Canon 7D Mkii DxOMark Scores

I was very surprised no one was talking about this here, and I feel strange posting it because I've gone on the record many times about how these scores are really one, and only one measure of what a camera is capable of, and not a measure of real world worth.

That said, when the long awaited 7D Mkii came out I wasn't expecting to see sensor numbers that barely held up against 5 year old technology.

Canon EOS 7D Mark II DxOMark test score: identical to the 5 years old Nikon D300s camera | Photo Rumors

This speaks volumes regarding just how advanced Nikon sensors are. The unanswered (or asked) questions are...

• Does this really speak volumes about how good the in-camera processing is in the Canons?
• Does this really mean nothing, because DxOMark numbers are simply a measure of behavior at extremes and good photographers know how to work with any equipment?

I suspect the answer to both questions is, "Eh, kinda", but I suspect that the buzz that DxOMark has in the industry means that it could make this a rougher sell until it gets into a couple well-respected pros' hands and they give it the only, "Poppycock - let me show you what it can do". But, if a new pro-level Nikon DX can come out on the heals of this news and improve on those D7100 numbers then it could be a real win for them, which is something they can truly use.

I had to laugh this morning, I got this on Twitter, read it and kind of was like hum.... Thats interesting. Then went back to Twitter and it was followed by Kelby and him selling how good the camera was at High ISO. Had another laugh and moved on.

I like the speed of the camera, but the ratings are something to worry about. To me, like whats been previously said, only real world testing is beneficial to me. If it truly rates with the D300 then Canon needs to work on it, but I can't say for sure because I dont get into too many details of DXO ratings other than the combined score and ISO rating, which they have this camera really low.

Not sure what to think about it till someone compares both the 7D what the equivalent is for Nikon in a real world situation. To me with Sports I prefer what Fro ( Jared ) does and I am waiting for him to finish his testing of the 7D. So far with the testing he did on the 750 I am very impressed with the High ISO shots.

Not that I am planning on switching, but if the 7D comes out strong and gets a huge following then maybe that will make Nikon step up, maybe not. Still on the hunt for a second body, but not ready to pick it up for a few months. Kind of waiting to see how this all falls out and if any solid rumors come out. I want a high ISO, 7fps or 8fps body, dont care if its FX or DX but the cost can't break the bank. I just can't justify the D4# series yet.

Strictly in regards to the numbers, that is pretty sad. So, it took them five years to release a successor to the 7D, but their sensor can not do any better then a five year old D300s? Anyhow, i suppose someone will come along to prove the numbers "wrong".

While DxO Mark takes a lot of heat for their findings around here, and some have even alleged under the table dealings and other shady practices (without bothering to back up that mud slinging with anything resembling credible evidence); I've yet to see *any* legitimate source dispute either DxO Mark testing procedures (which they document quite thoroughly online), or their findings, in any way whatsoever. Yes, they are but a single benchmark to be considered but I find them entirely credible.

All that being said, I'm pretty shocked at the findings regarding the 7D MkII. On the spec sheets that was looking like a pretty killer setup but wow... Not looking so killer to me any more. The '7100 is spanks it hard, steals its lunch money and keeps saying, "Stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself..."

....

....

Horoscope Fish said:

While DxO Mark takes a lot of heat for their findings around here, and some have even alleged under the table dealings and other shady practices (without bothering to back up that mud slinging with anything resembling credible evidence); I've yet to see *any* legitimate source dispute either DxO Mark testing procedures (which they document quite thoroughly online), or their findings, in any way whatsoever. Yes, they are but a single benchmark to be considered but I find them entirely credible.

All that being said, I'm pretty shocked at the findings regarding the 7D MkII. On the spec sheets that was looking like a pretty killer setup but wow... Not looking so killer to me any more. The '7100 is spanks it hard, steals its lunch money and keeps saying, "Stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself..."

....

....

Click to expand...

What if the Canon says "uncle"?

and to think I was bitching about Nikon being overpriced!

AC016 said:

What if the Canon says "uncle"?

Click to expand...

Then it gets a *groin punch* and gets sent home crying.

Just how the '7100 rolls, my man... That's just how it rolls.

....

sonicbuffalo said:

and to think I was bitching about Nikon being overpriced!

Click to expand...

If the new DX body comes in under the 7D's $1799 it could be a real blow to anyone looking for a pro DX.

BackdoorHippie said:

If the new DX body comes in under the 7D's $1799 it could be a real blow to anyone looking for a pro DX.

Click to expand...

Not really the IF, but when. It seems that everyone is asking for it, but no one is listening unless they want it to be a complete surprise to us all... Yea, thats what I am going with.