Great video, this should help quite a few people block out a lot of the "noise" from camera snobs that think that the only good photos come from $6,000 full frame camera bodies.
Just purchased the R7. Been watching your videos for a week now. Thanks for doing such a great job and making it easy to get to know the rig. I've been using the R6 for two years now. Heading on a trip soon with the R7. Your videos really help Thank you Sir.
You've become my go to R7 guy...I've had mine for a week and noticed more "noise" than I ever seen from my full frame Canons, I've yet to use the higher ISO's you used ....DXO appears to be the magic!
Excellent series and very helpful for me (being a total rookie in photography) it’s become very clear I’ve made the right choice in the R7 (which I’m chuffed is actually on its way to me as I write ! 😊)
@@WILDALASKA thanks very much , think I might be a bit absent for a week or 3 getting to know the R7 , I have a friend that is an experienced wildlife stills photographer think he is going to be sick of the site of me 🙄🤣 Keep up the good content I’ll be keeping my eye out for it 👍
Great video! I just recently shot some green herons at 500m 7.1 ISO 12800 and was like idk. Then you posted DXO got the profile update. Updated and was like wow it clean it up so well and was thrilled as I enjoy the herons.
When shooting dragonflies at dawn in a peat bog, I had to use ISO 12800 and a tripod to get decent shots of dew covered dragons. The R5 handled that quite well, especially when the sun came up. Some of the later ISO 12800 shots didn’t need noise processing, no chroma noise, just a pleasing film grain like noise pattern. The earlier shots needed to get run through Topaz. This morning I have started using DXO PL to denoise images before adding them to lightroom :)
Good thing about DXO PureRAW is there is a 30 day full application use trial. DXO to me doesn't try to change your image. it just does the same almost as the CanonDPP4 software does. Looks more 'natural' to the jpeg version of the cameras processing
Thank You - good info on how to deal with low light and effectiveness of camera for low light … interesting approach to apply DXO or Topaz first - I will try that before LR … thanks again Terry Donofrio
Come back here to thank you again. Just downloaded the trial version of DXO PureRaw 2 (will go on to purchase for sure). Tried a couple of ISO 12800 files (RF 800 f/11 + 1.4TC) that I had previously run through Topaz - ok result, but, on a different level after DXO treatment, so big thanks!
I'm equally impressed both by the R7's image quality and by DxO. I've been using Topaz to clean up R5 files up to ISO 12,800. But the starting image at that point can look scary and I'm wary of over-processing. If DxO can establish a clean baseline for processing Canon files like you've shown here, I'm sold! (On the camera, too!)
Some (a lot) of people are obsessed with ISO noise, to the point where they can’t possibly get ‘anything worth keeping’, others take the shot and capture unique moments, and no one (other than photographers) would even mention the noise.
I don think anyone is obsessed with noise. Noise is ok. Its just when the CR3 and LR or ACR give you flat colors and an obscene amount of noise vs canons dpp4 software or other editors. THEN its an issue. As I said in many videos, there are times I add noise into a photo.
Cheers dude. I’ve watched all your R7 videos while I try to decide whether to keep mine and, while watching this one, I updated DxO and ran a couple of files through. My mind is made up and my R5 has a stable mate! Keep up the great work and I look forward to following your adventures. Best, J
Good to know you have both cameras. Deciding if I should get an R5...do you see any reason to spend the extra $2k on an R5 if the IQ is this good on the R7, factoring in extra reach of the R7 and the frequent need to crop an R5? Thanks!
@@unknownKnownunknowns Really tough to say. The R5 has better IQ but the R7 has great IQ also. Id say if your doing print work and getting paid. Ya a R5 and a R7. If your doing mostly for yourself a few prints etc. 2 R7's would be good. ORRRR... if you shoot a lot of blue hour or astro then ya a R5.
Hi Steven, That's a tricky one. I love the R5 and the image quality is definitely better than the R7. I think rolling shutter will be a big problem for birds in flight with the R7, with lots of funky wing shapes etc. I think this will make the pre-capture feature pretty useless, as it's primary purpose is to catch birds taking off. The R5 suffers much less with rolling shutter. Also, the shutter sound on the R7 is just appaulling. If you watch Jan Wagener, you'll have seen that the shutter "shake" has ruined many shors taken with a slower shutter speed. I'm also a keen landscape and architectural photographer and the R5 is a definite winner here. If I only had to keep one camera, it would be the R5 every day of the week. However, at the price, the R7 is a steal, even with the clear shortcomings. Best, J
@@juliangreaves4727 Rolling shitter on the R7 is exactly the same on the R5. You just have more examples of it at a higher frame rate when shooting. Wing curve is very very rare. It only happens if you hit it when they change direction. Also do NOT shoot a bird against trees or man made object when that object is in focus anyway. I have watched many a channel show that and its silly. you wouldn't use that image as a keeper even if the lines were straight. Ive show images of tree swallows and shown the amount of rolling shutter issues and 90% of them you wouldn't know if you didn't have a comparison image in the series. SO rolling shutter, not an issue. Ive taken around 50k images with the camera and none have been lost due to rolling shutter especially ones that would be keepers. I have. whole video on precatpure shooting tree swallows. on one 2 of the several hundred can you find the wing shapes off and even then you really wouldn't know without the other images in the series. I confirmed this by shooting the R3 on the same day to reproduce some of the more interesting shapes and only on wing pose I could not recreate with the R3. SO I guess if you worried about rolling shutter, don't. No-one was complaining about rolling shutter as much with the R5 and its exactly same issue with rolling shutter. Been using the r5 since its release and of course the R7. Both are great on BIF. I shoot a lot of them. Hope that helps.
I use Lightroom Classic for all my touching up and such, so I tried the trial of Photolab 5 to take a look and wasn't impressed. I thought it was the same tech as PureRaw, but I tried that tonight and.. holy moly does it really clean up my R7 images. Instant buy, it's so dang good.
I not afraid of high ISO. I have an R6 and don’t think twice about 25,800. I just received an R7 today and was shocked by just a few simple test shoots. The camera far exceeded my expectations. It’s seems far more than the extender for my full frame lenses I envisioned it to be. I had no complaints about the build quality of the camera. I’ve shot Rollieflexs, Leica M, Canon 1Ds, Canon 5Ds, over 50 years. And reaction today was this little R7, $1500. Camera is no joke.
Exactly my thoughts. My intent was a extra reach when needed, backup camera with another lens, and for video. What it turned out to be was a companion to the R5. IM not afraid of high ISO either but its in my mind. With chasing owls in winter with no light and AK weather, you just adapt to shooting in low light as that's 60% of the time up here ;)
Ya the Image reviews go long :P But I like t take you along the journey of why I say ya it's good. provide the evidence and then I get off topic :P Thanks for watching :)
In my experience with the R7 and DXO, 2000-3200 ISO is when you ever so slightly start to notice loss of detail. After extensive testing on my Sigma 150-600C which is slightly sharper at F8, that's the most I allow myself to shoot at f8, as it seems to be the tipping point where 6.3 will give slightly better results. The next jump in noticeable degradation is about 10-12k ISO, like you said, above that I'll try to lower the shutter speed as much as I can. 10-12k is about when DXO will still leave noticeable noise behind sometimes, which Topaz Denoise will always clean up nicely. The resulting image will have some loss of detail but be still perfectly usable usually. I've found that a second round in Topaz after DXO can be surprisingly useful at those high ISOs, with improvements of the 2nd round of NR starting to show at about 6400 and being pretty noticeable at around 10-12k. In my experience above that, you can still get reasonably good results up to 20-25k, as long as you don't crop. Especially for social media or things like that. 25k is my current limit on the auto ISO, and I've gotten some pretty alright (not amazing) bird pics at 20k. So overall, my experience is pretty similar to yours I'd say. Pretty impressive performance indeed!
I love your Loon images, had to give you thumbs up before I even completed the video! Have used the R7 up to ISO 12800, with reasonable results adding Topaz, but can see even on here DXO is doing a better job. Debating with myself whether I have the patience, commitment or need to learn a new way to process, adding or replacing a step in my current workflow. I would appreciate seeing your workflow process, not to necessarily the completed image, but from import back to Lightroom. I generally import to Lightroom Classic and just take best images to Topaz plug in, then finish again in Lightroom. Thanks again, always look forward to your content.
Will be making a video very soon on just that (workflow). DXO is Super simple to use. Just add you images ad hit process. there are some things your can adjust but the default is very good. Also there is a 30 day trial of the software. You can even just bring your files into Lightroom and then the you want to use DXO just hit export to > DXO and boom it applies its magic, no matter where you are in the process of editing the image. And thanks for the comment on the Loon. I didn't really try to get great shots of it that day. Was just getting the low light/high ISO shots. I did manage ny favorite pose of the bird for the upcoming thumbnail on video settings. You can see it on the community post for that upcoming video for this Saturday (8/6/22)
Great video as always. I absolutely agree, the ISO performance on the r7 is pretty good. I'm happy with the IQ and the AF is impressive too. R7 paired with the RF 100 to 500 is a perfect combo for wildlife photography. You have the reach and the light wait that you can handheld for hours. Love it.
Great video. You kit is the dame as mine and the information you give really resonates with my nature photography needs. Thank you for making these video!! They are very helpful. I think it's time to get a denoise software.
Thanks so much for taking the time to do theses tests. Given your conclusions using DXO, do you see any reason to spend the extra $2k on an R5 if the IQ is this good on the R7, factoring in extra reach of the R7 and the frequent need to crop an R5? ( Also, wondering if you tried Canon's free DPP for noise reduction? )
Yeah I used DPP4 in a lot the R7 reviews prior to DXO getting the R7 profile released. its such a cumbersome app to use though. If you do a lot of print work, astrophotography, or lot of blue hour photography then get an r5 along with R7. if you don't the 2 R7's would be great.
Thank you, Scott. I use R7, R6, RF100-500, RF 70-200, RF 800 and a 1.4TX. Mostly birds. Tried moto-cross bikes last week. R7 with RF 70-200. Whew! Very fast. Set AF to people and the R7 stuck tight on the helmets. Impressive. I am very happy to know you will be doing a workflow video on where DXO fits in. I've wondered that. What about Topaz in the chain? Thanks, again.
Great setups in gear. Topaz...only use it now if I need more noise in BG. If I have motion blur, out of focus. I just toss the shots now. I didn't upgrade on that last Topaz yearly cycle. DXO seems to take care of my issues (with photography anyway :P). If it doesn't then I just toss the photo.
Depends on conditions of the day for light. Sometimes I know it will need sharpening due to low light day or on a good light day I turn sharpening off. But every image goes through DXO for sure
Seems like a solid testimonial to the power of DXO PureRaw 2. Have you had a chance to evaluate the R7 performance at these same ISO values without DXO, perhaps even using the same photos as A/B reference? That would be helpful to me.
Yes check out the previous ISO performance video. But with that said the main issue is if your using adobe LR or ACR it doesn't matter as they don't have the appropriate optical profiles for the Canon mirrorless. SO it will always be crap ;)
Great info! Thanks for sharing your impressions.👍 Could you (or have you) walk us through your post-processing workflow? Where DXO PR fits in? FWIW, I have successfully used as high as ISO 16000 with my 7D Mark IIs, though I don't make a habit of it, some extra work in post is req'd and those are 20MP cameras. Of course they are also now an 8 year old model!
Yes I plan on making a video in next week hopefully of how I take the image from the camera, cull, pre process (duo) and then move to Lightroom/photoshop. Won't be how do I actually edit the image itself, just how do I get there and where do I go in each step. Sound like what you would like to see?
I often shoot 12800 on my R5. The out of camera RAW files do look very noisy but, as you say, DXO cleans them up fantastically. I use DXO Photolab so workflows a bit different. I am likely to buy a backup R7 after your video, looks a good option for travel with the RF 100-400 which I use with my R10, problem is my wife wants it so I will have to buy an R7. What a shame...
Great video. About to pull the trigger on R7 after having rented for a week. What do you use to extract photos from Camera? Capture One, DPP or DXO? It sounds like you use DXO for both extraction and denoising?
I transfer the images from the card to an external drive or my new raid setup (32TB) and then from there I cull my images with fastrawviewer, then I process the culled images in DXO Pure Raw, and finally I import them onto Light room
Interesting video, I was really disappointed when the R7 came out in terms of build quality and no battery grip but now I'm pretty tempted as it's clearly such a massive upgrade from my 7D mark ii especially in low light which I prefer to shoot in. I just started using DXO with my workflow and it's basically witchcraft except it's so slow with my old 2013 macbook pro. Thanks Noel
My advice to everyone lately is to see if you can rent the R7. They have a rental copy here in Anchorage so hopefully everyone can find one ti rent. DXO has been optimized for the Apple Silicone M1 chips. takes me 6 seconds per image for the 7 files.
Great video! I have an R10 and a sigma and I don't have enough money to update the lens, so I'm really thinking on the R7 since I love the preshooting mode, but it's too slow for the R10 in regards of readout speed. I watched your ISO video of the R10 too. I'm a beginner, so sorry if my question is silly. So I can see that at the same ISO, the R7 is superior, no doubt. But are they producing the same ISO at the same condition? So in the exact same situations and setting, wouldn't the R10 produce lower ISO due to the less MP? Because it's an equally important factor for real life shooting.
ISO is equal. It's the number of mp. Each mp will contain the same amount of 'noise' basically. More mp means more noise. Not necessarily bad, but if you push your iso it will crop up. Best thing to do is pre-process images you want to edit through DXO Pure raw to get a better camera profile and noise reduction.
DXO won't process jpeg, so the result for jpeg out of camera will be whatever you have the camera set to. AND you wont be able to edit as much in Lightroom, etc. with jpeg vs raw.
I have been strongly considering an R7 as a second body to my R5. I love DXO on my R5 and I have found that I can do a final clean up on really high ISO shots using Topaz DeNoise does a good job on cleaning up whatever noise I find on the high ISO files. Have you tried that?
I have both applications. I run DXO first before import to Lightroom and I have found that is about all I need anymore. If its still too high noise after hat then the shot was usually pretty crap or I have more where it isn't that high. Basically I haven't needed to Denise again after DXO, but there may be a day I need to maybe denoise the background more. I was forced to use Topaz again with thee R7 last few weeks and forgot how good DXO was at the process. Topaz just adjusted the image too much no matter what models I tossed at the image. For ny taste anyway. But I'm real addicted to pixel peeping :( And go rent the R7 and try it out if you can. You may be surprised. I was.
Glad I came across your channel. Its nice to see some new content from my home state. I am planning a trip up there with hopefully a new camera setup. Ive been looking at the Sony and Canon mirrorless ones. I had a 5dmk iii back in 2012 and it was great! I really liked how the Canon system and glass worked. How new they holding up in the Winter? Looking forward to more videos. Thank you!
@@beskimo2 Yes. We are just coming out of a solar minimum and didn't take many last year. But this year I will be chasing it more as it should be a better year for them.
Another great video. Thank you for the info. In DXO PureRAW 2 do you apply the "whole DXO optical corrections" or just the "denoising process"? Thanks again!
Definitely. I got it mainly as the second camera for doing field work, but after how well it performs its in the main lineup. Just whichever camera has the right lens on at the time will get used. Plus the 1.6 extra throw will be a factor too.
Thank you for the video! Great work as always! Since you announced there is a DxO profile for the R7 I got it and compared it to the Topaz suite and ended up buying the Topaz one, because of the huge color shift I got with Pure Raw 2. It's not unpleasant shift, but it really bothered me that I have no control over the denoising or the colors in Pure Raw. I come from a VFX compositing background, where we are using NeatVIdeo as industry standard and everything that lacks control is a red flag in my eyes. Anyways yesterday I tried a 25k ISO image and was amazed that it can still be used as a decent image to show to family and friends. Stay safe and I'm waiting for your next video, cheers!
I haven't seen any color shift myself. you can turn off the lens distortion and sharpening and you can adjust the amount of adjustments using the HQ, Prime, or Deep prime. It pretty much matched DPP4. Topaz adds way too much ai sharpening for me. even when I shove it to 0 on some images and smoothes the image too much. But each person has an eye for what they like out of their images. what looks good me may look off to you and vice versa. That's what I love about photography, its art and we get to mutate it to what we like to create :)
Impressive results Scott ! Seems like it made the R5 so jealous to make it curse nasty words towards the poor R7 (while you were sleeping), resulting in the R7 now being too scared to boot up ;-) Seriously, your loon is a hell of a lot better than the couple I shot in Iceland using the R6 and the 100-400Lii. Obviously you had a huge advantage in the amount of pixels on the bird !
@@WILDALASKA Right, seems like mine was about 100 feet away lol. You were shooting your pet-loon, or ?? On a few places in Iceland I didn't expect a bird .. but I could to my surprise approach them also to like 5 feet .. but the long zoom was in the car, and the 24-105/4 didn't give me the best bokeh ..
Ok, I just saw your video. I have heard that lightroom does not like CR3 files, which is why a lot of people use Topaz or DXO. Have you tried any other brand of camera to see if the raw files are better straight out of camera? I shoot an old Canon 80d and don't use DXO yet and get decent results, but am considering other brands like Sony or Nikon.
regardless of camera manufacturer Id personally still run it through DXO. All the manufacturers are very good. Advice is to pick your lens ecosystem and then go with that body version. Glass is your biggest investment and bodies will come and go.
Wow was not expecting this kind of difference between the r10 and the r7 in low light….I only do photography for sky and landscapes sometimes portrait would you recommend the R7? Or other cameras in the market?
In landscape photography your breaking the reciprocal rule and shooting very low shutter speeds and using more than 10k ISO would be extremely rare. So with that being said either the r10 or r7 would suffice. I would lean towards the r7 as it has more MP to work with which is huge in your type pf photography.
@@ruialex314 ya night shots are long exposures really. but if you take more night shots vs day id go full frame instead of crop sensor. r5,r6 sony a7iv, nikon z6 or z7 somehting like that
Love your videos, always teach me something! I am upgrading and looking to buy the Canon R7, and I would like a tip on what lenses to get (alongside the kit lens) for wildlife photography (mostly safari-style). I was looking at the RF100-400 but then saw some older EF 100-400 L (i) and EF70-200 L (ii) secondhand lenses for a similar price, and now I don't know which one to choose... what are your recommendations?
The L lenses are better. The RF 100-400 is a great lens just be careful with rain, etc. If its Sahara then the RF 100-400 would be a good start. And id forgo the kit lens and put it into the RF 100-400. Unless you just need the kit lens focal range. Lot of good used canon glass out there also.
Thank you. Yes I see the kit lens as just a regular lens for daily shooting (until getting better glass for that focal range), and I found some decent deals for the EF L lenses (same price as RF 100-400mm or slightly more) but was wondering if autofocus speed would still be comparable/good
@@mikhailnikitin5629 You mention "safari" shooting and for that are going to want more than 70-200mm. While there have been some excellent Canon EF 70-200s, only the last two versions (f/2.8 II & III) work well with teleconverters. I doubt you'll find those selling used for anywhere close to what a brand new RF 100-400mm costs. Plus there would be the added cost of an adapter and a teleconverter... Another $300 to $ 350 on top of the cost of the EF lens. If not the RF 100-400, then I'd recommend one of the two versions of the EF 100-400mm adapted to RF mount. At around the price of an RF 100-400mm, you are probably looking at the first version EF 100-400mm. That's the one with the push/pull zoom. It's a very good lens, maybe 1/4 lb. lighter than the typically more expensive "II" version. Both of them are significantly bigger and heavier than the RF 100-400mm... But both the EF 100-400 are L series with more robust build and better weather and dust resistance. The EF 100-400 "II" is a truly excellent lens that works very well with EF 1.4X II or III... but, again at a higher price and heavier. One odd nuance of the original, push/pull EF 100-400mm is that it doesn't "play well" with filters. For some reason it goes "soft" when even a high quality filter is installed on it. I have no idea why, but a lot of users of the lens were surprised how much sharper their images were after they removed the "protection" filter they had on it. Weird but true! If you buy that EF 100-400 L you will need an EF to RF adapter. Some good news is that there are now some of those being offered by 3rd party manufacturers at about half the price of Canon's own. There are now both plain 3rd party and versions with control rings, just like Canon. There are even 3rd party that accommodate drop-in filters, like the most expensive from Canon. I think I saw a Viltrox EF to RF adapter and have been pleasantly surprised by the quality of some of their other products (I don't yet need or have an EF to RF adapter). You probably DON'T want a "power booster" style of adapter... Those have optics and are primarily intended for video, not still photography.
@@alanm.4298 Very good info and exactly my thoughts on all of. Well explained. the 70-200III handles teles awesome. The 100-400 ef ii was ok, but you need to stop down on that lens when using the teles.
Very informative! I currently use a Nikon D500 with the Nikkor 200-500 lens but have wanted to get to a mirrorless and the R7 looks like a great option. I can't believe how good those high-iso shots look! I shoot raw and push everything through DXO Pure Raw. From there I use bridge and PS. I also have Topaz Denoise and Sharpen. I'll be looking for that lens review.
I’m really sorry if you covered this, but I missed it.. is there a place I can learn about the workflow you are using in this video? I am familiar with Topaz. I have always culled in LR Classic, then selected individual shots that need it and select “edit in Topaz.” After going through each shot to meticulously dial in settings, I will allow it to process for a while, then it creates copies in LR. I have never heard of DXO, but it looks like you ran everything through something before importing into LR? I assume whatever it is, you didn’t pick individual settings for each shot, because you obviously haven’t seen the results until the video starts. I am here because I am shooting on the R7 with Sigma EF 100-400 C, which is actually working out great for me. But I am feeling forced to try to take 400mm shots at stupid slow shutter speeds to deal with the lack of light in the trees (I’m in OR). My shots are SO noisy everywhere. Like, it always looks like I added a ton of noise just for fun. Any help you can give me to get results remotely like what you’re showing here would be amazing!
working up a workflow video now to cover just this. Im in AK where bad light is the norm. So I feel ya on the higher iso stuff. Just get a faster lens. 70-200 2.8 with 1.4 on the r7 would be very good. Its only money right? lol.
@@WILDALASKA Thanks! I’ll keep an eye out for that video. This camera was a big stretch for me to afford, as it is. I am 100% in hobby mode, so it’s hard for me to justify another wildlife lens at this point, but that sounds like an interesting combo idea..
@@WILDALASKA No wildlife. Is there a Canon you would recommend since the R7 isn't worth it, and the MP's are too low on the R6, without breaking the bank?
Thank you for that test. The R7 will probably be my next camera and I'm looking to also buy the rf600mm f11. I didn't know if it was conceivable or a waste of money on a aps-c sensor. I know your lens is much better and my results would be less impressive (talent taking apart). But still conceivable I think after what i just saw.
@@WILDALASKA Yep, I liked it, a lot! Pretty amazed with the high ISO results! Now I've got another thing to find out, and that's DxO... Like others already commented, I would like to see how you process your images using DxO in combination with Lightroom. It might take away my last bit of fear for shooting on ISO 3200 or more. Many, many thanks for everything you've showed us already on the R7, great job, keep it up! '
Have you ever shot with the 90D? - I find DXO Really has a hard time with these images once I get past 3200 iso - 6400 iso is pretty much un useable for me = I use on1 to do final edit - had problems downloading lightroom
I didn't have the 90D but I did/do have the M6 MKII which has the same sensor if I am not mistaken. I can tell you the noise in the R7 images is much less. I used to run all images with 3200 ISO or greater through Topaz. I had to sharpen and Denise all of those images. I haven't had to use Topaz with my R7 images.
Great review. I have not seen any issues with noise in my images on the R7 either. I don't recall any image that I rejected due to noise. When I used to use the M6 MKII I would run all images over 3200 ISO through Topaz NR to bring it down. I never took it all the way out, though the software will, just down so it looked better. I haven't used Topaz on any of my R7 images. With the R7 I am no longer afraid to shoot into the shadows.
I‘m using ISO8000 on my old 7DII since a few weeks and process them with Topaz, so hell yeah I would use ISO8000 or ISO10000 on a R7 😅 Nice series, I’m still thinking about getting the R7 over the R6 how I thought I would…
Very cool. Go rent one if you can and check it out. If you haven't experienced mirrorless yet, then you're in for a treat. Takes a bit to get used ti the EVF but once you do, you will worry about comp more than trying to get focus and exposure.
It will be a while before I could do this. Lot of travel and other tech videos in the hopper at the moment. Real quickly I can tell you that the R5 sensor is better and will have better IQ for sure. AF is more advanced on the R7 but a smidge stickier on the R5.
And yeah, i shoot a lot with my R7 at 6400+, for regular photo i try to not go above 6400, in my wildlife custom mode i have 12800 as maximum Auto ISO, but for video, the R7 is a charme in downsampled 4k fine and ISO 25600. One of my best images i took with ISO 16.000, ofc it needed a Topaz Denoise AI cleanup but it did well. Im mainly using as much overexposure as possible (also if it means a high ISO), by reducing exposure in post i also reduce the noise. If im really that crazy, i could even process the image with a master dark frame of a similar exposure time, temperature and ISO setting.
The video was about what does the image look like at each ISO level. Previous video we didn't have the DXO R7 profile so we could only compare the images to R5 with known iso performance to see if it held up. With this video, I pushed each situation to a higher ISO to see how it performed. these shots were not for producing a good image rather to see the ISO effect.
There aren't any sensor problems with the R7. It has a slower readout speed which is the same as the Sony a7r IV, etc. which will result in rolling shutter in some situations. Very few cameras do not have this issue
Great video, this should help quite a few people block out a lot of the "noise" from camera snobs that think that the only good photos come from $6,000 full frame camera bodies.
True, but I will say that R3, oh my did it feel and operate WELL. but MP and cost.....
Just purchased the R7. Been watching your videos for a week now. Thanks for doing such a great job and making it easy to get to know the rig. I've been using the R6 for two years now. Heading on a trip soon with the R7. Your videos really help Thank you Sir.
Glad it was helpful
Tbh your 100-500mm make a big part of the job in your pictures, this lens look so good, god damnit
It's good glass.
This is the real work. I highly like your ability to deal the issues correctly.
thanks
Thanks...
You're welcome
You've become my go to R7 guy...I've had mine for a week and noticed more "noise" than I ever seen from my full frame Canons, I've yet to use the higher ISO's you used ....DXO appears to be the magic!
DXO is a must have for me on both my Canon and Nikon cameras. And thanks for the kind words 😄
Great video, get my R7 tomorrow, already have DxO ordered. Looking forward to the next vid.
Awesome. Next video is about my video settings and will be out around 5 AM AKST (8am CST) This Saturday 8/6/22
Excellent series and very helpful for me (being a total rookie in photography) it’s become very clear I’ve made the right choice in the R7 (which I’m chuffed is actually on its way to me as I write ! 😊)
Awesome. If there's anything you would like to see on the channel, let me know.
You will love the camera.
@@WILDALASKA thanks very much , think I might be a bit absent for a week or 3 getting to know the R7 , I have a friend that is an experienced wildlife stills photographer think he is going to be sick of the site of me 🙄🤣
Keep up the good content I’ll be keeping my eye out for it 👍
@@buckylloyd6415 awesome
Great video! I just recently shot some green herons at 500m 7.1 ISO 12800 and was like idk. Then you posted DXO got the profile update. Updated and was like wow it clean it up so well and was thrilled as I enjoy the herons.
Love the herons and yes with canons CR3 files using DXO is a must. Email me or Im me on insta/facebook your fav heron shots. Love to see them.
When shooting dragonflies at dawn in a peat bog, I had to use ISO 12800 and a tripod to get decent shots of dew covered dragons. The R5 handled that quite well, especially when the sun came up. Some of the later ISO 12800 shots didn’t need noise processing, no chroma noise, just a pleasing film grain like noise pattern. The earlier shots needed to get run through Topaz.
This morning I have started using DXO PL to denoise images before adding them to lightroom :)
Good thing about DXO PureRAW is there is a 30 day full application use trial.
DXO to me doesn't try to change your image. it just does the same almost as the CanonDPP4 software does. Looks more 'natural' to the jpeg version of the cameras processing
Thank You - good info on how to deal with low light and effectiveness of camera for low light … interesting approach to apply DXO or Topaz first - I will try that before LR … thanks again Terry Donofrio
Must have on all my cameras to process with DXO first to get the camera and lens profiles along with Denise and sharpening
Come back here to thank you again. Just downloaded the trial version of DXO PureRaw 2 (will go on to purchase for sure). Tried a couple of ISO 12800 files (RF 800 f/11 + 1.4TC) that I had previously run through Topaz - ok result, but, on a different level after DXO treatment, so big thanks!
DXO is nice and thanks :)
I'm equally impressed both by the R7's image quality and by DxO. I've been using Topaz to clean up R5 files up to ISO 12,800. But the starting image at that point can look scary and I'm wary of over-processing. If DxO can establish a clean baseline for processing Canon files like you've shown here, I'm sold! (On the camera, too!)
very cool.
30 day full version trial of DXO pureRaw also. Wish I made some money off DXO now lol
Thanks for this video..! You convinced me to buy DXO and maybe even the R7 !
Hope you enjoy it!
Some (a lot) of people are obsessed with ISO noise, to the point where they can’t possibly get ‘anything worth keeping’, others take the shot and capture unique moments, and no one (other than photographers) would even mention the noise.
I don think anyone is obsessed with noise. Noise is ok. Its just when the CR3 and LR or ACR give you flat colors and an obscene amount of noise vs canons dpp4 software or other editors. THEN its an issue. As I said in many videos, there are times I add noise into a photo.
Unfortunately some times those unique moments- birds in a rainforest, or when light conditions are not optimal - require noise reduction.
Cheers dude. I’ve watched all your R7 videos while I try to decide whether to keep mine and, while watching this one, I updated DxO and ran a couple of files through. My mind is made up and my R5 has a stable mate!
Keep up the great work and I look forward to following your adventures.
Best, J
Exactly my sentiment. The R7 was brought into my lineup as backup/video. Now its close to on par with the r5 in my workflow considerations.
Cheers.
Good to know you have both cameras. Deciding if I should get an R5...do you see any reason to spend the extra $2k on an R5 if the IQ is this good on the R7, factoring in extra reach of the R7 and the frequent need to crop an R5? Thanks!
@@unknownKnownunknowns Really tough to say. The R5 has better IQ but the R7 has great IQ also.
Id say if your doing print work and getting paid. Ya a R5 and a R7. If your doing mostly for yourself a few prints etc. 2 R7's would be good. ORRRR... if you shoot a lot of blue hour or astro then ya a R5.
Hi Steven,
That's a tricky one. I love the R5 and the image quality is definitely better than the R7. I think rolling shutter will be a big problem for birds in flight with the R7, with lots of funky wing shapes etc. I think this will make the pre-capture feature pretty useless, as it's primary purpose is to catch birds taking off. The R5 suffers much less with rolling shutter. Also, the shutter sound on the R7 is just appaulling. If you watch Jan Wagener, you'll have seen that the shutter "shake" has ruined many shors taken with a slower shutter speed. I'm also a keen landscape and architectural photographer and the R5 is a definite winner here. If I only had to keep one camera, it would be the R5 every day of the week. However, at the price, the R7 is a steal, even with the clear shortcomings.
Best,
J
@@juliangreaves4727 Rolling shitter on the R7 is exactly the same on the R5. You just have more examples of it at a higher frame rate when shooting.
Wing curve is very very rare. It only happens if you hit it when they change direction. Also do NOT shoot a bird against trees or man made object when that object is in focus anyway. I have watched many a channel show that and its silly. you wouldn't use that image as a keeper even if the lines were straight.
Ive show images of tree swallows and shown the amount of rolling shutter issues and 90% of them you wouldn't know if you didn't have a comparison image in the series. SO rolling shutter, not an issue. Ive taken around 50k images with the camera and none have been lost due to rolling shutter especially ones that would be keepers.
I have. whole video on precatpure shooting tree swallows. on one 2 of the several hundred can you find the wing shapes off and even then you really wouldn't know without the other images in the series. I confirmed this by shooting the R3 on the same day to reproduce some of the more interesting shapes and only on wing pose I could not recreate with the R3.
SO I guess if you worried about rolling shutter, don't. No-one was complaining about rolling shutter as much with the R5 and its exactly same issue with rolling shutter. Been using the r5 since its release and of course the R7. Both are great on BIF. I shoot a lot of them.
Hope that helps.
I use Lightroom Classic for all my touching up and such, so I tried the trial of Photolab 5 to take a look and wasn't impressed. I thought it was the same tech as PureRaw, but I tried that tonight and.. holy moly does it really clean up my R7 images. Instant buy, it's so dang good.
Its a great tool for pre-processing images :)
I not afraid of high ISO. I have an R6 and don’t think twice about 25,800. I just received an R7 today and was shocked by just a few simple test shoots. The camera far exceeded my expectations. It’s seems far more than the extender for my full frame lenses I envisioned it to be. I had no complaints about the build quality of the camera. I’ve shot Rollieflexs, Leica M, Canon 1Ds, Canon 5Ds, over 50 years. And reaction today was this little R7, $1500. Camera is no joke.
Exactly my thoughts. My intent was a extra reach when needed, backup camera with another lens, and for video. What it turned out to be was a companion to the R5.
IM not afraid of high ISO either but its in my mind. With chasing owls in winter with no light and AK weather, you just adapt to shooting in low light as that's 60% of the time up here ;)
Amazing results in combination with DXO. Have an R7 on order, now will have to get DXO as well! Thanks for the info.
Hope you enjoy it!
I really like your videos sometimes a little bit to long but with timestamps great. I watched all the videos about the r7 keep going!👍🏽
Ya the Image reviews go long :P But I like t take you along the journey of why I say ya it's good. provide the evidence and then I get off topic :P
Thanks for watching :)
@@WILDALASKA for sure but since I noticed from the earlier videos that the more exciting part at 10 000iso starts I skip to that part 😅👌🏼
@@mrcvgt awesome. That's why I added chapters and hopefully easier to go back t something you wanted to see for reference later :)
In my experience with the R7 and DXO, 2000-3200 ISO is when you ever so slightly start to notice loss of detail. After extensive testing on my Sigma 150-600C which is slightly sharper at F8, that's the most I allow myself to shoot at f8, as it seems to be the tipping point where 6.3 will give slightly better results.
The next jump in noticeable degradation is about 10-12k ISO, like you said, above that I'll try to lower the shutter speed as much as I can. 10-12k is about when DXO will still leave noticeable noise behind sometimes, which Topaz Denoise will always clean up nicely. The resulting image will have some loss of detail but be still perfectly usable usually.
I've found that a second round in Topaz after DXO can be surprisingly useful at those high ISOs, with improvements of the 2nd round of NR starting to show at about 6400 and being pretty noticeable at around 10-12k.
In my experience above that, you can still get reasonably good results up to 20-25k, as long as you don't crop. Especially for social media or things like that. 25k is my current limit on the auto ISO, and I've gotten some pretty alright (not amazing) bird pics at 20k.
So overall, my experience is pretty similar to yours I'd say. Pretty impressive performance indeed!
Good info
I love your Loon images, had to give you thumbs up before I even completed the video! Have used the R7 up to ISO 12800, with reasonable results adding Topaz, but can see even on here DXO is doing a better job. Debating with myself whether I have the patience, commitment or need to learn a new way to process, adding or replacing a step in my current workflow. I would appreciate seeing your workflow process, not to necessarily the completed image, but from import back to Lightroom. I generally import to Lightroom Classic and just take best images to Topaz plug in, then finish again in Lightroom. Thanks again, always look forward to your content.
Will be making a video very soon on just that (workflow).
DXO is Super simple to use. Just add you images ad hit process. there are some things your can adjust but the default is very good. Also there is a 30 day trial of the software.
You can even just bring your files into Lightroom and then the you want to use DXO just hit export to > DXO and boom it applies its magic, no matter where you are in the process of editing the image.
And thanks for the comment on the Loon. I didn't really try to get great shots of it that day. Was just getting the low light/high ISO shots. I did manage ny favorite pose of the bird for the upcoming thumbnail on video settings. You can see it on the community post for that upcoming video for this Saturday (8/6/22)
@@WILDALASKA Thank you, will be sure to keep watching.
Great video as always. I absolutely agree, the ISO performance on the r7 is pretty good. I'm happy with the IQ and the AF is impressive too. R7 paired with the RF 100 to 500 is a perfect combo for wildlife photography. You have the reach and the light wait that you can handheld for hours. Love it.
Couldn't agree more!
Great video. You kit is the dame as mine and the information you give really resonates with my nature photography needs. Thank you for making these video!! They are very helpful. I think it's time to get a denoise software.
Thanks. DXO and Topaz both have a 30 day trial.
@@WILDALASKA Thank you!!
Thanks so much for taking the time to do theses tests. Given your conclusions using DXO, do you see any reason to spend the extra $2k on an R5 if the IQ is this good on the R7, factoring in extra reach of the R7 and the frequent need to crop an R5? ( Also, wondering if you tried Canon's free DPP for noise reduction? )
Yeah I used DPP4 in a lot the R7 reviews prior to DXO getting the R7 profile released. its such a cumbersome app to use though.
If you do a lot of print work, astrophotography, or lot of blue hour photography then get an r5 along with R7. if you don't the 2 R7's would be great.
@@WILDALASKA Great to know. Thank you!
Thank you, Scott. I use R7, R6, RF100-500, RF 70-200, RF 800 and a 1.4TX. Mostly birds. Tried moto-cross bikes last week. R7 with RF 70-200. Whew! Very fast. Set AF to people and the R7 stuck tight on the helmets. Impressive. I am very happy to know you will be doing a workflow video on where DXO fits in. I've wondered that. What about Topaz in the chain? Thanks, again.
Great setups in gear.
Topaz...only use it now if I need more noise in BG. If I have motion blur, out of focus. I just toss the shots now. I didn't upgrade on that last Topaz yearly cycle.
DXO seems to take care of my issues (with photography anyway :P). If it doesn't then I just toss the photo.
Great video, I also like my combo. Do you sharpen in DXO? I prefer soft sharpening in DXO. Particularly for small birds.
Depends on conditions of the day for light. Sometimes I know it will need sharpening due to low light day or on a good light day I turn sharpening off. But every image goes through DXO for sure
Great Video! From BC just south of ya!
Gorgeous country :)
Seems like a solid testimonial to the power of DXO PureRaw 2. Have you had a chance to evaluate the R7 performance at these same ISO values without DXO, perhaps even using the same photos as A/B reference? That would be helpful to me.
Yes check out the previous ISO performance video. But with that said the main issue is if your using adobe LR or ACR it doesn't matter as they don't have the appropriate optical profiles for the Canon mirrorless. SO it will always be crap ;)
Great info! Thanks for sharing your impressions.👍
Could you (or have you) walk us through your post-processing workflow? Where DXO PR fits in?
FWIW, I have successfully used as high as ISO 16000 with my 7D Mark IIs, though I don't make a habit of it, some extra work in post is req'd and those are 20MP cameras. Of course they are also now an 8 year old model!
Yes I plan on making a video in next week hopefully of how I take the image from the camera, cull, pre process (duo) and then move to Lightroom/photoshop. Won't be how do I actually edit the image itself, just how do I get there and where do I go in each step.
Sound like what you would like to see?
Would be great.
@@WILDALASKA That would be excellent!
I often shoot 12800 on my R5. The out of camera RAW files do look very noisy but, as you say, DXO cleans them up fantastically. I use DXO Photolab so workflows a bit different. I am likely to buy a backup R7 after your video, looks a good option for travel with the RF 100-400 which I use with my R10, problem is my wife wants it so I will have to buy an R7. What a shame...
good info.
Outstanding sir! Thank you
Glad you liked it!
Great, informative video thanks..
Glad it was helpful!
I go to 12800 ,with my 90d running through dxo, usable images
Very cool. DXO rocks )
Great video. About to pull the trigger on R7 after having rented for a week. What do you use to extract photos from Camera? Capture One, DPP or DXO? It sounds like you use DXO for both extraction and denoising?
I transfer the images from the card to an external drive or my new raid setup (32TB) and then from there I cull my images with fastrawviewer, then I process the culled images in DXO Pure Raw, and finally I import them onto Light room
@@WILDALASKA thanks so much!
Interesting video,
I was really disappointed when the R7 came out in terms of build quality and no battery grip but now I'm pretty tempted as it's clearly such a massive upgrade from my 7D mark ii especially in low light which I prefer to shoot in.
I just started using DXO with my workflow and it's basically witchcraft except it's so slow with my old 2013 macbook pro.
Thanks
Noel
My advice to everyone lately is to see if you can rent the R7. They have a rental copy here in Anchorage so hopefully everyone can find one ti rent.
DXO has been optimized for the Apple Silicone M1 chips. takes me 6 seconds per image for the 7 files.
@@WILDALASKA sadly on my old mac book 53 images took about 14 hours to process with DXO
@@noelchignell1048 Time to upgrade. The new M2 air will handle it well also or an older M1 air. Both can be under 1K USD.
Thank you so much for your Content 👍
My pleasure!
Great video! I have an R10 and a sigma and I don't have enough money to update the lens, so I'm really thinking on the R7 since I love the preshooting mode, but it's too slow for the R10 in regards of readout speed. I watched your ISO video of the R10 too. I'm a beginner, so sorry if my question is silly. So I can see that at the same ISO, the R7 is superior, no doubt. But are they producing the same ISO at the same condition? So in the exact same situations and setting, wouldn't the R10 produce lower ISO due to the less MP? Because it's an equally important factor for real life shooting.
ISO is equal. It's the number of mp. Each mp will contain the same amount of 'noise' basically. More mp means more noise. Not necessarily bad, but if you push your iso it will crop up.
Best thing to do is pre-process images you want to edit through DXO Pure raw to get a better camera profile and noise reduction.
Thanks for your answer! :)
Great review which has reinforced my purchase of this camera to shoot sports and birds. Do you think the results would be the same shooting in JPEG?
DXO won't process jpeg, so the result for jpeg out of camera will be whatever you have the camera set to.
AND you wont be able to edit as much in Lightroom, etc. with jpeg vs raw.
I have been strongly considering an R7 as a second body to my R5. I love DXO on my R5 and I have found that I can do a final clean up on really high ISO shots using Topaz DeNoise does a good job on cleaning up whatever noise I find on the high ISO files. Have you tried that?
I have both applications. I run DXO first before import to Lightroom and I have found that is about all I need anymore. If its still too high noise after hat then the shot was usually pretty crap or I have more where it isn't that high.
Basically I haven't needed to Denise again after DXO, but there may be a day I need to maybe denoise the background more.
I was forced to use Topaz again with thee R7 last few weeks and forgot how good DXO was at the process. Topaz just adjusted the image too much no matter what models I tossed at the image. For ny taste anyway. But I'm real addicted to pixel peeping :(
And go rent the R7 and try it out if you can. You may be surprised. I was.
Glad I came across your channel. Its nice to see some new content from my home state. I am planning a trip up there with hopefully a new camera setup. Ive been looking at the Sony and Canon mirrorless ones. I had a 5dmk iii back in 2012 and it was great! I really liked how the Canon system and glass worked. How new they holding up in the Winter? Looking forward to more videos. Thank you!
Very well in winter. if you look through some of my other videos you will see some winter photo excursions for owls, fox, ptarmigan , etc.
@@WILDALASKA Thanks I will take a look through them. Have you done any shoots with Northern Lights?
@@beskimo2 Yes. We are just coming out of a solar minimum and didn't take many last year. But this year I will be chasing it more as it should be a better year for them.
Another great video. Thank you for the info. In DXO PureRAW 2 do you apply the "whole DXO optical corrections" or just the "denoising process"? Thanks again!
Thanks.
Whole enchilada. If I notice an oddity I may go back and turn the sharpening off. But it has only happened once in almost 2 years on the R5.
Thank you you for the content, have injoyed them. Looks like you have some nice volgs coming up. Will you keep the R7? 👍
Definitely. I got it mainly as the second camera for doing field work, but after how well it performs its in the main lineup. Just whichever camera has the right lens on at the time will get used. Plus the 1.6 extra throw will be a factor too.
@@WILDALASKA That great. It is looking very nice at the moment for what price you are paying for it, but you are getting a lot for your money.
Very interesting! It has me wondering what it’s capable of doing for astro!
Good question!
Thank you for the video! Great work as always! Since you announced there is a DxO profile for the R7 I got it and compared it to the Topaz suite and ended up buying the Topaz one, because of the huge color shift I got with Pure Raw 2. It's not unpleasant shift, but it really bothered me that I have no control over the denoising or the colors in Pure Raw. I come from a VFX compositing background, where we are using NeatVIdeo as industry standard and everything that lacks control is a red flag in my eyes. Anyways yesterday I tried a 25k ISO image and was amazed that it can still be used as a decent image to show to family and friends. Stay safe and I'm waiting for your next video, cheers!
I haven't seen any color shift myself. you can turn off the lens distortion and sharpening and you can adjust the amount of adjustments using the HQ, Prime, or Deep prime. It pretty much matched DPP4. Topaz adds way too much ai sharpening for me. even when I shove it to 0 on some images and smoothes the image too much.
But each person has an eye for what they like out of their images. what looks good me may look off to you and vice versa. That's what I love about photography, its art and we get to mutate it to what we like to create :)
Impressive results Scott ! Seems like it made the R5 so jealous to make it curse nasty words towards the poor R7 (while you were sleeping), resulting in the R7 now being too scared to boot up ;-)
Seriously, your loon is a hell of a lot better than the couple I shot in Iceland using the R6 and the 100-400Lii. Obviously you had a huge advantage in the amount of pixels on the bird !
plus that bird gets like 5 feet from me lol. :) and thanks
@@WILDALASKA Right, seems like mine was about 100 feet away lol. You were shooting your pet-loon, or ??
On a few places in Iceland I didn't expect a bird .. but I could to my surprise approach them also to like 5 feet .. but the long zoom was in the car, and the 24-105/4 didn't give me the best bokeh ..
@@WernerBirdNature we have 2 loons that show up every year at the float plane base and they do weird things.
@@WILDALASKA Yeah, I didn't know them before this July, but I got them also in some weird poses. I like them a lot !
Ok, I just saw your video. I have heard that lightroom does not like CR3 files, which is why a lot of people use Topaz or DXO. Have you tried any other brand of camera to see if the raw files are better straight out of camera? I shoot an old Canon 80d and don't use DXO yet and get decent results, but am considering other brands like Sony or Nikon.
regardless of camera manufacturer Id personally still run it through DXO.
All the manufacturers are very good. Advice is to pick your lens ecosystem and then go with that body version. Glass is your biggest investment and bodies will come and go.
Wow was not expecting this kind of difference between the r10 and the r7 in low light….I only do photography for sky and landscapes sometimes portrait would you recommend the R7? Or other cameras in the market?
In landscape photography your breaking the reciprocal rule and shooting very low shutter speeds and using more than 10k ISO would be extremely rare. So with that being said either the r10 or r7 would suffice. I would lean towards the r7 as it has more MP to work with which is huge in your type pf photography.
@@WILDALASKA even if a lot of the photos are taken at night? Cheers for the quick answer
@@ruialex314 ya night shots are long exposures really. but if you take more night shots vs day id go full frame instead of crop sensor. r5,r6 sony a7iv, nikon z6 or z7 somehting like that
@@WILDALASKA thank you
Love your videos, always teach me something! I am upgrading and looking to buy the Canon R7, and I would like a tip on what lenses to get (alongside the kit lens) for wildlife photography (mostly safari-style). I was looking at the RF100-400 but then saw some older EF 100-400 L (i) and EF70-200 L (ii) secondhand lenses for a similar price, and now I don't know which one to choose... what are your recommendations?
The L lenses are better. The RF 100-400 is a great lens just be careful with rain, etc. If its Sahara then the RF 100-400 would be a good start.
And id forgo the kit lens and put it into the RF 100-400. Unless you just need the kit lens focal range.
Lot of good used canon glass out there also.
Thank you. Yes I see the kit lens as just a regular lens for daily shooting (until getting better glass for that focal range), and I found some decent deals for the EF L lenses (same price as RF 100-400mm or slightly more) but was wondering if autofocus speed would still be comparable/good
@@mikhailnikitin5629 yes AF will be fine
@@mikhailnikitin5629 You mention "safari" shooting and for that are going to want more than 70-200mm. While there have been some excellent Canon EF 70-200s, only the last two versions (f/2.8 II & III) work well with teleconverters. I doubt you'll find those selling used for anywhere close to what a brand new RF 100-400mm costs. Plus there would be the added cost of an adapter and a teleconverter... Another $300 to $ 350 on top of the cost of the EF lens.
If not the RF 100-400, then I'd recommend one of the two versions of the EF 100-400mm adapted to RF mount. At around the price of an RF 100-400mm, you are probably looking at the first version EF 100-400mm. That's the one with the push/pull zoom. It's a very good lens, maybe 1/4 lb. lighter than the typically more expensive "II" version. Both of them are significantly bigger and heavier than the RF 100-400mm... But both the EF 100-400 are L series with more robust build and better weather and dust resistance. The EF 100-400 "II" is a truly excellent lens that works very well with EF 1.4X II or III... but, again at a higher price and heavier.
One odd nuance of the original, push/pull EF 100-400mm is that it doesn't "play well" with filters. For some reason it goes "soft" when even a high quality filter is installed on it. I have no idea why, but a lot of users of the lens were surprised how much sharper their images were after they removed the "protection" filter they had on it. Weird but true!
If you buy that EF 100-400 L you will need an EF to RF adapter. Some good news is that there are now some of those being offered by 3rd party manufacturers at about half the price of Canon's own. There are now both plain 3rd party and versions with control rings, just like Canon. There are even 3rd party that accommodate drop-in filters, like the most expensive from Canon. I think I saw a Viltrox EF to RF adapter and have been pleasantly surprised by the quality of some of their other products (I don't yet need or have an EF to RF adapter). You probably DON'T want a "power booster" style of adapter... Those have optics and are primarily intended for video, not still photography.
@@alanm.4298 Very good info and exactly my thoughts on all of. Well explained.
the 70-200III handles teles awesome. The 100-400 ef ii was ok, but you need to stop down on that lens when using the teles.
Very informative! I currently use a Nikon D500 with the Nikkor 200-500 lens but have wanted to get to a mirrorless and the R7 looks like a great option. I can't believe how good those high-iso shots look! I shoot raw and push everything through DXO Pure Raw. From there I use bridge and PS. I also have Topaz Denoise and Sharpen. I'll be looking for that lens review.
very cool
I’m really sorry if you covered this, but I missed it.. is there a place I can learn about the workflow you are using in this video? I am familiar with Topaz. I have always culled in LR Classic, then selected individual shots that need it and select “edit in Topaz.” After going through each shot to meticulously dial in settings, I will allow it to process for a while, then it creates copies in LR.
I have never heard of DXO, but it looks like you ran everything through something before importing into LR? I assume whatever it is, you didn’t pick individual settings for each shot, because you obviously haven’t seen the results until the video starts.
I am here because I am shooting on the R7 with Sigma EF 100-400 C, which is actually working out great for me. But I am feeling forced to try to take 400mm shots at stupid slow shutter speeds to deal with the lack of light in the trees (I’m in OR). My shots are SO noisy everywhere. Like, it always looks like I added a ton of noise just for fun.
Any help you can give me to get results remotely like what you’re showing here would be amazing!
working up a workflow video now to cover just this.
Im in AK where bad light is the norm. So I feel ya on the higher iso stuff. Just get a faster lens. 70-200 2.8 with 1.4 on the r7 would be very good.
Its only money right? lol.
@@WILDALASKA Thanks! I’ll keep an eye out for that video. This camera was a big stretch for me to afford, as it is. I am 100% in hobby mode, so it’s hard for me to justify another wildlife lens at this point, but that sounds like an interesting combo idea..
What's your thoughts on the R7. I have the Canon 90D and want to make it my 2nd body, and I'm looking for a main body (Mirrorless)
Greta camera, You can watch man 3 month review here -->. ua-cam.com/video/tvtFeV5Tdp4/v-deo.html
@@WILDALASKA What about the R6 vs the R7, and I'm use to the 90D button layout?
@@RichieColemanSr if it'd for wildlife with r6 then its really not enough MP
@@WILDALASKA No wildlife. Is there a Canon you would recommend since the R7 isn't worth it, and the MP's are too low on the R6, without breaking the bank?
Hi, maybe i saw in an other video, but...: which is your workflow with DXO PureRaw2 and this R7 files?
Video upcoming
Thank you for that test. The R7 will probably be my next camera and I'm looking to also buy the rf600mm f11. I didn't know if it was conceivable or a waste of money on a aps-c sensor. I know your lens is much better and my results would be less impressive (talent taking apart). But still conceivable I think after what i just saw.
I have a review from couple weeks ago on the Rf 600 F11. Very good lens.
@@WILDALASKA oh! I missed that one. I will check that out. Thanks.
Can't want to get home and watch this!
hope you like it :)
@@WILDALASKA Yep, I liked it, a lot! Pretty amazed with the high ISO results! Now I've got another thing to find out, and that's DxO... Like others already commented, I would like to see how you process your images using DxO in combination with Lightroom. It might take away my last bit of fear for shooting on ISO 3200 or more. Many, many thanks for everything you've showed us already on the R7, great job, keep it up! '
@@williambakkernl working on that video today.
Have you ever shot with the 90D? - I find DXO Really has a hard time with these images once I get past 3200 iso - 6400 iso is pretty much un useable for me = I use on1 to do final edit - had problems downloading lightroom
never owned the 90D. I have no issues with DXO ro Topaz on the CRS3 files with the R5 or R7
I didn't have the 90D but I did/do have the M6 MKII which has the same sensor if I am not mistaken. I can tell you the noise in the R7 images is much less. I used to run all images with 3200 ISO or greater through Topaz. I had to sharpen and Denise all of those images. I haven't had to use Topaz with my R7 images.
Great video 🍻🍻
Thanks 👍
Great review. I have not seen any issues with noise in my images on the R7 either. I don't recall any image that I rejected due to noise. When I used to use the M6 MKII I would run all images over 3200 ISO through Topaz NR to bring it down. I never took it all the way out, though the software will, just down so it looked better. I haven't used Topaz on any of my R7 images.
With the R7 I am no longer afraid to shoot into the shadows.
Very nice. All my photos for serious edit go through DXO. It just helps the colors and small noise adjustments (proper adjustments that is)
I‘m using ISO8000 on my old 7DII since a few weeks and process them with Topaz, so hell yeah I would use ISO8000 or ISO10000 on a R7 😅
Nice series, I’m still thinking about getting the R7 over the R6 how I thought I would…
Very cool. Go rent one if you can and check it out. If you haven't experienced mirrorless yet, then you're in for a treat. Takes a bit to get used ti the EVF but once you do, you will worry about comp more than trying to get focus and exposure.
Sir, Please compare R5 vs R7 image detail and sharpness with Same size/same crop
It will be a while before I could do this. Lot of travel and other tech videos in the hopper at the moment.
Real quickly I can tell you that the R5 sensor is better and will have better IQ for sure. AF is more advanced on the R7 but a smidge stickier on the R5.
why are you shooting on 1/8000 on the image in 5:13? Ofc its underexposed heavily, i didnt even know the R7 can shoot 1/8000 EFCS/mechanical lol
And yeah, i shoot a lot with my R7 at 6400+, for regular photo i try to not go above 6400, in my wildlife custom mode i have 12800 as maximum Auto ISO, but for video, the R7 is a charme in downsampled 4k fine and ISO 25600.
One of my best images i took with ISO 16.000, ofc it needed a Topaz Denoise AI cleanup but it did well.
Im mainly using as much overexposure as possible (also if it means a high ISO), by reducing exposure in post i also reduce the noise. If im really that crazy, i could even process the image with a master dark frame of a similar exposure time, temperature and ISO setting.
The video was about what does the image look like at each ISO level. Previous video we didn't have the DXO R7 profile so we could only compare the images to R5 with known iso performance to see if it held up. With this video, I pushed each situation to a higher ISO to see how it performed.
these shots were not for producing a good image rather to see the ISO effect.
Are you shooting mechanical shutter?
Electronic always on both the R5 and R7.
I was going to get a r7 but when I read it had sensor problems I cancelled it.
There aren't any sensor problems with the R7. It has a slower readout speed which is the same as the Sony a7r IV, etc. which will result in rolling shutter in some situations. Very few cameras do not have this issue
Si, però hai scattato anche con un obiettivo da 3000 €.............. anche quello conta
glass matters