See page 3 for 1 year thoughts with Canon EOS R7

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

jeffnles1

jeffnles1

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
OK, I've been debating this internally for a few months now. I'm retired and not a wealthy man so this is a pretty big decision and one that will hopefully last many years. I'm looking to make the move to mirrorless and have been looking strongly at the Canon R7 as a new body with a few Canon lenses (100-500, 100mm Macro, 24-105 F4). This range covers 90+ percent of my photography. I am coming from Nikon D500.

Here is a link to my Flickr page. This will show the range of subjects I normally shoot. I'm not 100% wildlife and shoot a variety of wildlife subjects.
Jeff's Flickr Page

Guess my question(s) are around suitability for intended use. You guys and gals who have used this camera and/or Canon mirrorless in general, pros and cons. I've seen the YouTube reviews and read online reviews but I'd rather hear what real photographers who specialize in nature photography with real world in the field use have to say.

Thanks group.

Jeff
 
Last edited:
I see from your photos you already have a d500? Are you thinking of totally switching to canon? The lenses you listed are going to be over $4,000. Plus the body at $1500.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
jeffnles1 said:
Thanks group.
Click to expand...
There's no doubt the R7 can be used very successfully for wildlife and nature work. To me the bigger questions prior to an expensive ecosystem switch is whether you like all the ergonomic aspects of the new camera and related things like menu structures and programability. I'd strongly recommend borrowing or renting the new system and getting out into the field with it before dropping a lot of cash to completely switch systems.

The trouble with a lot of online reviews from folks already in the proposed camera and lens ecosystem as they're already familiar with things like control layouts, menu structures and the various ways the system can be customized. IOW, things they may take for granted might not work for you at all or you may love those features. Best to get some hands on time before making a major switch.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
I see from your photos you already have a d500? Are you thinking of totally switching to canon? The lenses you listed are going to be over $4,000. Plus the body at $1500.
Click to expand...
Well, that is the current thinking. I was figuring on somewhere in the $7K range for this switch. Once I'm fully into the new system I'd be selling my Nikon stuff. Given the current used prices I won't recover a lot but some.

One reason for the switch is I have been shooting more video lately and carrying a dedicated video camera along with the stills gear is kind of a pain. Also, after messing with some friends mirrorless, the EVF I can see has some advantages. Just time for a change. I've been waiting (and waiting and waiting) for Nikon's 200-600 and a D500ish camera or a mid-tier that has updated AF and other capabilities. Realizing that is probably not going to happen in the immediate future, it may be time to move on. At 62 years old, not sure how much more time I have to go out lugging camera gear around and hiking 5-7 miles 3 or 4 times a week.
 
Member's gallery
DRwyoming said:
There's no doubt the R7 can be used very successfully for wildlife and nature work. To me the bigger questions prior to an expensive ecosystem switch is whether you like all the ergonomic aspects of the new camera and related things like menu structures and programability. I'd strongly recommend borrowing or renting the new system and getting out into the field with it before dropping a lot of cash to completely switch systems.

The trouble with a lot of online reviews from folks already in the proposed camera and lens ecosystem as they're already familiar with things like control layouts, menu structures and the various ways the system can be customized. IOW, things they may take for granted might not work for you at all or you may love those features. Best to get some hands on time before making a major switch.
Click to expand...
Dave,
I for sure would rent or borrow one. One of my buddies has the R7 and the 100-500. He doesn't do any landscape, portraits or macro work but I can most likely go out with him for a day and get some hands on use.
 
Member's gallery
Jeff-

As you recall, I decided to switch from my D500/500pf somewhat less than a year ago and I actually purchased a Canon R-7/100-500 and tested it against an OM Systems OM-1/100-400.

For my hands I found the R-7 excellent. I liked the controls. I did find the Canon 100-500 big and fat compared to the OM Systems 100-400 or the Nikon 500pf. At that time I was unable to compare IQ because the software was not out yet to process CRAW but I loved the 32mp 1.6 crop. The R-7 sensor's readout speed is slow compared to a stacked BSI sensor (OM-1 has one) but I did not see any rolling shutter shooting small birds.

Switching to anything can be painful but the R7 will be no more difficult.

Tom
 
jeffnles1 said:
Well, that is the current thinking. I was figuring on somewhere in the $7K range for this switch. Once I'm fully into the new system I'd be selling my Nikon stuff. Given the current used prices I won't recover a lot but some.

One reason for the switch is I have been shooting more video lately and carrying a dedicated video camera along with the stills gear is kind of a pain. Also, after messing with some friends mirrorless, the EVF I can see has some advantages. Just time for a change. I've been waiting (and waiting and waiting) for Nikon's 200-600 and a D500ish camera or a mid-tier that has updated AF and other capabilities. Realizing that is probably not going to happen in the immediate future, it may be time to move on. At 62 years old, not sure how much more time I have to go out lugging camera gear around and hiking 5-7 miles 3 or 4 times a week.
Click to expand...

And is crop sensor something important to you? With Canon you also have some good full frame options. There is rumored to be an r5ii on the way soon, more like $4k or the new R8, around $1500.

www.canonwatch.com

The Canon EOS R5 Mark II Might Get Announced Before The EOS

A new rumor surfaced from the interweb of rumor mills. A bit strange, though. The Canon EOS R5 Mark II might get announced before the long
www.canonwatch.com www.canonwatch.com
 
Member's gallery
Tom Reynolds said:
Jeff-

As you recall, I decided to switch from my D500/500pf somewhat less than a year ago and I actually purchased a Canon R-7/100-500 and tested it against an OM Systems OM-1/100-400.

For my hands I found the R-7 excellent. I liked the controls. I did find the Canon 100-500 big and fat compared to the OM Systems 100-400 or the Nikon 500pf. At that time I was unable to compare IQ because the software was not out yet to process CRAW but I loved the 32mp 1.6 crop. The R-7 sensor's readout speed is slow compared to a stacked BSI sensor (OM-1 has one) but I did not see any rolling shutter shooting small birds.

Switching to anything can be painful but the R7 will be no more difficult.

Tom
Click to expand...
Thanks Tom.
I remember someone switching from D500/500pf to Canon I didn't remember who.
I'm coming from D500 and 200-500. The Canon 100-500 is downright light and minimal in comparison.

Thanks for your perspective.
Jeff
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
And is crop sensor something important to you? With Canon you also have some good full frame options. There is rumored to be an r5ii on the way soon, more like $4k or the new R8, around $1500.

www.canonwatch.com

The Canon EOS R5 Mark II Might Get Announced Before The EOS

A new rumor surfaced from the interweb of rumor mills. A bit strange, though. The Canon EOS R5 Mark II might get announced before the long
www.canonwatch.com www.canonwatch.com
Click to expand...
Thanks.
Crop or Full Frame isn't all that important to me. I am comfortable with crop and have been using one for a very long time (Since the D5600, D7100, D7200 and most recent D500). I do think I'd go with the R6Mii before the R8 if for no other reason than the IBIS.

R5 (I of ii) is getting up there out of my price range.

Jeff
 
Member's gallery
jeffnles1 said:
Thanks Tom.
I remember someone switching from D500/500pf to Canon I didn't remember who.
I'm coming from D500 and 200-500. The Canon 100-500 is downright light and minimal in comparison.

Thanks for your perspective.
Jeff
Click to expand...

I liked the R7 BECAUSE of the cropped sensor. It makes the 100-500 an 800mm FF effective reach which is why I eliminated the R5 from consideration. (The 100-500 does not take a TC well. The zoom is retarded.) 32.4MP meant that I could crop more than I could on the D-500 or the OM-1.

I chose the OM-1/100-400 simply because it is an even smaller form factor and my wife loved it.
 
Member's gallery
Tom Reynolds said:
I liked the R7 BECAUSE of the cropped sensor. It makes the 100-500 an 800mm FF effective reach which is why I eliminated the R7 from consideration. (The 100-500 does not take a TC well. The zoom is retarded.) 32.4MP meant that I could crop more than I could on the D-500 or the OM-1.

I chose the OM-1/100-400 simply because it is an even smaller form factor and my wife loved it.
Click to expand...
Thanks Tom, Much appreciated.

I fully understand about the wife loving something. If mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy. :) :)

I will look into the OM-1 some more. I'm not worried about print size. I rarely print anything larger than 16X20 and I'm sure any of them can produce pleasing prints at that size.

Jeff
 
Member's gallery
just remember it’s hard to recover value from used equipment. as a nikon shooter it sounds to me like the new canon mirrorless cameras are quite good. that said unless you need to move right away i’d try to wait until the z6iii is announced and see if that might fit your needs as it’s likely to be as good as those canon cameras and alleviates your need to sell your existing lenses
 
Member's gallery
John Navitsky said:
just remember it’s hard to recover value from used equipment. as a nikon shooter it sounds to me like the new canon mirrorless cameras are quite good. that said unless you need to move right away i’d try to wait until the z6iii is announced and see if that might fit your needs as it’s likely to be as good as those canon cameras and alleviates your need to sell your existing lenses
Click to expand...
good point.
I guess where I am coming from, and this may not be the best way to think of it, is that eventually I'd get all Z mount glass anyway.

Even if I get a Z6iii or a Z7iii when/if they become available, I would get the 200-600 when it came available and all but some rarely used glass would most likely be replaced with Z. I have even considered keeping the D500, 200-500, 105macro and 24-70 F2.8 as a backup kit or a loaner kit should one of my friends need a camera in an emergency.

Honestly, deciding between very expensive toys is a good problem to have.

I was going to wait but some family health issues (brother in law diagnosed with ALS) and my personal journey through COVID, that went to Sinus Infection, that went to severe bronchitis resulting in about 10 weeks of being sick have caused me to be a little less patient in these things. At 62 years old, not sure I want to wait another year or two for Nikon to do something and then another 10 months plus for us non NPS peasants to be able to actually get our hands on one.

I may end up waiting. Just really trying to figure all this out now.

Jeff
 
Member's gallery
jeffnles1 said:
Thanks Tom, Much appreciated.

I fully understand about the wife loving something. If mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy. :) :)

I will look into the OM-1 some more. I'm not worried about print size. I rarely print anything larger than 16X20 and I'm sure any of them can produce pleasing prints at that size.

Jeff
Click to expand...

Jeff-
I am going to the St. Petersburg Alligator Farm 4/5-4/8. If you can get there, I will put an OM-1/100-400 in your hand for the duration. ( I carry a complete backup. )

This does not mean that the OM-1/100-400 config is better for you than the R-7/100-500. I considered both of them an excellent upgrade from the D-500.

Tom
 
Member's gallery
Tom Reynolds said:
Jeff-
I am going to the St. Petersburg Alligator Farm 4/5-4/8. If you can get there, I will put an OM-1/100-400 in your hand for the duration. ( I carry a complete backup. )

This does not mean that the OM-1/100-400 config is better for you than the R-7/100-500. I considered both of them an excellent upgrade from the D-500.

Tom
Click to expand...
Tom,
Thanks that is a generous offer. I am in the Cincinnati area so that would be a pretty hefty drive. One of our local photographers uses an Olympus OM-1. He is about an hour north of me but I'm sure we cold meet up while he's out. A pretty good friend has the R7 and 100-500. I have shot a few with his but not for ay length of time just a "here take a look" kind of thing.

Jeff
 
Member's gallery
I shot consumer level Canon before my mirrorless switch to Nikon. I of course considered staying with Canon but made the switch to Nikon and glad I did. Nikon is showing you where they are going with their lens selection. Canon has some great lightweight RF lenses, but the slow aperture and TC issues with the 100-500 and the inability to use a TC on the 70-200 put me off, as well as Canon’s slightly higher pricing.

As far as wait times, if I were in your shoes I would wait until the end of April as I fully expect the 200-600 will be released by then. If Nikon hasn’t released a new body I liked by then, I would buy a used Z6 or 7, 1st or 2nd Gen, as a temporary body for the 200-600. Not much is lost at resale when starting off with a used body.

If by some chance Nikon didn’t release the 200-600 by the end of April and I definitely wanted a zoom that stretched to at least 500 mm, I would bail at that point.
 
Member's gallery
OM-1/100-400 vs. R7/100-500
----------------------------------
The Lenses
------------
The 100-400 is much smaller and more compact which was why my wife liked it. The 100-500 has a much bigger diameter which made it harder to deploy. The 100-500 does not take a TC well as the zoom is restricted to 300-500. The 100-400 has a very small TC available, hardly noticeable physically. The difference is basically because the 100-500 is a FF zoom that is THE zoom for Canon cameras while the 100-400 is specifically designed for a 2.0 crop. Both lenses are premium lenses. I would call them equal. The 100-400 does focus down to 4' and I have seen many insect and flower shots with it.

Camera controls
------------------
I found the OM-1's buttons difficult to press. I found press and rotate almost impossible. I found the R7's form factor more friendly and its controls larger and easier to use. However, the OM-1 has four (4) custom modes that are independent of each other. I switch from mode to mode via a press-on, press-off implementation. This is way cool. I did not customize the R7.

Camera Sensor
-----------------

The R7 has a traditional Canon designed sensor that has a relatively slow readout speed. Canon types think that the R5 has the minimum readout speed which is double that of the R7 so this is a potential problem (rolling shutter) but I did not experience it. The electronic shutter is limited to 30 f/s and you need to shoot in CRAW to get 3 seconds + of shots. Pre-capture is set to 30 frames, and @ 30 f/s it is 1/2 second before shutter press and 1/2 second after shutter press. I liked 30 f/s and found the pre-capture setting just fine. 1/.2 second before shutter press is where I have the OM-1 set. The big plus is the 32.4 mp image size and the 1.6 crop versus the 2.0 crop. Particularly using pre-capture cropping is required.

The OM-1 has a BSI stacked sensor that reads out in 1/125 sec. This is 1/2 the speed of the Z-9 but double the speed of the R5 and 4x the R7. The camera actually reads out 80 million light readings because each pixel has 4 light sensors in an X pattern under the color lens. A BSI stacked sensor will provide better low light and less noise than a traditional sensor but the effective F/stop (actual F/stop x crop factor) is significantly higher. My experience was that the OM-1 acquires a BIF amazingly fast but the R7 was no slouch either.
I typically shoot @ 20 f/s but I could shoot 25 f/s and I do in ProCapture. The OM-1 also has many cool computational modes, none of which I have used.

Overall
--------
The OM-1 is lighter, more compact and easier to use in my wife and my experience. However, this may very well not be your experience. I think you won't go wrong with either. Do remember, however, that as a Nikon shooter switching to Canon is going to the dark side while going OM is simply weird.

Tom
 
Member's gallery
I think you got a lot of good advice here. The R7 is a very solid camera and it will give you what you need.

My concern with Canon is actually more the glass; the 100-500 is optically superb but the external zooming, very long throw and stiff zoom ring is what deterred me from canon - make sure you spend quality time with that zoom before you decide. Some folks love it, I never could get used to the handling.

The 24-105 will in effect be a 38-168 on the 1.6x apsc - so not very wide. Depending on what you need you might want to consider the 14-35 f:4 instead which is a very good lens.

The bottom line, and you farmed it very well, is whether you want to wait or not. There is no doubt Nikon will have a great option for you at some point. How long you are willing to wait is the question. If you want to switch now, the R7 is a great choice.
 
Member's gallery
I find the 100-500mm zoom ring is relatively smooth, on par with other telephoto zooms across Nikon, Sony, Sigma and Tamron; you can adjust the smoothness of the turn; it's just too fat in the bag; on the other hand, the RF 70-200mm is a beautiful lens.

One thing I do find annoying is Canon's strict policy on "no-3rd party lens", even for different focal length; oh well, it's how Canon likes to control the market.

Oliver
 
Member's gallery
FB101 said:
I think you got a lot of good advice here. The R7 is a very solid camera and it will give you what you need.

My concern with Canon is actually more the glass; the 100-500 is optically superb but the external zooming, very long throw and stiff zoom ring is what deterred me from canon - make sure you spend quality time with that zoom before you decide. Some folks love it, I never could get used to the handling.

The 24-105 will in effect be a 38-168 on the 1.6x apsc - so not very wide. Depending on what you need you might want to consider the 14-35 f:4 instead which is a very good lens.

The bottom line, and you farmed it very well, is whether you want to wait or not. There is no doubt Nikon will have a great option for you at some point. How long you are willing to wait is the question. If you want to switch now, the R7 is a great choice.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Coming from a Nikon 200-500 anything is going to be a short throw. :) I will have to consider a 14-35 if I go the Canon route. I currently have a 24-70 F2.8 that I use on the D500 and sometimes wider would be welcome. I have a Tokina 11-20 that I use sometimes but it's not my favorite lens.
I agree I want to spend some quality time with the camera body and the tele 100-500 before I jump into the Canon pool with both feet.

Good points you made. thanks
Jeff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top