Birds My two biggest surprises with the R7……

[GaryM]

I finally picked up an R7 last week after spending many years and hundreds of thousands of shots on a 7D2 and 5D4.

Although I expected there to be a big improvement over the 7D2, quite frankly I was floored with just how good it is.
In my brief review of the R7 there are way many more pros than cons, but to me the two most surprising improvements (and unexpected)
were ISO and Jpegs. With the 7D2 I was rarely happy with in camera jpgs and ISO‘s above 1600 (and those even required some noise work. 800 was good). I always shot raw. With the 5D4 i still always shot raw but the jpeg engine was good enough that I used the second card for that and often times it required no post processing. I also could salvage a highly cropped bird image at up to 6400 ISO on an occasion.

I ended up having a couple rather hungry Rufous hummingbirds time their Oregon arrival with the arrival of my R7. So I was able to take a lot of images (several thousand) and put my R7 and high ISO’s to the test. I used my old EF glass (I have no RF glass at the moment) with the basic EF/RF adapter. I used my 200mm 2.8L 2.8ii and 100-400Lii with a sigma 1.4ex and canon 1.4xiii extenders. The 200mm and 100-400ii give very similar results. The 200mm just gives me the ability for faster shutter speeds.

Just a few initial samples to demonstrate High ISO's and a jpeg. I expect the images to improve as the rain and cloud subsides and my ability with the R7 improves. But at this moment in time I am quite pleased.

Left - 200mm 2.8Lii + sigma 1.4x EX , 3200 ISO, f5.6, 1/500s (lightly processed craw), 3F1E45BB
Middle - 200mm 2.8Lii, 5000 ISO, f3.2, 1/4000s (out of camera jpeg), C829DEBE
Right - 200mm 2.8Lii + sigma 1.4x EX, 6400 ISO, f5, 1/1600s (lightly processed craw), 9D230FFB

 

[shamlin]

Nice shots! I'm impressed with the out-of-camera JPEG. I just got my R7 back from service late on Saturday. It was pretty dark and overcast by the time I was able to try it. Conditions didn't improve much yesterday, but I shot a couple hundred frames anyway. I used ISO settings as high as 10000 - a setting I never would have tried with my DSLRs. I was using my EF 400mm F4 IS. The high ISO shots were very noisy out of camera, but running them through DxO PureRaw 3 made them pretty acceptable and a further step of processing with Topaz Denoise (low light) made them quite clean. I'm attaching a couple of them here.
One thing I discovered, which may be relevant to only a few dinosaurs like me, is that my first curtain electronic shutter was quite slow when set on High. I checked the other two shutter modes - electronic and mechanical - and both of them worked as expected. I called Canon support today to report the problem. The tech I spoke to (Pete) was very helpful. He looked up a lens compatibility chart that's included in the R5 manual, but not in the R7 version. According to that, most 1st generation IS lenses won't work in the electronic first curtain/high speed setting combination. Given that, I'm a little surprised that the electronic shutter seemed to work perfectly. I tried my camera with my newer 100-400 IS II lens after getting off the phone and found that everything worked more or less as expected.

Steve

 

[GaryM]

Thanks....I know the version ii lenses seem to work flawlessly with the R7. 10000 ISO?. Now I am really starting to think the unimaginable.
Could the R7 possibly replace my full frame DSLR when they come out with some better wide angle RF lenses. With canon dropping the price $100 today I ended up ordering an RF24 1.8 just to give me a glimpse of such possibilities. I know the EF35 F2 IS USM works flawlessly with my R7, but the field of view is more for family portraits than landscape. Do I see a 14-35 F4 in my future? A dedicated wide/ultrawide for the R7? The RF16mm 2.8 is just too soft in the corners for me, unfortunately.

Two weeks ago I never would have imagined such a conversation. I know I sound like a canoe homer, but I am a perfectionist and a pixel peeper and am just shocked in comparing some of my R7 images with my 5D4 images. They are very similar. Also as an FYI the EF 100mm 2.8L macro works incredibly well and you can attach a sigma 1.4 EX extender to it and it works very well too, not that you would need it though. But it does not correctly read the aperture.

Oh such crazy possibilities that exist nowadays!

Gary

 

[shamlin]

I have two M6 Mk II bodies that I've been shooting with for about two years. It has a very similar sensor to the one in the R7. I've tested that at fairly high ISO settings, but not as high as 10000. That camera too did remarkably well. For me, while the new Canons are remarkable, the game changer ISO-wise has been the addition of DxO and Topaz Denoise to my work flow. As a wildlife photographer who routinely chases small, fast birds in dimly-lit habitat, the whole ensemble is pretty exciting. I can shoot with confidence in conditions I wouldn't have considered a couple of years ago. I especially love the eye-detect of the R7. My M6 Mk II's have a rudimentary version of it, but it only works with human subjects.

 

[RickyRed]

I also have the 7DII and the 5D IV . The R7 is light years beyond both DLSRs. Topaz Studio 2 And DPP are my go too Software. Next camera, R6II.

• Canon EOS R7
• EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3
• 1/640 sec
• ISO 1250

 

[shamlin]

Nice Virginia Rail. I had two 7D Mk II bodies until recently. I had first one M6 Mk II, then I bought a second a little over a year ago. I found I liked the functions the mirrorless made available (mostly the accurate preview of exposure and the histogram, both in the EVF) that I wasn't using the 7D's. I found the relatively low configurability of the M6's (due to the basic menu options that are more similar to the Rebel series) to be a bit of a trade-down from the 7D's. The R7 offers everything I love about the M6 Mk II - the FV mode, the full-featured EVF, and the 32 mp sensor) with a menu that is much more similar to the ones I've been used to. It adds animal eye detection and three shutter choices, as well as really fast shutter burst speeds.

I like DPP too. I haven't been using it since buying On1, which is now my core processing program. I've developed a severe allergy to subscriptions, so I refuse to jump on the Adobe bandwagon. I have an old version (CS5) that I still use for some tasks, but it doesn't include Lightroom. I don't think Lightroom was available when I bought the suite I own. Like I said in my previous post, I'm a bit of a dinosaur.

 

[RickyRed]

The thing that prevents the R7 from truly surpassing the 7DII. , Larger,tougher body. An amazing camera RJ

 

[JHG]

The thing that prevents the R7 from truly surpassing the 7DII. , Larger,tougher body. An amazing camera RJ

The thing that I miss the most is the vertical grip. I just do not understand why Canon just excluded this option as it is pretty straight forward to add a plug inside the battery compartment. Even the lowly 350D (from a long long time ago) had the optional grip, you just wonder what was in the mind of the Canon designers.

 

[shamlin]

Personally, I really like the small size of the R7. I agree that it would be nice to at least have the option of a battery grip, but I've never used one, so I don't miss it. My M6 Mk II bodies were a little too small, so I added SmallRig cages to them, which made them quite comfortable to hold. I've looked at the cage SmallRig offers for the R7. It doesn't look like it would be as effective as the one for the M6II.

 

[JHG]

Personally, I really like the small size of the R7. I agree that it would be nice to at least have the option of a battery grip, but I've never used one, so I don't miss it. My M6 Mk II bodies were a little too small, so I added SmallRig cages to them, which made them quite comfortable to hold. I've looked at the cage SmallRig offers for the R7. It doesn't look like it would be as effective as the one for the M6II.

I was planning of getting the SmallRig cage for my R7, but that is one issue that is holding me back, i.e. the lens release button. That should not be a problem with the EF adaptor, but that will certainly pose a problem with my thick RF100-500.