Canon 7D mk2 image quality (IQ)

[fabiobernardino]

For those of you that got a good copy of the 7D mk2, what do you think about its IQ compared to the original 7D ?
Using the same lenses, do you think there is a noticeable improvement in IQ on a print ?

And if you had it compared to other cameras like 5Dmk3 and 6D, what IQ do you prefer ?

Thank you.

[David Stephens]

I own the 5D MkIII, the 7D MkII and the 7D MkI and I've tested the 1D X for several days.

At ISOs 800 and below, the 7D1 and 7D2 have essentially the same IQ. The Raw files of both exhibit lots of noise as the ISOs go to 1600 and beyond, but for some reasons that I don't understand, the 7D2 cleans up much better, with out losing detail in the NR process. Some of my 7D images looked pasty and blotchy in shadow areas, but I don't have any such trouble with the 7D MkII. At ISO 1600 and above, the 5D MkIII (and MkII for that matter), shows much less noise in the Raw files and, of course, is very easy to clean up.

IME, the main reason to go from the 7D to the 7D2 is to gain much improved AF performance, including initial subject acquisition, tracking and consistency. The AF of my 5D3 and my 7D2 are equivalent in this regard. Shooting a bare lens, in good light, the 1D X is about the same as the 7D2 and 5D3, but it's heads and shoulders above in lower light, or if you add the TCs, particularly the 2.0x TC-III at f/8.0.

For shooting in focal length limited situation, like birds, I prefer the IQ of the 7D2. For shooting in low light and landscapes where I'm using 100% of the file, I prefer the 5D3. That's why I own both. (Canon's best lenses tend to favor full-frame bodies).

I've never used the 6D, but it gets excellent reviews regarding low light performance, but only average comments about AF. It will not AF at f/8.0, so a 500/f4 with a 2x TC is out of the question.