times is very fast indeed. Unless the readout speed _AND_ AF is fast enough, then its not worth any price. Not at the scenario pictured above.
Some people are expecting to be disappointed, but I think we could be surprised.
For the R7, Canon mostly raided its existing parts bin with a sensor derived from that in the 90D. This is similar to what they did for the original EOS R (5D4) and RP (6D2).
If they follow pattern and develop all new sensor tech for their second-generation 7-series body, there is no reason why we could not see a profound leap in capabilities, as we first saw with the R5, and which has continued with subsequent full frame models.
Canon is certainly capable of the engineering required. I think it is only a matter of whether they believe this is what the market wants and is willing to pay for.
Z250SA wrote:
The R72 is first and foremost a body for wildlife,
You hope. Before the R7 was released, we all thought it would be an APS-C sports and wildlife camera with great AF, frame rate, buffer etc. Canon saw its place in the lineup differently.
big country wrote:
still waiting on that 200-500/300-600
PREACH brother!
gkinard1952 wrote:
Cannot wait to see the hype, and the fanboys praising this camera.
Remember the weeping and gnashing of teeth when the flagship R1 was revealed with a 24.2MP Full-Frame Sensor? If 24 MP is enough resolution for a pro body why would a crop sensor be lauded for 39 MP? If the R7 Mark II really shoots 35 frames per second X 39 MP as CR speculates, what memory card will that recording on?
That’s a darned good representation, even if the position of the stable endpoint can vary up or down a bit. But the wild swings are pretty darned typical!
It applies equitably well to a whole lot of non-photographic products. And ideas. And more.
.