You can buy the R7 here: adorama.rfvk.net/6eeR5r Remove noise in your images! Try Topaz DeNoise AI for free: www.topazlabs.com/denoise-ai/ref/901/ *Affiliate link
First of all Fabian, I hugely appreciate your down-to-earth style, without hoopla or drama. I have have been shooting wildlife for over 40 years, mostly with Canon gear. I have the 7D, 7DII and 90D DSLRS, plus the R5 & R6. Like many people, I was hugely looking forward to a replacement for the 7DII with a pro-level MILC camera. Like you, I think the R7 was a replacement for the 90D rather than the 7DII, so I remain puzzled at the model naming. First, I must say I never considered the 90D to be a valid replacement for the 7DII - because of its inferior tracking system and weather-sealing. While this camera has many excellent features to lure hobbyists and enthusiasts, and the price point is very attractive for those wanting to leave the DSLR market for MILCs, the things that have held me back from buying a R7 are many of the things you have said, but briefly: - The sensor is not BSI/Stacked, and that seriously inhibits the record speeds, along with an inadequate buffer, it chokes the 30FPS electronic shutter, resulting in a less than spectacular burst duration and the massive rolling shutter. While one can shoot with the mechanical shutter, it sounds like a tinker's cart. - I would like to have seen the BSI/stacked sensor connected to a bigger, faster buffer and recording on dual CF-Express type A cards that have much faster read/write, but are also backwardly compatible to SD cards. - I would like to have seen better weather sealing, it is not as good as the 7DII or R5 units, and for professionals that can be an issue as we cannot pack up and go home if the weather turns nasty. - I miss the availability of a battery grip - not only does that provide more energy supply, but also portrait-mode controls, and the grip weight helps to bring the centre of gravity back towards the body for longer telephoto lenses. - I agree with you about the lack of a third dial for ISO, but am on the fence as regards the new dial position - I am not quite so worried about the lack of the top screen but would like to have seen more buttons available for custom settings. All of these things would have made the the camera a lot more expensive, and I accept that, but I would have been willing to pay the difference. I don't want to rubbish the R7 per se, but I just think it was mis-named and it should have perhaps been called a R70, leaving the R7 designation vacant for a true replacement for the 7DII that I, and many others would have been happy to pay the difference. Still, the R7 is a great buy and I think Canon will sell them on a massive scale.
Hi Trevor Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think we pretty much agree on many strengths and weaknesses of the R7. I definitely think it has its place, but as you mentioned as well, rather as an R70 with room for a „proper“ R7 above
I'm a little confused by some of your points, firstly there is absolutely no situation in wildlife photography where you should be needing 30fps, if you're relying on spray and pray shooting then something has gone wrong somewhere. As for the card slots due the difference in size and shape you can't make a slot that will accept both CF express and SD, though I agree at least one CF or XQD slot would have been nice. The weather sealing is actually superior to the 7D mark ii though yes it's not to the level of the R5 but there's a massive price difference. The one thing that does annoy me is Canons lack of weather sealing on the RF 100-400, it's perfectly possible to make a mid priced lens with weather sealing etc....look at the Tamron and Sigma 100-400 lenses.
If you will recall, the 90d was announced at the time to be a replacement for both the 80d and 7d ii, which kind of told me that this was the direction Canon had decided to go. It is likely that they have decided that in 2022-23 (right or wrong) there isn't a sufficient market for a $2,000.00 + APS-C body. Having said that, the R7 is a significant upgrade to both the 90d and 7dii. Weather sealing is at least as good, buffer size larger, resolution significantly higher (than the 7dii), AF shows massive improvement, including face and eye tracking and considerably more focus points, 15 fps mechanical compared to 10 in the 7d, silent shooting ability (at 15 or 30 fps!), exposure preview etc. If mirrorless didn't exist, and this was a DSLR 7d iii, most photographers would be over the moon. But somehow, because it's mirrorless, and because it doesn't have a vertical grip (the compact size and weight make the R7 a perfect carry around and hiking camera, so I don't miss the added bulk), it somehow doesn't match up. I sold my 7dii and bought the R7 and have never looked back. With the R7 I am getting pictures I only dreamt of before.
I have set my R7 up so the front dial does shutter speed, the back dial does ISO and the lens ring does aperture. No need to push the ISO button and probably don't change FStop that often compared to ISO and shutter speed
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I've got the 100-500,but since the image is sharp wide open,I rarely have to adjust it....I set it at the widest aperture at 100mm and it stays at it's widest through the zoom range automatically
Hi Fabian… great video as always! I followed you already in your german spoken videos, as a dutchman is that no problem to understand. Your english is really good and now you can reach out to everybody out in the world what means greater exposure for your videos which you deserve…keep on the good work😀👍👍
Hi. Exellent review Fabian. I got mine this week. I have not yet formulated an opinion about the camera. Very impressive review, completely agree with your conclusions so far.
Thanks for sharing the video, I really enjoy it. The conparation was a little bit unfair for the r7 because the r5 is a beast of a camera but I learned a lot from the video, thanks 📸👍
Thanks! Yes, I agree that the R5 is another tier. But many people asked me specifically which of the two they should buy, so I decided to include it in the video
Nice review and well delivered. Thank you. I bought an R7 last week as a second body to accompany my R5. I’m delighted. I accept any shortcomings compared to my R5 because it is not an R5. I think the only unexpected difference for me is that the R7 needs a slightly deeper push on the shutter button to fire, compared to the “surgical” quality of the R5 but I have adapted easily. In my opinion it is a great body for a variety of users. That may be either those migrating up or those looking to complement a better body. By the way, Ron from Whistling Wings gives a great insight into getting the best from Mirrorless bodies, particularly for those moving from DSLRs and those adapting to high pixel density sensors. I took a lot from it.
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I just checked to give you the best chance if finding it….The channel is Whistling Wings Photography and the video is “Canon R5 - maximise your keeper rate”.
Great video! I have the R7 and agree with everything you liked and weren't too happy with. I also own the R5. The R7 is a disappointment in several areas like changing almost every button on top and back of camera. I guess they didn't think R5 users would be buying the R7. The buffer limit in RAW is horrible especially since this camera is marketed for wildlife photography. The other big disappointment is with the Mechanical and Electronic First Curtain shutter sound. I thought my camera got damaged in shipping until I heard a video of the shutter sound. On a positive note, I love using this camera. I especially love the 1.6x crop factor and the lighter body and faster fps.
Thanks! Yes, I think it might be a good entry level wildlife camera for people that don’t want to spend too much money. But I think an R6 (despite the low megapixel count) might be a better second camera to the R5
Thanks NewDay and Fabian! It is great to hear such honest evaluation of the R7 especially the issues faced when used for wildlife (especially the electronic shutter issues).
I shoot wildlife and birds with the R7, mostly electronic shutter 15fps in CRaw. Image quality is good. I can't see a difference between CRaw and Raw. I have never once had to wait on the buffer. I have photographed bear cubs playing, birds feeding their young and FOX kits rollicking! I can see where you might hit the buffer at 30fps, but I consider that number just marketing hype, like the 8k video on the 5d. Something most will never use. For me, 15fps is plenty fast. I don't feel I missed anything. If you really feel you need 30fps you should probably buy an R3.
@@alansach8437 I wrote this post 11 months ago when I just bought the R7. I have switched to CRAW to avoid hitting the buffer and saving a little space on my hard drives.
I am really enjoying my R7. The autofocus is great. I use it with my Sigma 150-600 C and my 800 f11. My keeper rate has increased a lot. What I like about the 32.5MP sensor is that if you need to crop you still have plenty of pixels. Battery life, for me, is much better than the rating. I am at over 800 shots on my first charge.
@@iechega Yes, you need the EF to EOS R adapter. Canon has 3 models, the first one is $99 and just allows you to use any EF or EFS lens. The next one is $199 and adds a control ring. The third option that canon has is $299 and allows a drop in filter. I got the base unit but the one with the control ring could be handy if you need the third control wheel.
Glad to hear! If you shoot wildlife, the battery will most likely last for more shots than the official numbers. With my R5 I managed several thousands (depending on the day of course)
I am still waiting for my order to come. But I can anticipate and agree with everything you said in this video. I plan to use mechanical shutter for BIF and tame birds/animals. For shy birds/animals, I might use electronic shutter. The R7 mechanical shutter does sound loud. I wonder if it is louder than the 1DX that I used to own for 10 years. Why Canon didn't put R5 mechanical shutter into R7? Perhaps Canon knows that most people will use the mechanical shutter most of the time. They use stronger materials for the mechanical shutter so that it will last. That might explain the loud sound. Great video.
I think that sounds like a good plan. I shot with the 1DX several years e ago, so I have a hard time recalling the exact volume. But I would say the R7 is a bit more quiet
Hello, thank-you for the well made and thoughtful video. If I have one criticism or suggestion, depends how you want to interpret it, it would be to do the noise comparison test at a higher ISO - 3200 or even 6400. Even if you are blessed with the ownership of an f4 long lens, in early morning light to get sharp pictures it is not unusual to be forced to work in this ISO range. In my experience this is where the difference in noise between full, crop, and MFT is most visible and it would have been helpful to see the image quality differences at the boundaries of where the cameras might be used. Nonetheless, keep up the good work and helpful content.
I don't understand the value of comparing a $1499 R7 with a $3899 R5. Of course the R5 is going to outperform the R7. You are comparing apples against oranges. Do you think Canon is going to put all their best features in their least expensive model? The R7 maybe performs 90% as well as the R5 at a tremendous price discount. It sounds to me that the R7 is a tremendous value for the money.
I got a lot of e-mails lately of people asking me whether to buy an R5 or R7. When I throw in the R6, they respond with: „no, not enough megapixels“. Same when teaching workshops. That’s why I used the R5 a couple of times. And of course I didn’t expect it would outperform the R5. The question was rather „how much of the R5 can you have for 1/3 of the price“. I hope that makes more sense
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography The more you pay the more you get. Not a good comparison. R7 is price value a great camera. R5 is a beast but not needed for people who use this as a hobby. R3 and R5 is nice when you earn money with it.
Well presented. I had already seen quite a few r7 reviews but was still able to pick up some new insight from your review and am looking forward to your setup video! Just subscribed.
Thanks! No, I have not. But at leas they way I understand how rolling shutter works, I don’t think that this would have changed something. But maybe I miss something here
Good job Fabian. You have a straight forward approach to your review and covered lots of the pertinent questions I have about this camera. Its very disappointing about the RAW pre-capture feature. I'm looking at this camera because of the crop factor element for distant small birds. I suppose until I have one in my hands and have used it for a little while I wont be able to tell for sure how much I like or dislike it. I have an R5 and a 100-500 so a lot of what you showed was very relevant to me - have you tried, or will you get a chance to try the R7 and 100-500 with the RF 1.4 Extender? Look forward to your camera setup video. Subscribed.
I mean comparing the r7 to such a big camera as the r5 you can only be disappointed, but for people like me who have a 90d and clearly don't have the money for an r5, the r7 is the grall lmao
I also agree that this camera should have been the R70 but maybe Canon is delivering a message that we don't want to hear. That message would be that there is not going to be a full spec feature apsc camera in their lineup ever again. Same happens with the lens lineup. I do hope that we will see RF-S L equivalent anytime soon replacements like the. EFS 17-55 2.8 and the efs 10-18....
I don't understand why the R7 is being compared to any other R camera body. Even the R6 is $1000 (US) more than the R7. You will get more camera for that much more money. Secondly, if you are comparing to another R body camera, the EOS-R is much closer but it is full-frame. The price of the EOS-R right now is exactly the same as the EOS-R7 at $1499 (US).
I agree, the comparison to an R5 is not really fair, given the huge price difference. But I got asked by many people for advise regardless regarding buying an R5 vs R7. So maybe a better question would be: how much % of the R5 performance can you get for 30% of the price?
Hi Fabian love from India. I am.about to order R7 I am a 6D Mii user. But after watching your video am a bit confused whether to go for R7 or R6. As I thought will sell 6D Mii and shift fully to Mirrorless. What's your opinion in this case ?
Hi! Hard to say. The R6 will give you clearly better image quality and I also prefer the handling, however, if you are happy with APS-C (for example because your focal length is too short), I‘d take the R7
Hi Fabian. Accidentally found your channel. Great content and presentations. Any chance of a quick review of the R7 with the last of the Canon 100-400 zoom for DSLR. I have the lens and was thinking of purchasing the R7. The combination looks like a great lightweight combination. Just wondering how this lens performs with the adapter. Cheers. Derek. Sydney.
I think the r10 is a better value for using the 800 f11 since ibis doesn't work with the lens and as you showed even 18 vs 32 isn't really noticeable so 24 vs 32 would be even less. It is a little over 0.4 pounds lighter too which is nice when trying to handhold the setup for several minutes in a row. The buffer in craw and 15 fps is around 150 images too.
awesome review Fabian, thank you very much. Canon really missed the mark with this camera imho. A real pity...is it usable? Yes. But, that buffer, UI design and rolling shutter are just well, terrible. High ISO was my other area of concern, but it appears that my initial concerns were wrongly placed and it is better than I expected and quite usable still. For me, I'll consider the R7, but will stick to the mechanical shutter and CRAW. I foresee a mark II version in 2 or so years with a stacked sensor @ 24mp to combat the buffer/rolling shutter problems (and also improve high ISO performance). Of course, the big screw up from Canon is NO battery grip. This is simply inexcusable and shows a complete failure to listen to customers..
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I was really hoping the R7 would be better than it is. I know a lot of people are really happy with it and think it's the best thing since sliced bread, but it isn't. Yes, it is usable, but there are some major design flaws with the camera. What is the point of 30fps when the buffer cannot cope? Canon would be better having had a 28mp BSI stacked sensor, dual CFAST and the R5's EVF and UI. Would it have cost more? Sure (although I personally think the R7 [and R5 and R6] is overpriced), but it would have been fully usable. I really do predict that Sony and NIkon's next APS-C mirrorless camera is gonna smash the R7. I really do. Nikon is already offering its high grade long telephoto lenses far cheaper than Canon (EF or RF, and the latter have been well and truly overpriced imho). Canon's use of technology to create a monopoly on the RF lenses is also not welcome, and not healthy for the market. I'm not asking Canon to give the RF tech away for free, but instead to licence it to 3rd parties for *reasonable* prices. Canon consumers are losers atm imho - overpriced RF lenses and no 3rd party options. Nikon is doing the same thing too sadly and it's time for government regulatory bodies to get involved and start metering out punishments. This is an area that it seems reviewers aren't touching. I guess they don't wanna piss off Canon. It is a massively important topic though.
I really hope that Sony and Nikon announce amazing APS-C cameras. We need competition! And I also agree that a BSI stacked sensor with Cfexpress (not cfast) would have been nice and well worth the premium price. Or at least a sensor that has a readout that is similar to the one of the R5 - I rarely have rolling shutter issues there
Hello, Professor. I want to ask you about the Canon R7 camera. What do you think of it? Is it good for shooting sports and wildlife, and what is the quality of the image? Do you recommend this camera to me?
This "RAW Burst Mode" sounds like a poor facsimile of the "ProCapture" mode that has been in Olympus cameras for at least 5 years. Except in ProCapture, you get to decide how many images are scrolling through the buffer as you half-press the shutter, and each is recorded as an independent RAW file. I'd be very interested to hear your perspective after testing this feature on an Olympus or OM Digital solutions camera system.
I briefly rented the OM-1 and I think they did a better job with this feature overall like you said. However, it is much quicker and easier to delete an entire burst on the Canon if you realize after shooting that it wasn’t worth saving (unless I missed something with the OM-1). A few times, I spent the afternoon using pro capture on the OM-1 and then had several thousand pictures to go through!
Fabian, I’m confused. You observed that there was no difference in resolution between the image shot with the R5+tc vs. R7? Did you observe at 100%? If I owned an R5 why would I want to buy this camera other than as an inexpensive back up?
Hi Adam, These were at least my conclusions based on the tests I conducted at 8:00 - 10:00. Without a 1.4x extender you have better AF but my other tests showed that even with cropping (not using an 1.4 extender) the R5 is not far behind. So in this sense I really think the main selling point of the camera is indeed the low price
Thanks for the comprehensive review but I dont feel Canon are crippling the R6 and R7 on purpose, The more you pay for something the more features you generally get. Every manufacturer does this.
Thanks for your comment! For hardware features I totally agree. But leaving out software on certain cameras (that they already developed) is something I find really annoying
sorry, but really have to disagree with this statement Dee. And just because every manufacturer does it, doesn't make it right. I mean, if everyone committed murder, would it still be right? Of course not. And the same logic applies to deliberate crippling of a product by a manufacturer to protect their upscale products
@@davepastern The cheaper R7 actually has some features even better than the R5. But this smaller camera is designed and targeted to the different consumer/amateur market. With a smaller body you cannot put all those dials & buttons - simply no place physically to put them. Did Canon of crippled the R5 in favour of the cheaper R7 then?
@@set3777 I'm calling BS. There's a set/cursor button on the back of the R7 and that should have been replaced with a traditional dial like on the R5. The only features the R7 has over the R5 and R6 is the AF system inherited from the R3. That's it. The facts are irrefutable - the Canon CrippleHammer is very real, and was blatantly used on the R7. I don't care if you're a Canon fanboy or not, that's not my problem. I'm just stating the facts.
@@davepastern R7 does not have 29.59 minutes video recording time-limit but R5 and R3 has. Speed of R7 is faster than R5 at 15fps mechanical/30fps electronic. Is that crippling? When Canon released the AE1 camera, it was for amateurs since most Professional Photographers were promoting the manual NIKON F with all those manual dials and buttons.. Result: Canon sold 5.7 million AE-1s whereas (then world No. 1) Nikon F sold only about 670,000 units. The R7 is made for the serious hobbyists and NOT for Professionals.
Hallo Fabian Ich hätte ein Frage zur Entscheidungsfindung. Ich benütze zur Zeit eine R5 mit einem Sigma 150-600C. Soweit ist diese Kombination sehr zufriedenstellend. Um die Brennweite zur erweitern überlege ich mir einen Konverter zu beschaffen oder anstelle des Konverters eine R7+ meine Sigma und damit mit dem Crop-Effekt +/- die gleiche Erweiterung zu erreichen. So wie ich es beurteile würde die Kombo R7+Sigma bei ungefähr gleicher Brennweitenerweiterung weniger Verlust der Lichtstärke im Vergleich zur Kombination mir der R5+Sigma+Konverter bedeuten. Beurteile ich das richtig oder gibt es noch andere Punkte zu beachten die ich übersehen habe?
Leider konnte ich das 150-600C nicht an der R7 testen. Aber der AF ist eh nicht so gut, dann da noch einen Konverter drauf tun halte ich für suboptimal. Allerdings kostet dir R7 auch wieder etwas Geld und ich fürchte, du wirst dann mit der Bildqualität nicht ganz zufrieden sein. Hast du dir mal die Alternative von Canon angeschaut? tidd.ly/49gyiqG
If only Thor could wield the Canon cripple hammer, he would be unstoppable. Seriously great review and answers a lot of questions. It's a strange camera IMO, so many great features, but so many really poor decisions. The camera is clearly not an R7 level, it's an R9 and now Canon have backed themselves into a corner unless they totally break their naming convention. There can be no higher spec APS-C. It's so frustrating that the sensor is so slow that electronic shutter mode is useless for action but that the mechanical shutter is so horribly loud. So many birds and wildlife would run away immediately you fired the shutter. I use a Sony A9 and Nikon Z9 and I am so used to totally silent shooting it's al;most impossible to use mechanical now, but at least R5 isn't terribly loud. I think maybe a second hand R5 is the way to go. I had high hopes the R7 would be more like the Fuji X-H2S, stacked sensor, high res EVF, CF-E tybe B card slot, larger buffer.
Great review. Answered a lot of my questions, as my R7 is still backordered. I hope you keep up the reviews, as you have a very pragmatic sensibility. The application I most expect to be useful versus my R5 is for reach-limited situations in decent light. This is the one test I'd have liked to see a bit more about. If I'm taking pictures of small creatures 200 yards away, where I'm going to be making major crops in the finished image, will the R7 pull out more resolution? This determines whether I keep it. I'll likely be using your same telephoto lens you have, but with a 1.4x teleconverter on it, so between that, the distance, the reduced light gathering, and the higher pixel density, there will be a lot of pressure on the image quality. Keep up the great work.
Thanks a lot! I think with such distances other things like particles in the air, heat waves etc. also start becoming a problem that can potentially degrade image quality
Thank you for the review. Very valuable. However, I would like to point out something. Many people, including you on this video, are blaming Canon for "crippling" the cameras "on purpose", and stating this as if Canon was doing something negative, sneaky or bad. For example, at the end of this video, you are mentioning that R7 and R6 could have some of the same features (saving the settings) as R5. I wonder why this is always "crippling" when it comes to Canon, but no one really complains about it when it comes to the pricing of many other products? If a hotel room includes breakfast and another less expensive room doesn't, does that mean the hotel is "crippling the other room" on purpose? Or if Audi A8 has more features and betters specs than A3, did Audi "cripple" A3 "on purpose"? Or did they just build different models of the product with a different price range? I don't see Canon doing anything different from other companies. Business as usual.
Thanks! For me it feels „crippled“ as these are purely software features. If you get breakfast in a more expensive hotel room, this makes sense as the hotel also needs to cover these costs for every client. Same for better hardware on a car or camera. But software-restrictions just feel like crippling to me
Yeah I understand... But the same pricing mechanism applies also to software market, even in situations where the main product is hardware and software is just the side product. Such is the world... :)
Hi, I have one question that is most important to me as an event photographer, is it with the EF-EFS lens adapter in video photography Decreases the number of frames from 50 to 25 as in the camera R ?
These videos are so weird. You watch one from a a birder who says the pixel density of the R7 is blowing away the current full frame sensors with its image quality and only an 83MP full frame would come close, which no one has yet, and then you have ones like this that simply say "well its aps-c and not full frame, so its not as good". Looking at your image comparisons, I see more detail and less noise in the R7 compared to the R5.
Thanks for your feedback! I was actually surprised that the R7 was not doing better. Maybe the R7 is a bit better, but I would not consider it significant in the real world
Great unbiased review. Thank you for that. I have a query. Can you shoot slower in electronic shutter? Say at 15 fps...that should theoretically remove the rolling shutter problem and yet be silent.
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography they way I understand it is that the rolling shutter occurs when data is being pushed faster than it can be processed or written to the card. So frame 2 might get data meant for frame 1..... If mechanical shutter does not exhibit rolling shutter then maybe electronic shutter at 15fps too should be free of it?
The was I understand it is that rolling shutter is occurring because the sensor gets read out line by line. And since this readout takes a bit of time, the subject’s position might have moved from the beginning to end of readout. With the mechanical shutter you have a „curtain“ determining the beginning and end of exposure. Since this curtain=shutter is very opening and closing extremely fast, you don’t get rolling shutter
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Thanks for this info. I guess I'll have to read up on this before I understand completely. Thanks again for a great review!
In theory I agree. However, I received a lot of e-mails lately of people asking me whether to buy an R5 or R7. When I throw in the R6, they respond with: „no, not enough megapixels“. Same when teaching workshops. That’s why I used the R5 a couple of times. And of course I didn’t expect it would outperform the R5. The question was rather „how much of the R5 can you have for 1/3 of the price“. I hope that makes more sense
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Funny how obsessed people are with megapixels. Everyone, that is, except all the pros shooting 1dx iis and R3s! It wasn't that long ago that 12 or 16 megapixels were considered a lot!
What is it clickbait artists can't understand? The R7 is not an R5. It costs less than half. It might just be nice for once to make a video for people who are coming to the R7 with the hope of improving their photos rather than downgrading from the camera they are so proud to afford. If you want to do a fair comparison video with your R5, consider comparing the possibility of buying an R6 and an R7 using each for the things they do best. There was quite a bit of interesting things in the video but you really turned me off saying 'R5' ten times for every time you said 'R7'. Good luck with your R1.
Sorry to hear the video is not for you. Clickbaiting was not my goal, otherwise I would have chosen another thumbnail 😉 I got a lot of e-mails lately of people asking me whether to buy an R5 or R7. When I throw in the R6, they respond with: „no, not enough megapixels“. Same when teaching workshops. That’s why I used the R5 a couple of times.
Instead of complaining about the R7 ..be grateful you can AFFORD the R5 as it's £4,500 where'as the the R7 £1,300 is priced to appeal to folks who can afford that price point as they may not want to buy an M50 .. To even compare it against the R5 is pointless , Canon would never release a Mirrorless that would outperform it's more expensive range of Cameras R6, R5,R3 ,,,,,
Two years ago there was simply not even the option of getting an R7 😉 I got a lot of e-mails lately of people asking me whether to buy an R5 or R7. When I throw in the R6, they respond with: „no, not enough megapixels“. Same when teaching workshops. That’s why I used the R5 a couple of times. And of course I didn’t expect it would outperform the R5. The question was rather „how much of the R5 can you have for 1/3 of the price“. I hope that makes more sense
Do Canon sell cameras like this to the general public ? Or do they just provide free ones to youtube channels ? This camera isn't available anywhere for someone that actually wants to buy it.
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Apologies to you, yes I have seen your video, but Canon do provide cameras to UA-cam channels to advertise and entice people into buying cameras they obviously can't provide for most people.
the camera was heavily pre-ordered and demand was seemingly very high. Given that we have a global pandemic, the war in Europe, and a massive lack of components due to the aforementioned problems, it is highly likely that the camera would sell out fast, and be slow to re-stock. PS don't go looking for a Nvidia GPU, it's even worse!
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I've seen banding in several other reviews at ISO6400 and above with the R7 Fabian. It's much better than the 7D Mark II though and barely noticeable.
I also rented the R7 for a week and then bought one. I am really impressed with the AF system. Beats my 5DIV, 7Dii and 90D. The R7 is basically a 90D mk II but in mirrorless. The only issue I had was how short it is, my pinky and often the ring are under the camera. I added a battery grip to it by taking a BG-E2 and cutting the extension off it. IT WORKS as a grip extension, no power or controls but makes the camera comfortable to use. i.imgur.com/hOLYzp0l.jpg
You can buy the R7 here: adorama.rfvk.net/6eeR5r
Remove noise in your images! Try Topaz DeNoise AI for free: www.topazlabs.com/denoise-ai/ref/901/
*Affiliate link
First of all Fabian, I hugely appreciate your down-to-earth style, without hoopla or drama. I have have been shooting wildlife for over 40 years, mostly with Canon gear. I have the 7D, 7DII and 90D DSLRS, plus the R5 & R6. Like many people, I was hugely looking forward to a replacement for the 7DII with a pro-level MILC camera.
Like you, I think the R7 was a replacement for the 90D rather than the 7DII, so I remain puzzled at the model naming. First, I must say I never considered the 90D to be a valid replacement for the 7DII - because of its inferior tracking system and weather-sealing.
While this camera has many excellent features to lure hobbyists and enthusiasts, and the price point is very attractive for those wanting to leave the DSLR market for MILCs, the things that have held me back from buying a R7 are many of the things you have said, but briefly:
- The sensor is not BSI/Stacked, and that seriously inhibits the record speeds, along with an inadequate buffer, it chokes the 30FPS electronic shutter, resulting in a less than spectacular burst duration and the massive rolling shutter. While one can shoot with the mechanical shutter, it sounds like a tinker's cart.
- I would like to have seen the BSI/stacked sensor connected to a bigger, faster buffer and recording on dual CF-Express type A cards that have much faster read/write, but are also backwardly compatible to SD cards.
- I would like to have seen better weather sealing, it is not as good as the 7DII or R5 units, and for professionals that can be an issue as we cannot pack up and go home if the weather turns nasty.
- I miss the availability of a battery grip - not only does that provide more energy supply, but also portrait-mode controls, and the grip weight helps to bring the centre of gravity back towards the body for longer telephoto lenses.
- I agree with you about the lack of a third dial for ISO, but am on the fence as regards the new dial position
- I am not quite so worried about the lack of the top screen but would like to have seen more buttons available for custom settings.
All of these things would have made the the camera a lot more expensive, and I accept that, but I would have been willing to pay the difference. I don't want to rubbish the R7 per se, but I just think it was mis-named and it should have perhaps been called a R70, leaving the R7 designation vacant for a true replacement for the 7DII that I, and many others would have been happy to pay the difference.
Still, the R7 is a great buy and I think Canon will sell them on a massive scale.
Hi Trevor
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think we pretty much agree on many strengths and weaknesses of the R7. I definitely think it has its place, but as you mentioned as well, rather as an R70 with room for a „proper“ R7 above
I'm a little confused by some of your points, firstly there is absolutely no situation in wildlife photography where you should be needing 30fps, if you're relying on spray and pray shooting then something has gone wrong somewhere.
As for the card slots due the difference in size and shape you can't make a slot that will accept both CF express and SD, though I agree at least one CF or XQD slot would have been nice.
The weather sealing is actually superior to the 7D mark ii though yes it's not to the level of the R5 but there's a massive price difference.
The one thing that does annoy me is Canons lack of weather sealing on the RF 100-400, it's perfectly possible to make a mid priced lens with weather sealing etc....look at the Tamron and Sigma 100-400 lenses.
If you will recall, the 90d was announced at the time to be a replacement for both the 80d and 7d ii, which kind of told me that this was the direction Canon had decided to go. It is likely that they have decided that in 2022-23 (right or wrong) there isn't a sufficient market for a $2,000.00 + APS-C body. Having said that, the R7 is a significant upgrade to both the 90d and 7dii. Weather sealing is at least as good, buffer size larger, resolution significantly higher (than the 7dii), AF shows massive improvement, including face and eye tracking and considerably more focus points, 15 fps mechanical compared to 10 in the 7d, silent shooting ability (at 15 or 30 fps!), exposure preview etc. If mirrorless didn't exist, and this was a DSLR 7d iii, most photographers would be over the moon. But somehow, because it's mirrorless, and because it doesn't have a vertical grip (the compact size and weight make the R7 a perfect carry around and hiking camera, so I don't miss the added bulk), it somehow doesn't match up. I sold my 7dii and bought the R7 and have never looked back. With the R7 I am getting pictures I only dreamt of before.
I have set my R7 up so the front dial does shutter speed, the back dial does ISO and the lens ring does aperture. No need to push the ISO button and probably don't change FStop that often compared to ISO and shutter speed
This is my setup s well
Yes, if you use an RF lens (that has the lens ring in a useful position - not like the RF 100-500) this is a great setup
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I've got the 100-500,but since the image is sharp wide open,I rarely have to adjust it....I set it at the widest aperture at 100mm and it stays at it's widest through the zoom range automatically
Also true! For my EF 600/4 this approach is not working though
I love my R7, great focus, easy to use on my 600mm F4 and 800mm F11. Great Kit for the price.
Enjoy the combination 😊👍🏻
Hi Fabian… great video as always! I followed you already in your german spoken videos, as a dutchman is that no problem to understand. Your english is really good and now you can reach out to everybody out in the world what means greater exposure for your videos which you deserve…keep on the good work😀👍👍
Thanks a lot 😊
You Rock Dear.One of the best & Uncomplicated Review.Kudos To Your Practical Approach.
Thanks
Hi. Exellent review Fabian. I got mine this week. I have not yet formulated an opinion about the camera. Very impressive review, completely agree with your conclusions so far.
Thanks a lot 😊
Thanks for sharing the video, I really enjoy it. The conparation was a little bit unfair for the r7 because the r5 is a beast of a camera but I learned a lot from the video, thanks 📸👍
Thanks! Yes, I agree that the R5 is another tier. But many people asked me specifically which of the two they should buy, so I decided to include it in the video
so true
@@FabianFoppNaturephotographyand you forget in video that you can put 1.4 tc on r7 also. I mean r5 + 1.4fc = 700mm, r7 + 1.4 fc = 1120mm!
Nice review and well delivered. Thank you. I bought an R7 last week as a second body to accompany my R5. I’m delighted. I accept any shortcomings compared to my R5 because it is not an R5. I think the only unexpected difference for me is that the R7 needs a slightly deeper push on the shutter button to fire, compared to the “surgical” quality of the R5 but I have adapted easily. In my opinion it is a great body for a variety of users. That may be either those migrating up or those looking to complement a better body. By the way, Ron from Whistling Wings gives a great insight into getting the best from Mirrorless bodies, particularly for those moving from DSLRs and those adapting to high pixel density sensors. I took a lot from it.
Thanks, I will have a look at the video you mentioned
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I just checked to give you the best chance if finding it….The channel is Whistling Wings Photography and the video is “Canon R5 - maximise your keeper rate”.
Great video! I have the R7 and agree with everything you liked and weren't too happy with. I also own the R5. The R7 is a disappointment in several areas like changing almost every button on top and back of camera. I guess they didn't think R5 users would be buying the R7. The buffer limit in RAW is horrible especially since this camera is marketed for wildlife photography. The other big disappointment is with the Mechanical and Electronic First Curtain shutter sound. I thought my camera got damaged in shipping until I heard a video of the shutter sound. On a positive note, I love using this camera. I especially love the 1.6x crop factor and the lighter body and faster fps.
Thanks! Yes, I think it might be a good entry level wildlife camera for people that don’t want to spend too much money. But I think an R6 (despite the low megapixel count) might be a better second camera to the R5
Thanks NewDay and Fabian! It is great to hear such honest evaluation of the R7 especially the issues faced when used for wildlife (especially the electronic shutter issues).
I shoot wildlife and birds with the R7, mostly electronic shutter 15fps in CRaw. Image quality is good. I can't see a difference between CRaw and Raw. I have never once had to wait on the buffer. I have photographed bear cubs playing, birds feeding their young and FOX kits rollicking! I can see where you might hit the buffer at 30fps, but I consider that number just marketing hype, like the 8k video on the 5d. Something most will never use. For me, 15fps is plenty fast. I don't feel I missed anything. If you really feel you need 30fps you should probably buy an R3.
@@alansach8437 I wrote this post 11 months ago when I just bought the R7. I have switched to CRAW to avoid hitting the buffer and saving a little space on my hard drives.
I am really enjoying my R7. The autofocus is great. I use it with my Sigma 150-600 C and my 800 f11. My keeper rate has increased a lot. What I like about the 32.5MP sensor is that if you need to crop you still have plenty of pixels. Battery life, for me, is much better than the rating. I am at over 800 shots on my first charge.
Do you need an adaptor for the sigma?
@@iechega Yes, you need the EF to EOS R adapter. Canon has 3 models, the first one is $99 and just allows you to use any EF or EFS lens. The next one is $199 and adds a control ring. The third option that canon has is $299 and allows a drop in filter. I got the base unit but the one with the control ring could be handy if you need the third control wheel.
@@jeffolson4731 thanks! The $99 will be my choice then
Glad to hear! If you shoot wildlife, the battery will most likely last for more shots than the official numbers. With my R5 I managed several thousands (depending on the day of course)
I am still waiting for my order to come. But I can anticipate and agree with everything you said in this video. I plan to use mechanical shutter for BIF and tame birds/animals. For shy birds/animals, I might use electronic shutter. The R7 mechanical shutter does sound loud. I wonder if it is louder than the 1DX that I used to own for 10 years. Why Canon didn't put R5 mechanical shutter into R7? Perhaps Canon knows that most people will use the mechanical shutter most of the time. They use stronger materials for the mechanical shutter so that it will last. That might explain the loud sound. Great video.
I think that sounds like a good plan. I shot with the 1DX several years e ago, so I have a hard time recalling the exact volume. But I would say the R7 is a bit more quiet
Hello, thank-you for the well made and thoughtful video. If I have one criticism or suggestion, depends how you want to interpret it, it would be to do the noise comparison test at a higher ISO - 3200 or even 6400. Even if you are blessed with the ownership of an f4 long lens, in early morning light to get sharp pictures it is not unusual to be forced to work in this ISO range. In my experience this is where the difference in noise between full, crop, and MFT is most visible and it would have been helpful to see the image quality differences at the boundaries of where the cameras might be used. Nonetheless, keep up the good work and helpful content.
Thanks! Yes, that’s a fair point. Especially if you shoot more on dark environments like forests
I don't understand the value of comparing a $1499 R7 with a $3899 R5. Of course the R5 is going to outperform the R7. You are comparing apples against oranges. Do you think Canon is going to put all their best features in their least expensive model? The R7 maybe performs 90% as well as the R5 at a tremendous price discount. It sounds to me that the R7 is a tremendous value for the money.
I got a lot of e-mails lately of people asking me whether to buy an R5 or R7. When I throw in the R6, they respond with: „no, not enough megapixels“. Same when teaching workshops. That’s why I used the R5 a couple of times. And of course I didn’t expect it would outperform the R5. The question was rather „how much of the R5 can you have for 1/3 of the price“. I hope that makes more sense
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography The more you pay the more you get. Not a good comparison. R7 is price value a great camera. R5 is a beast but not needed for people who use this as a hobby. R3 and R5 is nice when you earn money with it.
Well presented. I had already seen quite a few r7 reviews but was still able to pick up some new insight from your review and am looking forward to your setup video! Just subscribed.
Thanks, glad to hear that 😊
Hi Fabian, thanks for your comprehensive review.
Glad if it was helpful 😊
Thanks for such a thoughtful review! :)
Thanks 😊
Thanks Fabian, this is a very useful intelligent review.
Thanks for your comment!
Sehr guter Test. Thx!
Thanks 😊
Great video Fabian. Have you tried using the electronic shutter at 15 fps? If so, was rolling shutter still an issue?
Thanks! No, I have not. But at leas they way I understand how rolling shutter works, I don’t think that this would have changed something. But maybe I miss something here
Good job Fabian. You have a straight forward approach to your review and covered lots of the pertinent questions I have about this camera. Its very disappointing about the RAW pre-capture feature.
I'm looking at this camera because of the crop factor element for distant small birds. I suppose until I have one in my hands and have used it for a little while I wont be able to tell for sure how much I like or dislike it.
I have an R5 and a 100-500 so a lot of what you showed was very relevant to me - have you tried, or will you get a chance to try the R7 and 100-500 with the RF 1.4 Extender?
Look forward to your camera setup video. Subscribed.
Thanks a lot. No, unfortunately I won’t be able to do the test with the 1.4 extender
A very informative video. Thank you for sharing your experience with the R7.
Thanks for your words 😊
Nice practical natural feedback
Thanks a lot 😊
I mean comparing the r7 to such a big camera as the r5 you can only be disappointed, but for people like me who have a 90d and clearly don't have the money for an r5, the r7 is the grall lmao
Yes, I agree! But many people asked be specifically how it compared to the R5 so I wanted to include that as well
Great review and subscribed.
Thanks a lot 😊
Good video! As A Brit I was really impressed with your English (How many Europeans know little finger = pinky!!!)
Thanks a lot 😊
I also agree that this camera should have been the R70 but maybe Canon is delivering a message that we don't want to hear. That message would be that there is not going to be a full spec feature apsc camera in their lineup ever again. Same happens with the lens lineup. I do hope that we will see RF-S L equivalent anytime soon replacements like the. EFS 17-55 2.8 and the efs 10-18....
I completely agree
I don't understand why the R7 is being compared to any other R camera body. Even the R6 is $1000 (US) more than the R7. You will get more camera for that much more money. Secondly, if you are comparing to another R body camera, the EOS-R is much closer but it is full-frame. The price of the EOS-R right now is exactly the same as the EOS-R7 at $1499 (US).
I agree, the comparison to an R5 is not really fair, given the huge price difference. But I got asked by many people for advise regardless regarding buying an R5 vs R7. So maybe a better question would be: how much % of the R5 performance can you get for 30% of the price?
Hi Fabian love from India. I am.about to order R7 I am a 6D Mii user. But after watching your video am a bit confused whether to go for R7 or R6. As I thought will sell 6D Mii and shift fully to Mirrorless. What's your opinion in this case ?
Hi!
Hard to say. The R6 will give you clearly better image quality and I also prefer the handling, however, if you are happy with APS-C (for example because your focal length is too short), I‘d take the R7
Hi Fabian. Accidentally found your channel. Great content and presentations. Any chance of a quick review of the R7 with the last of the Canon 100-400 zoom for DSLR. I have the lens and was thinking of purchasing the R7. The combination looks like a great lightweight combination. Just wondering how this lens performs with the adapter. Cheers. Derek. Sydney.
Hi! Thanks for the nice feedback. No, unfortunately I already had to give the R7 back to my friend
I think the r10 is a better value for using the 800 f11 since ibis doesn't work with the lens and as you showed even 18 vs 32 isn't really noticeable so 24 vs 32 would be even less. It is a little over 0.4 pounds lighter too which is nice when trying to handhold the setup for several minutes in a row. The buffer in craw and 15 fps is around 150 images too.
That’s a good point! I guess it also depends whether you feel comfortable with the even smaller body of the R10
but the R10 lacks bird eye AF...a big issue. And the loss of IBIS is an issue if you use more than 1 lens...or use a lens without IS...
@@davepastern From what I have seen it has the same autofocus as the R7 (including bird eye AF).
awesome review Fabian, thank you very much. Canon really missed the mark with this camera imho. A real pity...is it usable? Yes. But, that buffer, UI design and rolling shutter are just well, terrible. High ISO was my other area of concern, but it appears that my initial concerns were wrongly placed and it is better than I expected and quite usable still.
For me, I'll consider the R7, but will stick to the mechanical shutter and CRAW. I foresee a mark II version in 2 or so years with a stacked sensor @ 24mp to combat the buffer/rolling shutter problems (and also improve high ISO performance).
Of course, the big screw up from Canon is NO battery grip. This is simply inexcusable and shows a complete failure to listen to customers..
Thanks for your comment 😊 I see we have the same feeling
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I was really hoping the R7 would be better than it is. I know a lot of people are really happy with it and think it's the best thing since sliced bread, but it isn't. Yes, it is usable, but there are some major design flaws with the camera. What is the point of 30fps when the buffer cannot cope?
Canon would be better having had a 28mp BSI stacked sensor, dual CFAST and the R5's EVF and UI. Would it have cost more? Sure (although I personally think the R7 [and R5 and R6] is overpriced), but it would have been fully usable.
I really do predict that Sony and NIkon's next APS-C mirrorless camera is gonna smash the R7. I really do. Nikon is already offering its high grade long telephoto lenses far cheaper than Canon (EF or RF, and the latter have been well and truly overpriced imho). Canon's use of technology to create a monopoly on the RF lenses is also not welcome, and not healthy for the market. I'm not asking Canon to give the RF tech away for free, but instead to licence it to 3rd parties for *reasonable* prices. Canon consumers are losers atm imho - overpriced RF lenses and no 3rd party options. Nikon is doing the same thing too sadly and it's time for government regulatory bodies to get involved and start metering out punishments. This is an area that it seems reviewers aren't touching. I guess they don't wanna piss off Canon. It is a massively important topic though.
I don't mind no battery grip. I just take a spare battery.
I really hope that Sony and Nikon announce amazing APS-C cameras. We need competition!
And I also agree that a BSI stacked sensor with Cfexpress (not cfast) would have been nice and well worth the premium price. Or at least a sensor that has a readout that is similar to the one of the R5 - I rarely have rolling shutter issues there
I can also live without a battery grip (in fact I‘m not using one on my R5). But I also think it’s always nice to give the customers more options
Looking good so far
Thanks 😊
If I look at your samples I can only say....it's al about the lenses 😉
Lenses are definitely more important than cameras
Hello, Professor. I want to ask you about the Canon R7 camera. What do you think of it? Is it good for shooting sports and wildlife, and what is the quality of the image? Do you recommend this camera to me?
That‘s why I did the video
This "RAW Burst Mode" sounds like a poor facsimile of the "ProCapture" mode that has been in Olympus cameras for at least 5 years. Except in ProCapture, you get to decide how many images are scrolling through the buffer as you half-press the shutter, and each is recorded as an independent RAW file. I'd be very interested to hear your perspective after testing this feature on an Olympus or OM Digital solutions camera system.
Yes, it sounds indeed like Olympus has a better solution. But I was so far not able to test it
ProCapture is great on the OM-1 and i agree with your point re 'poor facsimile' Nick.
I briefly rented the OM-1 and I think they did a better job with this feature overall like you said. However, it is much quicker and easier to delete an entire burst on the Canon if you realize after shooting that it wasn’t worth saving (unless I missed something with the OM-1). A few times, I spent the afternoon using pro capture on the OM-1 and then had several thousand pictures to go through!
Fabian, I’m confused. You observed that there was no difference in resolution between the image shot with the R5+tc vs. R7? Did you observe at 100%? If I owned an R5 why would I want to buy this camera other than as an inexpensive back up?
Hi Adam,
These were at least my conclusions based on the tests I conducted at 8:00 - 10:00. Without a 1.4x extender you have better AF but my other tests showed that even with cropping (not using an 1.4 extender) the R5 is not far behind. So in this sense I really think the main selling point of the camera is indeed the low price
Thanks for the comprehensive review but I dont feel Canon are crippling the R6 and R7 on purpose, The more you pay for something the more features you generally get. Every manufacturer does this.
Thanks for your comment! For hardware features I totally agree. But leaving out software on certain cameras (that they already developed) is something I find really annoying
sorry, but really have to disagree with this statement Dee. And just because every manufacturer does it, doesn't make it right. I mean, if everyone committed murder, would it still be right? Of course not. And the same logic applies to deliberate crippling of a product by a manufacturer to protect their upscale products
@@davepastern The cheaper R7 actually has some features even better than the R5. But this smaller camera is designed and targeted to the different consumer/amateur market. With a smaller body you cannot put all those dials & buttons - simply no place physically to put them. Did Canon of crippled the R5 in favour of the cheaper R7 then?
@@set3777 I'm calling BS. There's a set/cursor button on the back of the R7 and that should have been replaced with a traditional dial like on the R5. The only features the R7 has over the R5 and R6 is the AF system inherited from the R3. That's it.
The facts are irrefutable - the Canon CrippleHammer is very real, and was blatantly used on the R7. I don't care if you're a Canon fanboy or not, that's not my problem. I'm just stating the facts.
@@davepastern R7 does not have 29.59 minutes video recording time-limit but R5 and R3 has. Speed of R7 is faster than R5 at 15fps mechanical/30fps electronic. Is that crippling?
When Canon released the AE1 camera, it was for amateurs since most Professional Photographers were promoting the manual NIKON F with all those manual dials and buttons..
Result: Canon sold 5.7 million AE-1s whereas (then world No. 1) Nikon F sold only about 670,000 units.
The R7 is made for the serious hobbyists and NOT for Professionals.
Hallo Fabian
Ich hätte ein Frage zur Entscheidungsfindung. Ich benütze zur Zeit eine R5 mit einem Sigma 150-600C. Soweit ist diese Kombination sehr zufriedenstellend. Um die Brennweite zur erweitern überlege ich mir einen Konverter zu beschaffen oder anstelle des Konverters eine R7+ meine Sigma und damit mit dem Crop-Effekt +/- die gleiche Erweiterung zu erreichen. So wie ich es beurteile würde die Kombo R7+Sigma bei ungefähr gleicher Brennweitenerweiterung weniger Verlust der Lichtstärke im Vergleich zur Kombination mir der R5+Sigma+Konverter bedeuten. Beurteile ich das richtig oder gibt es noch andere Punkte zu beachten die ich übersehen habe?
Leider konnte ich das 150-600C nicht an der R7 testen. Aber der AF ist eh nicht so gut, dann da noch einen Konverter drauf tun halte ich für suboptimal. Allerdings kostet dir R7 auch wieder etwas Geld und ich fürchte, du wirst dann mit der Bildqualität nicht ganz zufrieden sein. Hast du dir mal die Alternative von Canon angeschaut? tidd.ly/49gyiqG
If only Thor could wield the Canon cripple hammer, he would be unstoppable. Seriously great review and answers a lot of questions. It's a strange camera IMO, so many great features, but so many really poor decisions. The camera is clearly not an R7 level, it's an R9 and now Canon have backed themselves into a corner unless they totally break their naming convention. There can be no higher spec APS-C. It's so frustrating that the sensor is so slow that electronic shutter mode is useless for action but that the mechanical shutter is so horribly loud. So many birds and wildlife would run away immediately you fired the shutter. I use a Sony A9 and Nikon Z9 and I am so used to totally silent shooting it's al;most impossible to use mechanical now, but at least R5 isn't terribly loud. I think maybe a second hand R5 is the way to go. I had high hopes the R7 would be more like the Fuji X-H2S, stacked sensor, high res EVF, CF-E tybe B card slot, larger buffer.
Yes, I completely agree!
An R7 is whatever Canon says it is!
this has best video features ever
It has some really nice ones but I also missed things of my R5
Such a great video, thank you
Thanks 😊
Great review. Answered a lot of my questions, as my R7 is still backordered. I hope you keep up the reviews, as you have a very pragmatic sensibility. The application I most expect to be useful versus my R5 is for reach-limited situations in decent light. This is the one test I'd have liked to see a bit more about. If I'm taking pictures of small creatures 200 yards away, where I'm going to be making major crops in the finished image, will the R7 pull out more resolution? This determines whether I keep it. I'll likely be using your same telephoto lens you have, but with a 1.4x teleconverter on it, so between that, the distance, the reduced light gathering, and the higher pixel density, there will be a lot of pressure on the image quality. Keep up the great work.
Thanks a lot! I think with such distances other things like particles in the air, heat waves etc. also start becoming a problem that can potentially degrade image quality
Think the R7 will go on sale for Black Friday?
Hard to say, I don’t know the dynamics in the US
Review of R7 + Tamron EF 150-600mm g2 please ? It is good or not
Unfortunately I don’t own this lens and can‘t test it
Really nice video.
Thank you!
Thank you for the review. Very valuable. However, I would like to point out something. Many people, including you on this video, are blaming Canon for "crippling" the cameras "on purpose", and stating this as if Canon was doing something negative, sneaky or bad. For example, at the end of this video, you are mentioning that R7 and R6 could have some of the same features (saving the settings) as R5. I wonder why this is always "crippling" when it comes to Canon, but no one really complains about it when it comes to the pricing of many other products? If a hotel room includes breakfast and another less expensive room doesn't, does that mean the hotel is "crippling the other room" on purpose? Or if Audi A8 has more features and betters specs than A3, did Audi "cripple" A3 "on purpose"? Or did they just build different models of the product with a different price range? I don't see Canon doing anything different from other companies. Business as usual.
Ps. Now subscribing to your channel. ✌
Thanks! For me it feels „crippled“ as these are purely software features. If you get breakfast in a more expensive hotel room, this makes sense as the hotel also needs to cover these costs for every client. Same for better hardware on a car or camera. But software-restrictions just feel like crippling to me
Yeah I understand... But the same pricing mechanism applies also to software market, even in situations where the main product is hardware and software is just the side product. Such is the world... :)
Hi, I have one question that is most important to me as an event photographer, is it with the EF-EFS lens adapter in video photography Decreases the number of frames from 50 to 25 as in the camera R ?
Unfortunately, I don’t know the answer to that one, sorry
These videos are so weird. You watch one from a a birder who says the pixel density of the R7 is blowing away the current full frame sensors with its image quality and only an 83MP full frame would come close, which no one has yet, and then you have ones like this that simply say "well its aps-c and not full frame, so its not as good". Looking at your image comparisons, I see more detail and less noise in the R7 compared to the R5.
Thanks for your feedback! I was actually surprised that the R7 was not doing better. Maybe the R7 is a bit better, but I would not consider it significant in the real world
Great unbiased review. Thank you for that.
I have a query. Can you shoot slower in electronic shutter? Say at 15 fps...that should theoretically remove the rolling shutter problem and yet be silent.
Yes, you can shoot slower. But I‘m not sure I understand how that would resolve the rolling shutter issue
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography they way I understand it is that the rolling shutter occurs when data is being pushed faster than it can be processed or written to the card. So frame 2 might get data meant for frame 1..... If mechanical shutter does not exhibit rolling shutter then maybe electronic shutter at 15fps too should be free of it?
The was I understand it is that rolling shutter is occurring because the sensor gets read out line by line. And since this readout takes a bit of time, the subject’s position might have moved from the beginning to end of readout. With the mechanical shutter you have a „curtain“ determining the beginning and end of exposure. Since this curtain=shutter is very opening and closing extremely fast, you don’t get rolling shutter
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Thanks for this info. I guess I'll have to read up on this before I understand completely.
Thanks again for a great review!
Well a comparison between the R7 and R6 might be more appropriate and useful as the are much closer in price than the R7 and R5
In theory I agree. However, I received a lot of e-mails lately of people asking me whether to buy an R5 or R7. When I throw in the R6, they respond with: „no, not enough megapixels“. Same when teaching workshops. That’s why I used the R5 a couple of times. And of course I didn’t expect it would outperform the R5. The question was rather „how much of the R5 can you have for 1/3 of the price“. I hope that makes more sense
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Funny how obsessed people are with megapixels. Everyone, that is, except all the pros shooting 1dx iis and R3s! It wasn't that long ago that 12 or 16 megapixels were considered a lot!
What is it clickbait artists can't understand? The R7 is not an R5. It costs less than half. It might just be nice for once to make a video for people who are coming to the R7 with the hope of improving their photos rather than downgrading from the camera they are so proud to afford. If you want to do a fair comparison video with your R5, consider comparing the possibility of buying an R6 and an R7 using each for the things they do best. There was quite a bit of interesting things in the video but you really turned me off saying 'R5' ten times for every time you said 'R7'. Good luck with your R1.
Sorry to hear the video is not for you. Clickbaiting was not my goal, otherwise I would have chosen another thumbnail 😉 I got a lot of e-mails lately of people asking me whether to buy an R5 or R7. When I throw in the R6, they respond with: „no, not enough megapixels“. Same when teaching workshops. That’s why I used the R5 a couple of times.
Instead of complaining about the R7 ..be grateful you can AFFORD the R5 as it's £4,500 where'as the the R7 £1,300 is priced to appeal to folks who can afford that price point as they may not want to buy an M50 ..
To even compare it against the R5 is pointless , Canon would never release a Mirrorless that would outperform it's more expensive range of Cameras R6, R5,R3 ,,,,,
Two years ago there was simply not even the option of getting an R7 😉 I got a lot of e-mails lately of people asking me whether to buy an R5 or R7. When I throw in the R6, they respond with: „no, not enough megapixels“. Same when teaching workshops. That’s why I used the R5 a couple of times. And of course I didn’t expect it would outperform the R5. The question was rather „how much of the R5 can you have for 1/3 of the price“. I hope that makes more sense
Do Canon sell cameras like this to the general public ? Or do they just provide free ones to youtube channels ? This camera isn't available anywhere for someone that actually wants to buy it.
Have you seen the video? Canon didn‘t provide me with one, a very nice friend gave me her personal camera
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Apologies to you, yes I have seen your video, but Canon do provide cameras to UA-cam channels to advertise and entice people into buying cameras they obviously can't provide for most people.
the camera was heavily pre-ordered and demand was seemingly very high. Given that we have a global pandemic, the war in Europe, and a massive lack of components due to the aforementioned problems, it is highly likely that the camera would sell out fast, and be slow to re-stock. PS don't go looking for a Nvidia GPU, it's even worse!
I got mine from Amazon's a few days ago with only a 2 week wait.
I can see banding is image ISO6400
Do you recall which image it was?
Because than I will check the raw file, sometimes the youtube compression makes things worse
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I think all ISO6400 and up images taken by R7.
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I've seen banding in several other reviews at ISO6400 and above with the R7 Fabian. It's much better than the 7D Mark II though and barely noticeable.
And no battery grip - so it is a no no for any serious wildlife photographers
I also don’t use a battery grip on both of my R5 cameras. But I get that this is quite important to some people
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography There should be an option at least
Yes, I agree!
I also rented the R7 for a week and then bought one. I am really impressed with the AF system. Beats my 5DIV, 7Dii and 90D. The R7 is basically a 90D mk II but in mirrorless. The only issue I had was how short it is, my pinky and often the ring are under the camera. I added a battery grip to it by taking a BG-E2 and cutting the extension off it. IT WORKS as a grip extension, no power or controls but makes the camera comfortable to use. i.imgur.com/hOLYzp0l.jpg
Great tip, Jeffrey. Would be great to see how it looks from other angles if you have a chance to post those shots. Cheers.
I can imagine that it’s quite a step up from these DSLR cameras. And thanks for the insights into your construction 😊
have one more angle and the Magivered grip i.imgur.com/kbweeprl.jpg i.imgur.com/DKHPCuol.jpg
@@JeffreyPadell THANK YOU!