I bought the RF 100-400mm lens a year ago and it's pretty amazing! It's not too hard to get sharp images if you don't expect great low light performance.
Just throwing this out there... the RF 100-400 is a FANTASTIC lens that I used on the R7 and the R5, and it's under $1000. Even though it's not as weather sealed as the more expensive options, I was recently caught in a Florida deluge and had that lens paired with my R7. I was worried that it might get some water inside, but when I got home I found zero issues. So either I was lucky or it's sealed "good enough".
Agreed, it’s by far my favorite lens, I’ve used it on an RP and R7. It’s so versatile and always amazes me. I even use it for astro and am blown away by the images I get from my light polluted City
Thank you for being brave and mentioning the 3rd party lenses mess. I’m sure your are getting abuse form the blindly loyal Canon owners, like the rest of us are, but it’s important that we continue to point out this issue.
Do not forget that canon do not allow third party ink manufactures for printers, and you cant use scan feature in scanner-printer without ink, so they try to force you into buing only their ink. I returned my printer-scanner, and will never buy anything from this company again...
+1 on the RF 24-105 F4L. It was my first lens for the R7 and it’s just fantastic 😮 I also got the RF16mm for something wider, but like you said… good, but not the greatest. I’ve upgraded it to the RF 14-35 F4L, probably my favorite lens on the R7 now!
@@Josh_Sattin yes quite happy… I got it for a sweet discount! It’s really like you said in the video: buy full frame lenses so you’re set once you upgrade the body 😊 Now all we need is a Canon R6 mk2!
Marry the lends, date the camera. Has the 15-35 2.8 been tried on this camera? I’m debating between the 15-35 and 24-70 for eventually being able to move to full frame
The Canon 17-55 is old but still gold...so great and versatile for documentary style/run & gun shooting...and pretty affordable these days on the used market
have you tried it for a video? I was looking at this lens, but I was afraid it was so old that you could hear the focusing motors if you shot a video with it.
@@808islandlife_HI yes I have! Shot a wedding on it in Ireland! For an old guy, the stabiliser and autofocus is solid, there’s a slight noise with autofocus which I’d say is the main downfall but it’s not as bad as other lenses like even the sigma 18-35. Great picture quality and buttery bokeh, perfect for run and gun
I have tried the EF-S 10-18 on my R7 and I found the image quality pretty soft and lacking detail. It wasn’t user error, I was very happy with results from the several RF lenses I have and used on the same trip. I definitely want a proper wide to mid tele with good aperture, eg 15-60 in f2.8. Meanwhile, for me the best lens and the reason I got the R7 is the RF 100-500.
The R7 paired with the RF 100-400mm is far and away the best combo for anything that needs a reasonable telephoto zoom at a surprisingly low price point. It is very sharp and lightweight. You will LOVE this lens once you try it. It is the lens that is almost always on my R7. I keep the RF 24-105mm F4L on my EOS R most of the time. If I ever need to bridge the gap between the two I reach for the RF 70-200mm F4L on my EOS R.
@@wlicesramos5261 The R7 and R10 will accept all of the RF lenses without an adaptor. FYI, any of the other "R" family bodies will accept the RF-S lenses and automatically go into crop mode.
I have R6 and R7 with Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art and and this duo is great with this lens. I can use R6 for 30mm and when i want to get closer to 50mm i just swap this lens to R7. For wildlife Sigma offers its 150-600 lenses which give huge reach and enough light for wildlife photos durning day. For macro photos R7 is amazing since i has Image staking function built in body so get AF macro lens and you can go crazy with that (sadly its only JPG and not RAW after processing) EF 100mm f2.8 L IS USM macros can be found under 1000$. Currently for macro photography i use RF 100mm f2.8 L IS USM macro which i upgraded from EF 100mm f2.8 L IS USM macro. EF was great but i just swapped it since it was need of maintenance soon and RF autofocus is just faster for taking photos of bugs and butterflys.
I shoot a RP and a 90D and have the kit lens for the RB and I live in a camp trailer. I obviously have a small budget. I shoot vintage glass out of need. Currently have Yashica 24 & 50mm bramded lenses which can only be described as "good enough". One I paid 50$ for and the other I had for about 40 years. They both are faster than my kit lens and the 50mm matches the kit lens in resolve. I have found that I don't miss auto focus and most of the time set iso to auto and that I have more fun overall . Vintage Zeiss lens in cy mount beat all the RF lenses on your list in terms of price except for RF 50mm (good deal for rf mount). I also have the RF to EF adapter which opens up a big list of used Canon glass. Don't let budget keep you in the house. Great video, thanks.
Okay, so first off, let me tell you how much I love my R7's..... About a year ago, after owning the R5 for a year, I "upgraded" to the R7 🙂 lol Loved it so much, that after a month, I sold the R5 and bought a second R7 for a backup. But now, here's why..... I am a very specialized shooter, of whom 98% of my photography is small, perched birds. For me, reach is of utmost importantance, and cropability is pretty important too. So for me, the R7 + 800 F11 is the best thing on the market. I will probably get the 200-800 too, but need to rent it first to be sure. All of this said ^ I think if I were the more average shooter, just walking around and shooting whatever, or a content creator, shooting with the lenses you talked about in this video, I would have either just stuck with my R5.... Or, if I were just getting into it today, I'd go with a FF R6 Mk II. Or, if you were really on a budget, I'd go for the original R6 used or refurbished. You could probably get that for the same price as a new R7. As a side note, for what little of it I have done, the R7 seems to be really great at macro too.
Nice video Josh. You;re so right about spending money on lenses. That's why I got the 24-70 2.8 and 15-35 2.8 (both RF) because they're native and work amazingly. I love these lenses on both the r5 and r5c.
Thanks Hugh! I absolutely love those two lenses. I have the 15-35 and will probably hold on to it for a while. I would like to pick up the 24-70 again too!
I just want to add something to make sure it's clear: the RF lens adapter works wtih EF *and* EF-S lenses (but *NOT* EF-M). I've also had my eye on the 24mm prime but have read about lots of barrel distortion that has to be corrected in post.
@bokemon2010 Yeah, me too! I'm torn between getting this and perhaps investing in a telephoto lens to round out my possible focal lengths...that AND saving money for that L glass, which is prohibitively expensive and the only higher-grade option, sadly.
I've actually "downgraded" from a full-frame... Selling my R & R6 and bought an R7 instead. Once the other cams sell I'll buy a 2nd R7. The R7 blows the R6 out of the water as an A-cam. I produce UA-cam content for various channels and the R6 overheats in 4k25 after just a couple videos, whereas the R7 doesn't and it has no record limit meaning I don't need to fork out for a Ninja V as a work around. 4KFine 7K down-sampled, dedicated video mode switch, 3 custom video profiles, AF/MF switch on the front, still has Zebras/Peaking, 10bit 422, Clog3, hot shoe mount etc... As a small freelancer 2x R7s for the price of 1x R6 is just a no brainer. I've been calling the R7 the C7 as for someone on a budget like me this is basically a baby C70, as close as I'll get at least haha! I've got the RF 24 - 105 F4 L, RF16 1.8, RF35 1.8, RF50 1.8, Samyang cine RF 85 T1.5, EF 100mm macro but I've got my eyes set on the Sigma Art 18 - 35 1.8, definitely want to pick that up as it'll likely be all I use haha. Your videos have been excellent, keep them coming!
Excellent video and great suggestions. I can vouch for the sigma 18-35 being far superior to the 17-55. But on the used market I picked up my 17-55 for 260 usd which imo is unbeatable at that price, moreso for photo than video though. I could only pick up the sigma 18-35 for around 480, but I would say it was worth upgrading to and will part will the 17-55 eventually. Paired with the RF50 1.8 it's a killer combo, worth the increase in price and having to switch lenses. All this is true for photo but even moreso for video I think. Having the 18-35 with IBIS is game changing and it's probably even better than the OIS on the 17-55 anyway! Remember you only get true IBIS+OIS coordination with RF lenses in general, not everyone is aware of that. The rumored RF-S 16-55 2.8 is definitely a lens to be excited about, but expect the price to be probably above the original MSRP of the 17-55, so quite a big jump in price. It's hard to beat the near flawless optics, build quality and internal zoom of the sigma 18-35 already anyway and it won't beat it in aperture so buying the 18-35 today is still a very good future proof option. The fact that it's so hard to find a used bargain on it says a lot about how relevant it is and will continue to be for many more years. I can vouch for the RF 100-400 being an incredible value, it's unbelievably good. This is the best stabilization I've even seen in any telephoto and the lightweight and great IBIS+OIS coordination are big reasons. It's definitely good and stable enough for wildlife video handheld. With the 4k crop mode you get ridiculous reach but you might need a tripod for the best stabilization at that high magnification. And the AF is reliable and stupidly fast. Don't recommend the 1.4x TC with it though, I tried it and had to return it as it didn't deliver at all. The F11 primes are definitely better suited to FF in general, but if you need to get one the 600 is the one to get. So many people say the 800 is just too long for APSC even for photography and I agree. The 800 is definitely not stable enough for handheld video on APSC (it is even for photography in many situations) and I'm not sure on the 600, but being 200 shorter it should be a lot more manageable. Other lenses people might consider for wildlife videography are the sigma EF 150-600s (C, S and 60-600S). While for photography the C in particular is a great recommendation (can't stress how good it is for the price, it's my favorite wildlife lens ever and the best value for optics of any wildlife lens ever), the AF is not reliable for wildlife video as it has short glitch pulses from time to time. It's an extremely minor bug/inconvenience for photography but for video it would ruin it I think. If you already have it though you can give it a go and it will do okay in many situations. Sadly I think the only true step up from the 100-400 is the 100-400L mkii (not worth buying in this day and age imo) or the RF100-500L (amazing but ungodly expensive). I'd be cautious of the 600 F11 but it may very well be good enough for wildlife video in general per your recommendation! As for wide lenses another one to consider is the newer Tamron 10-24. It's apparently a noticeable step up in IQ from the 10-18. Personally I almost went for it but figured I'd wait for the RF-S version to come (I'm guessing it's the next to be released alongside the rumored R100). Between the Canon 10-22 and 10-18, get the 10-18. Thanks again for the great video. I definitely need to check out your speedboosters review as I was looking at the Canon one but can't justify the price atm, but I'm scared the Viltrox wouldn't deliver anyway. Imma watch it right now! Cheers
17-55 is very much beatable by 15-85. Especially in sharpness and a bit in speed due to newer usm. Though 15-85 is dark, but who cares when you shoot fashion? Try it! Pity, this underrated lens is not present in video list here.
@@Sanbenitor Yeah, but then you have to consider lenses such as the 24-70 and 24-105 f4. More expensive but far superior. Also, I doubt that this 15-85 is THAT much better than the 18-150 kit lens tbh. For the small niche it's for I bet it's more than decent. I always prefer the versatility of having more aperture, personally.
@@simonthibodeau7082 i have 24-70 (first version) sonce 2008. Much better colors but speed and sharpness are comparable. More or less. Anyway we talk about efs, not ef. So 15-85 is a good alternative to 17-55 in everything, even weight.
Congratulations on the work you do, it helps a lot to everyone interested in photography. I have two lenses an EFS 24mm 2.8 STM and an 85mm 1.8 USM. I'm thinking about buying the R7 and I'm in doubt: Should I buy the RF 18-150mm kit lens or continue with my lenses? The intention is landscape photography. Thanks
I will be using that 100-400mm on my vacation. I am testing this lens to the Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS. I am debating on getting that 100mm Macro though. Cheers!
@@Josh_Sattin I am going to Arizona. Lot of great parks and scenery. Unfortunately my Mom needs help and she is going to work me to death. But if I survive I'll show off what it does. Cheers!
I would like to add Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM Lens to Telephoto list... i tried this lens on r7 and i took hundreds of photos,no problem at all and it was really nice
Kinda surprised you didn't mentioned the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 G2 in the mid range zoom category. It's a fantastic lens with great IS and pair very well with my R7 + Meike VND adapter. Maybe a little heavy, but i'm a tough guy 😂
Wow! so much info here. I am looking to buy R7 but I have a small room to take photos and videos of my artwork. Not sure what lens is right here but giving some guidance would be helpful. I have Canon Mark 6 II but it is not to my liking.
I'd like to suggest another option for purchasing lenses...auctions. I don't see many, but its mostly because of low availability being Canadian with a small market. But I did score 2 great lenses this way. I picked up a Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6 3 DC OS HSM for $300can and a Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM for $350can. And I did see a Canon R6 body twice showing up that probably went for $2200 (its usually $3200can). It'll take a bit of hunting and you probably won't find exactly what you are looking for, but I have no regrets with those 2 lenses I picked up.
@@peachy-patches Auction houses are pretty spread out in Toronto. But there is a site called HiBid that is like a Google search for auctions in your area. But the main auction clearance place I follow isn't part of HiBid.
You can't ignore the RF 24-105 f/4-7.1. It's way lighter and cheaper (used )then the EF version and IQ is just as good. It's an awesome combo on an R7/R10,that can be carried around all day, with no problem. I have the R10.
My comment was in reply to the author suggesting the EF or RF 24-105 L. The L is a lot faster but you’d be hard pressed to see any difference in IQ with the much cheaper and lighter RF 24-105 f/4-7.1 lens. I’ve been using that lens on my RP for a couple of years and it works even better on my R10. However, I’ll be using my R10 primarily for birding with my RF 100-400 lens.
I have an old canon 24-70mm f2.8 L no IS works like a champ with the camera ibis ... pictures are sharp and crystal clear .... big difference between my EOS R
I hope it's not too late to ask this question. After the firmware update, will the R7 still work with a Sigma 18-35(3rd party EF) with an RF to EF adapter?
I like your advice about buying FF lenses even if you are using a crop sensor camera. I'm glad I did that, as all my lenses work with all my cameras. Related, why is it "upgrade to FF" ? I have an R5 and an R7. They are different tools for different tasks. My R7 is capable of things my R5 cannot do, and my R5 is capable of things my R7 is not suitable for.
An additional point to lens choice: never ever use a filter without a good reason. I've ruined many a shot because I had the mind set of having a filter (typically UV) on my lens without thinking, "why?" Lens protection? Buy a hood. Test your filters extensively because they can bite you depending on focal length and the type of light. Don't cheap out on filters because a bad $10.00 filter turns a great $500.00 lens into a bad $500.00 lens.
Using a canon eos r10. I have the 35mm F1.8 prime and that performed excellent in low light at a small bar venue for a band I photographed for. However i had to get closer to get the shots with the nice blurred background. What lens would you recommend for me to get if i wanted to cover the whole band without having to physically walk closer to the band? Sometimes they play outside so im not always dealing with low light situations but a lens that’s versatile in both cases would be nice.
Thank you for the video! I was wondering if I'm upgrading from Canon 80D +Sigma 18-35 1.8, is it better to go for the R7 or the brand new FX30? also BMPCC4K is on my mind as well.
Hey Josh, I'm currently shooting on an 80 + 90d for A,B cam set up. Two of my lenses are the efs 18-135 is (nano) usm & 70- 300 is ii (nano) usm. Love both the lenses think they're some of the best of the price range. I'd love to see how they'd perform on the r7. With the canon adaptor. Thinking about upgrading to the r7 next year. Would appreciate your thoughts. Steve :D
Hey Steve. I haven't used those lenses so I can't really comment on how well they would perform on the R7. Like with most older EF lenses, they will perform just as they do on the EF mount cameras. Sometimes the older lenses can hold back some of the newer features and performance of the RF mirrorless cameras, but it varies from lens to lens.
@@Josh_Sattin Hi Josh, thanks for your reply! That's good to know. Despite their f5.6 max aperture across the zoom range their wicked. I'd be half tempted to say I'd post one of them for you to play with for a week if you'd be ingerested?
Buy lenses for the system you have, not for the one you do not have. Full frame lenses are often very big and expensive especially in ultra wide. There currently are only four RF-S lenses anyway, no primes.
Do you need them? Others do not know what you shoot and your style.Buy lenses when you have reached the limits of your existing lenses. Do not ask others what to buy.
Can anybody let me know if the EF adapter for the R7 worth it? I mean what lenses EF do you recommend if I get the adapter to attach it on my R7 Canon? Thanks if you take a quick time to share!
Not yet. They gave Cosina a license to make manual focus RF lenses. From what I have heard they are looking at proposals for licensing to other manufacturers, but no third party autofocus lenses right now.
You can't stack the speedbooster and the Meike VND adapter since they are both RF-EF adapters. If you need to use the speedbooster and a ND, then you need to add NDs on the front of the lens with either a screw-on filter or matte box system.
I just bought the r7 and got the EF-EOS R 0.71x adapter. But when I use the adapter, I get what looks like vignetting. I've updated the firmware on the camera. The only time I can eliminate the vignette is if I'm in "4k crop". Any advice?
I don't have one since I own the RF 15-35 F2.8. There is a crazy good sale on it right now. I'd love to try that lens since it's much smaller and lighter than the 15-35, but I can't justify owning both lenses.
Okay so question, do the all the APS-C designed lenses produce vignette with the speed booster on the R7? because I was highly considering the Sigma 18-35 but I found out that it has vignetting at the wide end so Its no longer in my consideration ! Could you build a list or drop a video on lenses that are best compatible with the r7/r10 paired with the speed booster that DONT have vignetting ? Thanks!
The Sigma 18-35 is only designed for APSC sized sensors. That’s why it vignettes with the speedbooster or if you use it on a full frame camera. The image circle it produces is not large enough. You need to use full frame EF lenses with the speedbooster. If you'd like to learn more about speedboosters, please check out this video: ua-cam.com/video/7E7jKZq7VyA/v-deo.html
You can adapt the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. I use this lens adapted onto my R6M2. The R6M2 automatically recognizes the lens and crops the full frame sensor.
Do you have any experience with Meike’s MK-EFTR-A? Not sure if image stabilization is any different in comparison to the Meike adapter in your video. Thanks
With tears in my eyes I'm looking at Canon users, who trying to survive in a hard RF-mount ecosystem :) Adapters, speedboosters, worn out and outdated EF lenses with noisy autofocus... What good will that do you?
I find all modern cameras and lenses heavily overpriced. If you still want to go with company that bans third party ink manufactures for printers, and stops scan feature to work when there is no ink inside... i reccomend tamron g2 zoom lineup and 1.4 and 1.8 primes with VC, also sigma 1.4 are way better than "nAtIv gLaSs"... (and pray that cranon wont ban old glass with firmware)
Canon made 140 million EF lenses. That is 80 different lenses in focal length and F stops. Now you can also use any EF mount third party lenses. Plus they already have 30 RF lenses in there line up. So that is a 110 Canon lenses to choose from and all the 3rd party EF lenses ever made. Sigma is now selling their EF lenses with an RF adapters. Oh no conspiracy over! I get it. Complaining get you clicks, but this is an absurd complaint.
@@paullanoue5228 Mirrorless lenses are sharper. The r7 is great, but it lacks lens options. look at the old vs new sigma art lenses, new one is miles better but for canon you can only get the dated version from 2014 oslt..
@@unknownKnownunknowns they don't work well. I have this camera, and I have an EF glass. the stabilization specifically shutters and stutters around, especially with 3rd party EF-s lenses.
@@ossme interesting. I have this and an R5 and adaption working well for sports. I don't use the IBIS much, so you have a point. I primarily shoot at 1/1000th both indoor and out. The R7 +EF 24-70 indoors, the R7 + 70-200 outdoors all nail AF, better than my 5d4 ever did.
@@unknownKnownunknowns yes, I don’t face the same issues with my r5 as well. You can have a look at the issues we are having here: ua-cam.com/video/1bwjmR2H2z4/v-deo.html
I bought the RF 100-400mm lens a year ago and it's pretty amazing! It's not too hard to get sharp images if you don't expect great low light performance.
Just throwing this out there... the RF 100-400 is a FANTASTIC lens that I used on the R7 and the R5, and it's under $1000. Even though it's not as weather sealed as the more expensive options, I was recently caught in a Florida deluge and had that lens paired with my R7. I was worried that it might get some water inside, but when I got home I found zero issues. So either I was lucky or it's sealed "good enough".
Agreed, it’s by far my favorite lens, I’ve used it on an RP and R7. It’s so versatile and always amazes me. I even use it for astro and am blown away by the images I get from my light polluted City
Thank you for being brave and mentioning the 3rd party lenses mess. I’m sure your are getting abuse form the blindly loyal Canon owners, like the rest of us are, but it’s important that we continue to point out this issue.
Do not forget that canon do not allow third party ink manufactures for printers, and you cant use scan feature in scanner-printer without ink, so they try to force you into buing only their ink. I returned my printer-scanner, and will never buy anything from this company again...
+1 on the RF 24-105 F4L. It was my first lens for the R7 and it’s just fantastic 😮 I also got the RF16mm for something wider, but like you said… good, but not the greatest. I’ve upgraded it to the RF 14-35 F4L, probably my favorite lens on the R7 now!
I wanted to recommend the 14-35 for this list, but it's definitely a pricier lens. Sounds like you have an awesome kit!
@@Josh_Sattin yes quite happy… I got it for a sweet discount! It’s really like you said in the video: buy full frame lenses so you’re set once you upgrade the body 😊 Now all we need is a Canon R6 mk2!
Would you recommend the 15-35 if you had the budget for it?
I´m just waiting for the RF-S 16-55 2.8 IS , I think it would be a total killer with the quality of the new RF glass and the new inexpensive R7 !!
That would be an awesome lens for sure.
Are you sure they are making this lens? The lens matter is preventing me from buying the R7.
@@sal9211 Not at all! This is what rumors said a few weeks ago
Marry the lends, date the camera. Has the 15-35 2.8 been tried on this camera? I’m debating between the 15-35 and 24-70 for eventually being able to move to full frame
It is pretty sad that Canon hasn't released it until now.
Super interesting video!, i'm enjoying my R10 a lot, just bought it with the RF 50mm 1.8. and super happy!
The Canon 17-55 is old but still gold...so great and versatile for documentary style/run & gun shooting...and pretty affordable these days on the used market
have you tried it for a video? I was looking at this lens, but I was afraid it was so old that you could hear the focusing motors if you shot a video with it.
@@808islandlife_HI yes I have! Shot a wedding on it in Ireland! For an old guy, the stabiliser and autofocus is solid, there’s a slight noise with autofocus which I’d say is the main downfall but it’s not as bad as other lenses like even the sigma 18-35. Great picture quality and buttery bokeh, perfect for run and gun
Im glad to hear that my trusty Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 would work with the R7 body.
Get the 24-70 2.8 Tamron lens. It has stabilization and it works as should on the C70 and R7.
I cannot tell you how informative your videos and I absolutely love them. You're doing a great job, my friend!
That is awesome to hear. Thanks for watching!
I have tried the EF-S 10-18 on my R7 and I found the image quality pretty soft and lacking detail. It wasn’t user error, I was very happy with results from the several RF lenses I have and used on the same trip. I definitely want a proper wide to mid tele with good aperture, eg 15-60 in f2.8. Meanwhile, for me the best lens and the reason I got the R7 is the RF 100-500.
Yeah, unfortunately there just aren't good wide options right now. It is very frustrating. The 100-500 is super nice!
user error for sure. No problem AT ALL here even using with my R10...
@@VicenzzoPaiva turned out my used copy of this lens has a fault inside, there’s a mark on one of the elements which is why the images have been soft.
The R7 paired with the RF 100-400mm is far and away the best combo for anything that needs a reasonable telephoto zoom at a surprisingly low price point. It is very sharp and lightweight. You will LOVE this lens once you try it. It is the lens that is almost always on my R7. I keep the RF 24-105mm F4L on my EOS R most of the time. If I ever need to bridge the gap between the two I reach for the RF 70-200mm F4L on my EOS R.
hi what adaptor i can use to put that lense on my R10?
@@wlicesramos5261 The R7 and R10 will accept all of the RF lenses without an adaptor. FYI, any of the other "R" family bodies will accept the RF-S lenses and automatically go into crop mode.
I agree with the R7 and rf100-400 comment! Absolutely love mine and quality is nuts for the price.
i also have the rf 100-400 on my r7.
There's not a gap between them. There's an overlap.
I have R6 and R7 with Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art and and this duo is great with this lens. I can use R6 for 30mm and when i want to get closer to 50mm i just swap this lens to R7.
For wildlife Sigma offers its 150-600 lenses which give huge reach and enough light for wildlife photos durning day.
For macro photos R7 is amazing since i has Image staking function built in body so get AF macro lens and you can go crazy with that (sadly its only JPG and not RAW after processing) EF 100mm f2.8 L IS USM macros can be found under 1000$.
Currently for macro photography i use RF 100mm f2.8 L IS USM macro which i upgraded from EF 100mm f2.8 L IS USM macro. EF was great but i just swapped it since it was need of maintenance soon and RF autofocus is just faster for taking photos of bugs and butterflys.
Hey, tb to sure, the Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art will work on R7 with an ef-rf canon adaptor right? and how is the image stabilization with it?
I shoot a RP and a 90D and have the kit lens for the RB and I live in a camp trailer. I obviously have a small budget. I shoot vintage glass out of need. Currently have Yashica 24 & 50mm bramded lenses which can only be described as "good enough". One I paid 50$ for and the other I had for about 40 years. They both are faster than my kit lens and the 50mm matches the kit lens in resolve. I have found that I don't miss auto focus and most of the time set iso to auto and that I have more fun overall . Vintage Zeiss lens in cy mount beat all the RF lenses on your list in terms of price except for RF 50mm (good deal for rf mount). I also have the RF to EF adapter which opens up a big list of used Canon glass. Don't let budget keep you in the house. Great video, thanks.
Thanks
Okay, so first off, let me tell you how much I love my R7's.....
About a year ago, after owning the R5 for a year, I "upgraded" to the R7 🙂 lol Loved it so much, that after a month, I sold the R5 and bought a second R7 for a backup.
But now, here's why.....
I am a very specialized shooter, of whom 98% of my photography is small, perched birds. For me, reach is of utmost importantance, and cropability is pretty important too. So for me, the R7 + 800 F11 is the best thing on the market. I will probably get the 200-800 too, but need to rent it first to be sure.
All of this said ^ I think if I were the more average shooter, just walking around and shooting whatever, or a content creator, shooting with the lenses you talked about in this video, I would have either just stuck with my R5....
Or, if I were just getting into it today, I'd go with a FF R6 Mk II. Or, if you were really on a budget, I'd go for the original R6 used or refurbished. You could probably get that for the same price as a new R7.
As a side note, for what little of it I have done, the R7 seems to be really great at macro too.
Nice video Josh. You;re so right about spending money on lenses. That's why I got the 24-70 2.8 and 15-35 2.8 (both RF) because they're native and work amazingly. I love these lenses on both the r5 and r5c.
Thanks Hugh! I absolutely love those two lenses. I have the 15-35 and will probably hold on to it for a while. I would like to pick up the 24-70 again too!
If you could only afford one of those which would you suggest? I run the 17-55 2.8 on my 77d exclusively
I just want to add something to make sure it's clear: the RF lens adapter works wtih EF *and* EF-S lenses (but *NOT* EF-M). I've also had my eye on the 24mm prime but have read about lots of barrel distortion that has to be corrected in post.
@bokemon2010 Yeah, me too! I'm torn between getting this and perhaps investing in a telephoto lens to round out my possible focal lengths...that AND saving money for that L glass, which is prohibitively expensive and the only higher-grade option, sadly.
Modern cameras can correct distortions on the fly if you shoot jpeg.
The EF-S 15-85 is great along with the older EF-S 10-22. I’m itching for 10-22 & 17-55 successors
I've actually "downgraded" from a full-frame... Selling my R & R6 and bought an R7 instead. Once the other cams sell I'll buy a 2nd R7. The R7 blows the R6 out of the water as an A-cam. I produce UA-cam content for various channels and the R6 overheats in 4k25 after just a couple videos, whereas the R7 doesn't and it has no record limit meaning I don't need to fork out for a Ninja V as a work around.
4KFine 7K down-sampled, dedicated video mode switch, 3 custom video profiles, AF/MF switch on the front, still has Zebras/Peaking, 10bit 422, Clog3, hot shoe mount etc... As a small freelancer 2x R7s for the price of 1x R6 is just a no brainer.
I've been calling the R7 the C7 as for someone on a budget like me this is basically a baby C70, as close as I'll get at least haha!
I've got the RF 24 - 105 F4 L, RF16 1.8, RF35 1.8, RF50 1.8, Samyang cine RF 85 T1.5, EF 100mm macro but I've got my eyes set on the Sigma Art 18 - 35 1.8, definitely want to pick that up as it'll likely be all I use haha.
Your videos have been excellent, keep them coming!
Thanks Josh another solid video. Great content. 👍🏻🌋🌴🏝🌊📸☕☀️
Sigma released 18-50mm f2.8 RF lens.
Excellent video and great suggestions. I can vouch for the sigma 18-35 being far superior to the 17-55. But on the used market I picked up my 17-55 for 260 usd which imo is unbeatable at that price, moreso for photo than video though.
I could only pick up the sigma 18-35 for around 480, but I would say it was worth upgrading to and will part will the 17-55 eventually. Paired with the RF50 1.8 it's a killer combo, worth the increase in price and having to switch lenses. All this is true for photo but even moreso for video I think.
Having the 18-35 with IBIS is game changing and it's probably even better than the OIS on the 17-55 anyway! Remember you only get true IBIS+OIS coordination with RF lenses in general, not everyone is aware of that.
The rumored RF-S 16-55 2.8 is definitely a lens to be excited about, but expect the price to be probably above the original MSRP of the 17-55, so quite a big jump in price. It's hard to beat the near flawless optics, build quality and internal zoom of the sigma 18-35 already anyway and it won't beat it in aperture so buying the 18-35 today is still a very good future proof option. The fact that it's so hard to find a used bargain on it says a lot about how relevant it is and will continue to be for many more years.
I can vouch for the RF 100-400 being an incredible value, it's unbelievably good. This is the best stabilization I've even seen in any telephoto and the lightweight and great IBIS+OIS coordination are big reasons. It's definitely good and stable enough for wildlife video handheld. With the 4k crop mode you get ridiculous reach but you might need a tripod for the best stabilization at that high magnification. And the AF is reliable and stupidly fast. Don't recommend the 1.4x TC with it though, I tried it and had to return it as it didn't deliver at all.
The F11 primes are definitely better suited to FF in general, but if you need to get one the 600 is the one to get. So many people say the 800 is just too long for APSC even for photography and I agree. The 800 is definitely not stable enough for handheld video on APSC (it is even for photography in many situations) and I'm not sure on the 600, but being 200 shorter it should be a lot more manageable.
Other lenses people might consider for wildlife videography are the sigma EF 150-600s (C, S and 60-600S). While for photography the C in particular is a great recommendation (can't stress how good it is for the price, it's my favorite wildlife lens ever and the best value for optics of any wildlife lens ever), the AF is not reliable for wildlife video as it has short glitch pulses from time to time. It's an extremely minor bug/inconvenience for photography but for video it would ruin it I think. If you already have it though you can give it a go and it will do okay in many situations.
Sadly I think the only true step up from the 100-400 is the 100-400L mkii (not worth buying in this day and age imo) or the RF100-500L (amazing but ungodly expensive). I'd be cautious of the 600 F11 but it may very well be good enough for wildlife video in general per your recommendation!
As for wide lenses another one to consider is the newer Tamron 10-24. It's apparently a noticeable step up in IQ from the 10-18. Personally I almost went for it but figured I'd wait for the RF-S version to come (I'm guessing it's the next to be released alongside the rumored R100). Between the Canon 10-22 and 10-18, get the 10-18.
Thanks again for the great video. I definitely need to check out your speedboosters review as I was looking at the Canon one but can't justify the price atm, but I'm scared the Viltrox wouldn't deliver anyway. Imma watch it right now! Cheers
17-55 is very much beatable by 15-85. Especially in sharpness and a bit in speed due to newer usm. Though 15-85 is dark, but who cares when you shoot fashion? Try it! Pity, this underrated lens is not present in video list here.
@@Sanbenitor Yeah, but then you have to consider lenses such as the 24-70 and 24-105 f4. More expensive but far superior. Also, I doubt that this 15-85 is THAT much better than the 18-150 kit lens tbh.
For the small niche it's for I bet it's more than decent. I always prefer the versatility of having more aperture, personally.
@@simonthibodeau7082 i have 24-70 (first version) sonce 2008. Much better colors but speed and sharpness are comparable. More or less. Anyway we talk about efs, not ef. So 15-85 is a good alternative to 17-55 in everything, even weight.
Rumor is an 11-22 RFS similar to the em version will be coming soon. That would be great for landscape, video or vlogging for the r7
Oooh. I haven't heard about that rumor, but that would be cool.
I have that lens on my m5. It is really good.
I just subscribed right now and I have to tell yout, this is the most beautiful description below :D
Another solid video brother
Thank you!
Congratulations on the work you do, it helps a lot to everyone interested in photography.
I have two lenses an EFS 24mm 2.8 STM and an 85mm 1.8 USM.
I'm thinking about buying the R7 and I'm in doubt: Should I buy the RF 18-150mm kit lens or continue with my lenses? The intention is landscape photography.
Thanks
Such a badass video! Thank you! Lot's of great info and options to choose from. Definitely has helped me in choosing the right lenses for what I need.
You're welcome. Thanks for watching!
I would love an RF-S 18-35 IS lens. I have an R6 and an R7, and it’s disappointing that there aren’t any pro level rf-s lenses.
Agreed! We never really had pro level Canon EF-S lenses so I’m not too hopeful.
Metabones also has one it 479.00
I will be using that 100-400mm on my vacation. I am testing this lens to the Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS. I am debating on getting that 100mm Macro though. Cheers!
I definitely would like to try out the 100-400 on the R7. Seems like a great affordable combo.
@@Josh_Sattin I am going to Arizona. Lot of great parks and scenery. Unfortunately my Mom needs help and she is going to work me to death. But if I survive I'll show off what it does. Cheers!
true canon must make a 10-18mm RF-S version asap
I would like to add Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM Lens to Telephoto list... i tried this lens on r7 and i took hundreds of photos,no problem at all and it was really nice
Kinda surprised you didn't mentioned the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 G2 in the mid range zoom category. It's a fantastic lens with great IS and pair very well with my R7 + Meike VND adapter. Maybe a little heavy, but i'm a tough guy 😂
I pair my Tameron 24-70 with my R10, works a charm
@@christenrichards5768 which adapter do you use?
Wow! so much info here. I am looking to buy R7 but I have a small room to take photos and videos of my artwork. Not sure what lens is right here but giving some guidance would be helpful. I have Canon Mark 6 II but it is not to my liking.
I'd like to suggest another option for purchasing lenses...auctions. I don't see many, but its mostly because of low availability being Canadian with a small market. But I did score 2 great lenses this way. I picked up a Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6 3 DC OS HSM for $300can and a Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM for $350can. And I did see a Canon R6 body twice showing up that probably went for $2200 (its usually $3200can). It'll take a bit of hunting and you probably won't find exactly what you are looking for, but I have no regrets with those 2 lenses I picked up.
Where are these auctions located?
@@peachy-patches
Auction houses are pretty spread out in Toronto. But there is a site called HiBid that is like a Google search for auctions in your area. But the main auction clearance place I follow isn't part of HiBid.
You can't ignore the RF 24-105 f/4-7.1. It's way lighter and cheaper (used )then the EF version and IQ is just as good. It's an awesome combo on an R7/R10,that can be carried around all day, with no problem. I have the R10.
Out of curiosity - why'd you prefer this lens over the 18-150 rf-s lens?
My comment was in reply to the author suggesting the EF or RF 24-105 L. The L is a lot faster but you’d be hard pressed to see any difference in IQ with the much cheaper and lighter RF 24-105 f/4-7.1 lens. I’ve been using that lens on my RP for a couple of years and it works even better on my R10. However, I’ll be using my R10 primarily for birding with my RF 100-400 lens.
UPDATE - Canon announced on March 4th in Paris that they are in talks with the 3rd party manufacturers. One is already approved.
Does that lens have autofocus?
I have an old canon 24-70mm f2.8 L no IS works like a champ with the camera ibis ... pictures are sharp and crystal clear .... big difference between my EOS R
Ive got Canon R7 nifty 50 ,14/35 wide,24/70 rf 100/400 rf
I hope it's not too late to ask this question. After the firmware update, will the R7 still work with a Sigma 18-35(3rd party EF) with an RF to EF adapter?
You forgot the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 :(
I have the r7 + ef-rf + ef 100mm f2,8 Marco (550$) and ef 50mm f1,4 (200$) and the big one ef 2x (150$) + ef 400mm f2,8 mark1 (2500$) (6kg). Alex ;)
I like your advice about buying FF lenses even if you are using a crop sensor camera. I'm glad I did that, as all my lenses work with all my cameras.
Related, why is it "upgrade to FF" ? I have an R5 and an R7. They are different tools for different tasks. My R7 is capable of things my R5 cannot do, and my R5 is capable of things my R7 is not suitable for.
What if you only own the R7 and want (close to) FF? Speed booster.
best quality lens for vlogging on a r7, i want the best quality. im ordering the r7 tonight. name a couple for me
the 70-200 f4 IS i makes beautiful photos with the r7 but the AF does struggle a bit and focus breathes alot in video in my experience
Unfortunately, they don't have a light original lens equivalent to the 24-70 2.8 without an adapter which complicates the matter.
An additional point to lens choice: never ever use a filter without a good reason. I've ruined many a shot because I had the mind set of having a filter (typically UV) on my lens without thinking, "why?" Lens protection? Buy a hood. Test your filters extensively because they can bite you depending on focal length and the type of light. Don't cheap out on filters because a bad $10.00 filter turns a great $500.00 lens into a bad $500.00 lens.
Using a canon eos r10. I have the 35mm F1.8 prime and that performed excellent in low light at a small bar venue for a band I photographed for. However i had to get closer to get the shots with the nice blurred background. What lens would you recommend for me to get if i wanted to cover the whole band without having to physically walk closer to the band? Sometimes they play outside so im not always dealing with low light situations but a lens that’s versatile in both cases would be nice.
Canon needs to release crop version equivalent to the FF 24-70 IS, it's holding me back from getting an R7...
There is that older EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS.
Thank you for the video! I was wondering if I'm upgrading from Canon 80D +Sigma 18-35 1.8, is it better to go for the R7 or the brand new FX30? also BMPCC4K is on my mind as well.
You're welcome! Here are my thoughts on the R7 vs the FX30: ua-cam.com/video/OVxTvIim5Tc/v-deo.html
@@Josh_Sattin Thank you so much! can't wait you to put ur hand on the FX30 and show us how it's going!
You're welcome. I'm definitely looking forward to getting my hands on one!
Hey Josh, I'm currently shooting on an 80 + 90d for A,B cam set up. Two of my lenses are the efs 18-135 is (nano) usm & 70- 300 is ii (nano) usm. Love both the lenses think they're some of the best of the price range. I'd love to see how they'd perform on the r7. With the canon adaptor. Thinking about upgrading to the r7 next year. Would appreciate your thoughts. Steve :D
Hey Steve. I haven't used those lenses so I can't really comment on how well they would perform on the R7. Like with most older EF lenses, they will perform just as they do on the EF mount cameras. Sometimes the older lenses can hold back some of the newer features and performance of the RF mirrorless cameras, but it varies from lens to lens.
@@Josh_Sattin Hi Josh, thanks for your reply! That's good to know. Despite their f5.6 max aperture across the zoom range their wicked. I'd be half tempted to say I'd post one of them for you to play with for a week if you'd be ingerested?
I appreciate the offer. Unfortunately I have so much on my plate right now.
@@Josh_Sattin No danger, thanks for making such great informative videos!
@@stevengreaves639 You're welcome. Thanks for watching them!
Buy lenses for the system you have, not for the one you do not have. Full frame lenses are often very big and expensive especially in ultra wide. There currently are only four RF-S lenses anyway, no primes.
You may now update your comment @1:00
The speedboosters are still working fine?
If I already own the 50 1.8 would there be any point getting a 85 mm or 35Mm as I have the 18-150m kit lens.
Do you need them? Others do not know what you shoot and your style.Buy lenses when you have reached the limits of your existing lenses. Do not ask others what to buy.
Can anybody let me know if the EF adapter for the R7 worth it? I mean what lenses EF do you recommend if I get the adapter to attach it on my R7 Canon?
Thanks if you take a quick time to share!
RFs 15-85mm f2.8
I received my r7 today along with rf-50mm f1.8. Can you recommend me a medium telephoto under 600.
Thank you
geni.us/aEakH
24mm 1.8 is best for videos
What about the RF 24-105 F4-7.1?
It really brings nothing over the kit lens.
135 f2 has enough sharpness for these
i know this video is old by now but didnt they lift that 3rd party restriction for rf lenses?
Not yet. They gave Cosina a license to make manual focus RF lenses. From what I have heard they are looking at proposals for licensing to other manufacturers, but no third party autofocus lenses right now.
do you stack the speed booster and the meike nd filters? or do you use speed booster + lens and nd filters made for the lens thread size?
You can't stack the speedbooster and the Meike VND adapter since they are both RF-EF adapters. If you need to use the speedbooster and a ND, then you need to add NDs on the front of the lens with either a screw-on filter or matte box system.
Hey Josh, with that 4K crop on R7 does it mean we can use Super 16 lens without much vignetting?
The 4K crop mode is only in 60fps. It is a 1.81x crop on top of the 1.6x APS-C crop.
I just bought the r7 and got the EF-EOS R 0.71x adapter. But when I use the adapter, I get what looks like vignetting. I've updated the firmware on the camera. The only time I can eliminate the vignette is if I'm in "4k crop". Any advice?
Are you using full frame lenses? You will get vignetting if you are using crop sensor lenses.
Are ef-s lenses compatible with R7 or do i need a adapter!?
Yes they are compatible but you need this adapter: geni.us/tH8GTn
Do you have the RF 14/35 f4? It’s now on sale but I saw mixed reviews on the internet
I don't have one since I own the RF 15-35 F2.8. There is a crazy good sale on it right now. I'd love to try that lens since it's much smaller and lighter than the 15-35, but I can't justify owning both lenses.
Let’s just hope Canon doesn’t cripple the Viltrox speedbooster in the next firmware for the R7… 💁🏼♂️
Oh man. That would be next level.
Okay so question, do the all the APS-C designed lenses produce vignette with the speed booster on the R7? because I was highly considering the Sigma 18-35 but I found out that it has vignetting at the wide end so Its no longer in my consideration ! Could you build a list or drop a video on lenses that are best compatible with the r7/r10 paired with the speed booster that DONT have vignetting ? Thanks!
The Sigma 18-35 is only designed for APSC sized sensors. That’s why it vignettes with the speedbooster or if you use it on a full frame camera. The image circle it produces is not large enough. You need to use full frame EF lenses with the speedbooster. If you'd like to learn more about speedboosters, please check out this video: ua-cam.com/video/7E7jKZq7VyA/v-deo.html
@@Josh_Sattin thank you for such a quick reply and the useful information ! I appreciate you !
@@Josh_Sattin thank you for such a quick reply and the useful information ! I appreciate you !
You’re welcome. Thanks for watching!
shame canon, great video though, thanks man!
will be oke if you straight on point
No sigma ex 17-50 f2.8 😢
You can adapt the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. I use this lens adapted onto my R6M2. The R6M2 automatically recognizes the lens and crops the full frame sensor.
Do you have any experience with Meike’s MK-EFTR-A? Not sure if image stabilization is any different in comparison to the Meike adapter in your video. Thanks
I don't have that one. I use the Canon one for a basic pass through adapter.
With tears in my eyes I'm looking at Canon users, who trying to survive in a hard RF-mount ecosystem :) Adapters, speedboosters, worn out and outdated EF lenses with noisy autofocus... What good will that do you?
I find all modern cameras and lenses heavily overpriced. If you still want to go with company that bans third party ink manufactures for printers, and stops scan feature to work when there is no ink inside... i reccomend tamron g2 zoom lineup and 1.4 and 1.8 primes with VC, also sigma 1.4 are way better than "nAtIv gLaSs"... (and pray that cranon wont ban old glass with firmware)
Agreed! I have the 24-70 and 70-200 from tamron which work well for me on the video AND photo end
Canon made 140 million EF lenses. That is 80 different lenses in focal length and F stops. Now you can also use any EF mount third party lenses. Plus they already have 30 RF lenses in there line up. So that is a 110 Canon lenses to choose from and all the 3rd party EF lenses ever made. Sigma is now selling their EF lenses with an RF adapters. Oh no conspiracy over! I get it. Complaining get you clicks, but this is an absurd complaint.
@@paullanoue5228 Mirrorless lenses are sharper. The r7 is great, but it lacks lens options. look at the old vs new sigma art lenses, new one is miles better but for canon you can only get the dated version from 2014 oslt..
Not having third party lenses killed this camera for me. Somehow, I know that Canon will never release good lenses for the RF-s system.
There are hundreds of Third party lenses available in EF mount. The adapter works great for $69 refurb.
@@unknownKnownunknowns they don't work well. I have this camera, and I have an EF glass. the stabilization specifically shutters and stutters around, especially with 3rd party EF-s lenses.
@@ossme interesting. I have this and an R5 and adaption working well for sports. I don't use the IBIS much, so you have a point. I primarily shoot at 1/1000th both indoor and out. The R7 +EF 24-70 indoors, the R7 + 70-200 outdoors all nail AF, better than my 5d4 ever did.
@@unknownKnownunknowns yes, I don’t face the same issues with my r5 as well. You can have a look at the issues we are having here: ua-cam.com/video/1bwjmR2H2z4/v-deo.html
can i use 18-135 stm nano canon lens on canon r7
Yes, you can use any EF or EF-S lens on the R7 with the EF-RF adapter.
not recommending 17-55 f2.8 is just plain stupid. that is hands down the best apsc lens for canon.