My R7 died after falling into seawater - Replacement camera advise

[R7Dutch]

Good day All,

During my recent trip to Lofoten Islands in Norway I slipped on a icy rock at Uttakleiv Beach and my camera landed softly in the salty seawater. Took the battery out, and removed lense, and tried to switch it on after a couple of days, had it drying in a bag of rice. The camera doesnt switch on anymore. Local camera store told me that with salt water, its very bad and circuits will be shorted/corroded very quickly. I bought the only available R10 in the area to continue my photo tour, which was great. Although I missed IBIS with video shoots, even with my IS stabilised lenses, I noticed the difference, especially zoomed in and windy conditions. The R10 I will sell.

Insurance will cover my R7 loss, now I am considering will I buy another R7 (or mark II when i comes), or step up to the R6 Mark II (good prices now in Holland) to FF.

I do like to do wildlife now and then, with extra crop factor of the R7, also shooting F1 motorsports sometimes, however I do mostly landscapes, closeups, city, and in summer time Milkyway and winter time Aurora shots (sometimes). Especially those night shots, I believe I will have less noise using the full frame sensor of the R6 mark ii, even when I would go back to F2 or F2.8 full frame wide angles, compared to my sigma RF-S 12mm F1.4 that I currently use with the R7/R10. I find the R7 sensor still quite noise when shooting night shots, already from ISO 800 and up.

I already have the RF 100-400mm, which I can keep with the R6, my other lenses RF-S 18-150, sigma RF-S 2.8 18-50 and sigma RF-S 12mm F1.4, i would sell with the R10, and I would probably start with the RF 24-105 IS STM 4-7.1 light weight walkaround, a wide angle Loawa 15mm F2 and a canon 50mm RF 2.8 prime.

Im aware my hobby will get more expensive and more heavy with RF lenses, that's why I am a bit in doubt, staying with more compact/lower cost APS-C or moving to F-F now...

Andy advise, from people who made the step from APC-S to F-F ?
Thanks,

Regards
Bert

 

[Only RF]

I had an R7 and an R6II. I'm in an experimental year. I decided sell my R7 last year (early spring) and waited for the R6III and traded my R6II for it. I figured the extra megapixels will help and it has advanced subject detect AF. I really like some of the menu changes Canon made for the Case numbers.

This is the first year in a long time that I have been on an extended trip with only a FF. I'm not really sure yet but like others I have G.A.S. which does not help

I only have two lenses. After selling all my EF gear in 2019 I just replaced the lenses I used most often. I now have the RF 24-105 F4 which I love on a FF. I also have RR 100-500 and the 1.4 TC.

With the R7 and the 100-500 gave me 800mm. The FF (now R6III) gives me 700mm with the TC. That lens on a FF with a TC is a very nice fit. The TC worked well with the R7 but my keeper rate dropped significantly.

I'm missing some reach and crop power but I'm not sure how big of a difference that will make in the long run. It's just a hobby and I mostly post files in sites like this. All files I have been posting since Jan 1 have been with the R6III.

Not sure what to suggest. You have a body to work with and I think it is official that the R7II is coming out soon. Personally I never liked the shutter thump on the R7 so I shot with ES all of the time. We'll see if the R7II has a stacked sensor (or softer shutter) but I have to admit it really never affected me using my R7.

The R7II will have the advanced subject detection and I can say the R6III has exceeded my expectations in that area.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

I'm defiantly going to look at the R7II but I want to hold it and take some shots first so I'll wait until my local dealer has a display model. You may want to wait and see what the R7II brings. Another option is to trade up to the R6III.

This not my shot with the R6III. I got the RAW off another site before the R6III was released so I could play around with it. Cropped using Lightroom Classic and no other 3rd party apps or upscaling applied.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[Only RF]

I posted this the other day just for fun. I normally never crop this much.

Full-Frame Thread 'RF 100-500 and 1.4'

Tuesday at 11:12 AM

It's not a wall mount but taken with My R6III. I did crop down below 1600 on the long side, applied LrC's Super Resolution which doubled pixels and sized to 1600 at export.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Only RF
• Replies: 6
• Forum: RF Lens Image Threads

• 

I don't use Super Resolution (Adobe LrC) very often. This was the only other time I tried it with my 24 mp R6II.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[R7Dutch]

I had an R7 and an R6II. I'm in an experimental year. I decided sell my R7 last year (early spring) and waited for the R6III and traded my R6II for it. I figured the extra megapixels will help and it has advanced subject detect AF. I really like some of the menu changes Canon made for the Case numbers.

This is the first year in a long time that I have been on an extended trip with only a FF. I'm not really sure yet but like others I have G.A.S. which does not help

I only have two lenses. After selling all my EF gear in 2019 I just replaced the lenses I used most often. I now have the RF 24-105 F4 which I love on a FF. I also have RR 100-500 and the 1.4 TC.

With the R7 and the 100-500 gave me 800mm. The FF (now R6III) gives me 700mm with the TC. That lens on a FF with a TC is a very nice fit. The TC worked well with the R7 but my keeper rate dropped significantly.

I'm missing some reach and crop power but I'm not sure how big of a difference that will make in the long run. It's just a hobby and I mostly post files in sites like this. All files I have been posting since Jan 1 have been with the R6III.

Not sure what to suggest. You have a body to work with and I think it is official that the R7II is coming out soon. Personally I never liked the shutter thump on the R7 so I shot with ES all of the time. We'll see if the R7II has a stacked sensor (or softer shutter) but I have to admit it really never affected me using my R7.

The R7II will have the advanced subject detection and I can say the R6III has exceeded my expectations in that area.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

I'm defiantly going to look at the R7II but I want to hold it and take some shots first so I'll wait until my local dealer has a display model. You may want to wait and see what the R7II brings. Another option is to trade up to the R6III.

This not my shot with the R6III. I got the RAW off another site before the R6III was released so I could play around with it. Cropped using Lightroom Classic and no other 3rd party apps or upscaling applied.

View attachment 43906View attachment 43907View attachment 43908

Thanks for your advise.

 

[Only RF]

Thanks for your advise.

I'm not sure it's good but it's all I have. It would have been novice to give you a definitive answer but I'm on the fence myself. Personally I would not buy another R7 at this point.

 

[R7Dutch]

I'm not sure it's good but it's all I have. It would have been novice to give you a definitive answer but I'm on the fence myself. Personally I would not buy another R7 at this point.

I will go to have another look at the camera store these days for the look and feel of the R6 Mark ii. I dont want to have a too heavy combination of body/lense. I was surprised how good the little R10 body performed as a replacement camera on my holiday, but I missed the IBIS for some video shots. for the rest the camera did a great job. Ultimately for higher dynamic range, less noise, I think I will need to step up to fullframe.

 

[Archibald]

Good day All,

During my recent trip to Lofoten Islands in Norway I slipped on a icy rock at Uttakleiv Beach and my camera landed softly in the salty seawater. Took the battery out, and removed lense, and tried to switch it on after a couple of days, had it drying in a bag of rice. The camera doesnt switch on anymore. Local camera store told me that with salt water, its very bad and circuits will be shorted/corroded very quickly. I bought the only available R10 in the area to continue my photo tour, which was great. Although I missed IBIS with video shoots, even with my IS stabilised lenses, I noticed the difference, especially zoomed in and windy conditions. The R10 I will sell.

Insurance will cover my R7 loss, now I am considering will I buy another R7 (or mark II when i comes), or step up to the R6 Mark II (good prices now in Holland) to FF.

I do like to do wildlife now and then, with extra crop factor of the R7, also shooting F1 motorsports sometimes, however I do mostly landscapes, closeups, city, and in summer time Milkyway and winter time Aurora shots (sometimes). Especially those night shots, I believe I will have less noise using the full frame sensor of the R6 mark ii, even when I would go back to F2 or F2.8 full frame wide angles, compared to my sigma RF-S 12mm F1.4 that I currently use with the R7/R10. I find the R7 sensor still quite noise when shooting night shots, already from ISO 800 and up.

I already have the RF 100-400mm, which I can keep with the R6, my other lenses RF-S 18-150, sigma RF-S 2.8 18-50 and sigma RF-S 12mm F1.4, i would sell with the R10, and I would probably start with the RF 24-105 IS STM 4-7.1 light weight walkaround, a wide angle Loawa 15mm F2 and a canon 50mm RF 2.8 prime.

Im aware my hobby will get more expensive and more heavy with RF lenses, that's why I am a bit in doubt, staying with more compact/lower cost APS-C or moving to F-F now...

Andy advise, from people who made the step from APC-S to F-F ?
Thanks,

Regards
Bert

The R7 is (IMO) fantastic for wildlife because it gives you reach and croppability (because of its high pixel density, not because of its crop format). But as you say, FF is better for general shooting and gives less noise. Since you don't do as much wildlife as some of us, I would agree FF is the way to go for you. FF has a better lens selection too, very expensive of course, but the lenses are there if you need them.

I do a lot of wildlife (far away birds and very close bugs), so for that I need the R7. But I also do general photography including studio work, and for that I need FF. So I have both. Cameras are tools, and you need the right tool for the job.

 

[Only RF]

I will go to have another look at the camera store these days for the look and feel of the R6 Mark ii. I dont want to have a too heavy combination of body/lense. I was surprised how good the little R10 body performed as a replacement camera on my holiday, but I missed the IBIS for some video shots. for the rest the camera did a great job. Ultimately for higher dynamic range, less noise, I think I will need to step up to fullframe.

I was pretty impressed with the R6II with the first few shots of my wife's choir. Indoors and about ISO 5000 as I recall.

 

[Mikey]

I jumped into the RF world by purchasing a R6MKII after using a Canon T3i for nearly a decade. Simply amazing is the gain in speed, AF and tracking accuracy, high ISO performance and just overall image quality. Took a while to dial in the controls and settings for my personal use but it has been a real joy to use. There have been no issues adapting my EF lenses to the body with an EF to RF adapter too.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[PKM-UK]

Hi Bert,

Looking at the sample images you posted recently, you should be giving us advice! (However, you did ask, so here's my pitch).


I much prefer FF, but Karen - my wife - much prefers Crop (self-professed zoom-queen!). The 'winning shot' is most often (95%-ish) down to the person who can see the best composition and/ or capture just the right moment. Where the tech can come in is if we need to go wide, long or low light (e.g. in like-for-like scenarios my R5 II tends to win out for tight/ dark architectural stuff, whereas Karen's R7 is hard to match for distant/ small wildlife, but by the same token she can capture fine details of distant/ decently lit architecture and I can eke out some good results in relatively dark/ tight wildlife situations).

Given the balance of your photographic needs I would definitely lean towards FF (with the R6 II/ III being very well regarded contenders). But that reach...


Here are YouTube 'FF vs Crop' discussions by Jan Wegener and Simon d"Entremont which you may find helpful. (Other YouTubers are available!).

Make of all this what you will - good luck with your choice...

Phil

 

[Only RF]

The only real issues I run into with distance is atmospheric distortion. We have no choice but to try. I have had very good success with the R7. I was in a blind and this one came out of nowhere on my right and I only had a second and I was lucky to get it in the frame.

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[R7Dutch]

Hi Bert,

Looking at the sample images you posted recently, you should be giving us advice! (However, you did ask, so here's my pitch).


I much prefer FF, but Karen - my wife - much prefers Crop (self-professed zoom-queen!). The 'winning shot' is most often (95%-ish) down to the person who can see the best composition and/ or capture just the right moment. Where the tech can come in is if we need to go wide, long or low light (e.g. in like-for-like scenarios my R5 II tends to win out for tight/ dark architectural stuff, whereas Karen's R7 is hard to match for distant/ small wildlife, but by the same token she can capture fine details of distant/ decently lit architecture and I can eke out some good results in relatively dark/ tight wildlife situations).

Given the balance of your photographic needs I would definitely lean towards FF (with the R6 II/ III being very well regarded contenders). But that reach...


Here are YouTube 'FF vs Crop' discussions by Jan Wegener and Simon d"Entremont which you may find helpful. (Other YouTubers are available!).

Make of all this what you will - good luck with your choice...

Phil

Thanks Phil for your kind words and advise

 

[R7Dutch]

Well, I went to the local camera store today with my current APS-C gear to compare with potential FullFrame replacement. Still waiting for the outcome of the insurance claim of my total loss R7, so I wont buy anything else right now.

Having the R7 (broken), replacement R10, RF-S 18-150, Sigma RF-S 18-50 F2.8, Sigma RF-S 12mm F1.4, and Canon RF 100-400mm. ah, and I also have the EF-S 55-250 with adapter, works well as well.

So, most of this is really light weight setup, easy to carry body/lense in 1 hand for a full day outside/in town.

Today I checked the Canon R6 MII with the canon RF 24-105mm F4.0 L. A nice combination, which could pair with my Canon RF 100-400mm, and a wide angle prime for astro (canon rf F2.8 or loawa 15mm F2 D2.0 ). and get rid of all the other RF-S stuff and R10.

However, I found it quite a chunky bit of kit, R6 body and 24-105mm is quite a heavy setup compared (1.4kg) to my current R7 with RF-S lenses (below 1kg easily). Not sure if I get used to this. One of the reasons to change from my EOS90D/EF-S setup to RF-S was to save weight.

The camera shop advised me that I would really see a benefit in low light/dynamic range/iso performance with the R6 over the R6, coupled with a good lense like the L4. Just the weight.... I like to travel light, and under the radar as well. Sometimes I travel for work to places like Trinidad, Angola or Nigeria, and its nice to have a small compact camera in my hand luggage, and also don't draw the attention of the crowds on the streets in those places.....

On the other hand I could probably do 90% of my shots just with 1 lense, the 24-105.

Do I really get much better Milkyway or Aurora shots with the R6? Below Milkyway shots were taken with the Samyang 12mm AF F2.0. which i recently replaced by the Sigma 12mm F1.4, which should give me better results at lower ISO in theory ?

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

• Join to view EXIF data.

Compromise would be to start off with R6 mark II and the light weight 24-105 STM F/4-7.1, however reviews not the best especially wide angle 24mm,

Alternative just stick with my RF-S setup and buy another R7 after insurance pays out.

Im still attacked making the move to full frame one day, so maybe that day is coming, Just havent made up my mind.

Not made up my mind.
choices.

cheers
Bert

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[Archibald]

Those are great photos!

For static shots, you can shoot at low ISO and get excellent results in the crop format.

Considering the nice collection of crop-frame lenses that you have, I would consider sticking with crop format for now. Maybe the R10 will be OK for you until the R7 II comes out.

Later, if you feel the crop format is limiting you, then you can go to FF with its benefits (and downsides of cost and weight).

The word lens is one of the few English words that ends in an S but is singular. Lots of people get confused by it.