In article , android wrote:

android:
http://www.imaging-resource.com has got a "Beta" of the 7D2 and
posted jpegs of their test targets in their camera
"comperometer". Here's a screen capture of the 7D2 vs the D7100
at ISO 6400... The Canon's on the left:
http://tinyurl.com/mhpwv5m I'm a RAW kind of guy but it's a
preview. "Half frame" fanatics should be ecstatic!

Sandman:
Yeah, like I said - the 7D is trounced by the D7100, and you
wanted to compare it to the D750, where it would be obliterated.

It's still 7D2 and as anybody can se: It's not obliterated by the
D7100

Yeah, it is.

Sandman:
ISO6400 is Max ISO for the D7100 and the 7D goes one step further,
yet at 6400 the 7D doesn't really look that much better. A pity,
why can't Canon handle image noise as good as Nikon?

The 7D2 does better than the D7100, IMNSHO...

Why can't you read? The 7D is *slightly* better, which is a clear win for
the $600 cheaper, smaller, lighter D7100 that has better battery life,
higher resolution and better LCD screen. Like I said:

Sandman
Who's the winner?
09/17/2014

"Uh, the D7100 beats the 7D in most areas. The 7D has
slightly better ISO performance and shoots at 10fps compared
to 6fps for the D7100, other than that, it's utterly
trounced."

It has slightly better ISO, and now we see what that gives. Not much. Not
$600 worth of better ISO, and since the D7100 totally owns the 7D in every
other aspect, it's not even a fair comparison to the old D7100. In order
for the 7D to look god, we need to go even lower-end on the Nikon side.


--
Sandman[.net]