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.

[Waddizzle]

I stand behind everything I said about the video, which fell far short of standard scientific methodolgies.

If you’re going to announce to the world that you have made a technical discovery, then you had better be correct and have data to back it up.  You MUST provide sufficient data for others to reproduce and confirm your result.  You MUST not leave anything open to assumption of speculation.  

First and foremost, you request a peer review.  You invite others to run the same tests to see if they get the same results.  The video failed on all of the above.  

Enjoy your new Canon camera.

[MehZhure]

Don't misunderstand me. I agree with you that his testing methodology was not scientific. That said, it should be fairly easy to reproduce given the information he gave. Since I don't have the camera or lenses...I cannot even attempt to reproduce it. That said, I don't recall seeing anyone in the comments stating they attempted to reproduce it and could not. And, yes, it is a highly situational issue...which most people would never encounter anyway. Regardless of all the points anyone has made, it isn't reasonable to dismiss a thing out-of-hand without personal investigation. Doing so is why it takes so long to advance science.

[rs-eos]

But ultimately it's up to you to either reproduce it before you make a purchasing decision (to see if it will affect your workflows), or otherwise make that decision without first-hand knowledge.

Personally, I wouldn't base my purchasing decisions on one single video that may or may not be demonstrating an issue.  And, an issue which appears to be an edge case.

[Tronhard]

I think the issue is the need for Canon to investigate is based on the premise that they have a responsibility to do so.  As discussed ad nauseam in many posts on this site, Canon have no right or  responsivity to test lenses from other makers on their products and make statements about them.  Nor do they have the authority to recommend or execute changes to such lenses.  That would be, in this case, the responsibility of Sigma, who have stepped away from this too.  Sigma simply state that their EF lenses are not designed to work on the R-series bodies.  So, it falls to other parties to investigate in a responsible and appropriate way. 

However, to do a fully-scientific test, it would require multiple repeated experiments under several conditions: several copies of the lens and camera should be used shooting different subjects under different lighting conditions, use of a tripod or not, IS on or not, variations for distance and aperture; and then we need to start on the lens customization options from Sigma that are available.

So, we come down to the fact that this one, rather casual test which Duade is quite open about is not a scientific one, has been taken and expanded completely out of proportion.

To come back to the original post.  In the light of all this, really the best way to decide if the R7 is for you is to rent or borrow one, and use it along with the lenses you wish to use, and under the conditions under which you intend to use it.

[Waddizzle]

“…I don't recall seeing anyone in the comments stating they attempted to reproduce it and could not….”  

That’s my point.  No one could attempt to reproduce the results, even if they wanted to.

[MehZhure]

I have no qualms with Canon for just outright saying, "That problem cannot be replicated on a Canon lense. You will need to speak with the third party company and have them fix the issue, since it is clearly something they have implemented incorrectly." Indicating they don't understand the problem, or denying it exists...that's an entirely different thing. The problem clearly exists.

Plus, I mean, the issue is not with something in the lense. It can't be...because the problem exists in manual lenses. If there is no IS in the lense, and the entirety of the stabilization is coming from the camera's IBIS...honestly, how do you get around that? It's a problem with the camera. There is no communication with the lense for stabilization. The lense info has to be set manually in the camera. Thus, if there is a problem with image stabilization...it cannot possibly be due to the lense. That option is explicitly ruled out due to it being a purely manual lense.

That is why I agree with Mark Wiemis (guy in the video) about the issue being something with the R7's IBIS...and it probably being fixable via a firmware update. But, if they (canon) refuse to acknowledge it/pretend to not understand this problem...that looks extremely bad on them.

[MehZhure]

I agree this needs further, more detailed, examination. But, let me ask you this question. Since the problem (in the video) exists with manual lenses...i.e. there is no communication with the lense...and the entirety of the image stabilization is being handled exclusive by the IBIS based on manually entered lense information...how can it be anything else except a problem with the IBIS of the R7?

[Tronhard]

To be perfectly honest I am qualified to answer that, since:
a) the manual lenses you refer to appear to be video lenses.  I have no history of videography
b) I don't have access to that hardware to test it for myself - neither the R7 or the lenses. 

I am not trying to belittle you or your question, I am being honest enough to know my limitations and I judge myself as having not the means to give you a valid answer.  Others on this site may be able to help you, I hope so.
Again, I come back to the idea of test what you have with the gear you want for your specific purposes.  There are professional reviewers that I respect, but when it comes down to making sure something will work for me, I do that myself so I have no-one to blame but me if it goes wrong.

[MehZhure]

Ah...so, you didn't even attempt to investigate. Because, yeah...there are several people who commented about having the exact same issues. One even noted that they ended up returning their R7 because of it.

So...yeah. That's why I think you are emotionally caught up in this. You go on and on about it not being scientific...while concurrently overlooking some pretty major details.

[MehZhure]

If you happen to be intrigued enough, you can scan over the comments on the video. It seems quite a few people have been able to replicate this problem. So, it's not an isolated incident.