I really wanted an R7 until

[MehZhure]

I had decided I was going to drop some cash on an R7 until I found out about not allowing third party manufacturers to make RF lenses and the IBIS problems going on with the R7. I mean, it's a new camera, there are bound to be some issues...no biggie. It only becomes a major problem when the blame is being placed on everyone else...or the company tries to pretend they don't understand the problem. Much as I hate to say it, this has pretty much changed my mind to go look at Sony's offerings. Pretty annoyed about it too.

Just for reference, here is a current user who has thoroughly described the problem I am referring to.

[Tronhard]

You Tube is full of information that is valid and not valid, along with a lot of opinions: some of which are very valid, others not so much.  One way to get a handle on this is to look at reviews from trustworthy sources and avoid the clickbait - which thrives on creating rumour.  We get a lot of inquiries here about issues with different bodies, but I cannot recall any on the R7 having IBIS issues.  There are others, but none that fit this specific issue.

However, the best thing to do is to check it out for yourself.  I would recommend borrowing or renting a Canon R7 and trying it out for yourself.

As to the issue of Canon and 3rd party lenses... 

What I find perplexing is the concept that people have that Canon have to make their cameras compatible with 3rd party lenses - which is a common misconception, it would appear. 

It is absolutely the responsibility of the 3rd party makers to ensure their gear works with the OEM's equipment.  Licensing agreements are established between the OEM and the 3rd party, in which both sides will have commitments: specifically the OEM will ensure that if they have licensed firmware to control devices like lenses of strobes, that they will update the 3rd party with such IP as appropriate - for this the 3rd party pays a fee. However, it is the responsibility of that 3rd party to then make their products compliant.  That does not apply as current 3rd party lenses were never intended by the makers to work with the new RF mounts and the makers clearly say so.

There is no suggestion by Canon that they will never allow 3rd party lens makers to create fully-compliant RF glass.  Canon and other makers have very good relationships with Sigma and other quality lens makers, because they recognize the benefits to their camera and peripheral sales to have alternative lenses for those who, for one reason or another, will not use OEM lenses.

Could I respectfully suggest that you read an earlier post in which I responded at length to this issue:
HERE 

[MehZhure]

Thanks for the reply, and the link to your prior discussion. I get the impression you did not watch the video I linked. The guy gets into the IBIS problem fairly quickly, and does a good job of demonstrating it. You may want to give it a watch so you know what I am referring to.

[Tronhard]

Fair enough, I should have looked, but I have dealt with a long line-up of people demanding that Canon make their cameras compliant with 3rd party gear, and that's ridiculous. I have had a good look at the video and have a couple of questions to ask.

I think that as a general principle, Canon is still correct in not taking responsibility in any way for third-party lenses. They are likely fairly defensive about that issue for the reasons I mentioned in the post to which I referred.  I suspect they don't want to even start to engage with any issues to do with third party lenses in any shape or form because that opens the door the the principle that they are in any way responsible for them, and they are not.  From what I can see those video lenses were not Canon: hence the reaction.

My own experience: I am not a cinematographer, so I don't use cinematic lenses. I have personally tested for still photography purposes over 29 EF and lenses with the R5 and R6 cameras and found them to work perfectly.  So, the issue seems to be with the R7 and in particular with cinematic lenses, applied to video - this seems to be the focus of the video clip.  Would that be your impression?

While I have not personally seen issues reported on this site for IBIS, that does not mean they don't exist, I would expect that those would be addressed directly to tech support, which this is not.  Personally, I have other issues with the R7 and have declined to purchase one.

The R7 was touted as the replacement for the 7DII pro-level APS-C camera, and my own belief (reinforced by statements by Canon Oz) is that it is actually more aligned with the 90D, which is a tier lower in the hierarchy of Canon products.

Canon, it seems to me, were under pressure to bring out an APS-C body range and to make it affordable.  They put in adapted versions of the R3 tracking and IBIS systems, but onto an ASP-C sensor array, and I wonder how well that is going to port across?  I honestly still see the line-up of DSLR and R bodies (with the exception of the R5c) as stills cameras with some video capability, despite the clear improvements that they have incorporated.  My point is that for a video-centric person who wants to pimp the R7 with cinema specific lenses that might be asking too much at this stage.  I wonder how many people will have that experience?  The presenter is correct that if enough people have the issue it will attract resources to solve it.

Question - for your personal use, are you intending to use the R7 in the same fashion as the presenter?  That is, with specialist video lenses?  If not, I what lenses and under what conditions will you use the camera?  I would suggest that it would be worthwhile seeing if you can get hold of an R7 yourself to test the lens + camera combos for your specific purposes.

If it turns out the camera does not perform well, in that case I would not buy the R7, for sure.  Get the Fuji x-T4 or the new Fuji X-H camera tweaked for video.  I have two X-t4 units and have to say that their tracking and IBIS do not perform as well as the R5 and R6, but they are FF cameras, built to a higher spec than the R7.

[MehZhure]

I was left with the general impression that he was both mildly surprised and disappointed to find the IBIS problem existed in the first place, but thought it wasn't such a big deal...until he had worked with support for a while only to have them either push the blame off on other companies, or pretend to not understand the problem.

And, no...I absolutely do not believe they don't understand the problem. This is what corporations do to avoid having to address known problems. It's enough to turn me against Canon...possibly permanently. I have, quite literally, spent the last several hours learning about Sony's offerings.

Regarding my intent, and reason for my interest in the R7... I was looking to get a moderately priced camera suitable for a VERY wide range of situations. Portrait shots, landscape, action photos, video...the whole gamut. Up until I stumbled across this problem, I had settled on getting an R7 sometime this month. As it stands now, I am probably going to go with a Sony a7R III or the Sony a7R IIIA.

[Waddizzle]

Please indulge me for a minute.  What exactly is this IBIS problem that you allude to?  Please do not tell me to watch your video.  If you do not want to describe it, then I do not want to watch it.

[EDIT].  Posts about some new found bug appear from time to tome.  Far more times than not, the problem is simple operator error.  But, some people are quick to blame the gear, instead of first taking an objective look at themselves.

I find it extraordinary that these posters cannot see the basic illogic to their claims.  They are experiencing a one-of-a-kind issue that they declare is firmware or hardware bug.  No one else using similar gear and settings has had a similar issue.

One recent example is a guy who claimed that R Series bodies experience “autofocus pulsing” with the Sigma 150-600mm C lens.  The lens has a rated MFD of about 3 meters, but he was trying focus on subjects at that distance with the lens fully zoomed out to 600mm.  Bad science is the best description I have for it.

[Tronhard]

Hi Bill:
I did and as best as I can summarize, the IBIS is not working as expected with cinema lenses. The video also suggests that with some native EF glass the IBIS is not working either.

The video also expresses frustration that Canon tech support do not see it as an issue and decline to get involved in any 3rd party lens issues, even if they are fully manual.

I think that is it - but I am sure the OP will correct me if I am missing something.

To be honest, I think that an expectation has been created that this is a pro-level camera and folks are going with that and trying to get it to do things that it is not designed for nor capable of doing.  I have not seen previous issues about IBIS, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.  I am not a videographer, so I am not familiar with the lenses but according to the video the video lenses are all manual 3rd party lenses - the claim being that as all manual lenses they should not need firmware to make them work.

[MehZhure]

Tronhard summarized the issue well enough. Honestly, though...if you don't feel up to watching a link posted that not only explains the problem, but also demonstrates it...why bother responding at all? You may as well have simply posted something to the effect of, "My opinion is so amazing that you must perform a task to acquire it. The fact that you already provided excellent resources explaining/documenting the issues means nothing to me."

[Waddizzle]

“Just for reference, here is a current user who has thoroughly described the problem I am referring to.”  

Okay, I surrendered to curiosity and watched the video.  It was about what I expected, bad science.  He failed to fully describe his test conditions.

What make of mount adapter was he using?  Was he shooting from a tripod or handheld?  I came away with the impression that he was using a tripod, which begs the question of WHY.  

Why would you enable IBIS when the camera is sitting on a tripod?  

@MehZure, you have also failed to describe your own test conditions and gear, too.  You and the video content creator have both failed to provide sufficient info to reproduce your issue.  

[MehZhure]

I believe you may be making too many knee-jerk assumptions to give an opinion on this situation. For instance, you came away with the impression he was filming using a tripod...yet, he was explicitly demonstrating a problem he has had with the IBIS...something which one would never use in conjunction with a tripod. Then, you pose the question of why a person would enable IBIS while using a tripod. The obvious answer being...they wouldn't. Which means, he didn't...since there would have been no shake if he had been using a tripod.

As for a full description of the test conditions, seems to me a person owning the R7 and some similar lenses would have sufficient info to replicate the situation quite easily.

As for my own test conditions...maybe you actually just skipped the original post entirely. I was considering purchasing the R7...meaning I do not own one yet. Thus...no test conditions for me.

I think maybe you are a Canon "fanboy", and are triggered by the thought someone might not believe the Canon corporation can do no wrong. Regardless, with what I have seen from you thus far, I am more likely to disregard your opinion now, as it appears you are so biased toward Canon that anything you say I would have to go verify it for myself anyway...making your opinion useless to me. Not saying that you aren't highly knowledgeable about this general topic. But, you have presented yourself as dangerously biased in favor of Canon. You have, effectively, invalidated your own opinion.

Maybe next time you join a conversation, do it in a manner that you would if you were speaking to the people face-to-face, instead of hidden behind the anonymity of the internet.