Has anyone who shot wildlife regretted going full frame?

[chrisan]

Hello everyone!

Short version: Have you regretted moving away from crop sensors to full frame (optionally with a TC) if you only can have (or want) 1 body?

Long version to give you an idea of my interests/use cases: My wife and I like to take "adventure" vacations (ie the kinda vacation you don't actually rest but hike 10-20 miles a day) and were frustrated by photos. After some reviews on starter wildlife kits (and childhood brainwashing by my dad who bought Canon everything) I landed on the R10 + RFS18-150 kit and a RF100-400 to get my toes wet. Our first vacation we had some photos good photos of the mountains and wildlife we were pleased with. After some use and frustrations with battery and buffer size I upgraded to R7 which I've had for about a year now. Along the way I upgraded glass to the 100-500L and 24-70 2.8L and Sigma 10-18 2.8. Now I just love getting to shoot whatever.

Wildlife got me into photography but I just enjoy many aspects and do landscapes, portraits (of dogs), macro, astro, sports of niece/nephew, and even some "product photography" to help my wife sell collectible items. This is a very addicting hobby, and always looking for an excuse to use my R7!

My current frustrations are the AF missing sometimes in bursts, focus seeking all over the place at times, not being able to use H+ (Canon suggestion not to use to help with AF), the low light performance, and while not a deal breaker the wonky "precapture" implementation. Another slight annoyance is the 24-70 is on most of the time, but frustrating when I have to switch to 10-18 for spaces I just cant step back further from. I'm not into the ultra wide look outside of astro.

Everything I've read seems to suggest full frame handles these issues better. I've also read full frame can be 1-2 stops better in low light than crop. I see pros or youtubers shoot with R1/R3 or the R5, but not a R7 outside of a review here and there.

If I were to go full frame, I am looking at the R6m3 as a middle ground between R5's ability to crop and R1/R3/R6m2 handling noise a bit better, as well as being the cheapest option with "real" precapture.

I was thinking to make up for the reach, when I need to, add on a 1.4 TC which costs a stop, so at worst I'd be at same low light ISO performance but still possibly better in terms of AF I also realize 1.4 won't be same fov as the 1.6 I get from the R7, 700mm vs 800mm effective on my 100-500.

So if you can only have 1 body, would I regret going full frame?

 

[Chris Summers]

I own both the R7 and R6 MkII, for me each has a purpose as well as pros and cons. My 2 longer lenses are the RF 100-500mm and the RF 200-800mm.

If I had to grade the two bodies and compare, I do think I get a big better quality images with the full frame R6 MkII. But I do like the extra reach of the R7. I tend to put the longer zoom on the R7 to get maximum reach but mostly for birds and other wildlife that aren't moving a great deal due to shutter roll and the fact the R7 just doesn't always lock on as well to moving targets. I like the R6MkII with the 100-500mm for moving subjects, just handles better. I realize that doesn't answer your question about which one to go with if you could only have one but just telling what works for me. My plan is to upgrade the R7 to a MkII as long as it has less shutter roll and a dedicated vertical grip.

 

[Only RF]

It's hard to tell. I had the R7 for few years and still have the R6II. I did have good results with my R7, 100-500 and 1.4 TC. In the summer of 2024 I decided to not put the TC on that combo for a year and my keeper rate went way up. Good for stills but I shoot a lot of BIF. IQ broke quickly when using crops with the TC but then you didn't need to as much. A bunch of 6's and 7's. Old fart trying to stay hip

I decided to try that experiment and sold my R7 in the spring of 2025. When you don't have something you learn to work with you have. That lens and TC work really well together on a FF. Without the TC there extra real estate to track birds or any type of sports, etc. I will wait and see what the R7II offers.

I'm getting the R6III when it comes out. I really liked my R which had 30 megapixels. I shot BIF with it, an EF 100-400 II and EF 2X TC. I don't have 2X anymore or any other EF gear.

• Join to view EXIF data.

Here is a recent shot with the R6II, 100-500 and 1.4. I used Adobe Super Resolution. I won't be using it very often but I tried it out of curiosity.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

R6 and 100- 500.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[Only RF]

R6II, 100-500 and 1.4

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

A little more than I like to crop but. The R6III will give me about 28% more pixels to work with.

R6II and 100-500

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[Only RF]

Sorry for bumping so much. For me R6II is the all around workhorse. From wildlife to landscapes to urban it does it all. The R7 or any crop is a specialized camera that can also do all of that as well . If I had to choose only one body it would be a FF and I've had both those and crops for about 15 years.

Post posting technology has improved so much I never worry about cropping, noise or fast lens for Bokeh, etc. There is an obvious limit to cropping but that also has to do a lot with user input. I discard a lot of shots when I cull a days shoot.

 

[Archibald]

I have a friend here in town who uses an R6II. It's a wonderful camera but he always falls short on reach. My R7 gets more than 3 times as many pixels on a distant duck as the R6II with the same lens.

Full frame is better, but you need a way bigger lens to get equivalent reach.

 

[Only RF]

I have a friend here in town who uses an R6II. It's a wonderful camera but he always falls short on reach. My R7 gets more than 3 times as many pixels on a distant duck as the R6II with the same lens.

Full frame is better, but you need a way bigger lens to get equivalent reach.

That is a consideration.

 

[RickyRed]

I have the R5 and R7. 100-500-24-105 F4 and the Sigma16-50 2.8. Very happy with this kit. The R7 is not an action camera. What's wrong with shooting 15fps, instead of 30? When Canon decides to release a true replacement for the 7DII I'll Stick with what I have.

 

[Flango85]

Hello everyone!

Short version: Have you regretted moving away from crop sensors to full frame (optionally with a TC) if you only can have (or want) 1 body?

Long version to give you an idea of my interests/use cases: My wife and I like to take "adventure" vacations (ie the kinda vacation you don't actually rest but hike 10-20 miles a day) and were frustrated by photos. After some reviews on starter wildlife kits (and childhood brainwashing by my dad who bought Canon everything) I landed on the R10 + RFS18-150 kit and a RF100-400 to get my toes wet. Our first vacation we had some photos good photos of the mountains and wildlife we were pleased with. After some use and frustrations with battery and buffer size I upgraded to R7 which I've had for about a year now. Along the way I upgraded glass to the 100-500L and 24-70 2.8L and Sigma 10-18 2.8. Now I just love getting to shoot whatever.

Wildlife got me into photography but I just enjoy many aspects and do landscapes, portraits (of dogs), macro, astro, sports of niece/nephew, and even some "product photography" to help my wife sell collectible items. This is a very addicting hobby, and always looking for an excuse to use my R7!

My current frustrations are the AF missing sometimes in bursts, focus seeking all over the place at times, not being able to use H+ (Canon suggestion not to use to help with AF), the low light performance, and while not a deal breaker the wonky "precapture" implementation. Another slight annoyance is the 24-70 is on most of the time, but frustrating when I have to switch to 10-18 for spaces I just cant step back further from. I'm not into the ultra wide look outside of astro.

Everything I've read seems to suggest full frame handles these issues better. I've also read full frame can be 1-2 stops better in low light than crop. I see pros or youtubers shoot with R1/R3 or the R5, but not a R7 outside of a review here and there.

If I were to go full frame, I am looking at the R6m3 as a middle ground between R5's ability to crop and R1/R3/R6m2 handling noise a bit better, as well as being the cheapest option with "real" precapture.

I was thinking to make up for the reach, when I need to, add on a 1.4 TC which costs a stop, so at worst I'd be at same low light ISO performance but still possibly better in terms of AF I also realize 1.4 won't be same fov as the 1.6 I get from the R7, 700mm vs 800mm effective on my 100-500.

So if you can only have 1 body, would I regret going full frame?

Have had both I now shoot an R6 MKll. I have no regrets. Low light performance is superb. Focusing is also really good and fast I have the 100-500 and a 1.4 TC. They work very well together for wildlife. I shoot a lot of indoor sports with the 70-200 2.8 RF and it’s amazing as well. I find that low iso shots are not as important as well exposed and in focus shots. I have learned to push the ISO in ways I never would have dreamed of back in the film days. Anyway that’s my 2 cents.

 

[Only RF]

Have had both I now shoot an R6 MKll. I have no regrets. Low light performance is superb. Focusing is also really good and fast I have the 100-500 and a 1.4 TC. They work very well together for wildlife. I shoot a lot of indoor sports with the 70-200 2.8 RF and it’s amazing as well. I find that low iso shots are not as important as well exposed and in focus shots. I have learned to push the ISO in ways I never would have dreamed of back in the film days. Anyway that’s my 2 cents.

These days High ISO is on the very bottom of my list of concerns. I showed my some high ISO shots to a buddy who used to shoot a lot of film long ago. He couldn't believe his eyes.

From 2019. I was doing some bracketing for HDR but recently decided to try one frame with the current tools.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

ISO 40,000

• Join to view EXIF data.