topic Re: The R7 in EOS DSLR & Mirrorless Cameras

The R7

Tronhard — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 20:15:12 GMT

OK, first of all I am not using a production model of the R7, nor do I have one in my hands, but I can read the specs and the first reviews from sources I trust, and I have reservations. I make these points from someone looking for a pro-level body that is great for wildlife photography in particular. So features like video specs, for example, have no value to me.

I honestly feel this camera is not a natural contender for a R7 designation in the context of the EOS 7D range and market.

To explain: the 7DI and II were professional-level APS-C bodies and that had several characteristics: the best sensors of the time, great buffers, great weather sealing (and built like a tank), great tracking (7DII), and battery grips to increase the energy supply and balance the heavier lenses.

While the R7, without doubt, has a great tracking system, to me this is more like an evolution of the ##D series, of which the last was the 90D, for the following reasons:

This camera is competing with BSI and stacked sensors from competitors like Sony and Fuji. In a premium camera I would have expected Canon to match that.

While the sensor may not be leading edge it is capable of producing enough throughput to stress the buffer. I would like to have seen a bigger buffer leading to dual CF Express A card slots that were backward compatible with SD cards, as Nikon has done - that would resolve any bottleneck issues.

According to several sources, Canon have advised that the weather sealing is NOT as good as for the R3, 5, and 6 bodies - which makes no sense for a pro-level wildlife camera that has to be used in all conditions.

The reviews and sample images I have seen seem to indicated a lot of noise for images in excess of ISO 4000, which these days is considered a fairly modest ISO value, again time will tell but it's another straw in the wind...

Finally, there is no announcement of a battery grip, when one is usually announced with the body. This provides not only a benefit for more energy capacity, but also (especially for a light body) helps to balance the longer and heavier glass that normally goes along with wildlife photography.

So: I DO applaud the camera at the price point at which it is located, and I think it is great value for money - no argument there. However, to me it is not a inheritor of the pro-level characteristics that would make this deserve a R7 designation. Perhaps call it something like an R8 or R9? I would expect a R7 to have all the features that I listed as a true inheritor of the marque...

So for me the question is: is this their best effort at a truly pro-level APS-C camera? I am not going to rush out to find this camera (I suspect there will be a long queue for that anyway), I shall wait and see. Maybe Canon will make a 100+MP replacement for the 5DsR that I love, and with that capacity, keep the specs above and produce a camera that I can shoot great scenery in FF and wildlife in crop mode!

Re: The R7

dkoretz — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 13:04:36 GMT

I complexly agree. I’d add the mediocre EVF and the slow, seemingly consumer-oriented RF-S lenses it was released with. It looks to me like an excellent, reasonably priced replacement for the 90D. I don’t see it as a replacement for he 7D II.

I’m looking for a lighter alternative or complement to my 5D IV, but this appears to be too much of a step down. It will be a superb camera for many purposes, just not mine.

Re: The R7

Waddizzle — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 15:29:06 GMT

Totally agreed.

Re: The R7

Waddizzle — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 15:30:19 GMT

The RF-S lens lineup is irrelevant.

Re: The R7

Tronhard — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 18:28:03 GMT

Personally, I have not even considered the RF-S lenses, I have enough FF lenses of EF and RF varieties for my needs. If Canon were to bring out the 10-24 on the RF roadmap as a FF lens, I would be interested, as it would give me 10-24 + 24-105 + 100-500, which is a massive spread in three lenses. But otherwise, if it is RF-S glass, it is not on my list of wants.

Re: The R7

dkoretz — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 19:57:59 GMT

RF lenses matter to me for two reasons. First, there is no high-quality R-mount zoom with the appropriate focal lengths to make a good walk-around lens for the R7, as far as I know. Second, the bulk of the weight savings from a smaller sensor system is the lenses. This is not just because a shorter FL provides he same AOV. It’s also because lenses designed for a smaller image circle are narrower, hence lighter and cheaper to produce.

Re: The R7

Tronhard — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 21:08:05 GMT

Nothing wrong with that perspective. That's the nature of photography! 🙂 If we all needed or wanted exactly the same thing, it would make for a rather limited market space, I suspect.

Re: The R7

Philnick — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 18:43:38 GMT

A contrary viewpoint:

While I agree that the R7 could have been called something like an R70 or R90 - if maintaining the xD naming conventions applies outside the xD series - from the viewpoint of someone upgrading from the xxD series (70D -> 80D to this) who could never justify the price level of the xD and prior R-series bodies, the R7 is perfect. Other than losing a pop-up flash that I don't use and the top-panel LCD, this body is an across-the board win. (I'll keep my 80D to use with its battery grip until one comes out for the R7.)

My main reason to upgrade is to get the EVF so I can use Live View in bright daylight (I'm a landscape shooter who trusts the sensor focusing more than the viewfinder focus points, which have a different light path - yes, I've done the Micro AF calibration for all of my lenses, but that's still a kludge).

Like the EVF, everything else is an improvement over the xxD series: two card slots, viewfinder focus joystick, R3-type autofocus, fast burst speeds.

With the EF to RF Control Ring adapter I'll be able to use my two EF lenses (Canon 70-300 IS USM, Tamron f1.8 45 VC) and my three EF-S lenses (Canon f2.8 17-55 IS USM, Canon 10-18 IS STM. and Canon 18-135 IS USM).

You folks looking for an upgrade to your 7D Mk II bodies will probably get one with dual CF card slots and a stacked BSI sensor - but it will probably cost a lot more than this xxD-priced model.

Re: The R7

dkoretz — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 17:34:58 GMT

Not a contrary view at all. Look at Tronhard's OP or my first reply. He wrote "this is more like an evolution of the ##D series, of which the last was the 90D." I wrote: "It looks to me like an excellent, reasonably priced replacement for the 90D." What neither he nor I think it is is a replacement for the 7D II.

There are a few smaller-sensor cameras that are designed to compete in the semi-pro market. One is the new OM-1, which does cost $700 more than the R7 despite having a smaller sensor. Another is the new Fuji X-H2S, which is $1000 more. The Fuji XT-4, which costs only $200 more than the R7, might be in this category also. I don't know it well enough to know.

BTW, I may be wrong, but I don't think you need the EF-RF adapter with the control ring to use your EF lenses. I think the regular adapter without the control ring works fine, from what I have read, and it costs half as much.

Re: The R7

Philnick — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 20:18:46 GMT

I know that the control ring version isn't necessary, but that control ring is desirable, since it makes EF/EF-S lenses behave more like RF lenses, giving me the ability to have an aperture control ring on the lens - something I grew up with on FL/FD lenses on my Canon FT-QL (from over half a century ago).

I believe that the FT-QL was the only SLR to ever have Canon's Quick Load system - a hinged inner panel that opened and closed with the back door of the camera to hold the end of the film in place over the sprocket gear while you closed the back. It made loading 35mm film a breeze. No threading the end into a slot in the take-up spool, just lie the end of the film over the sprocket gear and close the back. Not only could you load the camera while walking around, it made loading so repeatable that you could switch film types in the middle of a roll with no waste. Just put the lens cover on and fire off enough shots to get back to where you were - all you had to do was always put the same-numbered sprocket hole over the gear.

Re: The R7

Tronhard — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 18:28:28 GMT

Your approach is perfectly valid. The issue I, and I suspect many of my colleagues have, is that Canon have been quite consistent in naming R-series bodies with the same numbers as their DSLR equivalents. In numbering this new camera the R7 they are essentially taking a category of model that was occupied by a high-end, professional-grade APS-C DSLR.

The camera that now has the R7 badge on it is not at the level of a 7D-series successor, for reasons I laid out in my original post. This camera is an excellent upgrade for those who want to have a camera to replace their XXD series bodies, but I would feel happier if it was identified as something like a R70

What is concerning is for those who want a replacement to 7D-series camera for our wildlife or other applications, where an APS-C sensor offers benefits but will work at the highest level with the best protection. With this slot in the line-up taken, it begs the question as to whether Canon will or will not make such a camera. If they did not, then it pushes us in the direction of other brands, such as Fuji (which specializes in APS-C bodies and has some excellent offerings), Nikon and Sony. All of these brands are offering stacked and/or back-lit sensors, decent buffers and fast cards, along with serious environmental sealing - all things that are missing in this camera.

So, no-one is trying to deny you, or anyone else this body - it's a great deal (although I would wait for the reviews on its noise above ISO-4000) and will be a great upgrade, but those of us who wanted something more are asking - "That's great, but what about us?"

Re: The R7

Tronhard — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 19:34:41 GMT

I understand where you come from. It's an interface thing and you, like me, harken back to those days when cameras were controlled by dials on top and rings on the lens, and not by menus. I have shot Canon since about 1980, but I went to Nikon for their excellent Df body back in 2016, which was a direct tribute to those cameras by their designer, MR TETSURO GOTO who made the camera his parting project as head of Nikon design from 1975 until his retirement in 2019. I love this tribute camera: the ergonomics of a classic Nikon SLR combined with the quality of a high-end DSLR FF sensor that is outstanding in low light. I have two of them and love shooting with them.
In the MILC realm Nikon did come out with the Zfc, but I was less enamoured with that as it was a crop sensor body and pandered to market forces to add video. Instead I looked at the excellent Fuji X-T4, and found that I could use all of my Canon glass on it with a Fringer Pro II adapter, that offered full aperture control via a ring, and allowed me to use my lenses flawlessly. I have a couple of those and really enjoy them too. The X-T4 has a brilliant sensor, and many other features that make it a competitor to what Canon is offering in the APS-C MILC market. I am expecting a new release of the X-T5 in the not too distant future.

So if you are seeking a classic camera design there are some beautiful units out there, and with one you can actually use your Canon glass.

Re: The R7

Philnick — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 21:02:01 GMT

I go back even further. I started with a 120 roll-film camera in 1958 doing my own B&W darkroom work, taught by my dad when I was 8. Worked my way up to a folding camera with a small rangefinder in the flash shoe and a tiny light meter in the flash shoe I epoxied on top of the rangefinder, before buying the FT-QL in my senior year in high school in 1968.

Taught myself color printing in college when home chemistry and paper became available. Only went digital in 2003 with a Rebel XTi - which let me control the whole process with Photoshop and an Epson Stylus printer and ceramic-coated paper that maintains the image's sharpness courtesy of a surface covered with thousands of inkwells across its surface so the pigment sprayed by the print head doesn't spread horizontally or smear if touched. (At this point I mainly use DxO's PhotoLab because I prefer its more Canon-faithful color rendering of Canon RAW files to Adobe's and it's ViewPoint geometry-correction makes my 10-18 lens into an anamorphic Cinemascope lens with no "fisheye" lens distortion.)

I've ridden the improvements in the tech, adopting the scattered dual pixel and Live View of the T4i and then the vastly improved versions in the 70D and 80D.

Call me an oddball, but Live View lets me ditch auto-exposure completely. I live in Manual exposure, and Live View and an EVF in my G5X (and the R7 I've got on order) let me set exposure "to taste." There's no electronic "backseat driver" trying to override my settings for exposure! What I see is what I get.

Re: The R7

Tronhard — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 22:11:54 GMT

I respect your experience. 🙂
We all have different ways of shooting, and that is one of the great boons of the modern technology. Pretty much from the get go I shot transparencies and that meant my images were judged for sale as shot - no processing. The combinations of film and transparencies, and my work in the wild for long periods meant I had to develop a discipline that one does not often see today. I had fixed ISO's, limited film stock, and I wasn't going to see the outcome for possibly weeks. That all meant I shot very conservatively. These days the trend is to fire off shots like Rambo. For me, having to look at a gazillion images in PP is not how I want to spend my life.

I don't do much printing: from early on I led a fairly mobile life, so the prints became more of a liability than an asset. Now that digital photo frames are available, I can get the images I want on the wall at a decent size and I can change them as often as I like for no cost!

That was one thing I liked about the Df and the Fuji bodies: the top dial controls (which are an option, you can use the conventional DSLR interfaces), make one slow down and turn the taking of an image into an occasion that I choose to savour at this stage in my life. I wish Canon would bring out a retro body with modern innards and dials on top, but I suspect that bird has flown...

I do use Av a lot, and don't share your view that it is a 'back seat driver' - it was even on my F3 and A-1 bodies - but we all gravitate to those things within our comfort zones. I do use M when I know the light won't change significantly and I want to keep the settings. That said, with Av, back button focus and exposure lock can also be very effective and they are my go to settings on my cameras. I shoot mostly hand-held, and appreciate the stability offered by using any viewfinder to stabilize the camera, especially with longer lenses that I use.

I have a couple of G5X bodies and think they are brilliant within their family of 1" sensors, especially with the longer focal length range. I have a G1XMkIII, and with its APS-C sensor, and body the size of the G5X, it's great for more detailed work when I want more resolution, but don't need the reach. Both great when carrying a bulkier unit is not on the agenda.

If I was to name a best all-in-one unit it would be Sony's RX-10 MkIV, really the best bridge camera out there with a 1" sensor, Stacked 21MP Sensor, 24-600 Equivalent FoC, stabilization, environmental sealing, IS. IMHO nothing touches it for going on multi-day hikes or when bulk and weight are an issue but one needs the flexibility.

Re: The R7

Philnick — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 23:09:53 GMT

I found that by coupling my G5X's RAW files with DxO PhotoLab I get very good available light shooting from that combo - much better image quality than I had expected.

I like the idea of a digital picture frame - I've heard them talked about a lot but haven't seen one in real life.

Re: The R7

Tronhard — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 23:11:25 GMT

There are lots of small digital photo frames, but what I wanted was something that would replace a decent-sized print, framed.

An image that is seen using reflected light will never have the same characteristics as one that projects light. In case of point, if one visits the Wildlife Photographer of the Year exhibition, there is a huge difference in lustre and pop between the backlit screens in the show and prints in the books etc.

While most TV's will display images as a slide show, they often don't have the matte surface and wide angle of view one would prefer for a static image, nor are they necessarily as thin or elegant as a framed image.

There are now a couple of solutions out there. Samsung makes The Frame, which is both a TV and Photo frame. It is super thin, and can be wall-mounted to look like a print frame, or sit on a stand. The sizes range 24" to 55".

The other is the Netgear 'Meurel' frame. It comes in sizes up to 27" and has the added advantage of giving one access to a huge range of digitized artwork of various genres. I recently got this one.

The higher initial cost is, for me, worth the investment, as I can enjoy the display characteristics I like, and I can change the images to match my mood, as often I like, and for no cost.

Re: The R7

Tronhard — Wed, 08 Jun 2022 09:44:57 GMT

I think your perspective is very valid. A lot depends on where one is coming from. At the moment, given my reservations about the R7 and the promise of a lot of glass coming out for the RF / RF-S mount (Canon promised 32 over 4 years), , so I feel no necessity to go out to look for RF-S units: I can wait and enjoy what I've got. But again: everyone is different!

For myself, I have a huge range of Canon lenses, at last count: 34 EF and EF-M lenses, and 4 RF lenses. I have the actually rather excellent RF 24-240 lens which is a bit of hidden gem. I was encouraged by reviews by those I respect that indicated it was actually quite competitive to some RF L glass: for example, it held its own across the range of the RF 24-105 f/4 L lens. So that works for me as a walk-around unit very well with my R6 bodies

Also a lot depends on what focal lengths one is shooting at. My work is usually at the very long tele end, being a wildlife photographer, and so the RF 100-500 is a natural unit for me, but I can also use my existing EF 100-400MkII, and Sigma 150-600 and 60-600 units as they work flawlessly with the Canon EF-RF adapters, so no further immediate investment is needed. 🙂