Compatible third party lenses for R7

[lovetoshoot2023]

I’m coming from the Sony A mount world where I primarily used 2 Tamron products: an 18-270 and a 150-600mm lens. After purchasing my R7 I have become disappointed by the lack of compatible third party products. What lenses would you suggest that would be like the ones I used with my Sony camera?

[rs-eos · Accepted solution]

Check out Canon's History of Lens Mounts which includes a short video on the new RF mount.

[Anonymous]

I would think that Canon R mount lenses would be the best option. What is your reason for looking for third-party lenses?

[lovetoshoot2023]

I have experience with their products. Also their lenses are priced at the enthusiast level.

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

Respectfully, the Tamron EF 18-270 f3.5~6.3 is priced below what I might consider enthusiast level.  Its an 11 yr old lens.  At $249 new, its quite a bargain. 

The Canon RF-S 18-150 f3.5~6.3 ($499) is a much nicer lens, and a better match for your R7. 

The 150-600 f5~6.3 G1 for sony (about 10 yrs old now) lacks IS. 

In this case, I might opt for the RF 100~400 f5.6~8 (on sale for $649) at the moment. 

Lets look at what you get.  Image stabilization.  You can ditch your adapters.  The RF 100 ~400 (1.4 lbs) will feel like a feather instead of the Ugh, (4.42 lbs) of the Tamron.  

Both lens will take advantage of Canon's latest AF performance and software algorithms.  The newer lenses will focus faster and track better.  The R7 is a nice camera.  You'll not realize its full potential trying to use it with 3rd party lenses intended for a prior era of photography.

[Tronhard]

A couple of questions to clarify so I can help you better:
What features of the R7 made you choose it over any other cameras - especially as you apparently are a previous Sony user?
What do you want to take photographs of, precisely?  Is it still, to quote one of your posts from a previous thread: ""to capture stills of flying and perching birds as well as wide angle landscape co.mpositions [sic]"
If so, what do you define as Wide Angle?
Of the two lenses you quoted above, the Tamron 150-600 for Canon for Canon EF mount should be able to work fine with the R7 via the EF-RF adapter.  While I don't use this lens myself I know others who do.  Since you would be looking for a new (non-Sony mount lens) I can personally recommend the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary with the EF mount, which works faultlessly with my R-series bodies (1xR5, 2xR6 and 1xR6MkII) - note that I do not use the R7 for reasons alluded to in the second video link.  Sigma make a wide range of 3rd party lenses that they have actually stated are compatible with the R-series bodies, as per this video: which uses the Canon EOS R6 to demonstrate.

That said, there are caveats specific to the R7, as I have pointed out at some length in other fora. However, to get to the chase I recommend you view this video:

So, the good news is that according to them, you can attach any Sigma lens to an R-series body via the appropriate adapter - and they make some great super zoom lenses, just like Tamron - to your R7, but note that they will not focus consistently at 30fps.  This aligns with my own experience and investigations, which is why I chose the bodies I have.  That said, the R7 is still a capable camera, if operated with the cautions suggested by Canon Japan: i.e. the focus works fine at lower frame rates, especially in high contrast environments..

[Waddizzle]

I have a very low regard for the content creator in your second video.  He makes no claims to being a professional photographer and freely admits that he is an amateur that is learning.

Boy, does he have a LOT to learn.  This issue he is describing about how focus seems to shift about is another example of his frequent operator errors.  Focus is shifting about because he has the lens on a tripod while OS in the lens is active.  If he followed the standard best practice of switching off image stabilization when using a tripod, then this “Issue” that he claims to have discovered goes away.

He has made other videos about “focus pulsing”, which are more examples of operator error and bad science.  In typical fashion, he has image stabilization enabled while using a tripod. He doubles down on basic mistakes by trying to focus on subjects that are inside the MFD, minimum focus distance, of the lens.  

https://youtu.be/CIbHENAY3ss?si=u5H7e4yzlY_0aHF1 

For example, the lens has a listed MFD of 10 feet or 3 meters.  He tries to focus on a subject at that distance, except he has the lens fully zoomed out to its maximum focal length.  When he was making the videos, he obviously did not know that MFD applies to minimum FL of the super telephoto lens.  As you increase FL to maximum, the MFD will also increase.  It increase by some unspecified, but one should expect a significant with a consumer lens like a Sigma 150-600mm. 

Duade is sincere in what he does, but he has a lot of homework to do.  I think he may have since figured out his problems with photography fundamentals.  He even got response from Canon about the issues he is having in his videos.

[EDIT] Duade has been experiencing AF issues for years.  He has video somewhere in his collection that describes the same focus pulsing (focus shifting) issues with an EOS 40D and a Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary.  I’ve watched the entire video at your link.  He still has a LOT to learn.

[Tronhard]

Hi Bill:
Certainly, I agree with you about Duade in the flaws of his experimental methodology. 

What got me was not Duade per se, but the response from Canon, which I DID regard as significant as they tested his camera in house (thus eliminating his methodological flaws) and, having found the camera worked as spec'd, referred back to Canon Japan for inclusion in their response, which is significant.   Their response also chimes with my own experience, experiments, and sheer logic when one looks at the specs.  When I looked at the technical details for the R7 I was immediately struck by the imbalance in the data bus, and to cut a long story short this is what I felt...

First, let me say I was looking forward to the R7 as a true successor the the 7D DSLR series (both of which I owned), which was the premier APS-C camera body, boasting good tracking (for the time), high shutter speed, quiet shutter, excellent sealing and a battery grip.   The R7 is more like a MILC revision of the 90D with rebranding, and that is where it starts to be an issue for me.

Given the R7 has a 32 MP APS-C sensor, the data density of that sensor is equivalent to that of a FF 83MP sensor, combined with claims of an electronic frame rate of 30fps, which no maker has yet approached until Fuji came out with their 40MP APS-C sensors at a much more modest 15fps. That is a lot of sensor photo-sites for such a small unit to refresh rapidly, and the processor struggles at high frame-rates.  Now, a similar sensor appeared on the 90D, but it has a maximum frame-rate of a much more modest 11 fps, and it was not attempting to track, focus and gauge exposure all at once full-time.
The sensor was not BSI/Stacked, so it was too slow to refresh fast enough to avoid pixel shift, and if one shoots in RAW the buffer fills up in 1.2sec, which is not IMHO anything to write home about. The camera still uses dual SD cards, when the throughput would really demand a CF-Express card to try to take the pressure off the buffer.  Of course, one can use mechanical shutter at a much more modest rate, but the noise is massive - it sounds like a machine gun!

There is a good reason why the R3 has a much more modest FF BSI/Stacked 24MP sensor, massive buffer and CF-Express card configuration, because it designed to perform flawlessly for sports and wildlife professionals - and that comes at a significant cost.  To me, the R7 was built to a price that did not support any of those missing elements and that led to compromises.   

Now, that would not be such an issue if Canon marketing had not pushed the 30fps frame-rate as a major feature.  They did the same thing when they pushed the very high video resolutions on the R5 when it was released, and got a lot of flak because the camera heated up and froze - that seriously undermined the reputation of that body for some time until several firmware updates did much to alleviate the situation. 

Essentially, if the quote from Canon is accurate, (and as an ex-cop I don't doubt Duade's honesty) then they essentially were saying don't try to use the camera at the maximum combination of specs advertised, and suggest one throttle back the much-touted frame-rate to more like that of the 90D.   So, one has to ask why they put in, but more significantly touted such an ambitious frame-rate when it is not fully supported without being clear about that compromise.

In the end, the issue is not so much technical competence - for its price point it performs well overall, but I consider it should have been branded as an R70, leaving that R7 slot open for a truly prosumer-level body.  Furthermore, Canon should have been more forthcoming as to the compromises one should consider if shooting at high frame-rates.   Canon over-promised and under-delivered.

[Waddizzle]

Like I said, he shoots from a tripod with Image Stabilization still turned ON.

He complains about the image shifting about when filming video.  Again, he is filming on a tripod with Image Stabilization active.  To make matters worse, he is using a wide angle lens to focus on distant objects.  If I took a photo and zoomed in on those objects, then those same objects would appear soft.  They’re soft because they are so far away that the camera is struggling to find something sharp and defined on which to lock focus.

[Tronhard]

Absolutely agree Bill, but that was not my issue.  The response from Canon Japan was.

[Peak-kid]

You are talking absolute rubbish about Duade. He mentioned that inconvenience of switching IS off while mounting on tripod. The issue with this sigma lens is absolute real especially when subject is closed to MFD.