Joel N
Well-known member
Now go out and have some fun
See page 3 for 1 year thoughts with Canon EOS R7
- Thread starter jeffnles1
- Start date
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).
Thanks Joel - that's the plan.Now go out and have some fun
Guys and Gals,
Resurrecting an old thread.
1 year since I bought the R7. I have been very happy with it. After a year of use and I don't know how many images 50K maybe, I've become comfortable with the quirks of mirrorless in general and the R7 specifically.
My overall impressions:
1) All the RF glass I have (100-500L, 24-105 F4L, 100 F 2.8L Macro, 16mm F2.8, 10-18 variable aperture RF-S). Are sharp. Even the more inexpensive non "L" lenses have exceeded my expectations.
2) the Canon Macro I do not like as well as the 105mm Nikon macro. I can't put my finger on it. The Canon lens is incredibly sharp, focuses fast, but the image quality lacks some character that the Nikon had. The Canon lens seems sharper than the Nikon (looking over hundreds of photos shot) and there was just something about that Nikon Macro that was magic on my D500. Don't get me wrong, the Canon Macro lens is an incredible lens. To my eye, the Nikon macro was just a little better.
3) Rolling Shutter - Not sure what all the hub Bub is about. Yes, it is there and yes, there are ways to get around it (i.e. mechanical shutter if you want to freeze dragonfly wings or you're photographing a flock of ducks flying over the marsh). I can make it happen at will but I also can avoid situations where it exists and still get the shots I want.
4) Focus issues? I have seen the You Tube videos where photographers have been experiencing every other shot being out of focus. I simply have not had that problem. I shoot at 15fps mechanical and electronic. I don't find 30fps useful in all but a few specific. circumstances. I can quickly shift to it if I think I'm going to need it. Perhaps the focus issues are a 30fps issue.
5) Only 2 SD Cards. Yes that's the case. I've not had a problem with it. In fact, SD cards are less expensive, my computer and USB Hub have built in SD readers and in a pinch, I can get SD cards at just about any Walmart, gas station or dollar card. Not V90 cards but at least I'm not out of business if I leave the cards at home.
6) limited buffer (partly related to SD cards mentioned above). I'm not one to hold the shutter button down for extended periods of time. With C-Raw on card one and JPG on card 2 both being V90 cards,I get a few seconds buffer which is all I've ever needed. Perhaps because I learned photography with manual advance film cameras and over the years got used to a more leisurely pace. I came to the Mirrorless world from a D500 which "only" had 10fps. The R7 at mid speed is 15fps which is a 50% increase over what I had before. If your photography needs lengthy bursts with extremely deep buffer, then this camera is not the one for you. If you can live with 3 or so seconds of buffer before it fills (35-45 images in a burst) then it is worth a consideration. Just wanted to point this limitation out. It's not been problematic for me but it may be a deal breaker for others so consider this if looking at the EOS R7.
7) Pre-capture - I kind of thought this was a gimmick but after using it, I like it. I have been able to capture many dragonflies in flight, birds taking off from a branch, frogs jumping, and even salamanders coming up for air during their mating rituals. I like how it captures about 15-20 shots before the shutter is fully pressed and will continue capturing shots until the buffer fills up as long as you hold the shutter button down. I put it on my "My Menu" quick access and assigned a button for the menu option to get there quickly. One of the things I ended up liking about mirrorless cameras when I thought it was a "ho hum" thing before using it.
Closing Thoughts:
Is it the "best?" I'm not really sure there is a "best" camera any more. All the current "top tier" cameras from the major manufacturers are all great. I really like the 100-500 lens for its clarity, sharpness and light weight. Battery life is on par with other mirrorless cameras my friends and local photographers are getting. Overall, I think it is a really good camera at any price and a steal for the current price. If anyone is looking for an ASP-c mirrorless camera, the Canon EOS R7 is worth considering. I'm not suggesting everyone should run out and buy it, it's not going to solve world hunger or end wars, it is not going to turn every one of your average shots into National Geographic Cover shots. But it is a solid camera platform with a very good array of lenses available for it.
Would I buy it again?
Yes. Would I look at Sony and Nikon offerings? Yes and I would buy the system that best meets my needs at the time I decide to get a new camera.
Hope this helps.
Resurrecting an old thread.
1 year since I bought the R7. I have been very happy with it. After a year of use and I don't know how many images 50K maybe, I've become comfortable with the quirks of mirrorless in general and the R7 specifically.
My overall impressions:
1) All the RF glass I have (100-500L, 24-105 F4L, 100 F 2.8L Macro, 16mm F2.8, 10-18 variable aperture RF-S). Are sharp. Even the more inexpensive non "L" lenses have exceeded my expectations.
2) the Canon Macro I do not like as well as the 105mm Nikon macro. I can't put my finger on it. The Canon lens is incredibly sharp, focuses fast, but the image quality lacks some character that the Nikon had. The Canon lens seems sharper than the Nikon (looking over hundreds of photos shot) and there was just something about that Nikon Macro that was magic on my D500. Don't get me wrong, the Canon Macro lens is an incredible lens. To my eye, the Nikon macro was just a little better.
3) Rolling Shutter - Not sure what all the hub Bub is about. Yes, it is there and yes, there are ways to get around it (i.e. mechanical shutter if you want to freeze dragonfly wings or you're photographing a flock of ducks flying over the marsh). I can make it happen at will but I also can avoid situations where it exists and still get the shots I want.
4) Focus issues? I have seen the You Tube videos where photographers have been experiencing every other shot being out of focus. I simply have not had that problem. I shoot at 15fps mechanical and electronic. I don't find 30fps useful in all but a few specific. circumstances. I can quickly shift to it if I think I'm going to need it. Perhaps the focus issues are a 30fps issue.
5) Only 2 SD Cards. Yes that's the case. I've not had a problem with it. In fact, SD cards are less expensive, my computer and USB Hub have built in SD readers and in a pinch, I can get SD cards at just about any Walmart, gas station or dollar card. Not V90 cards but at least I'm not out of business if I leave the cards at home.
6) limited buffer (partly related to SD cards mentioned above). I'm not one to hold the shutter button down for extended periods of time. With C-Raw on card one and JPG on card 2 both being V90 cards,I get a few seconds buffer which is all I've ever needed. Perhaps because I learned photography with manual advance film cameras and over the years got used to a more leisurely pace. I came to the Mirrorless world from a D500 which "only" had 10fps. The R7 at mid speed is 15fps which is a 50% increase over what I had before. If your photography needs lengthy bursts with extremely deep buffer, then this camera is not the one for you. If you can live with 3 or so seconds of buffer before it fills (35-45 images in a burst) then it is worth a consideration. Just wanted to point this limitation out. It's not been problematic for me but it may be a deal breaker for others so consider this if looking at the EOS R7.
7) Pre-capture - I kind of thought this was a gimmick but after using it, I like it. I have been able to capture many dragonflies in flight, birds taking off from a branch, frogs jumping, and even salamanders coming up for air during their mating rituals. I like how it captures about 15-20 shots before the shutter is fully pressed and will continue capturing shots until the buffer fills up as long as you hold the shutter button down. I put it on my "My Menu" quick access and assigned a button for the menu option to get there quickly. One of the things I ended up liking about mirrorless cameras when I thought it was a "ho hum" thing before using it.
Closing Thoughts:
Is it the "best?" I'm not really sure there is a "best" camera any more. All the current "top tier" cameras from the major manufacturers are all great. I really like the 100-500 lens for its clarity, sharpness and light weight. Battery life is on par with other mirrorless cameras my friends and local photographers are getting. Overall, I think it is a really good camera at any price and a steal for the current price. If anyone is looking for an ASP-c mirrorless camera, the Canon EOS R7 is worth considering. I'm not suggesting everyone should run out and buy it, it's not going to solve world hunger or end wars, it is not going to turn every one of your average shots into National Geographic Cover shots. But it is a solid camera platform with a very good array of lenses available for it.
Would I buy it again?
Yes. Would I look at Sony and Nikon offerings? Yes and I would buy the system that best meets my needs at the time I decide to get a new camera.
Hope this helps.
Last edited:
RikWriter
Well-known member
Are you going to give the 200-800 a try?
I tried the R7-100-500 combination with the 15 f/s mechanical shutter seemed to me to check all boxes. In particular having a 500mm lens on a 1.6 cropped sensor of 32mp seemed a good thing to me.
I think the Canon 100-500 is probably sharper than the 100-400 that I use on the OM-1.
Regards,
Tom
I think the Canon 100-500 is probably sharper than the 100-400 that I use on the OM-1.
Regards,
Tom
There are a couple other Canon shooters in my area. If one of them turns up with the 200-800 I'm sure they will let me give it a spin on my camera. One of the fellows is the type who has all the newest toys so I'm sure he will be bringing one out soon. If none of them get it, I may rent it to see if I like it better than the 100-500. It will need to be a pretty spectacular lens for me to give up the 100-500 though.
I think there may be a couple of us hiding in the back of the class.
I've not used the OM systems cameras and lenses so I cannot speak to if the Canon is sharper than the 100-400 OM glass. With outdoor photography there are so many variables it's really hard to compare unless the photographer has both systems and can shoot the same scene with each on the same day at the same time. Even then, just a minute or two can make a difference. I've seen some impressive images shot with OM systems cameras posted on various forums and on Flickr.
I don't post a lot of stuff on Flickr but there are a few from the past year with the Canon camera and various lenses I have with it. Also, some on Instagram but that format doesn't tell us a whole lot about the quality of the original images. I like to share the images there and in the Facebook group I manage but more for the interesting stuff we see than the quality of images. Links to both of my pages are in my signature line if you're interested in looking.
ajrmd
Well-known member
As much as the R7 deserves its criticisms, for roughly $1100, there isn't another APS-C camera like it on the market. Yes, the buffer is tiny, the read-out rate is as slow as molasses in the winter, the EVF has distortion at the edges, the DR is one-stop less than the R5, and at times the AF is wonky, though one can take fantastic images with this body. Combined with the 100-500, it was my favorite "walk around" wildlife combination.
I had a little thought about the business model and our subconsciously expectations for Canon Sony and Nikon.
Canon: Not a perfect product, good enough to get the shot. Can’t complain.
Sony: a more refined product, doesn’t offer all kind of creative optics, but the smaller form factor appeals to all event and photo journalism type of photography, Some sports and wildlife. Which gives us the opportunity to somewhat complain of not having enough optics.
Nikon: Aimed for perfection, highest quality and creative optics, lenses for every professional/perfectionist
for all types of photography. Which gives the perfectionist the bigger list to complain for all missing expectations not yet implemented.
Lesson learned from this thread: Have your priorities, but take the courage to make yourself flexible…
I highly admire the OP for his move.
And he might move again…
The main takeaway; “Don’t be stuck!”
Canon: Not a perfect product, good enough to get the shot. Can’t complain.
Sony: a more refined product, doesn’t offer all kind of creative optics, but the smaller form factor appeals to all event and photo journalism type of photography, Some sports and wildlife. Which gives us the opportunity to somewhat complain of not having enough optics.
Nikon: Aimed for perfection, highest quality and creative optics, lenses for every professional/perfectionist
for all types of photography. Which gives the perfectionist the bigger list to complain for all missing expectations not yet implemented.
Lesson learned from this thread: Have your priorities, but take the courage to make yourself flexible…
I highly admire the OP for his move.
And he might move again…
The main takeaway; “Don’t be stuck!”
Don't be stuck is a good take away. Being flexible is a good thing for sure.
I agree, it is far from perfection but it is good enough for what I want it to do. The glass, especially the L glass is really nice. If a Version II comes out, I'll look into it to see if it is worth the upgrade or I may decide on a Version II of the R5. I'm not in the market for the rumored R1 or the current or next generation R3. I'm not a working photojournalist or professional sports or wedding photographer. I'm just a guy who loves to go out strolling around in the woods, getting hot, cold, dry, wet, hungry, thirsty sometimes all on the same day. I take my camera along to capture what beauties Nature may bestow on me that day. I sell a few calendars along the way and a few prints now and then, led a few local photography seminars with a few nature / civic groups. A $5,000+ camera body on a retiree's income isn't going to happen.
I agree with your assessment of the R7. Not perfect but good enough.
Agreed. I was able to compare the R7 against the Sony A6600 (I think that was their higher end APS-c at the time) and my D500. One of my friends had the R7 and let me try his with the 100-500 before I decided to buy. Nice o him to loan me his camera for an hour or so. There are things the D500 did better and things the R7 did better (easily switch from stills to video and back being one of them and the pre capture feature that I mentioned above). The Sony, while a nice camera and lens system, just didn't feel all that great in my hands. I have and use a Sony Bridge camera (RX-10iv) so I'm not a Sony Basher by any stretch just the ASP-c Sony didn't feel all that good.
But, as a general rule, I would advise anyone to get some hands on time with any new camera, especially if from a different brand or part of a different system) before making the final purchase decision. Spec sheets, YouTube videos and forum discussions only tell part of the story. How well a piece of equipment works in your hands for your photography is what really matters.
I have been seeing those rumors too. I'm not one to get overly excited about rumors. A version ii may be just around the corner, it may be a year or two or three away or it may never come. I'm 63 and have come to the realization that waiting a year, two, three, etc. is a much higher percentage of the time I have left than it was when I was 23 (or 53 for that matter).